Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2006-10-16Final Regular Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board ^ Monday, October 16,2006 at 5:30 p.m. 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Report of Tompkins County Legislature - Ram Mackesey 4. Report of City of Ithaca Common Council - Robin Korherr 5. Report of Fire Commission 6. Persons to be Heard and Board Comments 7. Presentations from funding requestors 8. Report from the Town's Independent Auditors 9. 7:00 p.m. - Public Hearing regarding Local Law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca _ Code, titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law 10. SEQR regarding a Local Law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law 11. Consider Adoption of Local Law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law 12. 7:15 p.m. - Public Hearing regarding Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations 13. SEQR regarding Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations 14. Consider Adoption of Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, ^ titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations 15. Discussion of 2007 Town of Ithaca Budget 16. Discussion and Consider Approval of Elected Officials' Salaries for 2007 Final 17. Discussion and Consider Approval of Employee Wages for 2007 \ ' 18. Discussion and Consider Adoption of Town of Ithaca 2007 Tentative Budget as the 2007 ' Town of Ithaca Preliminary Budget 19. Consider Recommending Conservation Board Member as Representative to the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council 20. Discussion of Possible Purchase of Development Rights Program for Environmentally Sensitive and Important Lands 21. Discussion and Consider setting public hearing regarding local law adding chapter XXX to the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Privacy Notification Law" to comply with the requirements of State Technology Law Section 208 22. Consider extension of Provisional Appointment of Planner 23. Consider Authorizing Supervisor to Sign Utility Line Easement between Cornell University and New York State Electric & Gas 24. Consent a. Town Board Minutes b. Bolton Point Abstract ^ c. Authorization to attend Design of Stormwater Management Practice conference d. Appointment of Account Clerk Typist - SCLIWC appointment 25. Report of Town Officials a. Town Clerk b. Highway Superintendent c. Director of Engineering d. Director of Planning e. Budget Officer f. Manager of Human Resources g. Network/Records Specialist h. Recreation and Youth Coordinator i. Attorney for the Town 26. Report of Town Committees a. Agriculture Committee b. Agricultural Land Preservation Committee c. Alternate Energy Committee d. Capital Projects and Fiscal Planning Committee e. Codes and Ordinances Committee f. Ethics Committee ^ g. Personnel Committee h. Public Works Committee i. Recreation and Human Services Committee - Discussion ]. Records Management Advisory Board Final k. Safety Committee 1. Transportation Committee 27. Intermunicipal Organizations a. Cayuga Lake Watershed intermunicipal Organization b. City/Town Trail Committee 0. Intermunicipal Cooperation and Consolidation Study Group d. Joint Youth Commission e. Lake Source Data Sharing f. Pegasus Oversight Committee g. Recreation Partnership h. Special Joint Committee (Sewer) 1. Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission j. SPCA monthly report for January 2006 28. Review of Correspondence a. 9/29/06 letter from P. Long re Schickel Road b. 8/31/06 thank you letter from D. Skorton 29. Consider Adjournment October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Regular Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Monday, October 16, 2006 at 5:30 p.m. 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York THOSE PRESENT: Supervisor Valentino, Councilman Burbank, Councilwoman Gittelman, Councilman Engman, Councilman Stein, Councilman Cowie, Councilwoman Leary STAFF PRESENT: Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk; Dan Walker, Town Engineer; Fred Noteboom, Highway Superintendent; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Judith Drake, Human Resources Manager; Nicole Tedesco, Planner; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town EXCUSED: Al Carvill, Budget Officer OTHERS PRESENT: Barbara Allan Eaglesham, 106 Pinewood Drive; Susan R|ha, 109 Maplewood Drive; Kay Senney, WHCU; Gregory Ezra, 110 Birchwood Drive; Bill Gilligan, 1224 Trumansburg Road; Kurt Drumme, 219 Coddington Road; Elliot Allford, 219 Coddington Riad; Jacob Wallack, 219 Coddington Road; Madhara Hansen, 219 Coddington Road; Matthew Cockcroft, 122 14 A Coddington Road; Robert Barry, 105 Hudson Street, Rachel Mandel, 202 Prospect Street, Dinah Collins, 107 Pennsylvania Avenue; Jutta and Joe lacovelli, 216 Pennsylvania Avenue; Samantha Henry; Eileen Gravani, 203 Salem Drive; William Sonnenstuhl, 206 Winston Drive; Donna Heilweil, 1464 Hanshaw Road; Rose Pinnisi, 1464 Hanshaw Road; Pat Long, 4 Schickel Road; Brian Wilbur, Ithaca City Fire Department; Zack Ford, 02-01 Circle Apartments; Molle DeBartolo, 231 Pennsylvania Avenue; Anna Corson, 136 Crescent Place; Stephen Penningroth, Community Science Institute; Stephen Wagner, 112 Sapsucker Woods Road; Sabine Detterbeck, 231 Pennsylvania Avenue; Diane Conneman, Conservation Board; Kathleen Valentino, 118 Cambridge Place; Margaret McCasland, 272 Hayts Road; Adrian Williams, 108 Sapsucker Woods Road CALL TO ORDER Supervisor Valentino called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. and led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance. Supervisor Valentino told the Board that the meeting was being video taped. This would allow the Town to put their meetings on public television, the website, and onto DVDs. They were experimenting with this meeting to see how well the Town's existing equipment would work for this purpose. Agenda Item No. 5 - Report of Fire Commission (Attachment #1 - monthlv report) Mr. Romanowski appeared before the Board and read his monthly report. Chief Brian Wilbur appeared to comment on the proposed 2007 City of Ithaca budget. He reported an increase in equipment costs. The capital projects budget includes funds for a new fire engine, a pumper, and rescue radios. The new radios will allow the fire department to operate with the new 800-megahertz communication system the County is building. A software upgrade for the Department is also included in the budget. The capital projects replacement schedule has been slipping over the past few years and they are currently behind schedule. 1 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 The equipment line In the operating budget consists of about $99,000 and Includes purchasing equipment the Department has needed for a long time. The budget also provides for two new positions, the municipal training officer and part-time data clerk. Chief Wilbur commented that the contract between the City and the Town requires that the Town approve any Increase In staffing. He wanted the Board to be aware of It and have the opportunity to affirmatively act on the Increase In staffing. Chief Wilbur went on to explain that the Town's share of the fire department budget Is 32.61%. Supervisor Valentino added that Mr. Thayer had sent her the proposed budget and that the Town's portion has not changed a lot from 2006. Councilman Stein asked If the sharing percentage was based on assessed value. Supervisor Valentino stated that was correct. Councilman Stein was surprised that the City's assessed value grew so quickly. Supervisor Valentino thanked Mr. RomanowskI and Chief Wilbur for their report. Agenda Item No. 3 - Report of Tompkins Countv Legislature - Pam Mackesev Ms. Mackesey appeared before the Board on behalf of the Tompkins County Legislature. She commented that during budget discussions, the funding of the library was discussed. There was a suggestion that funding for rural libraries be cut and discussion of getting the towns and villages to support their libraries. The Legislature, however, decided to reinstate funding In full. A point was raised that the Town of Ithaca was one of the largest users of the Tompkins County Library and Ms. Mackesey expected that someone might be approaching the Town to make a contribution to the Tompkins County Library. Ms. Mackesey reported that the extended Budget Committee estimated a tax rate Increase of 2.4%. It would mean a tax levy Increase of 5.09%. The rate Is not definite because there are still some departments bringing their final figures to the Budget Committee. The County Legislature will be voting on the final County budget at their first meeting In November. Supervisor Valentino explained that the Town Board at Its last meeting passed a resolution In support of the County continuing Its support of the Recreation Partnership. Ms. Mackesey stated the County did reinstate the funding for the Recreation Partnership. Councilman Stein did not realize that the City made a contribution to the County Library. Ms. Mackesey explained that the City makes a contribution through their sales tax. She added that the City also makes a substantial contribution In that the library Is located In the City of Ithaca and It was commercial property taken off the tax roll. Supervisor Valentino thanked Ms. Mackesey for her report. Agenda Item No. 6 - Persons to be Heard and Board Comments Briarwood II Development Supervisor Valentino recognized the persons speaking with regard to the Briarwood II Development project and stated that there Is a 3-mlnute limit on comments. n rr rmei ;3«BST October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Gregory Ezra, 110 Birchwood Drive Mr. Ezra appeared before the board and made the following statement: / have with me here a copy of a letter that was sent in 1994 to Town Engineer, Dan Walker, and copy to then Chair of the Planning Board. This letter was really in the form of a petition from a group of residents off Birchwood Drive, most of whom are still there and it concemed what we considered at the time, this is 1994, to be growing problems with drainage in our area, especially conceming excessive stormwater runoff and snow melt Which at the time again, we felt were overwhelming the capacity of the system in that area of Town, which we also felt was a direct result of the, at that time, ongoing Briarwood I development that was occurring in the wetland to the east of that area. Most of the people who signed the petition at that time had been residents in the area for at least a number of years so were able to gauge the extent to which things had deteriorated. The reply, which I received from Mr. Walker, agreed and stated quite clearly that drainage in northeast Ithaca has been a concem for a number of years, this was in 1994, and that the Highway and Engineering staffs were working together to develop a drainage plan for the area. Okay. This was 12 years ago and in the intervening period I think it is fair to say, and most of us still living in the area would agree, that the situation has gotten worse and not better. Despite the considerable time spent, and effort, and person power invested by the Highway Department, who spent a lot of time amongst other things digging ever deeper ditches. Anyone can check the work log, I'm sure, to see the department is spending what must be a huge fraction of their effort up in that area of Town. Again, the problems are that the stormwater runoff from what is essentially a wetland is Just exceeding the capacity of the system to deal with it. The reason that I and others are here to raise the issue now is because we are faced with the prospect of the Brian/vood II development, which is in the same area, which is currently under consideration by the Planning Board, who have already granted preliminary approval for this development. To myself and to other residents of the area, it is simply inconceivable that this proposed Briarwood II development, which is on an 18-acre extensive wetland and woodland, will not lead to significant worsening of the drainage problem. Mr. Ezra's time was up and he thanked the Board. Susan Ria, 109 Maplewood Drive Ms. Ria appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I have had many conversations with Fred over the years on the phone about our problems and in the middle of April this year a number of us on the southside of Maplewood and east of Salem petitioned the Town to address the drainage problem that currently exists along our street. We have the same water problems that Greg mentioned, but in addition, we're concemed that we have a further problem and that is water is running in our so-called stormwater drainage ditches 24-7. I have resided there for 20-21 years and for the first 15 or 16 years it was not like that. They were really Just stormwater drainage ditches. But after the BrianA/ood I development, we had this water running permanently and this has implications along with the peak flows that Greg referred to about the frequency of flooding in the basements because it reflects the change in the water table and that you have moved water from a higher elevation east of us in the Briarwood I and some of that water is now residing October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 down slope in the older development And it also has implications for sinking driveways and it makes these ditches unmaintainable and potentially dangerous. My understanding with conversations from Fred Noteboom over the years and Dan Walker recently is that they both agree that our down slope older development has drainage problems that the Town needs to address. Therefore, I was surprised, as well as Greg, to learn in July that the Town Planning Board gave preliminary approval to the Briarwood II development without considering the current drainage problems in our area and there is no question that the new development will further increase the amount of water that flows into our neighborhood. Therefore, I am requesting that there be further discussion of this issue by having the Town Board add this as an agenda item for detailed discussion at their next meeting. That this include a thorough review of the current and potential additional drainage problems in our area and how and by whom these problems will be addressed. Allan Eaglesham, 106 Pinewood Mr. Eaglesham appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I reside at 106 Pinewood, but most of our property is on Maplewood. I would like to add some personal observations as a relative newcomer. We have occupied that property since spring of 2002. Although it was a very wet spring, lots of thunderstorms in May and June, we had a normal July and August and eventually the ditch did dry out and I was able to mow it. However, I have not been able to mow it since. It is constantly running water and in fact, we have established such a strong stand of watercress that our Asian neighbors frequently visit j and harvest it for their salads. It is clear to me that the water table is rising. Our basement is • ' fully finished, but it is certainly a concem. The implications of the rising water table is a concern for ourselves and our neighbors. Thank you. Bill Sonnenstuhl, 206 Winston Drive Mr. Sonnenstuhl appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I have lived there for about 22 years now and I just want to reiterate the concerns of my neighbors here about Briarwood II and I would like to add to their concerns about the drainage. Also, I am a little concemed about the way that this assessment, the environmental assessment, was conducted because if you go back and look at the June 2(f^ meeting, minutes of the meeting, it seemed to be that the decision was actually pretty hastened through there. That the only side that had a chance to make a presentation was the developer's side. Some of my neighbors raised issues, discussion was cutoff, and even a number of the members of the board raised issues about it being a hasty decision and asked for the time to be reconsidered. So in that context, in addition to the environmental considerations, there is also a democratic sort of process here that needs to be looked at as well. Thank you for your consideration and I would like to hope that we would open this discussion again. Thank you. Stephan Wagner, 112 Sapsucker Woods Road Mr. Wagner appeared before the Board and made the following statement: ' October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Knowing your agenda it filled to the hilt, I would like to limit myself to saying that I concur with the comments made by the previous speakers with regard to our concems about the Briarwood II proposal. There is a whole ring of issues that we would like to address more extensively during a future meeting of your Board, for which I hope you will be able to make time. So I would like to request to be put on the agenda of a future meeting, possibly the November meeting. I would also like to say that we are planning to submit a petition that will specifically address the issues of drainage, the environmental impact and also some procedural concems we have had with the way the Planning Board has gone about this approval process so far. Thank you very much. Councilman Stein stated that he has also been concerned about the project. He does not completely understand the powers of the Town Board or whether or not the Town Board has any supervisory power over the Planning Board. As a result of these concerns, the Town Board is having someone from the Department of State come and explain what authority the Town Board has over the problems expressed by the public. Councilman Stein suggested that a meeting about Brianwood II occur after the presentation from the State. Councilman Stein went on to say that two people have mentioned what they called only a cursory listening to their concerns by the Planning Board and a rather quick approval of the site plan. Mr. Kanter explained that there was more than one meeting about the development. This project goes back at least three years and in that time the Planning Board saw several different versions of the Briarwood II proposal. The Planning Board saw it first in the form of a sketch plan. The Board gave comments back to the developer, requesting a revision of the plans. The developer came back before the Planning Board with a modified sketch plan. This happened several times over a period of a couple of years. Mr. Kanter thought that the Board became more comfortable with the overall development proposal when there was a clear indication that all of the delineated wetlands would be preserved, a substantial part of the open space area would be donated to the Lab of Ornithology at Cornell and volumes of information regarding stormwater management, the natural area, traffic, etc, were provided to the Board. Mr. Kanter thought that it was open to people's interpretation of how the process went, but his impression was that it was a long and thorough review. Councilman Stein asked if Mr. Kanter, Mr. Walker and the Planning Board were sure that more development in the area would not exacerbate existing problems. Supen/isor Valentino commented that drainage problems have been plaguing the Town of Ithaca for a long time. She explained that the Town does have authority over stormwater and drainage, and their management. They work with the Planning Board and engineers to figure out how much water there is and where it should go. She stated that what they were hoping to do in the near future was to have a meeting at the Northeast school to discuss the drainage of the area. The aim was to set up the meeting after the budget was complete. She thought that type of meeting would be more productive than coming to a Board meeting at this point. A woman from the audience asked if the budget included implementation of a plan to improve the drainage. Supervisor Valentino answered that it is not included in the proposed 2007 budget, but the Town does have a fund balance to help with financial costs. Mr. Noteboom added that the budget does include work for Winston Drive. The Northeast Drainage Study is being presented to the Public Works Committee at their next meeting and the Committee will October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 talk about some of the ramifications. He stated that in time more capital plans would be developed for the area. i . Councilman Stein brought the Board's attention back to his original question of whether or not future development would exacerbate existing problems. Mr. Walker stated that the analysis is being done, but is not complete yet. The completed preliminary engineering indicates that there is enough area that has been designated for stormwater management that the Town can retain sufficient water to alleviate and probably improve the drainage problems in the northeast as part of the Briarwood proposal. The concept plan will work and they are still working out final details and the developer is working out final details. Mr. Walker explained that they are getting into issues of stormwater management and wetland management that are outside of the Town's jurisdiction. It is the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers and the Department of Environmental Conservation. The proposal utilizes the wetland area for stormwater detention on a short-term basis. The Town is waiting to receive the approvals on the proposal. If the approvals are not received, then the basis for approving the project no longer exists. There is also an ongoing stormwater management plan. They have been working on it for 15 years or more. It includes rebuilding the Dewitt Pond, work in the Christopher Circle and Christopher Lane area. It will take a while to fund all the improvements. Councilman Stein asked again if the current situation would be made worse by the proposed development. Mr. Walker answered that the proposed development would not make the situation worse and that it may improve the current situation if it can be built the way they need to. But if the project cannot be built the way that it needs to, then it will not be built. Supervisor Valentino thought that this was a discussion that needed to happen when the Town could meet with the neighbors and look at the proposed plans and develop the plans with the neighbors. Noise Ordinance Supervisor Valentino recognized the persons speaking with regard to the Noise Ordinance and stated that there is a 3-minute limit on comments. Jacob Wallack, 219 Coddington Road (Attachment #2 - Copy of petition regarding Noise Ordinance) Mr. Wallack appeared before the Board and made the following statement; I am before you today to discuss Chapter 184 of the Town Code. I must begin by stating that after speaking with multiple residents and Town Officials, i feel that i have a well-rounded grasp on why the current ordinance is in place as well as the concerns of both sides of the issue. Today i speak supported by a petition containing over 145 signatures of people opposed to the current Chapter 184. In order to create a healthy community, we must work together in a positive way that does not antagonize residents on either side of the argument and encourage dialog instead of strict, zero tolerance enforcement measures that are impersonal and degrade the stability n October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 of the community. The law has created an ambiguous situation where residents are constantly guilty and the rules set out are inconsistently enforced. Additionally, I must note that this law aims to reduce crime that is not directly related to noise. Crimes that already have definitive laws that are not strictly enforced, such as public urination, open container, etc. In saying this, i must question the Town having created such a vague law instead of targeting these problem residents with the definitive laws that have been around for a long time. After discussing with many that helped pass the current law, / can see that their main concems are not with noise, but with things that they connect with the noise such as belligerence and rowdiness on the roads and vandalism of mailboxes, etc. We should focus our energy and enforcement on those that break definitive laws and not those that are enjoying reasonable social events. One major concem that we have is that the 25 foot rule as defined by Chapter 184, subsection 9, creates a system where residents' reasonable actions are considered violations, therefore, requiring selected and subjective enforcement. In order the remedy this we must revise the law with definitive limits and measurement devices, if necessary, for use in enforcement. In connection to this, we must also disband selective patrolling in order to promote equal protection as stated in our great country's Constitution. To further the issue of selected enforcement, I must state that Chapter 184, subsection 13 does not foster a community atmosphere at ail. Instead, it is creating a police state in the Town of Ithaca that unjustly antagonizes students by arbitrarily handing out tickets without waming. Allowing law enforcement officers to file complaints rather than the residents is overzeaious and certainly doesn't foster community dialog. This gives too much power to the Sheriffs in determining what is or isn't unreasonable noise in a certain area. To foster a healthy community, we must promote dialog amongst neighbors and only allow complaints from those that are directly affected by the noise. Mr. Wallack gave a copy of the petition to the Town Clerk. Robert Barry, 105 Hudson Street (Attachment #3 - Comments on Noise Ordinance) Mr. Barry appeared before the Board and made the following statement continuing the comments of the previous speaker: Additionally, the law will not successfully achieve its goal. After discussion with two large landlords, we have come to understand that this subsection will only act as a method of double fining as owners will also pass fines on tenants. The law contains little definitive content and must be drafted in a manner that does not allow for bias interpretation and enforcement against student residents. Without definitive language, we are allowing for selective enforcement and nit picking as what constitutes unreasonable noise. I must add that i was upset to find hate mail from the local wife of a police officer today. The residents here don't care if this law tends to bother you. That is what it is intended to do. Further more, the fines are not intended to be something that the students can afford. This is an obvious sign that long-term residents are not the only ones being antagonized, but also thoughtful and reasonable student residents such as myself. As is, this law will not promote a healthy cooperative community as it intends to do, but will create a system where frustration will continue to build on both sides in the community. We as a group will not stand for that. October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 I Just wanted to echo his sentiments after having read that and we have some recommendations that we would like to give. We have put a lot of work into them and we are Just really looking to maximize the goals between the Town and its residents, which we | believe is to have a safe, relaxed, friendly community and social scene. If these changes are made, we believe it will provide for a more amiable relationship between the Town and the students who reside there. Supervisor Valentino asked if the speaker had a list of the recommendations. A copy was provided to the Town Clerk. Elliot Alford, 219 Coddlngton Road Mr. Alford appeared before the board and made the following statement: Two of my roommates have received tickets because of this ordinance and one of the things that really bothers me about it is the amount that the fine could be. I think the first offense is anywhere from $100 to $500, second offense up to $1,000 and it seems unreasonable to me that behavior which is not directly threatening the welfare of anyone or their livelihood or their pursuit of happiness, however you want to define it, could cost someone hundreds of dollars. It has also been brought to my attention that there has been extra patrol cars that have been hired by the Town for the weekend when this law is in effect that it seems to me that those patrol cars are what Justifies the high cost of the tickets and that the fine only becomes Justified by the cost of those extra patrol cars. Supervisor Valentino interjected that the Town of Ithaca is not paying anything extra for | I patrols. Mr. Alford asked if there is anything that requires there be more patrols from Friday ' ' to Sunday. Supervisor Valentino stated that Mr. Alford would need to talk to the Sheriff about the additional patrols. Mr. Alford thought that the law should be reassessed on a number of grounds, but most importantly, the amount of the fines. Kurt Krumme, 219 Coddlngton Road Mr. Krumme appeared before the board and made the following statement: I live at 219 Coddlngton Road and I guess that makes me a member of the South Hill Community Neighborhood, but more importantly I am a musician. I am a music student at Ithaca College in Jazz Studies. I play a number of instruments and one of those is drums and on September id^ I was playing them at Midnight at my house and I have 5 police cars outside my house and I sat in the back of the car for an hour and a half. It was good, but you know, apprehended for unreasonable noise, but I can see the connection that is obviously made between loud noises, colleges, students partying and actual Just normal noise like I have mutes on my drum set and I play with bundles, which dramatically reduces the noise. It is not like I was trying to be unreasonable. There was no party going on. I would like the law to be reassessed as well on a couple of points. Mostly I don't like the fact that police officers can be the complainants. If it is a police officer that drives by, hears noises, thinks we are being out of control but we actually Just have a muted drum set with altered drumsticks to reduce the noise. That can get me a $500 fine. It is not like our neighbors made a call in. It ^ was police officers and I believe 5 of them for a musician playing drums or a musical { instrument of any kind in his own house, it Just doesn't seem right to me and I would like this law to be reassessed on those grounds. Thanks. 8 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Councilman Burbank asked if Mr. Krumme was ticketed for playing his drums and if he was given a warning. Mr. Krumme responded that he was ticketed and indicated he was not given a warning. Councilman Stein asked if there was a party happening. Mr. Krumme stated that there was not a party going on. Supervisor Valentino wondered what time Mr. Krumme was playing the drums. Mr. Krumme responded that he was playing them at midnight. Councilwoman Leary asked if Ithaca College had facilities where musicians can practice. Mr. Krumme responded that they do. Councilwoman Leary clarified that the intent of the law was not to shut down parties. The basis for a violation is whether a noise can be heard outside the premises for a certain distance. If the Deputy heard that at midnight, then it might not have been reasonable. Zack Ford, Student Body President at Ithaca College (Attachment #4 - Mr. Ford's comments regarding Noise Ordinance) Mr. Ford appeared before the Board and read from a prepared statement on behalf of the Ithaca College Student Government Association. Jenna Domber, 514 South Aurora Street Ms. Domber appeared before the Board and made the following statement: For the record, we are opposed to the City's ordinance as we//, but we as a group are going to start here because this is the most recently passed one and has been prosecuting students at an alarming rate. So I am here to talk about the noise ordinance, but most specifically the permit granting process that it sets up. As it stands, the noise permit procedure is impossible to comply with. It is both vague and it sets up unreasonable requirements. Without concrete interpretations, there is no way that students can abide by the laws that you have set forth. Allow me to highlight all my points of contention. First of all, it leaves discretion completely to the police officers whether or not to grant the noise permit, therefore, preventing dialog between the community members when the neighbors should be setting up the party perimeters with them rather than the police officer. I don't think that these neighborly activities should be given over to the local government Secondly, it is very vague by asking the person that is requesting the permit to explain why they can't comply with the law, especially since the law as it stands now asks that I mean requires that we can't make noise that can be heard over 25 feet, which is unreasonable because that would mean that I was in violation if someone in the back row can hear me right now. Thirdly, the 45-day period of time as President Zack Ford pointed out is really excessive, especially given the nature of the student life. More questions about the entire process need to be answered, such as is there an application that students...[tape flipped]...it needs to be more clear. I do believe that we can make this work and that students and permanent residents can live harmoniously, specifically in South Hill. I personally will volunteer myself to sit down and give recommendations as student input. Thank you. Councilwoman Leary asked Ms. Domber to repeat what she had said about the permitting process. Ms. Domber responded that it is discretionary whether or not the law enforcement officer is going to grant the permit. Councilwoman Leary clarified that is not the way the noise ordinance written. It is not up to the law enforcement officers to grant a permit. The October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Town Board grants the noise permits. Ms. Domber felt that by having the Town Board approve the permit instead of the neighbors, then it was taking the approval away from the people who are most affected by the noise. Matthew Cockcroft, 122.5 Coddington Road Mr. Cockcroft appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I would like to address the construction clause. For large construction Jobs, it is often...you need to use most of the hours of the day. So often times people begin working at 6:00 a.m. Many times adults seem to... (not audible)...different hours than the younger people and I am sleeping usually at 6:00 a.m. I thought it was completely almost embarrassing when I read the clause that I could actually call in the construction workers next to my house and report them for the noise violation. I also found it hard to believe that the police would take my situation as seriously as if there were a social event going on during the same period of time in the night. I thought that it would be wise to either to take that one-hour back for those people who are doing construction in the morning or to reassess the situation. Jutta lacovelli, Pennsylvania Avenue Ms. lacovelli appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I am Just here to strongly urge that the Town stand firm with this ordinance. It was passed because it was needed. Personally, I find it very frustrating and annoying that I need to come down here and to defend my right to have a peaceful, quiet neighborhood because the students, who are really guests in our town, are upset because they are finally being held accountable for their rude and disruptive behavior. The ordinance is working. Every neighbor that we have talked to in the last week or so has noticed a difference. It is quieter in our neighborhood and it is good to look forward to the weekend and know that we can be sleeping at 1, 2, or 3 a.m. in the morning. And by the way, those drums were playing until about 2 or 3 that morning. In answer to that petition, it is not the law enforcement officers that are making the complaints, it is the residents that are calling the Sheriffs Department to make the complaints. So the law enforcement officers are there because they have gotten a complaint. I also find it a little ironic that now the students want to have a community dialog. I never heard of any such interest before. Now that they are being held accountable for their behavior, now they want a dialog, now they want permission and that is what in fact they are asking for is permission to continue the behavior that they are doing. And the attitude, I know that there are good students. There are also bad students, but it seems like the general attitude of Ithaca College students is we should be allowed to do whatever we damn well please. Excuse my language. And Just as an indication of their attitude, let me read you something that I found on the Sheri^s website. You can get to these via their media link. This incident happened I believe on September at approximately 11:56 p.m. Deputies responded to Troy Road for a complaint of unreasonable noise. Upon arrival the responding Deputy discovered a gathering of approximately 500 people at this residence. When the Deputy stopped his patrol car, the car was struck by several full cans of beer that had been thrown by persons attending the party. The Deputy had to radio for immediate assistance. It goes on to say that New York State Police had to be called in and there were several arrests made. This is the typical activity. The noise... Troy Road is out in the middle of nowhere and ( we are still hearing this noise. Thank you. 10 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Steve Ehrhardt, Juniper Drive Mr. Ehrhardt appeared before the Board and made the following statement: The Town's noise ordinance, as you all know, Is modeled after the City's noise ordinance and that was the product of decades of very dlWcult experience. Experience with the problem that basically taught us that preventing a significant amount of students from behaving In uncivilized ways within our neighborhoods Is not a problem of cross cultural dialogue or Intergeneratlonal communication, It Is a technical problem. The law Is being broken, uncivilized behavior Is occurring, noise Itself In the wee hours of the moming Is uncivilized behavior. If you have a kid and want to put your kid to sleep, you are feeling, you Just want to go to sleep at 1 In the moming, 2 In the moming. Noise Is offensive. This Is a technical problem with law enforcement and behavior modification. The City teamed the hard way that nothing short of a tough law worked. Pleasant Street massacre, January 1988. I lived on Pleasant Street, I can tell you about It. September 10, 1989 Pleasant Street massacre 2, the dialog that night was a student shimmying up a pole at about Midnight to tell an 83 year old widow that she was a bitch for having complained about the noise and she never had the nerve to complain again, which Is why resident complaints should not be the source of the complaint that generates the enforcement, why It Is alright for the police to do It on their own accord because residents are Intimidated. Chief of Police Herson 1986, why wouldn't you break up the party. Chief? There were only two of us, there were hundreds of them. What did you want us to do? Well, you are the police. It doesn't make any difference. So there Is history here before the kids speaking to you tonight were even bom we have been living with this history and they don't have perspective and they don't know the history. They know that their fines are steep and they wish they wouldn't be punished so badly. You don't want to be punished, obey the law. If the law Is complicated, well go to your English Professor and have It explained to you. If the number of names on their petition exceeds the number of names on the petition that generated this law, all the more reason to stand by It. This Isn't a debate between one side who wants a sidewalk on a street and one side who doesn't. That Is a debate. There can be an affirmative and a negative position. This Is about civilized behavior In a residential neighborhood. There Is no negative position that you can give weight to. You are the Town Board. You have to back civilized behavior In residential neighborhoods. Thank you. Charles O'Dell, 100 Spruce Way Mr. O'Dell appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I have lived there for 35 years and I will testify that we have for decades fought with these kids, with bands, with kids marching up and down the road causing chaos at 1 o'clock In the moming. A couple of years ago I called the police, the Sheriff's Department, and the next night I had bottle rockets coming over Into my yard and I thought well at least It Is quiet. They didn't explode and you Just can't Imagine how gratifying It Is to walk out on the deck on the weekend and have It quiet and civilized. Okay It Is a tough law. It's too bad that It Is a tough law. Because these kids do not know how to behave. It has to be a tough law. I think the testify Is the amount of kids that are here so that they can act rowdy. Thank you very much. Nick Demuth, 101 Spruce Way Mr. Demuth appeared before the Board and made the following statement: 11 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 I have only lived here for 12 or 13 years and this has been an ongoing situation with the community for a long time. I'm not against kids having parties. I mean I was kid myself at one time, but I think if the kids can get together with the community maybe get the school to have arrangements where we could meet with the students we might be able to come to a little better agreement here of what is going on. I can cite different examples of things that happened, too. I had one one night at 1 o'clock in the morning going F-you, F-you real loud. Then I have had beer cans on my lawn that had nothing to do with the party, but they are all over my yard. I have had people come in my driveway, destroy my driveway. I'm only giving these as a few examples and the kids got to understand that this was instituted to try to put a little control on something. Maybe we can come together with a meeting with the school and have sort of a dialog. I'm for it. I mean I'm for having parties, too, but I want to live, too, peacefully and coexist. Thank you. Molle DeBartolo, 231 Pennsylvania Avenue Ms. DeBartolo appeared before the Board and made the following statement: I would just like to speak in response to some of the concerns raised by the residents about our intentions of being here and also our intentions in general as being residents of the community. Basically first off we are not here to not take responsibility for when we are wrong. We know that parties get out of hand. We know that parties can be unruly. We know that people's property gets destroyed. We know that our own property that we are living on gets destroyed. We are not here to dispute that at all. We know, like she said, there are good students, there are bad students. Well, there are good parties, there are bad « parties. Things go wrong. We don't want not be held responsible for when things get out of j | control. We want it to be a reasonable responsibility to be held for. I mean speaking on ' behalf of Just previous experience, you could be having a small get together with 10 of my friends here, we're all seniors in college and all of a sudden 50 freshmen come parading down Pennsylvania Avenue and will walk into the house and all of a sudden the party becomes unruly. While our original intentions were not to be unruly or to disrupt the neighbors or anything like that, its Just the college nature. People are out looking for a party. Things are happening. So I think it is unfair to punish the seniors and the Juniors that live off campus and are residing and paying the rent and having to pay the fines for obviously a whole college wide issue with parties. So first of all, I Just think that is unfair on our behalf because we seem to be the ones that always have to fess up to this and I was an underclassmen at one time too, so I know how underclassmen think that they can Just walk in anywhere and it doesn't really matter. But living in a house I understand the responsibilities and being a part of the community. On that note, I would Just like to say yes there are good students; yes there are bad students. Now if a resident came to my house at 10 o'clock at night and told me that I was being loud I'm not going to throw a beer can at their face, I'm not going to curse at them unruly, I'm not going to do anything like that. I mean I am an adult. I'm tuming 21 years old in two days and I think I am responsible enough to have a conversation with an adult. So I would Just like to clarify the fact that we are not unruly cave people running around Just trying to destroy your property, things like that. We are students. We are Just trying to enjoy ourselves on the weekend. Things do get out of control and we will take responsibility for that, but I don't think j | we should be fined amounts that. ..I don't even have $500 in my bank account, nor is my rent that much per month to be able to...for, you know, for these issues that have been 12 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 happening. I really do believe that we can foster a better relationship between the community and its residents. We are willing to be there. We are willing to have you come knock on our door and tell us if there is an issue and we would prefer it that way because we feel like we know you then and I have much more respect for people I know than a faceless person who ended up giving me a $500 fine. So I guess that is the basis. Sorry if that was mumbo- jumbo. Sam Podel, 227 Pennsylvania Avenue Mr. Podel appeared before the Board and made the following statement: / will be very brief. I would just like to reiterate the fact that many of us here are proud members of the South Hill community. I have a very, very strong relationship with many of my neighbors. I would also like to say that we are not here because we want to act rowdy. We are not here because we want to do whatever we damn well please. We are here because we feel that our rights have been compromised and that we are being unjustly targeted by law enforcement officials. I would Just like to say that examples such as the Troy Road incident and examples that happened on Pennsylvania Street over 20 years ago do not properly represent the actions of students in this day and age. I have been to several gatherings that have been reasonable that have been broken up and innocent residents have been fined, gatherings with less than 10 people. And I would Just like to reiterate the fact that IC students have a tendency to get out of control and we admit that. But it should be the behaviors that violate the laws that should be prosecuted, not gatherings that are of reasonable volumes and decibel level. That is all I would like to say. Councilwoman Leary remarked that many people have characterized the law as an attempt to solve other problems. This law is specifically for noise. She stated that the Board was told in recent history that noise was a problem. Board members have worked with Ithaca College and there is an ongoing working group that has student and community representation. Many attempts have been made in recent years to reach out to students and have dialog between students and community members. It worked to some extent, but there was still a small percent where there was a real problem and was why the Town felt the need to make the noise ordinance like the City's noise ordinance. She mentioned that there are many noise ordinances throughout the state. It was not an attempt to target one group. The aim of the law is to allow all residents the right to peace and quiet and a good night's sleep. Councilman Stein added that Councilwoman Leary and himself worked on the Town's noise ordinance. In response to comments made, Councilman Stein felt that the Board should look at the time period required for giving noise permits. He wanted everyone to understand that getting a noise permit does not give one the right to make unreasonable noise. Councilman Stein added that a fine is not supposed to be affordable. The heavy fines are supposed to be a deterrent. While drafting the noise ordinance, the committee was concerned about unreasonable enforcement and the Board would like to know of instances of unreasonable enforcement. The committee also thought that having a warning was not a good idea. There was warning that the noise ordinance was passed with a $500 maximum fine. Supervisor Valentino stated that the judge asks many questions about what actually happened and then determines if the noise was unreasonable. 13 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 12, 2006 Councilwoman Leary explained that the City has a police force to enforce their noise ordinance and the Town does not. The Town relies on the County Sheriffs Department to enforce the law and they have a lot of area to patrol. The committee decided not to have a <- warning process because the Sheriffs Department has limited resources. Schickel Road Construction Pat Long, 4 Schickel Road (Attachment #5 - Letter from Pat Long regarding need to resurface Schickel Road) Ms. Long appeared before the Board and made the following statement: This visit is a follow up to the letter I wrote the board and if I don't go home and tell my neighbors that something can be done to get Schickel Road repaired and resurfaced, get it on your agenda, get it on the budget, they are going to be very disappointed. I should say that it is interesting to hear about all these noise ordinances because I have become aware that since this development is going on at Westview that cars are coming in my road at 6:20 every moming because he has got to finish those houses. Now the trucks, I had two ovemight guests and they said at different times, "Pat, when do those trucks start coming in here?" 7 in the moming. Now we are talking concrete trucks, mixers, huge earthmovers, big trucks. I don't know what they are, but they are big and they are noisy and you know that they go too fast. Now, the letter I'm telling you about, the kids are playing and biking and riding their scooters on the road, which has been destroyed and I have been calling Dan's office and Fred's office so they know about this, but in my opinion if I was told that the owner and developer was going to fix the road the past spring, don't believe it. I don't believe it. We don't believe it and I don't feel it is ever going to happen if you wait for him. * I My other teaming experience as I said to the Planning Board, I was naively ignorant when this thing came about, not that I could stop selling the land. I couldn't stop the development. Heaven knows somebody else was probably trying and we are going to work together now because I have been in contact with DEC. I went to Cortland and i'm talking to Syracuse. I have the impression that what is going on in my neighborhood is not up to DEC standards and they have already told me that they are having ongoing problems with him. The other problem is that I know that Lansing had serious problems with him and they are having problems on Buttermilk Lane. Now it is interesting to me that Evan Monkemeyer who does nice work, has a lot of problem getting anything passed here and I don't understand that. But some developer like I'm dealing with comes in and I don't know whether he is saving all the trees he is supposed to or not, but the neighbors are not only complaining about the road, and I am, but they are complaining about dead trees. I have been hearing this from somebody on Danby Road. They said what's happening? The trees are dying. Is it the water? Well, I hear apparently the whole Town has water problems. Drainage problems, so on and so forth. I want to invite all of you to come out, look at the Buddhist development. They are doing exquisite work. Obviously I said to DEC, well you are going to like that. You are going to love that. Come out and see it and compare it to what the Buddhist are doing. Supervisor Valentino stated that she has arranged a field trip with Mr. Noteboom to look at ^ the site. 14 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 (mm^ Agenda Item No. 9-7:00 p.m. - Public Hearing regarding Local Law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 ^ of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law Supervisor Valentino opened the public hearing at 7:00 p.m., but deferred it in order to listen to funding request presentations. The Town Clerk had proof of Posting and Publication. Agenda Item No. 7 - Presentations from funding reguestors Steve Penningroth, Executive Director, Community Science Institute (Attachment #6 - Email from S. Penningroth, Request to Town of Ithaca to Share Cost of Water Quality Monitoring Partnerships, and Request for Funding Volunteer Monitoring in the Six Mile Creek Watershed in 2007) Mr. Penningroth appeared before the Board to request funding in the 2007 for continued water quality monitoring of Fall Creek and Six Mile Creek. Mr. Penningroth invited questions from the Board. Supervisor Valentino stated that she has included $2,100 for Fall Creek volunteer monitoring and $3,300 for Six Mile Creek volunteer monitoring. Mr. Kanter added that those were earlier numbers before the Town had received the funding request from Mr. Penningroth. The current request for Six Mile Creek monitoring is $4,339 and for Fall Creek monitoring is $1,637. Councilman Stein gathered that the Town was being asked to pay 20% of the funding and wondered who provided the rest of the funding. Mr. Penningroth answered that the Towns of Dryden, Caroline, and Ithaca, and the City of Ithaca have provided equal funds for Six Mile Creek. The Towns of Ithaca and Dryden and the City of Ithaca have contributed to Fall Creek monitoring. Councilman Burbank commented that the Board had received a request for a different monitoring station on Six Mile Creek. He wondered if the two monitoring programs were connected. Mr. Penningroth thought that they were complimentary and that the other program was testing for phosphorous and sediment and explained how the two are related. Agenda Item No. 12 - 7:15 p.m. - Public Hearing regarding Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations Supervisor Valentino opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m., but deferred it in order to listen to funding request presentations. The Town Clerk had proof of posting and publication. Agenda No, 7 Cont'd Supervisor Valentino stated that she is unsure at this point whether the other monitoring ^ program will need funding from the Town. She understood that the information from the monitoring would be helpful to the Town and the stormwater mitigation measures the Town 15 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13. 2006 has to develop. Staff feels it is important for the Town to continue funding the volunteer monitoring program because it will be helpful with stormwater mitigation. Mr. Penningroth added that they have 13 monitoring locations, but they are not set in stone. The volunteer group could look at locations for stormwater concerns. Michael Stamm, President of TCAD Mr. Stamm appeared before the Board to request funding for TCAD in the 2007 budget. He told the Board that the Town had been a member in years past until the prior attorney gave the opinion that the Town was not able to contribute. Mr. Stamm gave the Board a brief overview of what TCAD does for the community and offered to answer any questions from the Board. Councilman Stein asked if Mr. Stamm had said that the Board previously had a legal opinion from its counsel that the Town could not be a member of the organization. Mr. Stamm responded it was quite a few years ago and they gave up requesting funding because the Town had the same attorney, but now the Town has a new attorney. Councilman Stein stated that in order to change the position of the Board, they would need an opinion from current Town counsel that they could give funding to TCAD. Councilman Burbank wondered if the Town were to fund TCAD, would there be anything identifiable that would be dependent upon the funding of the Town that would directly affect Town taxpayers. Mr. Stamm stated that it would be investing in an organization that does important and good things within the community. Councilman Burbank asked if the Board did consider funding, what would be the mechanism if the Town wanted to have any role in the governing of TCAD? Mr. Stamm responded that they have a Board of Directors and an active committee structure that includes people not on the board. There is an Economic Development Strategy Steering Committee that Mr. Kanter and Supervisor Valentino are very active on. So there are opportunities based upon collective or individual interests. Ram Stonebreaker, Assistant Director of the SPCA Ms. Stonebreaker appeared before on behalf of the SPCA. She told the Board the SPCA had sent a proposal letter to the Town in September. They are asking for a 3.5% increase from what was paid in 2006. Supervisor Valentino stated the requested increase is equal to $700. Supervisor Valentino mentioned that a few months ago several Town Clerks in the County were upset about the SPCA reducing some of the service on tickets. Ms. Stonebreaker responded that the Director had suggested delivering tickets through the mail rather than personal service. He has withdrawn that proposal and the SPCA continues to personally deliver the tickets. Councilman Stein asked if he understood correctly that the Town is obliged to have someone provide dog control services. Ms. Stonebreaker responded yes. Dog control is a mandated service in New York State. 16 October 16, 2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Agenda Item No. 9 Cont'd - Public Hearing on Outdoor Lighting Law Supervisor Valentino invited members of the public to speak on the proposed local law. With no one interested in speaking, Supervisor Valentino closed the public hearing. Agenda Item No. 10 - SEQR regarding a Local Law adding Chapter 173. titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs." and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law (Attachment #7 - SEQR) TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-207: SEQR: Proposed Local Law adding Chapter 173. titled "Lighting. Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs." and Chapter 270 of the Town of ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law WHEREAS, this action is the enactment of a local law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law; and WHEREAS, said proposed local law will regulate the shielding of outdoor lighting along with other specific requirements for outdoor signs, recreational facilities, lighting under roof overhangs and canopies, for spotlights and floodlights, prohibited lights, temporary lighting, and submission requirements for new construction; and WHEREAS, this is an unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board is acting as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to the enactment of this local law; and WHEREAS, the Town Board, at a public hearing held on October 16, 2006, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form, Parts I and II for this action, prepared by Town Planning staff; RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. MOVED: Councilman Engman SECONDED: Councilwoman Gittelman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. 17 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Agenda Item No. 11 - Consider Adoption of Local Law adding Chapter 173. titled . "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of ithaca Code, titled "Signs." and Chapter 270 of the Town of ithaca Code, titled ' "Zoning" to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law (Attachment #8 - Local Law) TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-208: Resolution Adopting "A LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER 173. TITLED "LIGHTING. OUTDOOR" TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE. AND AMENDING CHAPTER 221 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE. TITLED "SIGNS." AND CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE. TITLED "ZONING." TO ADD REFERENCES TO THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING LAW" WHEREAS, a resolution was duly adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca for a public hearing to be held by said Town on October 16, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. to hear all interested parties on a proposed local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER 173, TITLED "LIGHTING, OUTDOOR" TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 221 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "SIGNS," AND CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "ZONING," TO ADD REFERENCES TO THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING LAW"; and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was duly advertised in the Ithaca Journal; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was duly held on said date and time at the Town Hall « of the Town of Ithaca and all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak on ! behalf of or in opposition to said proposed local law, or any part thereof; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") and its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, adoption of said local law is an Unlisted action for which the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, acting as lead agency in an environmental review with respect to adoption of this local law, has on October 16, 2006 made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II prepared by the Town's Planning staff; NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts said local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER 173, TITLED "LIGHTING, OUTDOOR" TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 221 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "SIGNS," AND CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "ZONING," TO ADD REFERENCES TO THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING LAW", a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file said local law with the Secretary of State as required by law. MOVED: Councilman Engman ' ' 18 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 SECONDED: Supervisor Valentino Roll Call Vote: Supervisor Valentino, aye Councilwoman Leary, aye Councilman Cowie, aye Councilwoman Gittelman, aye Councilman Burbank, aye Councilman Stein, aye Councilman Engman, aye Agenda Item No. 12 Cont'd - Public Hearing on Solar Collectors and Installations Supervisor Valentino invited members of the public to address the board. With no one interested in speaking. Supervisor Valentino closed the public hearing at 7:31 p.m. Agenda Item No. 13 - SEQR regarding Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-209: SEQR: Proposed Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code. Entitled Zoning. Regarding Solar Collectors and Installations (Attachment #9 - SEQR) WHEREAS, this action is the enactment of a local law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, entitled Zoning, regarding solar collectors and installations; and WHEREAS, said proposed local law would permit the installation and use of solar collectors in any zoning district in the Town, subject to certain criteria. These provisions would be added to the section of the Zoning Code regarding "Special Regulations" (Section 270-219.a) and would also add several definitions pertaining to solar installations in Section 270-5; and WHEREAS, this is an unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board is acting as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to the enactment of this local law; and WHEREAS, the Town Board, at a public hearing held on October 16, 2006, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form, Parts I and II for this action, prepared by Town Planning staff; RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. MOVED: Councilman Burbank SECONDED: Councilman Cowie 19 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman j Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously Agenda Item No. 14 - Consider Adoption of Local Law Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning" regarding solar collectors and installations Attachment #10 - Local Law) TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-210 : Resolution Adopting "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE. ENTITLED ZONING. REGARDING SOLAR COLLECTORS AND INSTALLATIONS" WHEREAS, a resolution was duly adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca for a public hearing to be held by said Town on October 16, 2006 at 7:15 p.m. to hear all interested parties on a proposed local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, ENTITLED ZONING, REGARDING SOLAR COLLECTORS AND INSTALLATIONS"; and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was duly advertised in the Ithaca Journal; and WHEREAS, said public hearing was duly held on said date and time at the Town Hall ^ of the Town of Ithaca and all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak on behalf of or in opposition to said proposed local law, or any part thereof; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") and its implementing regulations at 6 NYCRR Part 617, adoption of said local law is an Unlisted action for which the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, acting as lead agency in an environmental review with respect to adoption of this local law, has on October 16, 2006 made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II prepared by the Town's Planning staff; NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts said local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, ENTITLED ZONING, REGARDING SOLAR COLLECTORS AND INSTALLATIONS", a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this resolution; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file said local law with the Secretary of State as required by law. MOVED: Councilwoman Gittelman SECONDED: Councilman Engman 20 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Roll Call Vote: Supervisor Valentino, aye Councilwoman Leary, aye Councilman Cowie, aye Councilwoman Gittelman, aye Councilman Burbank, aye Councilman Stein, aye Councilman Engman, aye Board Comments Councilman Engman suggested that when going over the budget, the Board only bring up those things for which they might have a suggested change. Agenda Item No. 15 - Discussion of 2007 Town of Ithaca Budget (Attachment #11-5 Year Analysis of Factors Causing Increases in Town Personnel Costs prepared bv Councilman SteinO Councilman Stein made a presentation regarding the growth of the personnel budget from 2000 to 2005. Councilman Stein stated that he would like to establish using the CPI increase of the Northeast US Urban and the CPI increase of US Cities of less than 50,000 as the standard indexes for calculating the CPI. He proposed that the average of these two numbers be used to establish COLA for 2007 wages. After calculating the number for July of 2006 to July of 2005, he established that an increase of 4.6% was appropriate. Councilman Stein was willing to move a resolution increasing the Town of Ithaca COLA from the 4% in the budget to 4.6% when the time was appropriate. Supervisor Valentino made a presentation to the Board regarding how she determined that the COLA for 2007 should be 4.5%. She also gave a brief history regarding employee wages from 2000 to 2006. Councilman Cowie asked if Supervisor Valentino or Mrs. Drake could comment on Councilman Stein's suggestion of establishing which CPIs should be used. Mrs. Drake commented that they always look at the CPI for the Northeast and Urban area and they are relatively close. She thought it was fine to come to an agreement on which CPIs to use. She added that she also looks at the area union contracts and incorporates that information in what she brings to the Board. In response to Supervisor Valentino's presentation. Councilman Stein stated that reclassification brought employees up to where they needed to be so the cost of living increases given beforehand does not matter, which is why he only used the past 5 years in his presentation. He argued that it was not true that taxes have not been raised. Taxes have been raised at 8% per year over the past 5 years because the assessments increased. Councilman Stein stated the issue is how much the Town has increased the tax levy and the tax levy has increased approximately 8% per year. He felt that the Town could not say that they could afford to pay a little more than the COLA because the COLA is proportional to people's ability to pay. Wages cannot be increased beyond the ability of the taxpayers to 21 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 pay. He believes that it is the COLA that should be used by the Board to keep employees ^ comparable. i Councilwoman Leary stated that the reclassification year was an unusual year so the figures are not as bad as the figures make it look. Councilman Stein responded that he does not argue the reclassification. Councilwoman Leary did not agree that the Board could not tie the hands of future boards because they do it all the time. Future boards can untie their hands. She pointed out that whatever the Board decides on the increase for the 2007 staff increases needs to be applied to the 2007 elected officials increase. Councilwoman Leary felt is was fair to target the increase to the CP!. The Town wants to stay competitive, but also should have a principle that the employees are given enough of an increase to stay even, which ties it to the Cost of Living. Councilman Engman thought that the Board should be clear that taxes were raised and the tax rate was increased in 1998, 2000, 2005 and 2006. Admittedly, it was very tiny in 1998 and 2000. Supervisor Valentino explained that it wasn't actually an increase. The County used to round up the amount and keep a certain percentage of the Town's money. The Town and County have worked together and that is no longer the case. Councilman Engman explained that he has calculated it out over 10 years and the tax rate has been increased by 3.35% a year. He is concerned that the tax levy has increased an average of 8.9% per year. Councilman Engman felt that there needed to be a predictable future for the increases because the Town could not sustain an 8.9% increase per year. He was comfortable with the jmmc CP! that Councilman Stein suggested, but recommended that in the coming year the Town Board do a comparability study. Supervisor Valentino responded that a comparability study is planned for 2007. Councilman Engman thought that it would help to eliminate some of the discussion the Town Board was having. Councilman Stein stated that he wanted to move a resolution that the methodology he described, mainly to average Northeast US Urban and US Cities Less than 50,000 Population calculated July of the year in which the Board is passing the budget to July of the previous year, be adopted as the base rate considered as the COLA increase. Councilman Cowie seconded. Supervisor Valentino explained that the July-to-July number is usually a higher level than at the end of the year. Mrs. Drake added that is the time period that they always look at. She was concerned about fluctuations in the rate such as dropping to 1% or increasing to 15%. Councilman Stein responded that if the COLA drops to 1% then it drops to 1% because it is cumulative over time and if the rate is 15% then the Town Board needs to figure out how to pay the 15%. Councilwoman Leary thought that Councilman Stein was correct. The employees should not be the first ones to fall. She asked if the Board wanted to give equal weight to the US Cities under 50,000 or does the Board want to tweak the formula? Supervisor Valentino explainedthat the City, County, and other professionals that she talked with use the Northeast Urban. pi Councilman Cowie thought the discussion should be separated out. One discussion should be about what the system for giving wages should be and the other should be about the 22 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 measure. He asked Councilman Stein if he wanted the wage increase bound to the CP!. Councilman Stein wanted the Board to be bound as much as they could, but he did not think they could bind future Boards. He also did not think that the Board could bind the Supervisor to present the increase in the tentative budget. Councilman Stein wanted a sense of the Board that that was what was going to be used in general in the future. It was not clear to him that all major employers use the Northeast US Urban CPI. Supervisor Valentino felt that the Board could not be bound by the average that Councilman Stein was suggesting because it is hard to determine what the next year is going to be like. She added the Board needed to look at the surrounding wages, what is happening in the world, and what the Town can afford. Ms. Brock read suggested language for the resolution. Mr. Cowie recommended a language change from "inform" to basis for. Mr. Stein accepted the recommended change. IB RESOLUTION NO, 2006-211: Adopt Consumer Price Indexes for use in Calculatinq Town Cost of Living Adjustment BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca adopts the average of the CPIs for the Northeast US Urban and US Cities Less than 50,000 calculated during the preceding July to July period to be the basis for the Town Board's decision in calculating the Cost of Living Adjustment for Town employee wages for the next fiscal year. MOVED: Councilman Stein SECONDED: Councilman Cowie VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously Agenda Item No. 16 - Discussion and Consider Approval of Elected Officials' Salaries for 2007 Supervisor Valentino stated that she budgeted a 4% increase. Councilman Stein moved that the increase be 4.6% for elected officials. Councilwoman Leary seconded. Board votes on motion, carried unanimously. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-212- 2007 Proposed Elected Officials Salaries. WHEREAS, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca has reviewed the proposed salaries, indicated below, for the elected officials for the year 2007; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the elected officials' salaries at a 4.6% increase over 2006; and be it further 23 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to publish the said proposed salaries as required by Section 108 of the Town Law. MOVED: SUPERVISOR TOWN BOARD MEMBERS (6) TOWN JUSTICES' (2) Councilman Stein $ 44,978.00 $ 8,155.77 Each $ 15,591.84 Each (Paid Biweekly) (Paid Quarterly) (Paid Biweekly) SECONDED:Councilwoman Leary VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Sten, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 17 - Discussion and Consider Approval of Emplovee Wages for 2007 Councilman Stein moved that the increase be 4.6% for Town employees. Councilwoman Leary seconded. Councilwoman Leary suggested that in the future, the employee wage resolution be voted on before the elected officials' wage resolution because the elected officials' increase is tied to the employee increase. The Board concurred. Mrs. Drake explained that there has been a change in the salary of the Receiver of Taxes. She is recommending that the salary remain flat at the 2006 wage instead of being reduced to $5,000. There amount would not be increased in future years. Councilman Stein did not understand why the stipend was being frozen at the 2006 amount since it was the same amount of work. Mrs. Drake explained that they were trying to look at it in regards to that they had appointed a staff member to do the job. She was fine with the stipend increasing annually, but they were just looking at cost saving ideas. Councilwoman Leary thought that it was work just like any other work. She did not see why that job should be singled out and frozen. Supervisor Valentino suggested that the stipend be at the 2006 rate for 2007 and then add it in as a regular stipend in the next year. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-213: Approval of Year 2007 Emplovee Wages. WHEREAS, Town Board of the Town of Ithaca has reviewed the proposed wage increase of 4% for the Town of Ithaca employees for the year 2007 as presented to the Board Personnel Committee by the Town Supervisor and Human Resources Manager (see attachments); and, WHEREAS, the Town Board voted to change the proposed wage increase from 4% to 4.6%; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the employee wages at a 4.6% increase over 2006, as filed in the Human Resources Offices. MOVED:Councilman Stein r 24 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 SECONDED: Councilwoman Leary VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No, 18 - Discussion and Consider Adoption of Town of Ithaca 2007 Tentative Budget as the 2007 Town of ithaca Preliminarv Budget Supervisor Valentino brought the Board's attention to the worksheet provided to them on the table of the changes to the Tentative Budget requested by the Board at the October 5, 2006 board meeting. Supervisor Valentino and the Board walked through the items on the budget sheet. Communitv Science Institute Supervisor Valentino turned the Board's attention to the three funding requests made earlier in the meeting. She thought that it was a good idea to fund the Six Mile Creek Monitoring program because the data would be helpful to the Town in their stormwater management efforts and it was only an increase of approximately $600. Supervisor Valentino moved that the Board approve the funding for the two monitoring programs. Councilman Engman seconded. Supervisor Valentino clarified that it was funding Six Mile Creek and Virgil Creek monitoring, the two programs the Town is currently funding. Board votes on motion, carried unanimously. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-214: Approval of Communitv Science Institute Funding Reguest BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca approves funding the Community Science Institute's volunteer monitoring as follows: $4,339 for monitoring in the Six Mile Creek watershed, and $1,637 for monitoring in the Fall-Virgil Creek watershed. MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. SPCA Supervisor Valentino stated that the SPCA has decided to continue personally serving tickets. She thought that it should be clear in the new contract that dog tickets are to be personally served. Ms. Brock added it is required by law that appearance tickets are served personally. 25 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 The SPCA requested an Increase of $700 and Supervisor Valentino asked the Board what they thought about the Increase. Councilman Stein asked If the Board had a choice. Councilman Cowie suggested that the contract could be renegotiated. Supervisor Valentino stated that the SPCA would take It or leave It because they had plenty of money. Councilman CowIe asked If that was the case and If the SPCA was In fine financial shape. Supervisor Valentino answered that they are not In a financial bind. PETA and Mrs. Parks support them. Councilman Engman thought the Board should look at the quality of work and what the Town Is receiving for services. He added that $20,700 was reasonable and moved that the Board adopt It. Councllwoman GIttelman seconded. Councilman Stein asked the Board If they had ever assured themselves that It Is a reasonable charge for the services rendered. Supervisor Valentino knew from discussions with other towns that have looked Into contracting with a private company that the cost would exceed what Is paid to the SPCA because the SPCA has other funding sources. The Town also has to monitor the treatment of dogs and Is responsible for the care and treatment of the dogs. The SPCA Is a responsible agent to meet the requirements of New York State Agriculture and Markets law. IB RESOLUTION NO. 2006- 215: Approval of Increase In SPCA Dog Control Contract Amount BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca approves an Increase of $700 In the dog control contract with Tompklns County SPCA. MOVED: Councilman Engman SECONDED: Councllwoman GIttelman VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councllwoman GIttelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman CowIe, aye; Councllwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. TCAD Supervisor Valentino asked the Board what they thought of funding TCAD. Councllwoman GIttelman thought that It was well worth It. Councilman Stein did not know If It was well worth It or not. During the presentation. Councilman Stein thought that they would get their share of the sales tax If the development was not In the City and did not see why the Town shouldn't fund them. Councilman Burbank asked what makes this a different case than funding the bid proposal and what mechanism the Town would have to go through to fund the agency. Supervisor Valentino stated that they would probably have to give the money to the County and asked Ms. Brock If they would have to do a local law for a donation to the County. Ms. Brock responded that It Is the Comptroller's recommendation that a local law Is done when a contribution of money Is made to another municipality. 26 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Supervisor Valentino did not feel strongly one way or another. She thought that there has been some benefit to the Town for the South Hill development and other commercial development that they helped put together. She felt that the difference between the Downtown Partnership and TCAD is that the Town of Ithaca is making a substantial contribution to downtown by being downtown. She could not think of one benefit the Town receives from the Partnership, but could think of several benefits that the Town of Ithaca provides by being in the downtown area. Councilman Stein stated that Councilman Burbank raised a point that he had not thought of before. Everyone has different conclusions about whether or not the Town should pay the bid, but at the meeting it was argued that the Town could not contribute even if it was thought it was a good idea because it had to be funneled through a contribution to another municipality. Councilman Burbank points out that it is the same argument. Councilman Stein asked why it would be different. Ms. Brock answered it might be different because TCAD is a not-for-profit organization and a membership organization. The way one becomes a member is by paying the requested amount. She had not seen the by-laws to review all the privileges of membership. Supervisor Valentino stated that the Board needed to be careful. The Board was talking on one hand about the limited resources and then what starts happening when the Town starts funding these agencies is that it doesn't go away. She added that one of the criteria that the Board sets out is how much influence or input does the Town have on how the money is used once it is turned over. The Town is not on the Board of Directors for either the Downtown Partnership or TCAD. Ms. Brock added that Mr. Stamm had reported that some of the municipalities were earmarking the funds that they gave for certain projects. She assumed that the same courtesy would be extended to the Town of Ithaca. Ms. Brock did not know if it was really necessary to decide exactly what the mechanism is to do the funding. She thought the question is how much to put in the budget and then they can figure out what the best mechanism is to make it legal. Supervisor Valentino stated that they were shooting the costs up. The Board is looking at a tax increase now. Councilman Burbank stated that he was frustrated that the Board ended up discussing each of these in isolation without trying to develop a whole package. He could see giving to the library and bus service, but the Town cannot give to all agencies. The Board needs to think about how to weigh them. He finds the way the Board is going about it frustrating because it is decided on individual merits without weighing one against another. Councilwoman Gittelman interjected that TCAD brings jobs to Tompkins County. Councilman Stein asked how many things like this are in the budget. He thought that both Supervisor Valentino and Councilman Burbank were making good points. For future years. Councilman Stein suggested the Board consider funding outside agencies as a group. He thought looking at these as a whole package ought to be part of the Town's budget process. Supervisor Valentino thought it was a good idea and added that the Board needs to develop criteria for considering funding requests. 27 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Ms. Valentino asked the Board what they wanted to do about TCAD. 1 ; Councilman Stein moved funding $1,000 for TCAD. Councilwoman Gittelman seconded. The board voted as follows: Councilwoman Leary, no; Councilman Cowie, no; Councilman Stein, yes; Councilman Engman, yes; Councilwoman Gittelman, yes; Councilman Burbank, no; Supervisor Valentino, no. Motion fails. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-216: Tompkins Countv Area Development Funding Request BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca provide $1,000 of funding for Tompkins County Area Development in the 2007 Town of Ithaca budget. MOVED: Councilman Stein SECONDED: Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, nay; Councilman Burbank, nay; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, nay; Councilwoman Leary, nay. Motion failed. Mrs. Drake brought to the Board's attention that they had not voted to adopt the amendments to the budget. Councilman Stein thought that would happen when the Board voted on item 18. Supervisor Valentino felt the Board should vote on them so that they clearly have the budget amendments. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-217: Adoption of Amendments to the 2007 Tentative Budget (Attachment #12 - Summarv of Budget Chanaes Requiring Town Board Action to the Tentative 2007 Budget to be Included in the Preliminarv Budqett BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca adopts the amendments to the 2007 Tentative Budget agreed upon at the October 5, 2006 Town Board meeting and presented in the "Town of Ithaca Summary of Budget Changes requiring Town Board action to the Tentative 2007 Budget to be included in the Preliminary Budget". MOVED: Councilman Stein SECONDED: Councilwoman Valentino VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye Supervisor Valentino asked if the Board had any questions on other items in the budget. n Councilman Stein stated that, at the last meeting, he asked to have the new positions put in I n as something that is reported on. Namely, every year, what percentage increase can be ascribed to new positions? If the information is not available at this meeting, Mr. Stein stated 28 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 that they could do it at the next meeting and he would bring it up again. Supervisor Valentino mentioned that they do not have newly created positions for 2007. Councilman Stein stated that there is an increase in hours. Supervisor Valentino told him there are two increases in hours and Mrs. Drake added that they both represent 1% of the budget at 4% increase. Supervisor Valentino stated that increasing the planner position to 37.5 hours came up through the Building and Zoning Department Restructuring Committee. It was clear to the Committee when they were dividing the work between the Planning and Engineering departments that the position that would have to be going to the Zoning Board meetings needed to be funded at full time. Mr. Stein asked if he was correct that does not represent an increase because of Mr. Frost's retirement. Mrs. Drake explained that there are two positions, the Deputy Clerk and Planner, and each represents 1% of the budget, they are both a 9 thousand some dollars increase in the budget. Councilman Stein stated he would like to see the increase in the Clerk's hours taken out. Supervisor Valentino told him the Personnel Committee decided to keep the Deputy Clerk position at 30 hours. She said that putting the funding in doesn't mean the Board has approved it to go to full time. It puts the money there in case the Board decides they want the position to go to full time or use the funding some place else. Councilman Stein stated then he would like to move to take it out. Ms. Hunter, as department head, told the Board it was fine with her. Councilman Engman seconded the motion. Councilman Cowie asked if the Town was having any problems recruiting and retaining someone for the position because it was part-time. Ms. Hunter stated that the person currently in the position probably would like to go full-time, but they were also told when they were hired that there was no guarantee the position would go full-time and as far as Ms. Hunter knew the Board had not decided to fund the position full-time. IB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-218: Reduce proposed 2007 funding for Deputv Town Clerk BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca reduces the funding in the 2007 Tentative Budget for Deputy Town Clerk and leaves the position at 30 hours per week. MOVED: Councilman Stein SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Supervisor Valentino asked if there were other questions about the budget. The Board did not have further questions. She asked if the Board was ready to adopt the budget as the Preliminary budget. Ms. Hunter read proposed resolution language to the Board. Supervisor Valentino moved the resolution and Councilman Burbank seconded. Ms. Brock corrected that the date in the proposed resolution should be changed from October 13, 2006 to October 16, 2006. 29 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-219 : Adoption of the 2007 Town of Ithaca Tentative Budget as the Town of Ithaca 2007 Preliminary Budget Whereas, the 2007 Town of Ithaca Tentative Budget was filed with the Town Clerk on September 28, 2006 and distributed to the Town Board for their review, and Whereas, the Town Board reviewed and amended the Tentative Budget at their meetings on October 5, 2006 and October 13, 2006 Now, therefore, be it Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts the 2007 Town of Ithaca Tentative Budget as amended as the 2007 Town of Ithaca Preliminary Budget MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Burbank VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda No. 19 - Consider Recommending Conservation Board Member as n Representative to the Tompkins Countv Environmental Management Council Councilman Engman stated that Larry Sallinger is a member of the EMC and has done an excellent job. Councilman Engman moved the resolution and Councilwoman Gittelman seconded. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-220: APPOINTMENT TO TOMPKINS COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COUNCIL 'T RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby recommends and requests that the Tompkins County Legislature appoint Conservation Board member, Larry Sallinger, for the term January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008 to serve as a Town of Ithaca Representative on the noted council. MOVED: Councilman Engman SECONDED: Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 20 - Discussion of Possible Purchase of Development Rights Program for Environmentallv Sensitive and Important Lands (Attachment #13 - Draft Town of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Prooraml 30 n October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Mr. Kanter stated that the item could be deferred if the Board thought it was getting too late. He mentioned that material was provided to the Board. The Conservation Board has been looking at the idea, at the request of previous Town Boards, to add a Purchase of Development Rights Program for natural area preservation, which would be comparable to the Agricultural Land Preservation Program. The Conservation Board is at a point where they are willing and would be happy to look into it further, but would like direction from the Town Board whether it is something the Town Board wants them to pursue. Mr. Kanter stated that there are all kinds of questions that center around these kinds of programs: how effective has our agricultural land preservation program been; if it were fully implemented how much would it cost; how much would it cost to add a program for natural areas preservation. These are things that would have to be look at much closer. The draft report on Natural Heritage Preservation was contracted out and done by George Frantz as a consultant to the Town in 2001. It has the same sore of basis as the agricultural land preservation program has. The same idea but for different kinds of properties. Mr. Kanter stated it is a policy decision, something that was recommended the Town pursue in the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan. Supervisor Valentino thought that the Board could defer it; it is not time sensitive thing. Councilman Cowie would also like to defer it. Councilman Burbank thought it was time sensitive. He reported receiving a call earlier in the day from someone on Elm Street who alerted him that a large plot of land directly adjacent to Coy Glen Gorge is being marketed for development. The caller wondered if there was an^hing the Town could do. Supervisor Valentino asked what it was zoned and Mr. Kanter stated it was zoned low density residential and has already been subdivided into 4 lots. He added that the asking price on the property is really high, much higher than what the Town paid for the Dress preserve property. Mr. Kanter explained that the Town does have the open space reserve, which has $360,000 in the fund. The Town is annually putting in $50,000. It is not enough to sustain very many acquisitions and was originally intended for purchase of development rights. Mr. Kanter told the Board that right now if the Board felt strongly about pursuing a particular property, they could do that on a case-by-case basis. Councilman Engman said that he read the publication and thought it was great. He thought that the only decision the Board was being asked to make was whether or not the Conservation Board should fine-tune the document. Councilman Engman agreed with Councilman Burbank and has had two calls about properties that might become available. There is some urgency at least for the Conservation Board to be able to know the Town Board wants them to work on it. He suggested that unless there was an objection, that the Town Board send a message to the Conservation Board that they should fine tune the document and propose a conservation easement type program. The Board could then discuss something very specific. Supervisor Valentino and Councilman Cowie thought that was fine. Mr. Kanter agreed that it was a good idea for the Conservation Board to start looking at and move ahead with it. He thought there should be criteria and there should be target areas mapped, but there should also be ways of bringing in other properties if they do meet certain criteria Supervisor Valentino asked if there needed to be a motion or was it enough to have a consensus from the Board for the Conservation Board to move ahead with it. Mr. Kanter 31 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 thought a consensus motion would be appropriate. The Town Board felt that it was appropriate for the Conservation Board to move ahead. Agenda Item No. 21 - Discussion and Consider setting pubiic hearing regarding local law adding chapter XXX to the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Privacv Notification Law" to compiv with the reguirements of State Technologv Law Section 208 (Attachment #14 - Draft Local Law and emails from S. Brocks Supervisor Valentino proposed that the public hearing be scheduled for November 13, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. Councilman Stein seconded. Board votes on motion, carried unanimously. TB Resolution No. 2006-221: Consider setting Dublic hearing regarding local law adding chapter XXX to the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Privacv Notification Law" to comply with the reguirements of State Technology Law Section 208. which reouires the notification upon the unauthorized release of priyate information. 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 13 day of November 2006 , at 7:00 p.m. for the purpose of considering a proposed local law adding a chapter to the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Privacy Notification Law" to comply with the requirements of State Technology Law Section 208, which requires a policy on notification upon the unauthorized release of private information. RESOLVED, that at such time and place all persons interested in the proposed 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: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Stein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 22 - Consider extension of Proyisional Appointment of Planner Mr. Kanter recommended that the Planner position be extended at least through March 31, 2007. It would be fully funded by the revenues the Town is receiving from Cornell for the TGEIS project. He corrected the proposed resolution in that the wage would be changed from $22.97 to $23.11 as an hourly rate. 32 October 16, 2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Councilman Burbank moved the resolution and Councilwoman Leary seconded. Councilwoman Leary confirmed that the revenues from Cornell would cover the additional wage increase. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-222: EXTENSION OF PROVISIONAL APPOINTMENT OF PLANNER WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Town Board appointed Nicole Tedesco to fill a Planner position on a temporary, provisional basis starting on August 1, 2005 until December 31, 2006; and WHEREAS, Nicole Tedesco has worked diligently with the Transportation Committee on the preparation of the Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan; and WHEREAS, the Director of Planning recommends extending the temporary, provisional appointment of Nicole Tedesco as Planner at least through March 31, 2007 to complete work on the Transportation Plan, to continue working with the Transportation Committee on Plan implementation, and on other assignments, due to the extra work that will occur for the department by continuing being the lead agency on the Cornell University GEIS project, which is now estimated to extend well into 2007; and WHEREAS, as part of the GEIS process and pursuant to the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), Cornell has committed to provide additional funds to the Town of Ithaca to cover the Town's anticipated costs of participating as lead agency in the GEIS going into 2007, and said funds will be sufficient to cover the amount necessary for wages and benefits of the full time Planner position at least until March 31, 2007; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the extension of the provisional appointment of Nicole Tedesco as Planner through March 31, 2007, subject to further extensions as determined by the Town Board; and be it further RESOLVED, this continues the full time appointment of Nicole Tedesco from January 1, 2007 through March 31, 2007 at 37.5 hours per week at an hourly rate of $23.11, from account B8020.100, full time benefits apply; and be it further RESOLVED, that the appointment is provisional pending successful completion of the next civil service examination and being a reachable candidate. MOVED: Councilman Burbank SECONDED: Councilwoman Leary VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. 33 October 16, 2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 Agenda Item No. 23 - Consider Authorizing Supervisor to Sign Utility Line Easement between Cornell University and New York State Electric & Gas Attachment #15 - Proposed Utility Line Easement between Cornell University and NYSEG) Mr. Walker explained the easement is to bring electricity into the new tank on East Hill. Councilman Engman moved it and Councilman Burbank seconded. Board votes on motion, carried unanimously. TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-223 : Authorizing Supervisor to Sign Utilitv Line Easement between Cornell University and New York State Electric & Gas BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes Supervisor Valentino to sign the Utility Line Easement between Cornell University and New York State Electric & Gas Corporation for supplying electricity to the East Hill water tank and pump station site. MOVED: Councilman Engman SECONDED: Councilman Burbank VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. j Agenda Item No. 24 - Consent Agenda Supervisor Valentino stated that she had a correction on page 3 of the minutes. It should not be Recreation Partnership Funding, but the Joint Youth Commission budget funding. Supervisor Valentino moves the consent agenda and Councilman Engman seconds. Mrs. Drake added the Board needed to include the Approval of the Permanent Appointment of the Distribution Operator Trainee at Bolton Point in the consent agenda approval. Councilman Engman stated that on Page 10 of the minutes, the last sentence, "bare" should be changed to "bear". TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-: Consent Agenda Itenfis. BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the following resolutions for Consent Agenda Items: a. Town Board Minutes of September 11, 2006 and September 22, 2006 b. Bolton Point Abstract c. Authorization to Attend Design of Stormwater Management Practice conference j ! d. Appointment of Account Clerk Typist - SCLIWC appointment e. Appointment of Distribution Operator Trainee 34 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. IB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-224a: Town Board Minutes of September 11. 2006 and September 22. 2006 WHEREAS, the Town Clerk has presented the minutes for a Regular Town Board meeting held on September 11, 2006 and a Special Town Board meeting held on September 22, 2006 to the governing Town Board for their review and approval of filing; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby approve for filing the minutes for the regular meeting held September 11, 2006 and a special meeting held September 22, 2006 as corrected at the October 16, 2006 board meeting. MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously TB RESOLUTION NO. 2006-224b: 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 Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers. Voucher Numbers: 571, 573-580, 585-639, 641-658, 660 ^ Check Numbers: 9402, 9472-9479, 9486-9559 Operating Fund $ 175,752.37 ^ 1998 SCADA Capital Project $ 6,000.55 2003 East Hill Tank Project $ 53, 941.83 35 October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 2002 Office Space Addition $ 530.00 TOTAL $ 236.224.75 MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. TB RESOLUTiON NO. 2006-224c: Authorization for Attending Design of Stormwater Management Practices Conference WHEREAS, the Design of Stormwater Management Practices sponsored by SUNY- ESF is being held in Syracuse NY, on December 4 & 5, 2006; and WHEREAS, attendance at the said program will benefit the Town of Ithaca by providing additional training to Kristin Taylor Now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby authorize Kristin Taylor, to attend the Design of Stormwater Management Practices, being held in Syracuse NY, on December 4 & 5, 2006, NY, date; and be it further RESOLVED, the cost not to exceed $350.00 is to be expended from A1440.410. MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously RESOLUTION NO. 2006-224d - Appointment Account Clerk Tvpist-SCLIWC. WHEREAS, there is presently a vacancy in the full time position of Account Clerk Typist in the Administration Department at Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission; and WHEREAS, the General Manager and Human Resources Manager interviewed candidates from the eligible listing available from Tompklns County Civil Service; and 36 n October 16,2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 WHEREAS, the General Manager and Human Resources Manager have determined that Mary Monkman possess the necessary knowledge and skills to satisfactorily perform the duties of an Account Clerk Typist; and WHEREAS, Ms. Monkman was appointed by SCLIWC at the October 12, 2006 meeting based on a part time level of 20 hours per week, effective October 16, 2006; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby ratify SGLIWC's appointment of Mary Monkman as part time Account Clerk Typist for the Administration Department; and be it further RESOLVED, this is a twenty (20) hours a week position, at the hourly wage of $14.50, which is an estimated annual salary of $15,080.00, from account number SW8310.101, with part time benefits. MOVED: Supervisor Valentino SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously RESOLUTION NO. 2006-224e - Permanent Appointment Distribution Operator Trainee-SCLIWC. WHEREAS, the Commission appointed Glenn Pryor to the position of Distribution Operator Trainee in a provisional status pending jurisdictional testing on January 30, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Personnel has provided the certificate of eligible listing for Distribution Operator Trainee title, and Mr. Pryor was one of the top three candidates; and WHEREAS, the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission approved Mr. Pryor's permanent appointment at their October 12, 2006; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby appoint Glenn Pryor to the position of Distribution Operator Trainee in the permanent status with no current change in compensation or benefits, retroactive to October 12, 2006; and, be it further RESOLVED, a twenty-six (26) week probationary period applies, with no further action required if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Distribution Manager. MOVED: Supervisor Valentino 37 October 16, 2006 Regular Town Board Meeting Approved on November 13, 2006 SECONDED: Councilman Engman VOTED: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Cowie, aye; Councilwoman Leary, aye. Motion carried unanimously. Agenda Item No. 25 - Report of Town Officials (Attachment #16 - monthly reports) Mrs. Drake reported that the Health Insurance quote for 2007 came in at a 2.6% decrease from the 2006 rate. The Board wondered why it went down. Mrs. Drake explained that the usage of the health insurance went down. The Board discussed the taping of the meeting and how they might be able to put the meeting on the Town's website and broadcast it from PEGASYS. Agenda Item No. 26 - Report of Town Committees No report. Agenda Item No. 27 - Intermunicipal Organizations Supervisor Valentino mentioned that the funding for the 10 has been included in the budget. Also, the Intermunicipal Cooperation and Consolidated Study Group could be crossed off the agenda because it is now the Tompkins County Council of Governments (TCCOG). Supervisor Valentino reported that the Town of Ulysses had rejoined the Recreation Partnership and the County would continue funding. Supervisor Valentino mentioned that she could give the Board copies of the reports and minutes from the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission. Councilman Burbank stated that the Town has been acquiring parks and preserves. Mr. Noteboom and Mr. Schoch have been attempting to put up signs identifying the boundaries of parks and preserves. He would like to develop a more friendly and inviting sign to be posted because the current ones indicate, "keep out". Councilman Burbank volunteered to work with Ms. Brock on researching appropriate language for signs. Agenda Item No. 29 - Consider Adjournment On motion by Councilman Stein, seconded by Supervisor Valentino, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk Next scheduled meeting - November 9, 2006 38 i TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD SISN-IN SHEET DATE: Monday, October 16, 2006 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE /'/?JA/r ADDRESS/AFFILIATION /ofc lose o-- \ ; f^yjeWOo^ lVn \jy. (fkce) -AA^u;s tcj?ic JIc>^S.IymJJ tPOA U SayV^ (^,h4 ,f tcc/w^// Ck-KE EZ.KA A-^ P'l\ Onll. ho 'i I F~C^^^NOo 'J> ~>1ciV£r r a ^ TV\c, Ku.rf' iCmpviM^ /A)(or5 2 I ^ \Klj^llAcU Z\^ r ^ 4C£r ^£r^//'-y Ucuijfh \Vl i A/t tl- \0L p^)ur, CF ^QSi Pra^OfCF SGF^ 3 ^ ^ yu> M/ >9 • ^ U f) . ^(6 SL^X^Cc 5M1^ Clc/is cA Tjufe ^SCvAxrv^U'^ WzoiTM N tl-e^ Svp\ KJi vysflik ^ 0 (a tA-^x^ C^/tTK ^-1. f Ilk C^eP_ j • ^ K S I'N |6or^ I -(Va (^ ' j W.we \ o A ^ >TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD SISN-IN SHEET DATE: Monday, October 16, 2006 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME V)0'i>Q^ "Pi' n |/1 ; s, PLEASE /'/yiA/rADDRESS/AFFILIATION U Ok (\ 'Id I iAvvL CVtv 6'^-0\ / ;,xIl /yX 'XC (WqWfl. /Vv\v\a-, Go f^Or\ sTWoio-^ c■^Bd Cic-c^c-^jy\'YV\~ (■Ayy'O/i \J//'<^j (j jUYj (o/x/^u^^/TV Sc /a^xl^os LyKjsr/xor/z^ s V/,■S'3--|a--s-vuot<.<^ VJo-ti-cts . j \Jirxs-tXs S'^binc^ fl ziifemili/mi(t kL a y^-yyyJL (ti - Q Cw.vb/rcW PijzKji'S- /SArfSoCK^- lo^ Woolb'S Rb ■ / E>R.woo^^WlUUiArKS ^ i f I i ) < TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Carrie Whitmore, being duly sworn, say that I am the Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official newspaper, Ithaca Journal: ADVERTISEMENT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "ZONING", REGARDING SOLAR COLLECTORS AND INSTALLATIONS. Location of Sign Board Used for Posting: Town Clerk's Office 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Date of Posting: Tuesday, September 26,2006 ^ Date of Publication: Monday, October 2, 2006 ihki iklxMrAn Carrie Whitmore, Deputy Town Clerk, Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS: TOWN OF ITHACA) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2"^ day of October, 2006 Notary Public Dan! L. Hofford Notary Public, State Of New York No. 01H06052879 . SenecaCoun^ ^^ My Commission B^lres Dec. 26, t \ \ TOWN OF ITHACA NOnCE OF PUBUC HEARING WTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that th^ Town Boord of the Town of Ithaca will hold a public hearing ot 7:I5 p.m. on the 16th day of October, 2006 at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 for the purpose of considering d proposed lo cal law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithoco Code, titled "Zoning", re garding solar collectors ond inslallotions. A copy of the proposed Local Law is on file ot the Town Clerk's Office and ovoila- pie for review during regu lar office hours, MoncRiy throu^ Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.; and , FURTHER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thototsuch time and ploce oil persons interested in the proposed local I(w may be heord concerning the some; and FURTHER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that indi- viduals with visual or hear ing Impairments or other s^iol needs will be pro vided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make a request to the Town Clerk not less than 48 n^oufs prior to the time of the public heoring. Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk Dole: September 26, 2006 ii'vf ^ TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Carrie Whitmore, being duly sworn, say that I am the Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official newspaper, Ithaca Journal: ADVERTISEMENT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING: PROPOSED LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER 173 TITLED "LIGHTING, OUTDOOR" TO THE TONW OF ITHACA CODE, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 221 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "SIGNS", AND CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "ZONING", TO ADD REFERENCES TO THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING LAW. Location of Sign Board Used for Posting: Town Clerk's Office 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 ! \ Date of Posting: Tuesday, September 26, 2008 Date of Publication: Monday, October 2, 2006 Carrie Whitmore, Deputy Town Clerk, Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS: TOWN OF ITHACA) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 2"^ day of October, 2006 rirCU Notary Public ^ OanI L Holfon! Notary Public, State Of New York No. 01H06052879 Seneca County nrvixN My Commission Expires Dec. 26. TOWN OF ITHACA NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca will hold a public heoring at 7:00 |>.in. pn the 16th day of October, 2006 at the Town Noll, 215 NorA Tiogo Street, Ithaca, NY 14o50 for the purpose of considering a pressed lo cal low adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Out door" to the Town oT ithaco Code, and omending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled■Signs", and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code,titled "Zoning", to odd ref erences to the OutdoorUghttng Law. A cc^y ofthe proposed Local Low is on file at the Town Clerk's Office and available for review during regular officehours, Monday Hirough Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00p.m.; and FURTHER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that at suchtime and place oil personsinterested In the proposedlocal law may be neord concerning the some; and FURTHER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that indh viduols with visual or hear- mg impoirmenis or otherspecial needs will be pro vided with assistance os necessary, upon request.Persons desiring assistancemust make a request to the Town Clerk not less than 48hours prior to the time ofthe public hearing. Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Cleric Dale: SecMmber 26, 2006 10/2/06 If.. « .V - . OCTOBER 16, 2006 i £kij: zj^c^ .^c/^^cctssk ScfOGCr ^37^97i>S - 7}^€ ^<^7 £/:>£^^7?/tA& jSt/^£7^ //^S Szi^i>u ^ cfS/^y77^l> 75 ^^T&j&^£jO /g.4^J) ScJ/>JiA\/fSff^ . 7[Ale7ut>e.l> Me/^£>/67y 72> )/kA£jOT?AJc^ ^ /7rc^Mta/&73 r^C.£)(7^aA£>imz.^ //[/C'jt^d^T COsT Scf/^/f£^y* /Z-jfjjffTy ^j^j^jJjUjcaTTzhJs jidJ/> T^£" TBco&A. ^/7Z£^ /s^a Co^^t^/OiCA-rrcAj ^^sTZat AtA^ C3>4^s77ujcJ7cjc/, 777^^xA^uj A^^Me/Ocl^ rhuj^A Ar XTAf-AcA (i>/Ji£^ /7A£> AaU S^^^&a77£>4U 5>Ar^ kSa^./OZ^^c>X> . Q>AAX^ ji^p 7Pi>l)xr?e>A^S ; 7^ /fss/JTMcX. 70 AAAX/^A4^a^7^ OMaJTs Zoo^ A4L - 7M9r nt£> Z7^/: OA-Mp/aZZxaiCi s^Sg^c/A^ry eCK)t^£AJ£, KI^T/aJC U>/17f AfSAf^J^s 4J7f77^x£. /^AC 77?^^ /7UAp£tA£ /^(l<U>Af/^e/Ot>/Ae Aox. A-ce^XAArAs O^AAJTy , 777^ Ah7?cx[. AaA TTf-^ Y£AA. //-» 77ht^ 7^£AAA A^4At>^ XAC A^/>£cf:t^ 70 /SSiJ^ AaJP aaWCOCJZA ^AAiS77AA£. TT^S /AOATTif' (oc»7':Zce>, f/A£, /kA\/£A/7/CfJ /ffcfAzxiJf - /A/ejxy/>Si> /aJ AjS/oz^AT'/fAesSAJ7Srd> ^ Va7£077a)0 /J a /^,^SS9dJ AA 7^ At^Kf ^7e?;fhf/aXAy ^r7Z TJWtf: A/A£^ /^7r> /hJ^^UJS/^M-AT uJ/77^ ^ST^A/AA. /7/77AA-T/oa^ Ac7Tt//7}^ * J^^SAA-e/Xc.y ^:ofL>77AJe>£: C/Ty-^/ins 7b CoAip^tAAC^ COtTU TH-e. 7/x7?€>AAJL XA/c^l>£Ajr TfAA/xacAAjor^^ys?^ AAc^tfiAe^A*^. ZTcz7 ^<=3<a Cz?c^/&.^£,S AA£^ /A>y^MMJAJA/Q. X'AJ> />A£/fAAA'/7e>AS ^/JCJ£>£AurA^/ A- f^ACtSX, 7^^ CfTy i>£/>4Ar'A^ExAs ^ October 16, 2006 Town Board Meeting, Attachment 2 In relation to the recently adopted Town of Ithaca noise ordinance (18^, the undersigned protest on the grounds that the law contains indefinite language, is overly strict, and uses unnecessary means in order to achieve its goal. As residents of the directly affected area, the undersigned request reconsideration of this new law in a manner that promotes a healthy cooperative atmosphere in the town of Ithaca and restores discretion to the enforcement authorities. , • Name ,, . 1 n 'PotvirO 2. OsrC-A-' 5. WAUJVX 6. 9. 11. CmU\, 13. V/ill ^ 14. o osi^ p h C C4 sc ia'^'5 15. 3Aiqtsft.«l 16. (\<\r^|g- 25- ^ 26.p^-\\^ Vju\^CS^5Vv_ 27. kwi.£ , 30. "j^ nnn 37. fc\vW%- *rAHi%e»\vyit>^ 38. yAi.c*.M He.«o!»f Address (strandvKi^J CouH:: \ T Cr-^KjUi %-^r^UL^- "5. A-CATTjrT?^ \ 2-1*^ CocldiNgj^N • l'5'Z ^6^^ . Z/9 /^«S?V ... ^17 N- ^/{orc^<^ 5G. ^0"? Thtf 4oj A-Z iV<3s^ S't. Hio MacLis-dhS^ /O / 327 CtJddto^'fr;/! Poqa S i/'j 5i"." 11.6 ■6 i^l>Y '2St> /Vv>e,'2e'gi 11 Coj.likAju^([^J 3l U CoidMi^fovi <p.^^I(i? flodcl^^toVtl/Sci U'i 'rt. ^46 A \\\ l«.ndcULL-Kvc. l^^ct^dAJA A 11^ ytvL^ •■ • Kej'viji'l fVt fV t SH. \^«etA^ev,U Avfi' iW K«Al\ 39. Bfw-* .r, 40. QciV^QLoVVt 4irX^\\ LV-£r^<ji(cW 42.VcV-^' 43.'^XQi^ ^Ver>55tor\ 44.J*t^eS WK«^fV*w Aui^46. All^ two 47.fccfeC(^1^^e^£ 4^- 49.|vsA,ro' I^UiC^^ty 50. ^tff Murp^^ 52. V^Jroo 53. CHA^f^ /Sa^S 54. -^Ji 55. 4iW low 56. 57. feAXrtoAjUl ^^O/VS^ 5 8 59. >feixjedt>a'^<boe;;ik. 63. w'&ittr: 64. 67.'.. _. 6& f^tsl^ Mbe^ 69. Yv lf*~> 70. l\.Qe»^. 73. AliSoy^iSoi 74. .iuUo. ata*.v«^ 75.e<Mi>i<\« murifT 77. 78.-^^^^ fib4-cl7UA2:> 79. ^({QftA^ ^\rt>^ 80. ierio^ShCridart 81. ^..ebec^cc AlUbone- 82.1fY^>M6bc5?^ 83. ^®^3M\fl_rta\ferbecJlc^ I6S ke^U iVi-U \ii!<oidp^ \ <i9 ^ U«CVvA\ \(a«A V<w>&aS^ i6M K«via\ C^C /IH iUt)d(K\l \'>'\){.uJiAl\ I*. I V i I I ITS lr4!>^U»' |> \Ml 16€v^siY iCyI/ lot Penn^lym^ W'YVm Zi^-?e^4^V/aj7ia Uo f<wAjyvarvi^\ \\o l^r)S(.|ll;otv\fai no fkvmfvlv«kAiX. P'&.l, Pj3*i'\^k wck r\ i <\ \(o(o VC£«v4i5SAjl ast^ ^314- Q, 35^ B CPddLvA^ri A3S a CoefdiOjWv X24 Pcnr* iPon-v\-> Z2T PeAASy luani'T* Penns^\vc^f\ icy^ *2'3l Pex^n^aWctrvj 2-'61 fe^^hsuWcm* ^ pj / per\ns^)'^(^^ 85. 86. 87. 88. t K/Vx 90 4—f ™'^'90.^iieiv*,n niaK . 91-^£>.iY, UlfJ; 92. &e<o <vC« On 93. matt ' laxWie ' 9A. LuMr'- 95. C>r>^A) • 96.^YA.i9 Jlr\ec\Ci 98. Uia^^<5 99. ■fjjrv^nn OOQi-zc^bei^Vx St.Ol.lfio^vvjfi ^vV 02 - " •' SUa^Lj^ P«n..«MV C>uA 03. Er)V\'COY^04.KCb&iiLui(\^viAA. 05.|^lCjih)q4/\.06. S^irdoJl(^ 07. HAAtt ih\^h^^h 08. 09. COt/ ll.'iH^pKaAie Se^oVA. 13. Oithan ^ruck^ 14. Bn-HtXTHj rn^'ic^ 16.|<&lfM(a.gobeY^ 17. A (af'hll^ 18./MicKW ?rd 19. Scdtj'20.flibc/ Hall 21. *' Wefac/ vtXlf'io.... VoicMt WJCCAftTi22'?^,^ OiQ-kij^o WXt<?_SO«^• ^cruL^ C/i^. —. 23 24.25.^^ U/e\Yi-o^26ifa u/ii^ ^ Ctwruv j\^(jj^Co~- g^VeoAeo'^i— 9.-44- I'xy'WTs^lwti.^w- Arv^. 2^ ^ton'^ylireim y^vi. 45a lfe'N«»vh.a.ya Av<. , 35>- PCart Vv"2>f r ^/t ^57 (^A» 4v/z:. fc^wvAie. vforvA. V Pe^ r>. I'H Pcnn. ^c. 3^1 ^0nns(ilAjarM'^ 3^3 Reon 3<§to pe,A/\ 0 Pcaa. „ tCA/^ "S&M pe^n 3^M f^e.'HvA H p-ervA B-JM Pe«rv. 3?M-Pwn277 Um 2-71 ?w.JTi f^xxriWiuiMuA Cbddin(hn C<i^(%^pjf\ ^odfdjjxtofstv Co ^ 7Hl 7Hl <irc ZMI Wl aM(\ tM O.Qf 31. Ooo.A'N*. ViirAiark 32.tt^,'e^ 33. OdI»^ H(UK^ ftoeilAwrv, 8. iCurf' u»T^iivj<9r«' 9- M<nrt«. 43.A4vn a/i<S 44. l43fci5SbXicA_ 45 46 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. t < 3 GsdcUvw^V aST 6 |(2ct i4l& Kcr«Aali Auc' IHI k'erkdkU ftvAZ.. iCcA.iia'lt. *HS K«acUv\V/ Ave- 1^5 1^4al}/^(C. ' 7 14^ terwtt Ave. •;fe tew&vo. Av|^! ^2, Ave '<^6 Av'-e- /^\ ; ^ October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 3 f \ Town of Ithaca Noise Ordinance (Chapter 184) f Why the law must be reconsidered: The law as a whole: Has created an ambiguous situation where residents are constantly guilty and the rules set out are inconsistently enforced. Aims to reduce crime that is not directly related to noise, crimes that already have definitive laws that are not strictly enforced (Public Urination, Open Container, etc) The 25 ft rule (184-9): Creates a system where residents' reasonable actions are considered violations, therefore requiring selective and subjective enforcement The Noise permit Application process (184-12): Does not foster community dialogue Offers an unreasonable time frame of 45 days to acquire a permit Allowing law enforcement officers to file complaints rather than the residents (184-13) Doesn't foster community dialogue Allows for selective enforcement and nit-picking on what constitutes unreasonable noise It is imconstitutional for the authorities to usurp that much authority The wording of the law: Lacks definitive content Leaves too much lee-way for biased interpretation and perception Does not contain specifics such as tangible limits Use of fining $500 first offense/$1000 second offense: Is excessive ^ ^ Can drastically affect financial stability of residents Recommendations The law as a whole: May not be necessary if current laws are enforced. The 25 ft rule (184-9): Research proper decibel limits and measurement devices for use in enforcement Disband selective patrolling and promote equal protection The noise permit application process (184-12): Revise requirements in order promote neighborly dialogue such as requiring signatures of those that will be directly affected Reduce time frame needed to acquire permit Allowing law enforcement officers to file complaints rather than the residents (184-13) Do not allow sheriffs the ability to m^e complaints Require complainants to be directly affected and willing to testify in order to promote community dialogue and understanding The wording of the law: Utilize definitive language and technology in order to reduce arbitrary and selective enforcement Use of fining: Reduce fmes drastically Consider conununity service as an alternative for violators of this Chapter. This will promote violating students to get more involved with the community. October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 4 Statement to be R^ad at Town Council on October 16''', 2006 v", i!''^ c i Good evening. My name is Zack Ford and I am the Student Body President of Ithaca College. I stan^gfbpg^u tonfgfefis^^geseat^statement on behalf of the Ithaca College Student Government Association in regards to Chapter 184 of the Town of Ithaca Code, known also as the Noise Ordinance. The SGA is committed more than ever this year to building stronger relationships between the students at Ithaca College and our neighbors here in the community. We know that the lifestyles of students can greatly vary and do not always coincide with the needs of the more permanent residents whose lives may be impacted. We do not condone all these behaviors, and we hold great respect for this town's desire to establish policies that protect the rights of all residents to lead comfortable and happy lives. That being said, we also understand the needs of our fellow students to be students and enjoy their lives responsibly in this community. In this regard, we feel that the new Noise Ordinance passed five months ago in many ways targets our students. We understand why such an ordinance was called for, but we also understand some of the concerns brought forth by our fellow students here tonight. I would like to identify some points that the Student Government feels are vague or excessive that could hopefully be revisited so that the input of student residents may be considered. We believe it is not unreasonable for the hours of the ordinance's enforcement to be less strict on the weekends. Setting it at 9 PM on Friday and Saturday evenings hinders the activity of all members of the community and seems unrealistic. In addition, we believe 45 days to be an extremely excessive period of time to be necessary for requesting a Noise Permit. Given the school's calendar, such a deadline makes it very difficult for students to request such a permit. The community has clearly set their expectations for what its members deem a comfortable amount of noise and the size of the fines strictly enforce that. However, we feel that establishing a distance of 25 feet makes it very difhcult for individuals to comprehend the amount of noise they are making. Without any provisions for the issuing of warnings, individuals may be issued a large fine before they realize they are in violation of the policy. This is excessively strict and does not allow for any supplemental education regarding the expectations of the commimity. The text of the ordinance defines "unreasonable noise" as any excessive sound which annoys or disturbs a "reasonable person of normal sensitivities." We believe that, given the directive that local police officers have to enforce this policy, they do, in fact, have heightened sensitivities. While we believe that officers are doing their best for the entire community, allowing them to enforce this policy without filed complaints opens the door for subjective and selective enforcement. The biggest concem that we have is that this ordinance, as it stands, will foster a greater divide between members of the community. Permanent residents will be less inclined to introduce themselves to students because they can rely on the ordinance to enforce their comfort levels. Likewise, students will receive many more negative messages from the community and will not feel as comfortable or welcomed in the homes they are rightfully renting. By opening up the lines of communication and revisiting some of the issues we have brought forth this evening, we can establish a vehicle for accountability that comfortably accommodates all residents of the Town of Ithaca. We hope this Council realizes that the goal of the Ithaca College Student Government is for South Hill to be a healthy, neighborly environment for all its residents. This can only be accomplished when both students and permanent residents extend their hands in friendship and work together to establish a warm and vibrant community. Thank You. October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 5 *^own of Ithaca Board "ill Burbank < 'at Leary Peter Stein J 215 N. Tioga St. Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Members: eff Cowie Sandra Gittelman Herb Engman Sept. nOOF "r;;— ll P ,'^'"^®,THAC5TOTiNCrf^ I am requesting that you take immediate action to repair and resurface Schickel Rd. The mailman had threatened to stop delivering my mail due to the poor condition of the approach to my box. The road deteriorated considerably when the sewer was installed May/June 2005. I have called both Fred Noteboom's office and Dan Walkers's office for over a year regarding the road and overflowing ditches. Both of them came out and took photos of the flooding. Unfortunately heavy trucks make several runs in here daily. I have owned this house since 1963. Two houses have changed ownership recently and #8 about a year ago. These owners have young children playing and biking on Schickel. I was told that ''^Nris Simkin would repair and resurface the road this past ^^pring. Simkin did install a fine blacktop for his owners on arisa La. , and possibly the neighbors who sold and left here, have found ne constant dust, dirt, noise and traffic a great annoyance. I know that Judd Leonard came in during your planning process to complain about flooding. I suggest that instead of putting up a subdivision sign on Schickel^ a new entrance road be installed at the south end of Westview. That should prevent confusion over the different neighborhoods as the Davis's are worrying about. I believe the responsibility for Schickel Rd maintenance lies with you. I will appreciate your immediate attention. Thank you. Pat Long, 4 Schickel Rd. ^.October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 6 • A€]EfJM# 7 'gt: . RE 2007 Funding requests for volunteer monitoring In Six Mile Creek and Fall-Virgil Creek — Original Message— From: Steve Penningroth [mailto:spenningroth@communityscience.org] Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 11:03 To: Susan Ritter; Roxanna Johnston; Bambi Hollenbeck; Mahlon Perkins Cc: Craig Schutt; Tania Schusler; Pat Reidy; Kate Hackett Subject: 2007 Funding requests for volunteer monitoring in Six Mile Creek and Fall-Virgil Creek Dear Municipal Partners, Attached please find proposals for volunteer monitoring partnerships in two watersheds in 2007: Six Mile Creek and Fall-Virgil Creek. Proposals will be sent separately to municipalities that lie in one or the other of these two watersheds; The requested amount for Six Mile Creek is $4,339 per municipality and $1,637 per municipality for Fall-Virgil Creek for a combined total of $5,976 for the three municipalities that lie in both watersheds. The increase compared to 2006 of $1,513 for the City and Town of Ithaca and $1,979 for the Town of Dryden is due largely to the elimination of in—kind contributions of salary and fringe by CSI. It has become evident i«!^^006 • that donating a substantial amount of salary and fringe L ifits, which CSI has done since the inception of volunteer monitoring/s^^nerships in 2002, is singly not sustainable over the long term. i re has been significant growth in the number and visibility of unteer-agency monitoring partnerships in 2006. In addition to Six Mj.j.e Creek and Fall-Virgil Creek, volunteer groups are now monitoring water quality in Salmon Creek, Taughannock and Trumansburg Creek, and Stewart Park. CSI*s website at <www.communityscience.drg> has been revised, and it now features graphs and tables of monitoring results ^ keyed to detailed land use maps. Six Mile Creek results have been posted through i^ril 2006. Results for other watersheds will follow soon. CSI is continuing to work on obtaining funding to start a volunteer-agency monitoring partnership in the Cayuga Inlet watershed in 2007. Although the City and Town of Ithaca lie in the Inlet watershed, they will not be asked to contribute to a Cayuga Inlet volunteer monitoring partnership in 2007. To do so would increase the combined request for all three watersheds into the $8,000 range. Given the general state of municipal finances these days, such a sum appears untenable. CSI plans to focus on soliciting Cayuga Inlet monitoring funds from the Towns of Newfield, Danby and Enfield, from Ithaca College, and from businesses and private donors. Of course, the Ithacas are free to donate funds for Cayuga Inlet monitoring if they wish! On behalf of CSI's agency partners at Cornell Cooperative Extension and the Tompkins and Cortland County Soil and Water Conservation Districts, I hope you will give these proposals your full consideration, and that you will find them to be worthy of taxpayer support — for their SMdi^cational value to the community, for the collaborative interactions they promote between citizens and local government, and last but^ =1^ least, for the certified management-quality data they produce. jards, Steve ^-ephen Penningroth, Ph.D., Executive Director Community Science Institute Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org / Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication Request for Funding Volunteer Monitoring in the Six Mile Creek Watershed in 2007 Submitted to City of Ithaca and Towns of Ithaca, Dryden and Caroline . n Community Science Institute, Comell Cooperative Extension of Tompkins County, and Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District September 26,2007 Goal The goal of this funding request is three-fold: To monitor and characterize water qu^ty in Six Mile Creek in a cost-effective manner; to educate the public about water quality issues; and to build a long-term water quality database that can be used by goveniment to^ ^ manage water resources. Background and significance The Six Mile Creek Volunteer Monitoring Partnership was initiated in 2004. To date, ten monitoring events have been conducted at 13 locations spanning the entire Six Mile Creek watershed. Approximately 1,700 data points have been collected on 13 water quality parameters, stored in an MS Excel spreadsheet, and analyzed using graphs, tables and simple statistics. Results for the first ei^t monitoring events from September 2004 through April 2006 are reported on CSFs website at www.communitvscience.org/SixMile/SixMileCreek.html. A guide to inteipreting water quality data may be found on the Water Quality Data page. Terms are defined in the website Glossary. Preliminary findings are summarized in this proposal (see below). Since its inception in 2004, the Sfac Mile Creek Volunteer Monitoring Partnership has provided benefits to individual volunteers and their communities in the watershed: n Volunteers have become better educated about water quality and water r^urce management issues, increasing their sense of stewardship and helping build grassroots support for protecting Six Mile Creek and Cayuga Lake; n For municipalities required to meet Phase nStormwater regulations, volunteCT monitoring partnerships meet the minimum requirements for public participation; n Because the Community Science Institute's laboratory is certified by the New ^ York State Department of Health - Environmental Laboratory Approval Program ~ (ELAP #11790, EPA Lab ED# 01518), the Six Mile Creek Volunteer Monitoring / ^ Partnership has resulted in chemical and microbiological data that are considered ' management quality and acceptable by all levels of government; 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice^ax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroih Executive Director <info@conmmnityscience,org> CSi r > Community Science Institute ww.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication n Individual municipalities required to monitor stormwater have realized cost savings on the order of 90% due to volunteers donating their time to collect samples; agencies providing in-kind contributions of staff time and resources; the Community Science Institute discounting certified lab analyses; and multiple municipalities in the watershed sharing the balance of the cost of the monitoring program; n The Six Mile Mile Creek Volunteer Monitoring Partnership has resulted in the initiation of a long-term database which, if continued over the coming years, can serve as a resource for assessing water quality trends and evaluating their effects on Cayuga Lake over time. This database expands significantly on die water quality data collected approximately once a decade by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation's (NYSDBC) Rotating Intensive Basin Survey (RIBS) Program, filling large data gaps left by RIBS and bringing local water quality into sharper perspective; n By sampling at multiple locations throughout the watershed, the Six Mile Creek Volunteer Monitoring Partnership makes it possible to investigate and ultimately to manage sources of pollution; and n Regular monitoring combined with USGS flow data has begun to yield estimates of the loads of nutrients, sediment and salt that are transported from Six Mile Creek to Cayuga Lake. These estimates contribute to understanding and, if , necessary, managing these inputs. ' Water quality results from September 2004 through April 2006 When reading this section, please refer to two sets of graphs at www.commiinitvscience.org/SixMile/SixMileCreek.html. The first set reports average results for all the monitoring sites in the watershed and is foxmd by clicking on the buttons labeled "Bacteria," "Phosphorus," etc. The second set of graphs compares results for Plain Street with USGS flow measurements on each monitoring date and investigates the correlation between concentration and flow. This second set of graphs is at www.commiinitvscience.org/SixMile/PlainBacteria.html or can be found by clicking on the monitoring site "Plain Street," which is located near the mouth of Six Mile Creek, then on the graphs labeled "Bacteria," "Phosphorus," etc. 1) Bacteria: The EPA recommends that the geometric mean of a series of E. coli measurements (five or more per month) not exceed 126 colonies/100 ml for a heavily used swimming area. The geometric means of E. coli concentrations in Six Mile Creek, based on eight monitoring events over 20 months, are near or below the recommended EPA level at most sampling locations. However, concentrations of E. coli in single samples range as high as 6,900 colonies/100 ml. The other class of bacteria being tracked by our monitoring partnership, total coliform bacteria, are known to be more numerous than E. coli. The NYSDEC recommends that the median concentration of a series of samples not exceed ^ ^ 2,400 colonies/100 ml. Median concentrations of total coliform bacteria in Six < i Mile Creek exceed the recommended limit at most locations. Single samples 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <nfo@fionunuttitysciettce.org> Community Science Institute www.communityscieuce.oi^ Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication sometimes exceed 50,000 colonies/100 ml. It is often assumed that bacteria levels are low when the water is low in a stream, and that they rise when the water level is high following rain or snowmelt. Suiprisingly, flow appears to have had little if any effect on bacteria concentrations during the 19-month period from September 2004 to April 2006. One possible explanation is the long period of hot dry weather in 2005, when flows were low and bacteria levels rose. 2) Suspended sediment; Suspended sediment concentrations show a strong positive correlation with flow. Moreover, sediment concentrations trend upward as water in Sbc Mile Creek flows downstream. Interestingly, sediment concentrations parallels turbidity at monitoring sites above the Six Mile Creek reservoir. Below the reservoir, however, sediment concentrations fall slightly while turbidity continues to rise in samples from the Wildflower Preserve and Plain Street One possible explanation is that relatively large sediment particles are trapped in the silt pond and the reservoir, while tiny particles may pass through these barriers and produce a level of turbidity that is high in relation to their size. (Note. Turbidity is based on light scattering by suspended particles and is a qualitative, not quantitative, measure of sediment concentration. Li^t scattering is affected by the size and shape of suspended particles, in addition to their weight.)^ 3) Phosphorus nutrients: Average total phosphorus concentrations range from 14 to 26 ug/L in upper Six Mile Creek, then increase to 41 to 60 ug/L starting at German Cross Road. The correlation between total phosphorus and flow at Plain Street is excellent. A second phosphorus indicator, soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), correlates poorly with flow. Average SRP concentrations fall in a narrow range between 11 and 15 ug/L. Unlike total phosphorus, there is no discernible increase in SRP as watw flows downstream. 4) Nitrogen nutrients: Average nitrate-nitrogen concentrations range from 0.1 to 0.5 mg/L while average total nitrogen concentrations range from 0.2 to 0.8 mg/L. The correlation between flow and nitrate concentration at Plain Street is poor. The correlation between flow and total nitrogen concentration is significantly better. This may be due to organic nitrogen in stormwater runoff. 5) Salt and miuerals! Chloride concentration generally increased in a downstream direction, from 5.6 mg/L near the headwaters of Six Mile Creek to an average of 29.4 mg/L at Plain Street. Chloride concentration did not depend on flow. Alkalinity, which is due mainly to calcium carbonate in groundwater entering the stream, generally increased downstream. Alkalinity decreased as flow increased at Plain Street, probably due to the dilution of groundwater-derived calcium carbonate by the "soft" water in surface runoff. 6) Other chemical water gualitv indicators: In addition to the ten indicators analyzed on the CSI website, three more indicators have been measured since 2004 as part of tiie water quality monitoring partnershipi pH, total hardness and sulfate. Results are available electronically on request in MS Excel spreadsheet fonnat. ^ 7) Biological monitoring: Six Mile Creek volunteers have been active in naonitoring aquatic insects called benthic macroinvertebrates (BMI) at several locations as 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice^ax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@communityscience,org> 61 Community Science Institute www.communityscience,oi^ ^ Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication N biological indicators of stream water quality. Results of BMI monitoring will be posted on CSPs website soon. 8) Individual monitoring sites: Collecting water samples at multiple locations makes it possible to interpret water quality indicators in a watershed context, allowing direct comparisons among monitoring sites throughout the watershed. When monitoring sites are compared with one another in a watershed context, those with unusually poor water quality stand out. Two examples are "Irish Settlement Road" and "Horse Farm." Both show unusually high concentrations of E. coli bacteria compared with other sites nearby. The Six Mile Creek land use map on the CSI website offers a possible explanation: Both sites are located immediately downstream from pasture and cropland. Depending on how these particular agricultural areas are managed, E. coli might come from animals grazing close to the stream and/or from liquid manure present in runoff. Leaky on-site septic systems offer another possible explanation. Investigation of upstream land use practices might distinguish among these possible sources of elevated E. coli. In addition to average E. coli values spiking at two monitoring sites, two nutrient indicators, nitrate and dissolved phosphorus, trend slightly higher across the middle of the watershed, approximately from Boiceville Road to German Cross Road. The Six Mile Creek land use map on the CSI website shows that cropland i is concentrated in this area. The observed rises in nitrate and dissolved I phosphorus are thus likely to be due to agricultural fertilizer. Average E. coli levels also rise noticeably from Boiceville Road to German Cross Road, consistent with agricultural runoff. It should be emphasized that although these relative increases are clearly discernible in a watershed context, they are not large in absolute terms. Indeed, the fact that tiiey can be discerned at all, given the generally low concentrations of nutrients and bacteria that are prevalent in the Six Mile Creek watershed, serves to confirm watershed monitoring as a sensitive approach to investigating and managing potential sources of stream pollution. Preliminary conclusions about water aualitv Water quality in the Six Mile Creek watershed is generally good. This is probably due, in part, to the large amount of forest cover, over 75% (see Six Mile Creek land use map at www.conimunitvscience.org/SixMile/SixMileCreek.htmlI. Despite good water quality overall, results to date suggest that several indicators bear watching: a) Bacteria: E. coli levels frequently exceed federal standards for swimming areas. Total colifoim levels almost always exceed state guidelines for streams. Possible sources of bacteria are agricultural runoff, leaky on-site septic systems, and urban runoff; b) Sediment: Under high flow (stormwater) conditions, sediment loading to Cayuga Lake is substantial, c) Phosphorus: Sediment invariably has phosphorus tightly bound to it, and consequently the amounts of phosphorus reaching Cayuga Lake parallel the amounts of sediment However, it is not clear that sediment-bound phosphorus results in an increased ^ ^ concentration of phosphorus | 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@pommunityscience,org> 6t ^ Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication in Cayuga Lake water, because it may sink to the bottom of the lake along with the sediment to which it is tightly attached and thus remain unavailable as a nutrient for algae and other lake vegetation. The soluble reactive, i.e., dissolved, form of phosphorus is unquestionably available for plant growth. The concentration of dissolved phosphorus in Six Mile Creek is similar to concentrations in Cayuga Lake, 10 to 15 ug/L, suggesting that Six Mile Creek may not currently be adding to the pool of bioavailable phosphorus in Cayuga Lake. This assumes, however, that sediment-bound phosphorus remains at the bottom of the lake, and that it does not detach from sediment and join the pool of dissolved, bioavailable phosphorus. Activities proposed for 2007 Six Mile Creek monitoripg program Monitoring: Volimteers will continue to monitor the same 13 sites as they have since 2002. The Community Science Institute will continue to provide technical and laboratory support. Data analvsis. interpretation and communication: Graphs and tables analyzing Six Mile Creek monitoring data on CSI's website will be updated as new data are collected and entered in MS Excel. BMI results will be added to the website, as will new text that will focus specifically on interpreting water quality in the Six Mile Creek watershed and comparing it to water quality in other watersheds at the southern end of Cayuga Lake. Monitoring results will be communicated to the general public at the Volunteer Monitoring Symposium in December, 2007. Volunteers will be encouraged to communicate water quality results to their friends, neighbors, local governments and civic organizations as a way of building awareness and interest in regional water resources and their management. Volunteer retention and recruitment: The Six Mile Creek volunteer group has shown exceptional dedication to their mission over the past two-and-a-half years. Nevertheless, some volunteer attrition is inevitable. Cooperative Extension will support Six Mile Creek volunteers in community outreach and recruitment of new volunteers. CSI's website will augment volunteer recruitment strategies. Refresher workshops: CSI will offer refresher workshops on monitoring techmques upon request by volunteers. Workshops for new volunteers will be provided by CSI on an as- needed basis. Volunteer Monitoring Svmnosium: Cooperative Extension will take the lead in planmng and organizing the third annual Volunteer Monitoring Symposium to report to interested citizens on water quality and recognize volunteers' crucial role in assessmg the state of our streams. In addition to Six Mile Creek volunteers, volunteers from CSI's five other volunteer monitoring partnerships, municipal officials. Water Resource Coimcil members, staff of water management agencies, and members of the public will also be invited to the symposium. 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningrotk Executive Director <info@conmutniiyscience,o/g> 6t Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication Proposed 2007 Budget for Six Mile Creek COMMUNITY SCIENCE INSTITUTE Item Cost In-kind Total S. Penningroth, Project Director (125 hours (% $40)$ 5,000 $ 5.000 Fringe (31.25%)$ 1,563 $1,563 Webmaster (50hours®$20)$ 1,000 $1,000 Volunteer Monitoring Coordinator (50 hours ® $12)$ 600 $ 600 Fringe on Webmaster and Coordinator salaries (12.5%)$ 200 $ 200 Undergraduate interns and work-study student (150 hours ® $2.50)$ 375 $ 375 Certified analyses of water samples (5 events x 13 sites x 12 parameters x $14) $ 8,736 $2,184 $10,920 Volunteer workshops $ 700 $ 700 Bookkeeper (15 hours ® $35)$ 525 $ 525 Phone $ 20 $ 20 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $18,019 $2,884 $20,903 Indirect costs (15%)$ 2,703 $ 433 $ 3,135 TOTAL COST $20,722 $3,317 $24,038 CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION OF TOMPKINS COUNTY Item Cost In-kind Total Tania Schusler, Environmental Issues Educator, 60 hrs $1,200 $ UOO Fringe benefits (In-kind)$ 480 $ 480 Travel $ 20 $ 20 Printing and postage for publicity $ 100 $ 100 Volunteer monitoring symposium $ 100 $ 100 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 1,420 $ 480 $1,900 Indirect costs (15%)$ 213 $ 72 $ 285 TOTAL COST $ 1,633 $ 552 $2,185 TOMPKINS COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Item Cost In-kind Total Craig Schutt, Director. 20 hrs $ 600 $ 600 Jon Negley, Conservation Technician, 25 hrs $ 625 $ 625 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $1,225 $1,225 Indirect costs (15%)$ 184 $ 184 TOTAL COST $ 1.409 $1,409 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01S18 Stephen Penningroih Executive Director <info@communityscience,0rg> ( i N Community Science Institute . www.commnnityscience.oi^ Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication SIX MILE CREEK VOLUNTEERS Item Cost In-kind Total 15 Volunteers x 3 hrs/monitoring event x 5 events x $16/br $ 3,600 $ 3,600 10 volunteers x 10 hrs/BMI monitoring event x 1 event x $16/hr $ 1,600 $ 1,600 12 volunteers x 2 hrs/meeting x 12 meetings x $16/hr $ 4,608 $ 4,608 TOTAL COST $ 9,808 $ 9,808 BUDGET SUMMARY Item Total Total Aeencv and Volunteer Cost $37,440 Less Agency and Volunteer In-kind $ 15,086 Less TCSWCD contribution toward certified analyses costs (from FL-LOWPA)$ 5,000 Net Program Cost $17,354 2007 Municipal Cost (Distributed evenly among T. Caroline, T. Dryden, T. Ithaca, and City of Ithaca)$ 4.339 Explanation of budget: Changes from 2006: The total cost is sinular to 2006 ($37,223 in 2006 compared to $37,440 in 2007) while the net cost has increased from $11,822 to $17,354, resulting in an increased request of $1,384 for each of the four mumcipalities in the Six hdile Creek watershed, from $2,955 to $4,339 The increase in net cost is due primely to three factors: a) An increase in CSI salaries and elumnation of in-kind contributions for salaries and benefits; b) The need to maintain CSTs website and use it as a tool in community outreach and education; and c) An 8% increase in analyses costs (these costs had remained essentially level for two years). Project Director: This position includes overall project administration and manapinent; acting as Technical Director of CSFs laboratory and assuring that data quality objectives are met; supervising five to six part-time employees, including two laboratory technicians, the volunteer coordinator, the webmaster, and student employees; providing technical and laboratory support for volunteer monitoring groups and their agency partners; analyzing and interpreting raw monitoring data and communicating results, including the preparation of graphs, tables and explanatory text for posting on the Six Mile Creek page of CSFs website; and encouraging public discussion of water quality and water resource management issues. Dr. Stephen Penningroth holds a Ph.D. in Biochemical Sciences and serves as CSFs Executive Director as well as Techmcal Director of CSFs certified laboratory. Certified Analyses of Water Samples: Analyses are performed in CSFs independent certified water quality testing laboratory (NYS Dept. of Health — Environmental Laboratory Approval Program #11790, EPA Lab ID NY01518) located in room 284 of the Langmuir Laboratory, 95 Brown Road, in the Cornell Business and Technology Park. Laboratory test results are certified; are considered management-quahty; and are 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@conmmnityscience,drg> 6i Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroih Executive Director <info@communityscience.0rg> S acceptable to municipal, county, state and federal governments. CSI provides an average discount of 20% on analyses performed on samples collected by volunteers. Analyses costs include hourly wages and fringe for two part-time laboratory technicians; consumable laboratory supplies; certification fees to the New York Department of Health - Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NYSDOH-ELAP); and equipment maintenance, calibration and repair. Undergraduate Interns and Work-Studv Students: Summer interns and academic year work-study students from Cornell University and Ithaca College are playing a critical role in developing and maintaining CSI's website as a forum for disseminating water quality results and promoting public understanding of water resource management issues. Students enter raw monitoring data in MS Excel spreadsheets; design graphs and tables using advanced functions in MS Excel; and assist the webmaster in maintaining the website. Work-study students are paid $10/hour .of which Cornell University pays $7.50 and CSI pays $2.50. Without dedicated students giving of their time and talent, the CSI website would be neither possible nor affordable. Webmaster: This position is responsible for maintaining, improving and updating the CSI website with assistance from work-study students and interns. Indirect Costs: Overhead costs covered by this surcharge include rent on 330 square feet of lab space that doubles as office space, telephone and internet fees, commercial liability and workers compensation insurance, and professional services such as income tax ^ preparation. ^ 6i Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication Request for Funding Volunteer Monitoring in the Fall-Virgil Creek Watershed in 2007 Submitted to City of Ithaca; Towns of Ithaca, Dryden, Groton, Harford, and Virgil; Villages of Cayuga Heights, Dryden, Groton and Freeville; and Cornell University by Community Science Institute, Comell Cooperative Extension of Tompkins County, Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District and Cortland County Soil and Water Conservation District September 26,2007 Goal . The goal of this funding request is three-foldi To monitor and characterize water quality in Fall Creek and Virgil Creek in a cost-effective manner; to educate the public about water quality issues; and to build a long-term water quality database that can be used by government to manage water resources. Background and significance In 2002, the Community Science Institute formed a partnership with the volunteer Fall Creek Watershed Committee (FCWC) and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts of Tompkins and Cortland Counties to monitor water quality in the Fall Creek watershed. To date, 18 monitoring events have been conducted on lower Fall Creek below Freeville, three monitoring events have been conducted on upper Fall Creek, and 18 monitoring events have been conducted on Virgil Creek. For maps showing land uses in the two watersheds and the locations of the twelve monitoring sites, please visit CSI's website at www.coTnmunitvscience.org. Approximately 2,000 data points have been collected on 13 water quality parameters. Results for the period 2003-2005 were described in our 2006 flmding proposal. In 2006, a decision was made to analyze water quality data separately for the two watersheds. As a result, data are now stored in two separate MS Excel spreadsheets, one for Fall Creek and one for Virgil Creek. Analyses of results are currently in the process of being updated through August 2006 and will be reported separately for the two watersheds by December 2006 at www.communitvscience.org/FallCreek/FallCreek.html and www.communitvscience.org/VirgilCreek/VirgilCreek.html. For examples of the kinds of data analyses being prepared for Fall Creek and Virgil Creek usmg graphs, tables and simple statistics, you are invited to visit the Six Mile Creek page of the CSI 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@communityscience,0rg> 6^ Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication website at www.conimunitvscience.org/SixMile/SixMileCreek.htinl. Our Six Mile Creek funding proposal entitled Volunteer Monitoring in the Six Mile Creek Watershed in 2007 includes a discussion of the results on the CSI website. Similar analyses and discussions are planned for the Fall Creek and Virgil Creek data. Since its inception in 2002, the Fall Creek Watershed Committee Volunteer Monitoring Partnership has provided benefits to individual volunteers and their communities in the watershed: n Volunteers have become better educated about water quality and water resource management issues, increasing their sense of stewardship and helping build grassroots support for protecting Fall Creek, Virgil Creek and Cayuga Lake, n For municipalities required to meet Phase II Stormwater regulations, volunteer monitoring partnerships meet the minimum requirements for public participation; n Because the Community Science Institute's laboratory is certified by the New York State Department of Health - Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (ELAP #11790, EPA Lab ID# 01518), monitoring activities have resulted in chemical and microbiological data that are considered management quality and acceptable by all levels of government; n Individual municipalities required to monitor stormwater have realized cost savings on the order of 90% due to volunteers donating their time to collect samples; agencies providing in-kind contributions of staff time and resources; the Community Science Institute discounting certified lab analyses; and multiple municipalities in the watershed sharing the balance of the cost of the momtoring program; n The Fall Creek Watershed Committee Volunteer Monitoring Partnership has resulted in the initiation of a long-term database which, if conlmued over the coming years, can serve as a resource for assessing water quality trends and evaluating their effects on Cayuga Lake over time. This database expands significantly on the water quality data collected approximately once a decade by the New York State Department of Environment^ Conservation's (NYSDEC) Rotating Intensive Basin Survey (RTOS) Program, filling large data gaps left by RIBS and bringing local water quality into sharper perspective; n By sampling at multiple locations throu^out the two watersheds, the Fall Creek Watershed Committee Volunteer Monitoring Partnership makes it possible to investigate and ultimately to manage sources of pollution; and B Regular monitoring combined with USGS flow data has begun to yield estimates of the loads of nutrients, sediment and salt that are transported firom VirgU Creek and Fall Creek to Cayuga Lake. These estimates contribute to understanding and, if necessary, managing these inputs. 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 ^oice/Fax 6^ 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroih Executive Director <info@1con1munityscience.0rg> \ ' A / 1 6? Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org ' Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication Activities proposed for 2007 Fall Creek - Vireil Creek monitoring program Monitoringi Volunteers and agency staff will continue to monitor the same nine sites as they have since 2002 plus three sites on upper Fall Creek that were added in 2006. The Community Science Institute will continue to provide techmcal and laboratory support Data analysis, interpretation and commumcation: Graphs and tables analyzing Fall Creek and Virgil Creek monitoring data will be posted on CSFs website and updated as new data are collected and entered in MS Excel. For examples of the kinds of ^phs and tables that will be used to interpret and communicate Fall Creek and Virgil Creek monitoring data, visit the Six Mile Creek page on CSFs website at www.communityscience.org/SixMile/SixMileCreek.html. Monitoring results will also be presented to the general public at the Volunteer Monitoring Symposium in December, 2007. Volunteers will be encouraged to communicate water quality results to their friends, neighbors, local governments and civic organizations as a way of building awareness and interest in regional water resources and their management. Volunteer retention and recruitment: The Fall Creek Watershed Committee has persisted in its volunteer monitoring activities over a period of four years. Natural attrition has reduced the number of volunteers. FCWC is taking the lead in recruiting new volunteers. Cooperative Extension will support FCWC's outreach and recruitment efforts. CSI s website will augment volunteer recruitment strategies. Refresher workshops: CSI will offer refresher workshops on monitoring techniques upon request by volunteers. Workshops for new volunteers will be provided by CSI on an as- needed basis. ^ ^ . Volunteer Monitoring Symposium: Cooperative Extension will take the lead in planmng and organizing the third annual Volunteer Monitoring Symposium to report to interested citizens on water quality and recognize volunteers' crucial role in assessing the state of our streams. In addition to FCWC volunteers, volunteers from CSI s five other volunteer monitoring partnerships, municipal officials. Water Resource Council members, staff of water management agencies, and members of the public will also be invited to the symposium. 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth ExecuOve Director <info@conmmnityscience,drg> 6? Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication Pronosed 2007 Budget for Fall Creek and Virgil Creek Monitoring COMMUNITY SCIENCE INSTITUTE Item Cost In-kind Total S. Penningroth, Proiect Director (125 hours $40)$5,000 $5,000 Fringe (31.25%)$1,563 $1,563 Webmaster (50 hours $20)$1,000 $1,000 Fringe on salary (12.5%)$ 125 $ 125 Undergraduate interns and work-study student (150 hours $2.50)$ 375 $ 375 Certified analyses of water samples (5 events x 12 sites x 12 parameters x $14) $8,064 $2,016 $10,080 Volunteer workshops $ 700 $ 700 Bookkeeper (15 hours $35)$ 525 $ 525 Phone $ 20 $ 20 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $16,672 $2,716 $19,388 Indirect costs (15%)$ 2,501 $ 407 $ 2,908 TOTAL COST $19,173 $3,123 $2236 CORNELL COOPERATIVE EXTENSION OF TOMPKINS COUNTY Item Cost In-kind Total Tania Schusler, Environmental Issues Educator $ 500 $ 500 Fringe benefits (In-kind)$ 200 $ 200 Travel $ 10 $ 10 Printing and postage for publicity $ 50 $ 50 Volunteer monitoring symposium $ 200 $ 200 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 760 $ 200 $ 960 Indirect costs (15%)$ 114 $ 30 $ 144 TOTAL COST $ 874 $ 230 $1,104 TOMPKINS COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Item Cost In-kind Total Craig Schutt, Director, 20 hrs $ 600 $ 600 Jon Negley, Conservation Technician, 25 hrs $ 625 $ 625 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $135 $135 Indirect costs (15%)$ 184 $ 184 TOTAL COST $ 1,409 $1,409 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@icomnuinityscience,org> I \ Community Science Institute www.commuuityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication CORTLAND COUNTY SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT Item Cost In-kind Total Pat Reidy, Sr. Water Quality Specialist $ 300 $ 300 Darrel Sturgess, Environmental Technician $ 625 $ 625 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS $ 925 $ 925 Indirect costs (15%)$ 139 $ 139 TOTAL COSTS $1,064 $1,064 FALL CREEK WATERSHED COMMITTEE Item Cost In-kind Total George Patte, Chair, 80 hrs ®$16/hr $1,280 $1,280 Five (5) FCWC volunteers x 30 hrs $16/hr $2,400 $2,400 TOTAL COST $3,680 $3,680 BUDGET SUMMARY Item Total Total Agencv and Volunteer Cost $29,553 Less Agency and Volunteer In-kind $ 9,506 Less TCSWCD contribution toward certified analyses costs (FL-LOWPA)$ 4,000 Less Cortland SWCD contribution toward certified analyses costs (FL-LOWPA)$ 2,200 Net Program Cost $13,847 2007 Stakeholder Cost Small stakeholders, $250 each: T. VirgU, T. Harford, V. Freeville Large Stakeholders, $1,637 each: City of Ithaca, T. Ith^ T. Diyden, T. Groton, V. Cayuga Heights, V. Dryden, V. Groton, Comell University $ 750 $ 13,097 Explanation of budget: Changes from 2006: The total cost is slightly more than 2006 ($28,759 in 2006 compared to $29,553 in 2007) while the net cost has increased from $8,340 to $13,847. The increase in net cost is due primarily to three factors: a) An increase in CSI salaries and elimination of in-kind contributions for salaries and benefits; b) The need to maintain CSI's website and use it as a tool in commumty outreach and education; and c) An 8% increase in analyses costs (these costs had remained essentially level for two years). Stakeholders are divided into two groups: Three small stakeholders (T. Virgil, T. Harford, V. Freeville) who are asked to contribute $250 each; and eight large stakeholders (C. Ithaca, T. Ithaca, T. Dryden, T. Groton, V. Cayuga Heights, V. Dryden, V. Groton, Comell University) who are asked to contribute $1,637 each. 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01518 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@comnmnityscience.org> 61 Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org Volunteer Monitoring Watershed Science Risk Communication ^ Project Director: This position includes overall project administration and management; acting as Technical Director of CSTs laboratory and assuring that data quality objectives are met; supervising four to five part-time employees, inclutfing two laboratory technicians, the webmaster, and student employees; providing technical and laboratory support for volunteer monitoring groups and their agency partners; analyzing and interpreting raw monitoring data and communicating results, including the preparation of graphs, tables and explanatory text for posting on the Fall Creek and Virgil Creek pages of CSI's website; and encouraging public discussion of water quality and water resource management issues. Dr. Stephen Penningroth holds a Ph.D. in Biochemical Sciences and serves as CSPs Executive Director as well as Technical Director of CSI's certified laboratory. Certified Analyses of Water Samples: Analyses are performed in CSI's independent certified water quality testing laboratory (NYS Dept. of Health—Environmental Laboratory Approval Program #11790, EPA Lab ID NY01518) located in room 284 of the Langmuir Laboratory, 95 Brown Road, in the Cornell Business and Technology Park. Laboratory test results are certified; are considered management-quality; and are acceptable to municipal, county, state and federal governments. CSI provides an average discount of 20% on analyses performed on samples collected by volunteers. Analyses costs include hourly wages and fiinge for two part-time laboratory technicians; consumable laboratory supplies; certification fees to the New York Department of Healfii — Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NYSDOH-ELAP); and equipment maintenance, calibration and repair. Undergraduate Interns and Work-Studv Students: Summer interns and academic year work-study students from Cornell University and Ithaca College are playing a critical role in developing and maintaining CSI's website as a forum for disseminating water quality results and promoting public understanding of water resource management issues. Students enter raw monitoring data in MS Excel spreadsheets; design graphs and tables using advanced functions in MS Excel; and assist the webmaster in maintaining the website. Work-study students are paid $10/hoUr of which Comell University pays $7.50 and CSI pays $2.50. Without dedicated students giving of their time and talent, the CSI website would be neither possible nor affordable. Webmaster: This position is responsible for maintaining, improving and updating the CSI website with assistance firom work-study students and interns. Indirect Costs: Overhead costs covered by this surcharge include rent on 330 square feet of lab space that doubles as office space, telephone and internet fees, commercial liability and workers compensation insurance, telephone and internet fees, and professional services such as income tax preparation. 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 95 Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Certified Water Testing NYSDOH-ELAP #11790 EPA Lab Code NY01S18 Stephen Penningroth Executive Director <info@cotnmunityscience,org> I ) Wi f ^ Community Science Institute www.communityscience.org ^ 1 Vdluntccr Monitoriiii; Watershed Seience Risk C omnuinication Request to Town of Ithaca to Share Cost of Water Quality Monitoring Partnerships Background The Town of Ithaca has contributed to the cost of volunteer-agency monitoring partnerships in Six Mile Creek since 2004 and in Fall Creek since 2005. The partnerships include the Six Mile Creek Volunteers, the volunteer Fall Creek Watershed Committee, the Community Science Institute, Cornell Cooperative Extension, and the Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District. Initiation of a Cayuga Inlet water quality monitoring partnership is planned for 2007, contingent on funding. Significance of water qualitv monitoring 1. Water is the single most important economic resource in our region 2. MS4; The southern end of Cayuga Lake is listed as an impaired waterbody by the USEPA due to excessive nutrients and sediment 3. Cayuga Lake's water quality is determined by its tributary streams 4. To restore and protect Cayuga Lake, it is essential to identify, investigate and manage sources of pollutants in tributary streams 5. Tracking water quality at several locations along the length of a stream provides I ) documentation of pollutants and creates a factual framework for managing them j f 6. Monitoring water quality as a partnership between citizen volunteers, a certified laboratory, and government agencies is like taking out a double insurance policy on water resources: It creates a database to document water quality problems and trends, and it builds grassroots support for protecting water resources. Products 1. Certified water quality data at very low cost. Data are comparable to LSC monitoring data and less expensive. 2. Archive, analyze and report results via CSI's website 3. Build grassroots support and understanding for managing water resources 4. Meet minimum public participation requirements under MS4 Cost comparison with LSC monitoring (Note: LSC figures are estimated) LSC: 1,400 water quality data items per year @ approx. $100,000 = $71/data item CSI: 1,534 data items in 2007 for Six Mile Creek and Fall Creek Total cost = $66,993 or $44/data item Net cost = $31,201 or $20/data item Town of Ithaca share of net cost = $5,976 or $4/data item Low net cost is due to volunteer and agency in-kind contributions of time, FL-LOWPA funds, and sharing costs among municipalities and other stakeholders 284 Langmuir Lab/Box 1044 9S Brown Road Ithaca NY 14850 Voice/Fax 607 257 6606 Ccrriflcd Water Testinii SDOH-r.L.\P #11790 KPA Lab C ode NM)151S Stephen Penningroth Executive Diredor <info@communityscience.org> PROJECT ID NUMBER October 16, 2006 Town Board Meeting Attachment 7 617.20 SEQR APPENDIX C STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM for UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 1. APPLICANT / SPONSOR Town of Ithaca 2. PROJECT NAME Town of Ithaca Outdoor Lighting Law 3.PR0JECT LOCATION: Town of Ithaca Municipality Tompkins County County 4. PRECISE LOCATION: Street Addess and Road Intersections. Prominent landmarks etc - or provide map Law applies to entire Town of Ithaca 5. IS PROPOSED ACTION : New Expansion Modification / alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: The project is to adopt a local law adding Chapter 173, titled "Lighting, Outdoor" to the Town of Ithaca Code, and amending Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Signs," and Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Zoning," to add references to the Outdoor Lighting Law. The new law will regulate the shielding of outdoor lighting along with other specific requirements for outdoor signs, recreational facilities, lighting under roof overhangs and canopies, for spotlights and floodlights, prohibited lights, temporary lighting, and submission requirements for new construction. r. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially acres Ultimately - acres 8. Vy/ILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS? 0Yes n No If no, descrit)e briefly: 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? (Clioose as many as apply.) 0 Residential 0 Industrial | ^ [Commercial [Agriculture j✓ j Park/ Forest / Open Space j jotfier (describe) 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING. NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (Federal. State or Local)□ym 1^1 No If yes, list agency name and permit / approval: 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAUD PERMIT OR APPROVAL?QYes [^No If yes, list agency name and permit / approval: 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/ APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION?I Ives No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant / Sponsor Name MIchael Smith, Environmental Planner Date: September 29, 20j Signature, If the action Is a Costal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment PART 11 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by the Town; Use attachments as necessary) Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12 or Town Environmental Local Law? YES NO X If yes, coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. . Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6 YES NO X If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) Cl. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: See Attached. C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or Neighborhood character? Explain briefly: See Attached. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural area, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: See Attached. €4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: See Attached. C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: See Attached. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in Cl-CS? Explain briefly: See Attached. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy) Explain briefly: See Attached. D. Is there, or is there likely to be controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES NO X If yes, explain briefly: E. Comments of staff , CB , other attached. (Check as applicable.) PART 111 - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) Instructions: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important, or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope, and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting material. Ensure that the explanations contain suf^cient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately address. _Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. Check here if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on Attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this determination. Town of Ithaca Town Board Name of Lead Agency Preparer's Si^ature(If different from Responsible Officer) Catherine Valentino, Supervisor ^me & title of Responsible Officer In Lead Agency Signature of Contributing Preparer DATE: October 16, 2006 piature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency I PART II - Environmental Assessment: / Adoption of Outdoor Lighting Law Town of Ithaca Town Board A. Action is Unlisted. B. Action will not receive coordinated review. C. Could action result in anv adverse effects on. to or arising from the following: C1. Existing air oualitv. surface or groundwater oualitv or quantitv. noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? No significant adverse effects are anticipated relating to air quality, water quality or quantity, noise levels, traffic, solid waste, or potential for erosion, drainage, or flooding as a result of the proposed action. C2. Aesthetic, agriculture, archeological. historic, or other natural or cultural resources, or conununitv or neighborhood character? None Anticipated. While during the day, the light fixtures will look very similar to what is existing aroimd Town, it is anticipated that the new lighting requirements will enhance ' the nighttime aesthetics and character of the Town while increasing the safety and security for everyone. The new tjqies of lighting required will create less glare and light trespass, especially in the commercial areas of Town where a lot of large powerful lights exist. Most new lights are required to be fully shielded, which will direct the light down onto the ground and not out to the sides or upward, therefore reducing sky glow. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife snecies. significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? None Anticipated. C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officiallv adopted, or a change in use or intensitv of land or other natural resources? None Anticipated. This local law will add a new chapter to the Town of Ithaca Code dealing specifically with outdoor lighting. While the Planning Board has been requiring shielded lights as part of most site plan reviews recently, the proposed local law will provide a consistent requirement for all applications, including those not requiring site plan approval. The law will apply town wide in all zoning districts. C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likelv to be induced bv the proposed action? None Anticipated. The proposed law requires that outdoor sign lighting and lighting under roof overhangs and canopies be brought into conformance with the law within one year. Within the first year of the law, there are multiple properties throughout the Town that will require modifications to conform with the law. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C5? None Anticipated. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantitv or tvne of energv")? None Anticipated. D. Is there, or is there likelv to be. controversv related to potential adverse environmental impacts? No controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts is anticipated. PART IIL - Staff Recommendation. Determination of Significance Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed action, the proposed scale of it, and the information above, a negative determination of environmental significance is recommended for the action as proposed. Lead Agency: Reviewer: Review Date: Town of Ithaca Town Board Michael Smith, Environmental Planner September 29,2006 ' I TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 10/16/2006 OVERLOOK ON THE WEST HILL fr V Site work is substantially complete for Phase lb including stormwater detention, mass grading, and relocation of the water main and sewer improvements. The Engineering staff is monitoring the site sediment and erosion control measures. Pavement of West Hill drive has been completed. BIGGS BUILDING DEMOLITION Demolition of the old Biggs A building is continuing. The on site hard fill disposal area is being protected by the required sediment and erosion control measures and placement of hard fill is being monitored by the Engineering Department. Town Engineer's Report October 16,2006 Daniel R. Walker Page 5 10/11/2006 October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 9 □□□□□□□ Town Assigned Project ID Number Town of Ithaca Environmental Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, NY ONLY PART 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 1. Applicant/Sponsor Town of Ithaca Town Board 2. Project Name Local Law - Amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Entitled Zoning, Regarding Solar Collectors and Installations. 3. Precise location (street address, road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map:) Town wide Tax Parcel Number: N/A 4. Is proposed action: NEW? EXPANSION? MODIFICATION/ALTERATION? X (Amendment of Town Code) 5. Describe project briefly: (Include project purpose, present land use, current and future construction plans, and other relevant items): Enactment of a local law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, entitled Zoning, regarding solar collectors and installations. The local law would permit the installation of solar collectors in any zoning district subject to certain criteria. This would be in the "special regulations" section (270-219.a) and would also add several definitions pertaining to solar installations (270- 5). (Attach separate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project.) Amount of land affected: N/A (Townwide) litially (0-5yrs) Acres (6-lOvrs) (>10vrs) Acres How is land zoned presently? N/A (Townwide) 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? Yes NO If no, describe conflict briefly: N/A 9. Will proposed action lead to a request for new: Public Road? YES NO X Public Water? YES ^NO X Public Sewer? YES NO X 10. What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project? Residential Commercial Industrial Agriculture Park/Forest/Open Space Other Please Describe: N/A (Townwide) 11. Does proposed action involve a permit, approval, or funding, now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, State, Local?) YES NO X If yes, list agency name and permit/approval/funding: 12. Does any aspect of the proposed action have a currently valid permit or approval? YES NO ^ If yes, list agency name and permit/approval. Also, state whether it will require modification. I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE ^ Applicant/Sponsor Name (Print or Type): Catherine Valentino. Supervisor, Town of Ithaca Signature and Date: ^ C\ / ^ same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the / health, safety, and welfare of the community. (8) The Zoning Board of Appeals shall, in the granting of such variance, have the authority to impose such reasonable conditions and restrictions as are directly related to and incidental to the proposed use of the property and/or the period of time such variance shall be in effect. Such conditions shall be consistent with the spirit and intent of this chapter, and shall be imposed for the purpose of minimizing any adverse impact such variance may have on the neighborhood or community. C. The variances and the procedure for obtaining same shall, except where explicitly otherwise required by this chapter, be in accordance with the provisions of the Town Law, particularly § 267 et seq., and the provisions of the Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 270, Zoning, relating to the consideration of area variances. D. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals may have the decision reviewed by the Supreme Court of the State of New York in the manner provided by law. § 173-19 Law governing conflicts. ^ Where any provision of federal, state, county, or town statutes, codes, or laws conflicts with any provision of this chapter, the most restrictive provision shall govern except where preempted by state or federal law. Section 2. Chapter 221, Signs, Section 221-8 of the Town of Ithaca Code, entitled "Sign illumination," is amended as follows: 1. § 221-8.A is amended by adding a new subsection (6) reading as follows: "Illuminations that do not meet the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Law, Chapter 173 of the Town of Ithaca Code, are prohibited." 2. § 221-8 is further amended by adding a new subparagraph E. as follows: "In addition to the foregoing requirements, all illuminations shall meet the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Law, Chapter 173 of the Town of Ithaca Code." Section 3. Chapter 270, Zoning, Section 270-22. J of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Conservation Zones, entitled "Additional requirements and restrictions," is amended by adding a new subsection (3) as follows: \ \ 07/12/06 13 "All approved street lighting must comply with the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting / Law, Chapter 173 of the Town of Ithaca Code." \ Section 4. Chapter 270, Zoning, Section 270-188,M of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Site Plan Review, titled "Considerations for approval," is amended by adding the following underlined language to this subparagraph: "Compliance with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Regulations, Water Resources Ordinances, if applicable. Outdoor Lighting Law, and any other applicable laws, rules, requirements or policies." Section 5. Chapter 270, Zoning, Section 270-122.B of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Commercial Zones, entitled "Additional special requirements. Access and sidewalks," is amended by deleting the second sentence and replacing it with "All outdoor lighting must comply with the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Law, Chapter 173 of the Town of Ithaca Code" so that Section 270-122.B reads as follows: "Access and sidewalks. Access drives shall be paved with blacktop, concrete, or other solid material, and, if business is to be carried on in the evening, shall be adequately lighted. All outdoor lighting must comply with the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Law, Chapter 173 of the Town of Ithaca Code. Driveways and walkways shall provide safe access, egress and traffic circulation within the site. The placement, size and arrangement of access to ^ public streets shall be subject to the approval of the appropriate highway authority. Unless \ waived by the Town Board or Planning Board for good cause shown, sidewalks shall be installed by the developer of any commercial zone (except Lakefront Commercial Zones) simultaneously with construction of any commercial buildings on any site." Section 6. If any provision of this local 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 7. 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. / I 07/12/06 14 guilty of a violation as the same is defined in the Penal Law and shall be fined not more than $100 for each violation. Each day that such violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate violation. Any police officer or peace officer or any person who may be lawfully designated by the Town Board shall have the authority to issue appearance tickets in connection with such violations. E. In addition, any person, firm, corporation, or entity, whether as owner, lessee, agent, or employee, who violates any of the provisions of this chapter, or who fails to comply with any order or regulation made thereunder, or who installs, moves, or alters any light in violation of any detailed statement or plans submitted by him and approved under the provisions of this chapter or other Town of Ithaca Code provisions, shall be liable for a civil penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) for a first violation and two hundred dollars ($200.00) for a second or subsequent violation that was committed within a period of five years from the commission of the prior violation. Each day that such violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate violation. The Attorney for the Town or his or her designee may commence an action or special proceeding against the violator in a court of competent jurisdiction to collect these penalties, together with costs, disbursements and recoverable attorneys' fees, and/or to compel compliance or restrain by injunction any such violation. § 173-18 Appeals and variances. f ! A. The Zoning Board of Appeals, established pursuant to Chapter 270, Zoning, of the Town of Ithaca Code, shall hear and decide the following matters: (1) Questions of alleged error in any order or determination of the Enforcement Official involving the interpretation of the provisions of this chapter; and (2) Requests for variances from the provisions of this chapter. B. The Zoning Board of Appeals may grant variances from the application of this chapter upon the following conditions: (1) Any variance shall be prospective in its application and shall not relieve any person from the penalties and fines for violating this chapter by conditions that existed prior to the granting of the variance. (2) An application for a variance shall be submitted to the Town in a form substantially indicating the name and owner of the real property, the nature of the condition for which a variance is sought, and the reasons for which a variance is sought. 07/12/06 11 (3) The applicant shall pay the same fee as that set forth in Chapter 153, Fees, of , the Town of Ithaca Code for appeals to the Zoning Board of Appeals for \ variances. (4) Where the applicant is also seeking site plan review, the variance application shall be referred to the Planning Board, established pursuant to Chapter 270, Zoning, of the Town of Ithaca Code, for its review and recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. (5) The Zoning Board of Appeals shall hold a public hearing on the application and shall publish notice of said public hearing at least five days prior to its date. At the option of the Zoning Board of Appeals, notice of said application shall also be given to all landowners owning property adjoining the property for which a variance is sought. At the option of the Zoning Board of Appeals, a notice that a variance is sought shall also be posted on the property in accordance with the posting provisions of Chapter 270, Zoning, of the Town of Ithaca Code. (6) The Zoning Board of Appeals may grant a variance if it determines that the purposes of this chapter will be met if the variance is granted, and that the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted outweighs the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant. In making such determination the Board shall consider, among other matters: (a) Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the variance; (b) Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than a variance; (c) Whether the requested variance is substantial; (d) Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environment^ conditions in the neighborhood or district; and (e) Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created, which consideration shall be relevant to the decision of the Board of Appeals but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the variance. (7) The Zoning Board of Appeals, if it chooses to grant the variance, shall grant the minimum variance that it shall deem necessary and adequate and at the ( 07/12/06 12 t § 173-15 New construction. ( A. Submission contents. The applicant for any permit or approval required by any provision of the Town of Ithaca Code in connection with proposed work involving outdoor lighting fixtures shall submit (as part of the application for permit or approval) evidence that the proposed work will comply with the requirements of this chapter. The submission shall contain but shall not necessarily be limited to the following: (1) Plans indicating the location on the premises, and the type of illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, reflectors, and other devices; (2) Description of the illuminating devices, fixtures, lamps, supports, reflectors and other devices, and their lumen output. The description may include, but is not limited to, catalog cuts by manufacturers and drawings (including sections where required); (3) Photometric data, such as that furnished by manufacturers, or similar data showing the angle of cut off or light emissions, and the lumen output. B. Additional submission. The above-required plans, descriptions and data shall be sufficiently complete to enable the plans examiner or board to readily determine ^ whether compliance with the requirements of this chapter will be secured. If such plans, descriptions and data cannot enable this determination, by reason of the nature or configuration of the devices, fixtures, or lamps proposed, the applicant shall submit additional evidence of compliance to enable such determination, such as certified test reports by a recognized testing laboratory. C. Subdivision plat certification. If any subdivision proposes to have installed street or other common or public area outdoor lighting, the final plat shall contain a statement certifying that the applicable provisions of this chapter will be adhered to. D. Lamp or fixture substitution or addition. Should any outdoor light fixture, or the type of light source therein, be changed or added after the permit or approval has been issued, a change request must be submitted to the Enforcement Official for approval, together with adequate information to assure compliance with this chapter. Approval must be received prior to substitution or addition. § 173-16 Notification requirements. A. The Town of Ithaca application forms for site plan approval, subdivision approval, special approval, and building permits shall include a statement asking whether the planned project will include any outdoor lighting. 07/12/06 B. Within thirty (30) days of the effective date of this chapter, the Town Clerk shall , ^ send a copy of the Outdoor Lighting Law with a cover letter to all local electricians, local electric utility, local architectural firms, and local engineering firms (including at least those in the Towns of Ithaca, Danby, Dryden, Enfield, Lansing, Newfield, and Ulysses, and the City of Ithaca as listed in the Yellow Pages). §173-17 Enforcement of violations. A. In the event of a breach of any of the provisions of this chapter, the Enforcement Official shall notify the owner of the premises, in writing, to remove, repair, or bring the luminaire into conformance within 30 days of the date of such notice. B. Upon failure to comply with any notice within the prescribed time, the Enforcement Official may remove or cause removal, repair, or conformance of the luminaire, and shall assess all costs and expenses incurred against the owner of the premises on which the luminaire is located. C. All costs and expenses incurred by the Town of Ithaca in causing the removal, repair or conformance of any luminaire, as specified in this section, shall be collected from the owner of the premises on which such luminaire is located. Payment shall be made in not more than five days after the receipt of a written demand, or in not more than 30 days after the final decision on any judicial contest the owner may pursue. If the owner fails to make a timely payment, then such unpaid costs, expenses and interest at the per annum rate of 9% incurred from the date of removal, repair or Town action to bring the luminaire into conformance shall constitute a lien upon the premises on which the luminaire is located. A legal action or proceeding may be brought to collect such costs, expenses, interest, and recoverable attorney's fees, or to foreclose such lien. As an alternative to the maintenance of any such action, the Town may file a certificate with the Tompkins County Department of Assessment stating the costs and expenses incurred and interest accruing as aforesaid, together with a statement identifying the property and owner. The Tompkins County Department of Assessment shall in the preparation of the next assessment roll assess such unpaid costs, expenses and interest upon such property. Such amount shall be included as a special ad valorem levy (administered as a move tax) against such property, shall constitute a lien, and shall be collected and enforced in the same maimer, by the same proceedings, at the same time, and under the same penalties as are provided by law for collection and enforcement of real property taxes in the Town of Ithaca. The assessment of such costs, expenses and interest shall be effective even if the property would otherwise be exempt from real estate taxation. D. Any person, firm, corporation, or entity, whether as owner, lessee, agent, or employee, who violates any of the provisions of this chapter, or who fails to comply with any order or regulation made thereunder, or who installs, moves, or alters any light in violation of any detailed statement or plans submitted by him and approved under the provisions of this chapter or other Town of Ithaca Code provisions, shall be , , 07/12/06 10 § 173-11 Spotlight/floodlight. Spotlights and floodlights shall be aimed 45 degrees or more below the horizontal. Horizontal Plane 45 Degrees ACCEPTABLE Horizontal Plane ■T < 45 Degrees / UNACCEPTABLE Light sumed above horizontal plane Horizontal Plane UNACCEPTABLE § 173-12 Prohibitions. Laser source light. The use of laser source light or any similar high intensity light for outdoor advertising or entertainment, when projected above the horizontal, is prohibited. The temporary use of laser source lights that project light into the sky 07/12/06 may be allowed subject to the restrictions of temporary outdoor lighting contained in , , § 173-13. B. Searchlights and strobe lights. The operation of searchlights or strobe lights is prohibited. C. Mercury vapor fixtures and lamps. The installation of any mercury vapor fixture or lamp for use as outdoor lighting is prohibited. §173-13 Temporary outdoor lighting. Nonconforming temporary outdoor lighting may be permitted by the Enforcement Official after considering: (1) the public and/or private benefits that will result from the temporary lighting; (2) any annoyance or seifety problems that may result from the use of the temporary lighting; and (3) the duration of the temporary nonconforming lighting. The applicant shall submit a detailed description of the proposed temporary nonconforming lighting to the Enforcement Official, who shall consider the request. The Enforcement Official shall render the decision on the temporary lighting request within two weeks. § 173-14 Existing nonconforming luminaires. All luminaires lawfully in place on the effective date of this chapter that do not meet the requirements of this chapter are exempt from this chapter, except that: A. Any luminaire that replaces an existing nonconforming luminaire, or any existing nonconforming luminaire that is moved, must meet the requirements of this chapter; B. Any existing nonconforming luminaire that creates glare or light trespass shall be either shielded or re-directed within thirty (30) days of notification to the owner or occupant by the Town, so that the direct light is contained on the property; C. Existing nonconforming luminaires that direct light toward streets or parking lots and cause disability glare to motorists, pedestrians, or cyclists shall be either shielded or re-directed within thirty (30) days of notification to the owner or occupant by the Town, so that the luminaires do not cause a potential hazard to motorists, pedestrians, or cyclists; D. Existing nonconforming signs are exempt only for a period of one year, as specified in § 173-8C; E. Existing nonconforming lighting under or on roof overhangs and canopies is exempt only for a period of one year, as specified in § 173-IOC; and F. Section 173-9B regarding hours of operation shall apply. 07/12/06 § 173-7 Exemptions to control of glare. A. All temporary emergency lighting needed by police or fire departments or other emergency services, as well as all automobile luminaires, shall be exempt from the requirements of this chapter. B. All hazard-warning luminaires required by federal regulatory agencies are exempt from the requirements of this article, except that all luminaires used must be as close as possible to the federally-required minimum lumen output requirement for the specific task. D. Fossil fuel light. All outdoor light fixtures producing light directly by combustion of fossil fuels (such as kerosene lanterns, and gas lamps) or equivalent, are exempt from the requirements of this chapter. Holiday decorations. Lights used for holiday decorations are exempt from the requirements of this chapter. E. Fountain lights. All lights located within a fountain are exempt from the requirements from this chapter. § 173-8 Outdoor signs. A. Top mounted fixtures required. Lighting fixtures used to illuminate an outdoor sign shall be mounted on the top of the sign structure. All such fixtures shall comply with the shielding requirements of § 173-6. Bottom-mounted outdoor sign lighting shall not be used. </» .jS, '3 <>/ B. Outdoor signs of the type constructed of translucent materials and wholly illuminated from within do not require shielding. Dark backgrounds with light lettering or symbols are preferred, to minimize detrimental effects. 07/12/06 C. Existing nonconforming outdoor signs shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this chapter within one year from its effective date. D. In addition to the foregoing requirements, all outdoor signs must conform to § 221-8 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding sign illumination. § 173-9 Recreational facilities. Any light source permitted by this chapter may be used for lighting of outdoor recreational facilities (public or private), such as, but not limited to, football fields, soccer fields, baseball fields, Softball fields, tennis courts, or show areas, provided all of the following conditions are met; A. All fixtures used for event lighting shall be fully shielded as defined in § 173-4 of this chapter. B. All events shall be scheduled so as to complete all activity before or as near to 10:30 p.m. as practical, but under no circumstances shall any illumination of the playing field, court, or track be permitted after 11:00 p.m. except to conclude a scheduled event that was in progress before 11:00 p.m. § 173-10 Lighting under roof overhangs and canopies. A. Light fixtures mounted under roof overhangs and canopies shall be recessed so that the lens cover is recessed or flush with the bottom surface (soffit) of the canopy and/or shielded by the fixture or the edge of the canopy so that light is restrained to no more than 85 degrees from vertical. Canopy" Fascia Recessed Fixture Source: International Dark-Sky Association Lights shall not be mounted on the top or sides (fascias) of the canopy, and the sides of the canopy shall not be illuminated. Existing nonconforming lighting under or on roof overhangs and canopies shall be brought into conformance with the provisions of this chapter within one year from its ' . effective date. ? \ 07/12/06 to keep unnecessary direct light from shining onto abutting properties or streets, to help reduce the energy costs of outdoor lighting, and to reduce sky glow. § 173-4. Deflnitions. As used in this chapter, the following terms shall be defined as follows: DIRECT LIGHT: Light emitted directly from the lamp, off the reflector or reflector diffuser, or through the refractor or diffuser lens, of a luminaire. DISABILITY GLARE: Glare resulting in reduced visual performance and visibility. It is often accompanied by discomfort. ENFORCEMENT OFFICIAL: The official charged with the duty to enforce the zoning and other laws, ordinances, codes, and regulations relating to buildings and property. EXISTING NONCONFORMING LUMINAIRES: Luminaires not conforming to the provisions of this chapter that were in place on the effective date of this chapter. FIXTURE: The assembly that houses the lamp or lamps and can include all or some of the following parts: a housing, a mounting bracket or pole socket, a lamp holder, a ballast, a reflector or mirror, and/or a refractor or lens. FLOOD OR SPOTLIGHT: Any light fixture or lamp that incorporates a reflector, a refractor, or a prismatic lens to concentrate the light output into a directed beam in a particular direction. FULLY-SHIELDED LUMINAIRE: A luminaire constructed and installed in such a manner that all light emitted by it, either directly from the lamp or a diffusing element, is projected below a horizontal plane through the luminaire's lowest light emitting part. Horizontal Plane 07/12/06 ' tGLARE: Light emitted from a luminaire with an intensity great enough to reduce a viewer's ability to see, and in extreme cases causing momentary blindness. INDIRECT LIGHT: Direct light that has been reflected or has scattered off other surfaces. LAMP: The component of a luminaire that produces the actual light (commonly called a bulb). LIGHT TRESPASS: The shining of light produced by a luminaire beyond the boundaries of the property on which it is located. LUMEN: The unit used to measure the actual amount of light which is produced by a lamp. One footcandle is one lumen per square foot. For the purposes of this chapter, the lumen- output values shall be the INITIAL lumen output ratings of a lamp. Lumen output of most lamps is listed on the packaging. LUMINAIRE: A complete lighting system, including a lamp or lamps and a fixture. OUTDOOR LIGHTING: The night-time illumination of an outside area or object by any man-made device located outdoors that produces light by any means. SKY GLOW: The overhead glow from light emitted sideways and upwards, including light /^\ reflected upward from the ground or other surfaces. Sky glow is caused by the reflection and scattering of various forms of light by dust, water, and other particles suspended in the atmosphere. TEMPORARY OUTDOOR LIGHTING: The specific illumination of an outside area or object by any man-made device located outdoors that produces light by any means for a period of less than seven (7) days, with at least 180 days passing before being used again. § 173-5. Applicability of requirements. All new and replacement public and private outdoor lighting installed in the Town of Ithaca after the effective date of this chapter shall be in conformance with the requirements of this chapter. Certain lighting in place on the effective date of this chapter shall also be subject to the requirements of this chapter, as specified in § 173-14. Any inconsistent language in the Town of Ithaca Code is superceded by the requirements of this chapter. § 173-6. Control of glare—^shielding requirements. A. All nonexempt outdoor lighting fixtures shall be fully shielded, except glass tubes filled with neon, argon, or krypton do not require any shielding. B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any lamp of 1,000 lumens or less does not require any shielding. | j 07/12/06 / October 16, 2006 Ithaca town Board Meeting Attachment 8 TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. 12 OF THE YEAR 2006 A LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER 173, TITLED "LIGHTING, OUTDOOR" TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, AND AMENDING CHAPTER 221 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "SIGNS," AND CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "ZONING," TO ADD REFERENCES TO THE OUTDOOR LIGHTING LAW Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. The Town of Ithaca Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter 173, entitled "Lighting, Outdoor", reading as follows: Chapter 173 LIGHTING, OUTDOOR § 173-1. Title. § 173-2. Findings. § 173-3. Purpose. § 173-4. Definitions. § 173-5. Applicability of requirements. § 173-6. Control of glare—shielding requirements. § 173-7. Exemptions to control of glare. § 173-8. Outdoor signs. § 173-9. Recreational facilities. § 173-10. Lighting under roof overhangs and canopies. § 173-11. Spotlight/floodlight. § 173-12. Prohibitions. § 173-13. Temporary outdoor lighting. 07/12/06 § 173-14 Existing nonconforming luminaires. ^ I I § 173-15. New construction. § 173-16. Notification requirements. § 173-17. Enforcement of violations. § 173-18. Appeals and variances. § 173-19. Law governing conflicts. § 173-1. Title. This chapter shall be known as the Outdoor Lighting Law. § 173-2. Findings. The Town Board of the Town of Ithaca finds the following: A. Good outdoor lighting at night benefits everyone. It increases safety, enhances the Town's nighttime character, and helps provide security. B. New lighting technologies have produced lights that are extremely powerful, and these types of lights may be improperly installed so that they create problems of excessive glare, light trespass, higher energy use, and can negatively impact animals. Excessive glare can be annoying and can cause safety problems. Light trespass reduces everyone's privacy, and sky glow can interfere with observatories. If these problems are addressed, the resulting reduced energy use can benefit everyone through reduced pollution and lower energy costs. C. There is a need for a lighting law that recognizes the benefits of outdoor lighting and provides clear guidelines for its installation and operation so as to help maintain and complement the Town's character. D. Appropriately regulated, and properly installed, outdoor lighting will contribute to the safety and welfare of the residents and visitors of the Town. § 173-3. Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to promote the public safety and welfare by regulating outdoor lighting to reduce the problems created by improperly designed and installed outdoor lighting. This chapter is intended to eliminate problems of glare and minimize light trespass 07/12/06 PART IT - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (To be completed by the Town; Use attachments as necessary) Does proposed action exceed any Type 1 threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12 or Town Environmental Local Law? ^ES NO X If yes, coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6 YES NO X If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) Cl. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: None anticipated. C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: None anticipated. Freestanding solar collectors would be restricted to rear and side yards only. C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural area, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: None anticipated. C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as ofRcially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: None anticipated. C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: ^ None anticipated. C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C5? Explain briefly: None anticipated. C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy) Explain briefly: None anticipated. The local law would encourage the installation and use of solar collectors, which would reduce the reliance on conventional energy sources. D. Is there, or is there likely to be controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES NO X If yes, explain briefly: See Attached. E. Comments of staff X , CB , other attached. (Check as applicable.) PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE ( To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) Instructions: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important, or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting(i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope, and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting material. Ensure that the explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately address. Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. _X Check here if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on Attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this determination. Town of Ithaca Town Board Name of Lead Agency Preparifr's Signature(If different from Responsible Officer) Catherine Valentino. Supervisor ^^ame & title of Responsible Officer In Lead Agency Signature of Contributing Preparer jnature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency DATE: Ootobor 16, 2006 October 16, 2006 Town Board Meeting, Attachment 10 < \TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. 11 OF THE YEAR 2006 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 270 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, ENTITLED ZONING, REGARDING SOLAR COLLECTORS AND INSTALLATIONS Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Chapter 270, Article III, Section 270-5 of the Town of Ithaca Code, entitled "Definitions," is amended by adding the following definitions for "QUALIFIED SOLAR INSTALLER," "SOLAR COLLECTOR," and "SOLAR STORAGE BATTERY": "QUALIFIED SOLAR INSTALLER - A person who has skills and knowledge related to the construction and operation of solar electrical equipment and installations and has received safety training on the hazards involved. Persons who are on the list of eligible photovoltaic installers maintained by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), or who are certified as a solar installer by the North American Board of Certified Energy (0^ Practitioners (NABCEP), shall be deemed to be qualified solar installers for the ^ purposes of this section. Persons who are not on NYSERDA's list of eligible ^ installers or NABCEP's list of certified installers may be deemed to be qualified solar installers if the Town determines such persons have had adequate training to determine the degree and extent of the hazard and the personal protective equipment and job planning necessary to perform the installation safely. Such training shall include the proper use of special precautionary techniques and personal protective equipment, as well as the s\d\\s and techniques necessary to distinguish exposed energized parts from other parts of electrical equipment and to determine the nominal voltage of exposed live parts." "SOLAR COLLECTOR - A solar photovoltaic cell, panel, or array, or solar hot air or water collector device, which relies upon solar radiation as an energy source for the generation of electricity or transfer of stored heat." "SOLAR STORAGE BATTERY - A device that stores energy fi-om the sun and makes it available in an electrical form." Section 2. Chapter 270, Article XXVI of the Town of Ithaca Code, entitled "Special Regulations," is amended by adding Section 270-219.1 as follows: September 12, 2006 i y "§ 270-219.1 Solar collectors and installations. A. Rooftop and building-mounted solar collectors are permitted in all zoning districts in the Town. Building permits shall be required for installation of rooftop and building-mounted solar collectors. B. Groimd-mounted and freestanding solar collectors are permitted as accessory structures in all zoning districts of the Town, subject to the following requirements: (1) The location of the solar collector meets all applicable setback requirements of the zone in which it is located. (2) The height of the solar collector and any mounts shall not exceed 20 feet when oriented at maximum tilt. (3) The total surface area of all ground-mounted and freestanding solar collectors on the lot shall not exceed 1,000 square feet. (4) A building permit has been obtained for the solar collector. (5) The solar collector is located in a side or rear yard. / C. Where site plan approval is required elsewhere in this chapter for a development or activity, the site plan review shall include review of the adequacy, location, arrangement, size, design, and general site compatibility of proposed solar collectors. Where a site plan exists, an approved modified site plan shall be required if any of the thresholds specified in § 270-191 of this chapter are met, including but not limited to proposed changes to or additions of solar collectors where such changes or additions meet a § 270-191 threshold. D. All solar collector installations must be performed by a qualified solar installer, and prior to operation the electrical connections must be inspected by the Town and by the New York Board of Fire Underwriters or other appropriate electrical inspection agency as determined by the Town. In addition, any connection to the public utility grid must be inspected by the appropriate public utility. E. When solar storage batteries are included as part of the solar collector system, they must be placed in a secure container or enclosure meeting the requirements of the New York State Building Code when in use and when no longer used shall be disposed of in accordance with the laws and regulations of Tompkins County and other applicable laws and regulations. September 12, 2006 I , F. If a solar collector ceases to perform its originally intended function for r more than 12 consecutive months, the property owner shall remove the collector, mount and associated equipment and facilities by no later than 90 days after the end of the 12 month period." Section 3. In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section 4. 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. September 12, 2006 October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 11 #17 Analysis provided by Councilman Stein October 2006 5 Year Analysis of Factors Causing Increases in Town Personnei Costs All Data Presented as a Percentage of Total Salary Cost Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 5 yr. Av. NewPositions 1.92 3.63 0.00 0.00 2.86 1.68 "COLA"5.37 3.50 6.76 3.13 6.29 5.01 Career Advancement 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.27 0.33 Overtime 0.33 Reclassification 20.81 4.62 4.24 27th pay period 3.85 0.77 Total 12.36 f A I B I C I D I E I F I G I H 1 Factors Contributrng to the Grovfth of Personnef Costs 2000 to 2005 2 All Data Presented as a Percentage of Total Salary Cost 3 4 Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 5 yr. Av. 6 NewPositions--1:92 3.63 0.00 0.00 2:86 1.68 6 "COLA"5.37 3.50 6.76 3.13 6.29 5.01 7 Career Advancement 0.57 0.69 0.11 0.27 0.33 8 Overtime 0.33 9 Reclasslflcation 20.81 4.62 4.24 10 27lh pay period 3.85 0.77 11 Total 12.36 12 13 14 15 CPl 16 Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 5 yr. Av. 17 Northeast US Urban 2.8 2.10 2.80 3.50 3.60 2.96 18 US Cities < 50,000 2.2 1.10 2.00 2.40 3.80 2.30 ^ 19 Average CPl 2.50 1.60 2.40 2.85 3.70 2.61 20 21 22 23 24 SUMMAR1 Five Year Average Annual Increase Reclasslflcation 4.24 -26 Jo6Rate Wage Increase 5J8 26 New Positions 1.68 27 Career Advancement 0.33 28 Overtime 0.33 29 Total 12.36 30 31 32 Average CPl Increase Step increase minus CP! 2.61 3.17 33 34 Cumulative Cost in 2006 of Annual Raises Greater than the CPl from 2601 to 2605 35 36 $428,000 37 38 I r \ / October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 12 TOWN OF ITHACA SUMMARY OF BUDGET CHANGES REQUIRING TOWN BOARD ACTION TO THE TENTATIVE 2007 BUDGET TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PRELIMINARY BUDGET GENERAL TQWNWIDE FUND RE\/fENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE REAL PROPERTY TAXES A1001 $1,749,283.00 $1,747,603.00 $(1,680.00) TOTAL CHANGES $1,749,283.00 $1,747,603.00 $(1,680.00) TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES A510 $3,362,893.00 $3,361,213.00 $(1,680.00) TOTAL PROPERTY TAX RATE/$1000 $ 1.68 $1.68 $- GENERAL TQ\AI[N\IMIDE FUND^RRROIIRlAi:!^ ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TRANSPORTATION STUDY A3310.406 $$8,000.00 $8,000.00 TOWN ATTORNEY A1420.400 $ 17,920.00 $46,500.00 $28,580.00 TOTAL CHANGES $ 17,920.00 $54,500.00 $36,580.00 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS A960 $3,764,583.00 $3,801,163.00 $36,580.00 GENERAl eunelMlange ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE A599 $ 401,690.00 $439,950.00 $38,260.00 TOTAL CHANGES $ 401,690.00 $439,950.00 $38,260.00 TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE A960 $ 401,690.00 $439,950.00 $38,260.00 Page 1 of 17 GENERAL PART TOWN FUND REVENUE f ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE CORNELL - TGEIS B2116 $$17,700.00 $17,700.00 TOTAL CHANGES $$17,700.00 $17,700.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES B510 $ 596,747.00 $614,447.00 $17,700.00 TOTAL NET CHANGE IN TAX RATE $$-$- GENERAL PART TOWN FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE PLANNING DEPT. WAGES B8020.100 $ 282,000.00 $296.629.00 14,629.00 TOTAL CHANGES $ 282,000.00 $296,629.00 $14,629.00 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS B960 $ 770,328.00 $784,957.00 $14,629.00 GENERAL PART TQVtfN FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE B599 $173,581.00 $170,510.00 $(3,071.00) TOTAL CHANGES $173,581.00 $170,510.00 $(3,071.00) TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE B960 $173,581.00 $170,510.00 $(3,071.00) Page 2 of 17 GENERAL PART TOWN HIGHWAY FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$$ TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES DB510 $1,868,889.00 $ 1,868,889.00 $ TOTAL NET CHANGE IN TAX RATE $$$ GENERAL PART TOWN HIGHWAY FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS DB960 $1,941,580.00 $ 1,941,580.00 $ GENERAL PART TOWN HIGHWAY FUND -FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE DB599 $ 72.691.00 $ 72,691.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE DB960 $ 72,961.00 $ 72,961.00 $ Page 3 of 17 WATER FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES F510 $3,402,925.00 $3,402,925.00 $- TOTAL WATER BENEFIT ASSESSMENT RATE/UNIT $ 80.00 $80.00 $- WATER FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS F960 $3,216,524.00 $3,216,524.00 $- WATER FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE F599 $ (204.401.00) $(204,401.00) $- TOTAL CHANGES $ - $$- TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE F960 $ (204,401.00) $(204,401.00) $- Page 4 of 17 N / SEWER FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES G510 $1,704,175.00 $1,704,175.00 $- TOTAL SEWER BENEFIT ASSESSMENT RATE/UNIT $ 30.00 $30.00 $- SEWER FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS G960 $$$ $2,021,010.00 $ 2,021,010.00 $ SEWER FUND n FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE G599 $ 316,835.00 $316,835.00 $- TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE G960 $ 316,835.00 $316,835.00 $- Page 5 of 17 \ FIRE PROTECTION FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SF510 $1,704,175.00 $1,704,175.00 $- TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION TAX/$1000 $ 3.74 $3.74 $- FIRE PROTECTION FUNO APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE V/CAYUGA HGTS FIRE DEPT. SF3410.492 $ 155,000.00 $170,037.00 $15.037.00 TOTAL CHANGES $ 155,000.00 $170,037.00 $15,037.00 TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SF960 $2,756,000.00 $2,771,037.00 $15,037.00 FIRE PROTECTION FyNO^ FUNEL^LANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SF599 TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SF960 $ (114,364.00) $ (99,327.00) $15,037.00 $ (114,364.00) $ (9,932.00) $15,037.00 $2,756,000.00 $ 2,771,037.00 $15,037.00 Page 6 of 17 t RISK RETENTION FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES R510 TOTAL TAX RATE $- $- $5,700.00 $5,700.00 $ $- $$ RISK RETENTION FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS R960 $- $. $ $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $ RISK RETENTION FUND n FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE R599 TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE R960 $4,300.00 $4,300.00 $ $-$-$ $4,300.00 $4,300.00 $ Page 7 of 17 r ^ DEBT SERVICE FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES V510 $ 979,946.00 $ 979,946.00 $- TOTAL TAX RATE $$$- DEBT SERVICE FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$$- TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS V960 $ 979,946.00 $ 979,946.00 $- DEBT SERVICE FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE V599 $$$- TOTAL CHANGES $$$- TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE V960 $$$- r\ Page 8 of 17 ^ FOREST HOME LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE r\ ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL1 -510 $ 384.00 $384.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.014 $0.014 $ FOREST HOME LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL1-960 $ 2,384.00 $2,384.00 $ FOREST HOME LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL1-599 $ 2,000.00 $2,000.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL1-960 $ 2,000.00 $2,000.00 $ Page 9 of 17 GLENSIDE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE f ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL2-510 $ 559.00 $559.00 $- TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.149 $0.149 $- GLENSIDE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL2-960 $ 859.00 $859.00 $- GLENSIDE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL2-599 $ 300.00 $300.00 $- TOTAL CHANGES $$-$- TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL2-960 $ 300.00 $300.00 $- Page 10 of 17 RENWICK HEIGHTS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE ^ } ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL3-510 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.019 $ 0.019 $ REWNWICK HEIGHTS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE i i TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $ - $- $ $ 1,200.00 $1,200.00 $ ( V RENWICK HEIGHTS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL3-599 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $- TOTAL CHANGES $-$-$- TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL3-960 $1,000.00 $1.000.00 $- Page 11 of 17 EASTWOOD COMMONS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL4-510 $ 442.00 $ 442.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.046 $ 0.046 $ EASTWOOD COMMONS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL4-960 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ EASTWOOD COMMONS LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND - FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL4-599 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL4-960 $ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $ Page 12 of 17 CLOVER LANE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL5-510 $ 182.00 $182.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.106 $0.106 $ CLOVER LANE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL5-960 $ 282.00 $282.00 $ CLOVER LANE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND -FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL5-599 $ 100.00 $100.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL5-960 $ 100.00 $100.00 $ Page 13 of 17 f \ WINNER'S CIRCLE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES TOTAL TAX RATE $-$-- $418.00 $418.00 $ $0.191 $0.191 $ WINNER'S CIRCLE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL6-960 $- $- $ $818.00 $818.00 $ WINNER'S CIRCLE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND n FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL6-960 $ 400.00 $ $400.00 $400.00 $ $-$-$ $400.00 $400.00 $ Page 14 of 17 BURLEIGH DRIVE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE r ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE f X TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL7-510 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $-$-- $300.00 $300.00 $ $0.083 $0.083 $ BURLEIGH DRIVE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS $- $$ $777.00 $777.00 $ BURLEIGH DRIVE LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND n FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE TOTAL CHANGES TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL7-960 $ 477.00 $ $477.00 $477.00 $ $-$-$ $477.00 $477.00 $ Page 15 of 17 WEST HAVEN ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE f ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL8-510 $ 2,061.00 $2,061.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.306 $0.306 $ WEST HAVEN ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL8-960 $ 3,261.00 $3,261.00 $ WEST HAVEN ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND -FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL8-599 $ 1,200.00 $1,200.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL8-960 $ 1,200.00 $1,200.00 $ Page 16 of 17 CODDINGTON ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND REVENUE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES IN REVENUE $$-- TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES SL9-510 $ 781.00 $781.00 $ TOTAL TAX RATE $ 0.111 $0.111 $ CODDINGTON ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND APPROPRIATIONS ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL APPROPRIATIONS SL9-960 $ 1,925.00 $1,925.00 $ CODDINGTON ROAD LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND -FUND BALANCE ACCOUNTS CODE TENTATIVE PRELIMINARY NET 2007 2007 CHANGE APPROPRIATED FUND BALANCE SL9-599 $ 1,144.00 $1,144.00 $ TOTAL CHANGES $$-$ TOTAL USEAGE OF FUND BALANCE SL9-960 $ 1,144.00 $1,144.00 $ Page 17 of 17 October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting Attachment 13 Agenda #20 Town of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program r- Town of Ithaca Town Board Catherine Valentino, Supervisor 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 -I* » w-'— ■.t;■4k DRAFT Feb. 27, 2001 r> ;; Table of Contents Introduction V Statement of Purpose 2 General Policies 3 Program Administration 3 Confidentiality 3 Minimum Criteria for Applications 4 M^: Tavm of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program 5 Costs ^ Program Participation ' Application Process 2 Criteria for Ranking Candidate Parcels 8 Appraisal Procedure 8 Purchase Decisions 11 Purchase Offers 11 Easement Documentation Requirements 12 f Administration of Acquired Easements 13 Pre-Closing Inspections 13 Easement Inspections 13 Enforcing Easements 13 Permitted Uses - General 1^ Subdivision of Land Subject to an Easement 16 Subdivision Procedures/Requirements 17 Annual Report & Records Mam^ement 18 Appendix A 20 Appendix B 23 Introduction The Town of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program is an initiative to preserve the most significant of our scenic and environmentally sensitive lands for future generations by purchasing the development rights to the land. It is a voluntary program through which a willing buyer ~ the Town Board on behalf of all Town residents ~ would purchase from willing owners of specific parcels of land the development rights to their land. In exchange for a monetary consideration the landowner would convey to the Town of Ithaca a conservation easement. The Natural Heritage Preservation Program is very much like the land preservation program of the Finger Lakes Land Trust, and is designed to supplement the valuable work of the Land Trust. The principal difference between the two programs is that the Town of Ithaca program will fund the purchase of conservation easements, whereas the Land Trust program must in general rely on donations of conservation easements. Just what are "development rights" is a question many people ask. Ownership of land conveys to an individual or individuals a variety of rights. Examples of such rights include the right to sell or lease, enter onto the premises, mineral rights, or easements for utilities or access. Landowners have the ability to convey such rights, through sale, lease or other mechanism, to other parties, while retaining ownership of the land. Another right that comes with land ownership is the right to develop the land to the extent allowed by law, including zoning and subdivision regulations. Through the Natural Heritage Preservation Program, the Town of Ithaca would purchase a conservation easement on the participating landowner's property to eliminate the potential for development, mining, or other human disturbance and to permanently preserve it for future as open space. The landowner would still retain other rights to their land, including the right to reside on, rent, sell or give it away. These rights, sometimes referred to as "reserved rights," are spelled out in the easement document. After the sale of their development rights, landowners retain the right to control access to their land. The sale of development rights to the Town of Ithaca would not convey to the Town the right to allow the public access to the landowner's property for hunting, fishing or other activities or, conversely, limit a landowner in their right to allow public access to the land. The sale or donation of a conservation easement to the Town of Ithaca may have positive tax benefits for the landowner. The various tax-related and estate planning implications of conveying a conservation easement however are too numerous and complex to be discussed in this document. Landowners should consult their own advisors on these issues before conveying an easement to the Town of Ithaca. Finally, the Town of Ithaca recognizes that a decision by a landowner to participate in the conservation easement program is a both a major business decision and a critical personal decision on their part their family. All potential program participants are thus urged to carefully consider the pros and cons of participating in the program. Statement of Purpose Target financial resonrces in a manner that will ensure the protection of the largest amount of land possible. Execute all agreements or other documents necessary to affect the purchase of conservation easements in the name of the Town of Ithaca. \ f > The purpose of the Town of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program is to: 1. Protect the Town's important scenic and environmentally sensitive lands by acquiring conservation easements that prevent the conversion of the land through development or other permanent improvements that would alter its scenic or environmental characteristics. 2. Provide landowners with monetary compensation in exchange for their relinquishment of the right to develop their property. 3. Protect the Town's existing public and private parks, preserves, County unique natural areas and Town critical environmental areas from in appropriate development adjacent to their borders. 4. Encourage a long-term commitment by landowners to the preservation of scenically and environmentally important land through financial incentives and stabilization of land use patterns favorable to agriculture. 5. Target conservation easement purchases to maximize protection of scenic and environmental assets and to protect the investment of taxpayers in acquired easements. A ' I f General Policies Program Administration The Town Board administers the Natural Heritage Preservation Program. The Town Board adopts all rules and regulations for the administration of the Program, and shall execute all agreements and other documents necessary to affect the purchase of agricultural conservation easements in the Town of Ithaca. The Town of Ithaca Conservation Board, acting in an advisory capacity to the Town Board, is responsible for: a. advising the Town Board on all proposed policies, rules and regulations for the administration of the Program; b. reviewing applications for participation in the Program; c. making recommendations to the Town Board regarding conservation easement acquisitions. The Town of Ithaca Planning Department, and the Town Budget Officer, are responsible for providing Program support staff to the Conservation Board and Town Board. Confidentiality The Town of Ithaca recognizes that a decision by a landowner to participate in the purchase of development rights program is a both a major business decision and a critical personal decision on the part of the farmer and their family. It is thus the policy of the Town of Ithaca that in the implementation of its Natural Heritage Preservation Program all contacts, correspondence or information exchanged between Town elected and appointed officials and Town staff shall be considered confidential to the extent allowed by state and federal laws governing access to public documents. Minimum Criteria for Applications ' > The following are the minimum criteria for eligibility to participate in the Natural Heritage Preservation Program: 1. The conservation easement shall be perpetual in duration. 2. The parcel under consideration for an easement shall be comprised of at least twenty (20) acres of contiguous land, unless said tract is at least ten (10) acres in size and is contiguous to a property which has a perpetual agricultural or other conservation easement in place which is held by the Town of Ithaca or other "qualified conservation organization" as defined by Section 170(h)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, or any similar, successor statute. 3. The candidate parcel shall be located within the areas identified on the map entitled of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program" as approved by the Town Board and amended from time to time by formal resolution. Parcels not meeting the above criteria are not eligible for consideration for the purchase of conservation easements by the Town of Ithaca. Landowners however may, if they so desire, offer to donate such easements to the Town of Ithaca. The Town Board in considering such offers of donated easements will take into account:I 1. The impact of accepting the proffered easement on intended long-term development patterns within the Town of Ithaca, as outlined in the Town's comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance, and other land use policy statements. 2. The impact of accepting the proffered easement on the optimum utilization of the Town's existing public water and sewer infrastructure systems. 3. Whether the acceptance of such an easement would significantly enhance the protection of adjacent lands already protected by an existing conservation easement or agricultural conservation easement. 4. Whether the acceptance of such an easement would significantly further the Town's goal of protecting its most important scenic and environmentally significant lands. Offers of donated easements will be reviewed by the Town of Conservation Board prior to any action by the Town Board. An offer to donate an easement shall consist of a letter offering the donation and a completed application submission. The Town Board, after considering the recommendation of the Conservation Board, will decide whether or not to accept the proffered easement donation. / > .))(J1CAYUGATOWN or mMCANATURALHERITAGEPRESERVATIONPROGRAMJMtMrr onPROPOSED PURCHASEOF DEVELOPMENTRIGHTS TARGETAREASKdTARGET AREAS rtMPWCHASC or COMERVAntMCASOCNTSOR PRIVATEPARKS OR PRESERVESexmvc KVfuncMTmrc.WRPW cr wnfurmn amihMR B NTt tumwu WVWK PMKCUS.OOO ftSCALEirrsif R, i ^KSMf Upon a Town Board decision to accept an easement donation, the prospective donor will be notified and asked to submit a request for appraisal. The appraisal will be utilized to determine the value of the easement donation to the Town. Costs In order to minimize the cost to the individual farm land owner and encourage participation in the Natural Heritage Preservation Program, the Town of Ithaca will be responsible for the following costs incidental to the transfer of development rights: 1. conservation easement purchase price; 2. cost of first appraisal; 3. cost of any necessary land surveys; 4. necessary legal fees incurred by the Town of Ithaca for title search, preparation of documents, including easement, and all recording fees; 5. necessary advertising fees as may be required by law. > ( The Town of Ithaca will cover the above costs for both purchased and donated easements. , \ Landowners are responsible for their own attorney costs.1 f \ i ^ > Program Participation Application Process The application process for participation in the Natural Heritage Preservation Program begins when the applicant completes and submits the CONSERVATION EASEMENT APPLICATION FORM (Appendix A) to the Town Planning Department. Applications for participation in the program are received on a rolling basis throughout the year. The Planning Department will: 1. review the application for completeness and accuracy and contact the applicant to resolve any questions regarding completeness and accuracy; 2. once determining that the application is complete the Planning Department shall: a. prepare a summary report with a preliminary evaluation of the candidate parcel based on the eligibility and ranking criteria set forth elsewhere for distribution to the Conservation Board; b. forward said application to the Chair of the Conservation Board. \ The summary report prepared by the Planning Department shall include: ' a. a description of the parcel including location size and specific scenic or environmental attributes; b. a location map showing the candidate parcel and all properties within five hundred (500) feet of its boundaries, zoning designation(s) for the parcel and surrounding properties, and any surrounding properties which have conservation easements or agricultural conservation easements in place or are being actively considered for such an easement(s); c. its score and ranking compared to other parcels within the target areas identified on the Natural Heritage Preservation Program Map. The Conservation Board in its evaluation will apply the eligibility criteria outlined above in making its recommendation to the Town Board. If more than one application is being considered in the course of any one meeting the Conservation Board shall make a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the prioritization of multiple applications. The Conservation Board in doing so shall take into consideration the number of points each parcel has been awarded under the criteria for ranking candidate parcels set forth below. \ f ( Criteria for Ranking Candidate Parcels ^ The following criteria were developed to allow the objective ranking of applications should the number of landowners who desire to sell a conservation easement to the Town of Ithaca in any one year exceed the number the Town could accommodate. Should there be a need to prioritize easement acquisition, the Town Board will utilize the criteria to establish a list of properties ranked according to their importance to the implementation of the overall purchase of conservation easements program. The criteria are comprised of a combination of factors to rank individual applications for participation in programs. They include: 1. development potential of the candidate parcel based on factors such as amount of available road frontage, amount of existing development in the vicinity, proximity to public water and/or sewer service, soil suitability for onsite septic systems; 2. the size of the land tract on which the development rights are being offered for sale; 3. presence within the parcel of one or more scenic or environment attributes, and the quality and significance of said attributes; 4. location of the candidate parcel relative to parcels which already have conservation , \ easements, including easements held by the Finger Lakes Land Trust or other private party, ^ or which are being considered for easement purchase; 5. presence of important existing protected lands such as public or private parks or preserves, and extent to which a conservation easement on the candidate parcel would protect those community assets. The Town of Ithaca will use, fair, equitable, objective and non-discriminatory procedures in applying its criteria and ranking agricultural parcels for determining purchase priorities. Appendix B contains the criteria and points schedule used to rank candidate parcels for acquisition of agricultural conservation easements. Appraisal Procedure An offer to purchase a conservation easement shall be based on one or more appraisal reports that estimate both full market value for uses allowed under zoning and other regulations and the value of the candidate parcel with a conservation easement applied. All appraisals shall be conducted by an appraiser who: 1) is a general certified real estate appraiser in the State of New York; 2) is qualified to appraise property for easement purchase; 3) is acceptable to the Town of Ithaca. \ \ I ^ ^ The completed appraisal shall be used to determine the value of the easement. The purchase price offered for the purchase of the easement may not exceed the appraised value of the easement, however it can be less. Appraisals shall be conducted using the comparable sales method if comparable sales information is available. The entire acreage of the candidate parcel shall be included in the determination of the value of a conservation easement, less the value of any acreage which was subdivided prior to the conveyance of said easement. Where a tract involves land that was subdivided prior to the conveyance of said easement, the appraisal shall take into account any potential increase in the value of the subdivided land accrued from the placement of an easement on the remaining land. The value of a building or other improvement on the candidate parcel may be considered in determining the easement value, however the value of said building or improvement shall appear separately in the appraisal report. For each appraisal the appraiser shall prepare a narrative report which contains, at a minimum, the following information, in the following format: 1. Introduction i) Table of contents ii) Affidavit of Appraiser iii) Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions n ^ iv) Purpose of the Appraisal v) Definition of Value Appraised vi) Appraisal Problem II Property Description i) Description of the Subject Property, including a legal description; a location map; tax map parcel number; property zoning information; taxes and assessed valuation, including any exemptions; description of land improvements; description of building improvements; a soils map ii) Area or Neighborhood Analysis iii) Economic Trends iv) Sales History of Property III Valuation Analysis and Conclusions i) Present use of Property ii) Valuation Methodology: Market Value a. comparable sales data b. location map of comparable sales iii) Market Value Estimate iv) Valuation Methodology: Conservation Land Value (v) Conservation Value Estimate (vi) Value of Improvements (vii) Easement Value (viii) Professional Qualifications of the Appraiser.\ \ At least four comparable sales shall be used for all appraisals. If the appraiser cannot obtain sufficient comparable sales data within the Town of Ithaca, the appraiser may use comparable sales data from other towns within Tompkins County. The appraiser shall note within their appraisal report that they could not obtain sufficient comparable sales data from within the Town of Ithaca. The use of comparable sales data that require adjustment of 50 percent or more is permitted only with the approval of the Town Board or its designated agent. Pertinent data for each comparable sale used in the preparation of the appraisal shall be stated in the appraisal report including but not limited to: date of sale; purchase price; road frontage in feet; topographical information; and soil conditions. The appraisal shall include an analysis comparing the pertinent data for each comparable sale to the subject farmland tract. In compiling comparable sales used to estimate the farmland value of the candidate parcel, the appraiser may use sales of land that are confined to conservation or recreational use because of legal restrictions or physical impairments that make the land valuable only for such uses. Data may be gathered from real estate markets where farms have no apparent development value, with the approval of the Town Board or its designated agent. The appraiser shall report whether the candidate tract has any public or private land use restrictions, or is in a floodplain, or has any physical attributes that may constrain its development / potential. / ^ 1 The location of each comparable sale used in the appraisal report shall be shown accurately on the comparable sales map and sufficiently identified and described. The appraiser shall submit to the Town a least one original and four copies of their appraisal report, all of which shall be bound. 10 f \ \ f Purchase Decisions The final decision regarding the purchase of an agricultural conservation easement shall rest with the Town Board. The Board will make its final purchase decision based on: 1. Consistency with the map 'Toww of Ithaca Natural Heritage Preservation Program'^ 2. Cost factors, including a) cost per acre of easement; and b) availability of fimding; 3. Ranking of candidate parcel relative to other parcels imder consideration for easement acquisition; 4. Proximity to existing protected lands such as public or private parks or preserves, and extent to which a conservation easement on the candidate parcel would protect those community assets; 5. Proximity to other lands subject to easements; The decision of the Town Board shall be made by a majority vote of the Board by resolution.. In the event that the Town Board decides not to make an offer to purchase an agricultural conservation easement on the candidate tract, the applicant shall be notified in writing. Purchase Offers Upon a decision by the Town Board to make an offer for the purchase of a conservation easement, the Board or its designated agent will meet with the applicant to discuss the offer. At this meeting the appraisal report will be reviewed with the applicant. If at that time the applicant indicates they are willing to continue with the easement sale, a formal offer by the Town Board shall be submitted in writing to the applicant and accompanied by the appraisal report. The offer may be equal to or less than the appraised value of the easement. All contacts, correspondence or information exchanged between Town elected and appointed officials and Town staff during such negotiations shall be considered confidential to the extent allowed by state and federal laws governing access to public documents. Within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written offer from the Town Board an applicant may either: 1. accept the offer; 2. reject the offer; or 11 3. reject the offer, but secure an independent appraisal of the candidate parcel easement ' > value, at their expense, in which event the applicant shall notify the Town of his or her ^ intent to secure an independent appraisal, and have up to 30 days to retain an independent appraiser. The failure of the applicant to act within thirty (30) days of receipt of the written offer shall constitute rejection of the offer. The acceptance of a purchase offer by the applicant in a timely manner shall then constitute a binding contract of sale to the Town. The contract shall be subject to the ability of the applicant to provide good title to the premises, free of any encumbrances such as liens, mortgages, options rights of others to surface mineable rock, gravel or other extractable mineral resources, adverse ownership interests and other encumbrances which in the Town's judgement would adversely impact the Town's interest in the candidate parcel. Easement Documentation Requirements All owners of land on which a conservation easement is being acquired shall execute a deed conveying the easement, in recordable form. The deed shall contain an accurate legal description setting forth the metes and bounds of the land subject to the easement, in form and substance ^ acceptable to the Town and its attorney. ! All candidate parcels on which an easement is to be acquired, if required by the Town, shall be surveyed by a licensed land surveyor, unless the legal description setting forth the metes and bounds of the tract subject to the easement conforms to a boundary survey completed within the past ten years. 12 ^ Administration of Acquired Easements Pre-Closing Inspection Upon the formal acceptance of a purchase offer and prior to the acquisition of a conservation easement the Town Board or its designated agent will conduct an inspection of the candidate parcel for the purpose of documenting: 1. location, type and general condition of all buildings, ponds, lanes, and other improvements; 2. location and type of all pipelines, overhead utility lines and other such improvements; 3. in cases where land is or has formerly been in agricultural uses, location and type of all soil conservation related improvements on the property, including but not limited to terraces, dikes, drainage swales, visible drainage tiles and filter strips; 4. location and general character of existing hedgerows, woodlots, including an approximation of the type, size and age of existing trees; 5. other features of the poperty which may be affected by or affect the conservation \ easement under consideration. ' \ All inspections shall be performed between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, on a day and at a time mutually agreeable to the Town and the landowner. The landowner, at their option, may accompany the Town's agent(s) on the inspection. Inspections may include the taking of photographs and/or use of videotaping by the Town's agent(s). Any photos or images taken in the course of an inspection shall be the property of the Town of Ithaca. Within ten (10) days of completing an inspection, the Town Board or its designated agent(s) shall prepare a written report of the inspection documenting all relevant findings. Said inspection report shall be submitted to the landowner for their review and comment at least ten (10) days in advance of the closing date. The inspection report shall be signed by the landowner, and the Town Supervisor, prior to or at the time of closing. Easement Inspections The Town Board shall be responsible for inspecting lands on which conservation easements have been applied, and for enforcing the provisions of any conservation easements. The Town Board or its designated agent(s) will have the right to inspect lands on which conservation easements have been applied by the Town of Ithaca, and enforce the provisions of any conservation easement. ' 13 These inspections will also be an opportunity for the landowner to discuss any issues or concerns relating to the conservation easement, with the Town Board or its designated agent. The Town Board or its designated agent(s) shall inspect all lands on which conservation easements have been applied on an annual basis in order to ensure compliance with the applicable deed of restriction. The following procedure shall be used in the conduct of such inspections: 1. Written notice of said annual inspection shall be mailed by certified mail to the landowner at least ten (10) days prior to the inspection; 2. All inspections shall be performed between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on legal holidays, or on a day and at a time mutually agreeable to the Town and the landowner; 3. Within ten (10) days of completing an inspection, the Town Board or its designated agent(s) shall prepare a written report that shall: a. identify the tract inspected; b. identify the owner(s) of the land; c. describe any modifications in the number, type, location and use of any new structures on the land since the filing of the conservation easement; d. outline any conservation practices being observed on the restricted land; e. include a statement of whether the provisions of the easement are being adhered to by the landowner. 4. The inspection report shall be submitted to the Tovm Board for its review and approval within 20 days of the inspection, or at the next regularly scheduled Town Board meeting. 5. Upon its approval by the Town Board a copy of the completed inspection report shall be mailed within ten (10) days of Town Board action. In the event that there is reasonable cause to believe that any provision of the conservation easement has been or is being violated, the Town Board or its designated agent(s) may inspect the land without prior notice. * f ^ 14 f \ Enforcing Easements In the event of the discovery of a violation of the terms of the conservation easement, either through an inspection or by other means, the Town Board or its designated agent(s) shall within ten (10) days send written notice of said violation, by certified mail, to the landowner. Said notice shall set forth the follovdng information: a. a copy of the inspection report; b. a copy of the easement document; c. a description of the action or condition which constitutes the alleged violation; d. a statement of the measures necessary to correct the violation. Sixty days after the mailing of a notice of violation, the Town Board shall have all remedies available in law and equity. Because of the inability to ascertain damages to the Town because of breach, among other remedies the Town may commence and prosecute an action in the appropriate court seeking an order to require the correction of violation, to enjoin ftirther violation of the terms of the easement, and other appropriate relief. At its discretion the Town Board will not commence such action under the following circumstances: 1. It determines that the violation has been corrected; or 2. It has approved a plan for mitigating or remediating the violation, the implementation of said plan to be undertaken at the owner's expense; or 3. It determines that the owner of the restricted land has commenced taking the actions necessary to correct the violation; and 4. It determines that the corrective actions cannot be reasonably completed within 60 days; and 5. It has established a period not to exceed one (1) year within which the corrective measures shall be completed. If the violation has not been corrected within the timeframe established under (4) above the Town Board may commence and prosecute an enforcement action as outlined above. 15 If, in the opinion of the Town Board, the easement can be amended in a manner that both corrects the violation, and results in an amended easement which results in equal or greater ^ protections to the protected lands, the Town Board may amend the easement. The decision whether or not to amend an easement shall be solely at the discretion of the Town Board. The owner of the land on which the conservation easement is held shall bear all costs associated with the correction of a violation of the eeisement, including: 1. Cost of the work required and materials used to correct the violation; 2. Administrative costs incurred by the Town of Ithaca; 3. Court costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred by the Town of Ithaca in enforcing the easement. Permitted Uses - General Property owners who convey an easement to the Town of Ithaca will retain all rights accruing from their ownership of their property, and permitted by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance or other relevant regulations. This includes the right to engage in or to permit others to engage in all uses of their property that are not expressly prohibited by the conservation easement or are not ^ inconsistent with the purpose of this conservation easement. ! ^ Subdivision of Lands Subject to an Easement Land subject to a conservation easement may be subdivided, provided the owner(s) meet(s) the criteria listed herein below. Subdivisions contrary to these criteria will not be permitted. Liability for all expenses incurred for such subdivision shall be the sole responsibility of the land owner(s). The burden of proof that any proposed subdivision of land subject to a conservation easement conforms to and complies with the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations shall be upon the applicant(s)/ land owner(s). The Town of Ithaca may attach reasonable appropriate conditions upon any subdivision approval of land subject to a conservation easement as may be necessary to insure perpetual compliance with the Deed of Conservation Easement, and the present Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Regulations. The owner(s) of a tract of land subject to a conservation easement may subdivide the property, provided that the following general criteria are met: (1) The subdivision conforms with all applicable State and Town of Ithaca regulations, including the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations, State Environmental Quality Review Act and relevant provisions of General Municipal Law Section 239; and 16 / ^(2) The new parcels which may be created through subdivision of land on which the Town of Ithaca has a conservation easement shall comply in all manner with the lot size and dimensional requirements of the zoning district \vithin which they are located. (3) The subdivision will not have an adverse impact on water rights and water access points. (4) The Town Board consents to the subdivision. In the case wherein an easement allows one additional residential structure, the owner shall indicate on which subdivision parcel the one allowed residential structure might be constructed. If any parcel proposed to be created through a subdivision will have no potential uses other than open space-related uses allowed for under the conservation easement, the owner shall acknowledge such in writing to the Planning Board and also state in writing the intended use of said newly created parcel. No subdivision of land subject to an easement shall become final until the owner has secured final subdivision approval from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. Subdivisions for the sale or exchange of parcels of land by adjacent property owners both or all of which are under a form of preservation easement containing covenants analogous to or as restrictive as those in the easements held by the Town of Ithaca are permitted, subject to the balance of the general and specific criteria. Subdivision Procedures/Requirements: Landowner(s) should submit plans for proposed subdivision to the Town Planning Department staff at least 30 days in advance of proceeding with detailed subdivision mapping. Staff will then review the proposed plat for consistency with the policies of the Natural Heritage Preservation Program, the requirements of the Tovm of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations. In this regard, landowner(s) is/are advised to carefully consider, prior to the submission of an application for the purchase by the Town of the original conservation easement, the exclusion from the proposed coverage of the easement of any land which the landowner(s) may wish to build upon or otherwise develop in the future. Following a preliminary review and discussion with Planning Department staff, the applicant (s) shall, in accordance with the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations, submit a subdivision application for review and consideration of approval by the Planning Board. In addition to the requirements of the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations, applicants shall also submit a letter of intent signed by the landowner(s) requesting the subdivision review and explaining the reasons for such a subdivision, including evidence that the quality of the resulting parcels as open space resources or the protection of scenic or environmental resources will not be diminished as a result of the proposed subdivision. \ 17 Annual Report & Records Management The Town Board shall prepare an annual report on all activities related to the Natural Heritage Preservation Program, and make such report available to the public. The report will be completed and made available for public review on or before April 1, and cover the activities of the Program during the previous year. All original, final, or legal documents associated with the acquisition of conservation easements and implementation of the Natural Heritage Preservation Program shall be filed in the office of the Town Clerk. ' \In cases where the proposed subdivision would result in a parcel of land that is restricted in its entirety by provisions of the conservation easement, the landowner shall acknowledge such in writing and state the intended use of the land within the parameters of the conservation easement. The Town of Ithaca Conservation Board shall receive copies of all such subdivision requests within five (5) working days of receipt of an application by the Planning Department. The Conservation Board shall have 30 days to review the application and make a written recommendation to approve, approve with specific conditions or modifications, or disapprove the proposed subdivision. The Conservation Board shall conduct its discussion of the proposed subdivision in an open meeting, and hear arguments for or against said subdivision from interested parties, prior to making its recommendation to the Planning Board. The request for subdivision will be reviewed at a public hearing before the Planning Board per the procedures outlined in NYS Town Law and the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations. The Planning Board shall not consider a proposed subdivision until the Conservation Board has made its recommendation, or the 30-day time period has expired. The applicant agrees that any required time period under State law or Town Subdivision Regulations for action by the Planning Board is automatically increased by such 30-day period. The applicant(s) shall have the burden of demonstrating, by a preponderance of the evidence, that ^ the criteria set out in these Subdivision Guidelines, as well as their commitments under the / ^ easement to the Town of Ithaca, have been satisfied. If the applicant fails to do so, the Planning / > Board shall not approve the application. ' 18 f \ Appendices f ) ( 19 APPENDIX A \ TOWN OF ITHACA ^ CONSERVATION EASEMENT APPLICATION FORM GENERAL INFORMATION: Name(s): Address: Street City State Zip Home Telephone: ( ) : Best time to contact: Work Telephone: ( ) Best time to contact: Home Address if Different: Street City State Zip Total acreage of parcel: . Town Tax Map Parcel Number(s): Are there any utility right-of-ways or easements through this property that you are aware of, or mineral or drilling leases on the property? . If so, what are they and who owns the rights of way or leases? To the best of your knowledge, do you own all the rights to minerals or other extractive resources underlying your property? . If answer is "no", please explain: Total acreage offered for easement purchase: (Please subtract out any acreage that would be excluded) Reason for exclusion: Are you interested in the possibility of donating all or a portion of your conservation easement? Yes No Possibly, I would like more information Deed Reference(s): Book Page ; Book Page ; Book Page ; Are you aware of any land in your immediate area with a conservation, agricultural or other type of perpetual conservation easement? If so, please describe: / 20 \ PARCEL DESCRIPTION Please briefly describe the parcel of land for which you desire to offer a conservation easement on, including physical characteristics of the land, types of vegetation and wildlife, presence of streams or wetlands, known rare or endangered plant or animal species, archaeological or historical resources, scenic views available to the public, historical use of the parcel or any other attribute you believe to be relevant. (Continue on back if needed.) Please complete the following table showing the land cover of the tract offered for easement purchase as a part of this application. Mature Old Field Meadow Wetland and/or Woodland Forest or Brush Water Body Excluded Total ^ac. plus ac. plus ^ac. plus ^ac. minus ^ac. = "Excluded" land is land that is not being offered for an easement conveyance. Your "Total" amount should equal the total acreage offered for easement purchase. 21 APPRAISAL AND PURCHASE STATEMENT: ^ Applicants, selected by the Town Board in a competitive evaluation among all applications, will be offered an appraisal to determine the development and agriculture values of the property. Those applicants who accept the appraisal offer will be required to complete an appraisal request form. Applicants may accept or reject the Town's appraisal. If rejected, applicants may order another appraisal from a qualified appraiser at their own expense. The Town Board may offer less, but no more, than the appraised value of the property; or the Board may decide not to make an offer after an appraisal has been completed. Applicants reserve the right to accept or reject the offer by the Town. SIGNATURES: It is necessary for ALL owners of the candidate tract to give their approval and consent to this application. I/we have read and understand the "Appraisal and Purchase Statement" and to the best of my/our knowledge, the information submitted in this application is true and correct. Signed: Date: Date: Date: ' Date: Date: ( 22 . ^ Appendix B Criteria for Ranking Candidate Parcels for Purchase of Conservation Easements. 1. Development Potential Amount of road frontage - road frontage of 0.5 miles or more - 0.25 to 0.5 mile - 500 feet to 0.25 mile - less than 500 feet Extent of residential development in area (ten or more developed lots of 10 acres or less) - adjacent to or within 1/4 mile of property boundary - within 1/4 mile to 1/2 mile of property boundary - within 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile of property boundary Proximity to public water or sewer, or both - public water or sewer within 1,000 feet, or less - public water or sewer within 1,000 feet to 1/2 mile - public water or sewer within 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile - public water or sewer within 3/4 mile to 1 mile - public water or sewer within 1 mile to 1 1/2 mile - public water or sewer 1 1/2 mile or farther away POINTS 30 20 6 0 20 15 10 20 16 12 8 4 0 Acreage of tract being offered for easement - 70 acres or more - 50 acres to 69 acres - 30 acres to 49 acres - 10 acres to 29 acres - less than 10 acres 25 18 13 8 0 2. Environmental Factors Percent of land offered for easement covered by mature woodland (i.e. majority of trees are 50 feet or more in height) -75% to 100% - 50% to 74% - 25% to 49% - 24% or less 25 20 15 5 Land coverage by mapped wetlands or by hydric soils - 50% or more of tract covered by wetlands - 25% to 49 % of tract covered by wetlands - 0% to 24% of tract covered by wetlands - no wetlands identified on tract 23 30 24 15 0 Land coverage by steep slopes - 75% or more of tract covered by slopes in excess of 15 percent - 50% to 74% of tract covered by slopes in excess of 15 percent - 25% to 49% of tract covered by slopes in excess of 15 percent -1% to 24% of tract covered by slopes in excess of 15 percent - no slopes in excess of 15 percent identified on tract Land coverage by erodible soils - 50% or more of tract covered by erodible soils - 25% to 49 % of tract covered by erodible soils -1% to 24% of tract covered by erodible soils - no erodible soils identified on tract 30 25 20 15 0 30 24 15 0 \ Stream corridor - parcel abuts or includes portions of Indian Creek, Williams Brook, Coy Glen Creek, Woodchuck Hollow Creek, Steep Hollow Creek, Enfield Creek, Cayuga Inlet, Lick Brook, Buttermilk Creek, Holley Creek, Six-Mile Creek, Cascadilla Creek, Fall Creek, Pleasant Grove Brook, Renwick Brook 30 OR - parcel abuts or includes portions of other year-round stream 20 Scenic/Environmental Resources - 30% or more of the tract's boundary adjoins a State, City or Town park, bikeway or preserve 20 -15% to 30% of the tract's boundary adjoins a State, City or Town park, bikeway or preserve 10 - 30% or more of the tract's boundary adjoins a privately held natural preserve 20 -15% to 29% of tract's boundary adjoins a privately held natural preserve 10 - all or part of the tract is within a Tompkins County Unique Natural Area 20 3. Clustering Potential (helps create contiguous tracts of protected land) Proximity to existing protected tracts of land - adjacent to tract with conservation easement in place or for which purchase offer has been accepted 20 - adjacent to tract for which application for participation in program has been received and accepted 15 - adjacent to tract that is eligible for program participation 10 - meets none of the above criteria 0 Amount of parcel located within Town of Ithaca CD-Conservation zoning district - tract is zoned CD-Conservation -at least 70 % of tract is zoned CD-Conservation - at least 50% of tract is zoned CD-Conservation - less than 50% of tract is zoned CD-Conservation - no portions of tract are zoned CD-Conservation Percentage of surrounding area in agricultural or open space uses -75% or more of tract's boundaries adjoin land in agriculture or open space use - 50% to 74% of tract's boundaries adjoin land in agriculture or open space use - 25% to 49% of tract's boundaries adjoin land in agriculture or open space use - less than 25% of tract's boundaries adjoin land in agriculture or open space use 4. Other 10 8 6 4 0 15 10 5 0 Landowner willing to sell rights below market value Landowner willing to receive payments in installments 25 25 24 October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting Attachment 14 Page 1 of2 Tee Ann Hunter kenda § 21 From: Susan H. Brock [brock@clarityconnect.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 1:38 PM To: Judy Drake; Cathy Co: Tee Ann Hunter Subject: Re; privacy notifications Judy Attached are red-lined revisions to the Privacy Notification law you sent me yesterday, as well as a clean version. I put this law in local law/Town Code format and made a few substantive changes-mostly adding things from the state law that I thought we should keep, and adding a definition for "personal information" from a parallel state law applicable to businesses. If these changes are acceptable, please let Tee-Ann know so she can send the Town Board the clean version. I know your version is going in the mail-out-she can either forward the revised version now or lay it on the desks. FYI, I'm out of the office Thursday and Friday and will be back in on Monday. I'll check voice mail and e-mail. Susan This electronic transmission contains legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other person is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at (607) 277-3995 (collect) or send an electronic mail message to brock@clarityconnect.com. In addition, please delete all copies of this message from your computer. — Original Message — From: Judv Drake To: Susan H. Brock ; Cathv Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 10:28 AM Subject: RE: privacy notifications Susan, Attached is a clean copy of the Privacy law that I have on the Agenda for next Monday. Also attached is the edited copy of the State law where the draft was created that is red lined. Tee Ann is requesting a name for the local law. I suggest Privacy Law or Privacy Notification Law. What do you think? Judith C. Drake, PHR Human Resources Manager Town of Ithaca 215 N. Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 phone: 607-273-1721 fax: 607-273-5854 10/16/2006 Page 2 of2 email: jdrake@town.ithaca.ny.us Original Message / From: Susan H. Brock [mailto:brock@clarityconnect.com] Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 4:26 PM To: Judy Drake; Cathy Subject: privacy notifications Judy & Cathy, This is a follow-up to a state law that became effective late last year. NY's State Technology Law Section 208 (attached) requires the Town Board to adopt a policy or local law requiring the Town to notify people when an unauthorized person acquires their private information from Town records. Has the Town done this yet? (While at first glance it appears the law applies only to the state, par. 8 at the very end says local governments have to adopt notification policies or local laws.) The Town basically needs to turn the language from Section 208 into a policy or law that the Town Board adopts. Susan \ f \ This electronic transmission contains legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other person is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at (607) 277-3995 (collect) or send an electronic mail message to brock@claritvconnect.com. In addition, please delete all copies of this message from your computer. 10/16/2006 \ TOWN OF ITHACA I LOCAL LAW NO. OF THE YEAR 2006 A LOCAL LAW ADDING CHAPTER XXX TO_a^THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE, TITLED "PRIVACY NOTIFICATION LAW" Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. The Town of Ithaca Code is hereby amended by adding Chapter XXX, titled "Privacy Notiilcation Law," readiim as follows: -CHAPTER XXX PRIVACY NOTIFICATION LAW^ S XXX-I. Definitions. S XXX-2. Notification of breach. ^ XXX-3. Notification to owners and licensees of information. ' S § XXX-4. Delay for law enforcement purposes. § XXX-5. Notification methods. S XXX-6. Notification content. S XXX-7. Notification to State. A local law ontablishing the Town of Ithaca policy on notification upon the unauthorized reloQGG of private information. PREFACE: This local law in adopted to comply with the requirements of State Technology Law Section 208. which became effective December. 7. 2005. Ft ^XXX-l. Definitions. As used in this chapter.local law, the following terms shall have the following meanings: October 11. 2006 t "PERSONAL INFORMATION" shall mean anv infonnaliun concerntnu a natural person j \ which, because oi' name, number, personal mark, or otJier identiHer. can be used to identify such natural person. ^-"Private informution""PRIVATH INFORMATION" shall mean personal information in combination with any one or more of the following data elements, when either the personal information or the data element is not encrypted or encrypted with an encryption key that has also been acquired^r f-OA. sSocial security number.7 dDriver's license number or non-driver identification card number^i-eF aAccount number, credit or debit card number, in combination with any required security code, access code, or password which would permit access to an individual's financial account. "Private information" does not include publicly available information that is lawfully made available to the general public from federal, state, or local government records. f^-"Breuch ol' L;ecurilv of the svGtem'-BREAClI OF TH1-: SIX'URn Y Ul- fHE SYS TEM" shall mean unauthorized acquisition or acquisition without valid authorization of computerized data which compromises the security, confidentiality, or integrity olw personal information maintained by the tTown. Good faith acquisition of personal information by an employee or agent of the tTown for the purposes of the tTown is not a breach of the security of the system, provided that the private information is not used or subject to unauthorized disclosure. In determining whether information has been acquired, or is reasonably believed to have been acquired, by an unauthorized person or a person without valid authorization, the tTown may consider the following factors, among others: t-HA. i-lndications that the information is in the physical possession and control of an unauthorized person, such as a lost or stolen computer or other device containing information.r-w indications that the information has been downloaded or copied.i-ef indications that the information was usedsued by an unauthorized person, such as fraudulent accounts opened or instances of identity theft reported. f€4-"Town"" TOWN" shall mean the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County. New York, and entity performing a go\^M-nmontal or proprietar>' function of the town, except the judiciary of the tTown. Ociober !1.2tK)6 1 f44-"Con!iumer ropoitinu agGncv""CQNSUMt:R RLiPORTING AGENCY" shall mean any person or entity which, for monetary fees, dues, or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages in whole or in part in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties, and which uses any means or facility of interstate commerce for the purpose of preparing or furnishing consumer reports. A list of such consumer reporting agencies is compiled by the sState aAttomey ^General and iumished upon recmest to the Town when it is required to make a notification under ^ XXX-2. i? XXX-2. Notification of breach. 2.When If the tTown owns or licenses computerized data that includes private information, it shall disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the system to any resident of New York State whose private information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by a person without valid authorization. The disclosure shall be made in the most expedient time possible and without unreasonable delay, consistent with the legitimate needs of law enforcement, as provided in ^ XXX- . subdivision fourolThis locu] law, or any measures necessary to determine the scope of the breach and restore the reasonable integrity of the data system. The Town shall consult with the State Office of Cvber Security and Critical Inl'rastructure Coordination to determine the scope of tlie breach and restoration measures. ^ XXX-3. Notification to «mners and licensees of information. -If the tTown maintains computerized data that includes private informationT which the tTown does not own, the tTown shall notify the owner or licensee of the information of any breach of the security of the system immediately following discovery, if the private information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by a person without valid authorization. ^ XXX-4. Delay for law enforcement purposes. 47The notification required by this chantenioclion may be delayed if a law enforcement agency determines that such notification impedes a criminal investigation. The notification required by this chapterGcction shall be made after such law enforcement agency determines that such notification does not compromise such investigation. XXX-5. Notification methods. ^rThe notice required by this chapter persons by one of the following methods: (^A. wWritten noticeT. be directly provided to the affected October 1 1. 2006 I ^ \ ehlectronic notice, provided that the person to whom notice is required h^ expressly consented to receiving said notice in electronic form and a log of each such notification is kept by the tXown when it notifies affected persons in such form; provided further, however, that in no case shall any person or business require a person to consent to accepting said notice in said form as a condition of establishing any business relationship or engaging in any transactiomr tTelephone notification, provided that a log of each such notification is kept by the tTown when it notifies affected persons^f-er sSubstitute notice, if the cost of providinu notice would exceed five hundred dollars, or the alTected class of subject persons to be notified exceeds one thousand, or the Town does not have sufficient contact information, which Substitute notice shall consist of all of the following: (1) eH-mail notice when the tTown has an e-mail address for the subject persons; (2) eConspicuous posting of the notice on ^;uch tthe Town's web site page, if the tTown maintains one; and (3) ftNotification to local and major statewide media. S XXX-6. Notification content. drRegardless of the method by which notice is provided, such notice shall include contact information for the tTown. includinu-aRd the name of the person making the notification, and a description of the categories of information that were, or are reasonably believed to have been, acquired by a person without valid authorization, including specification of which of the elements of personal information and private information were, or are reasonably believed to have been, so acquired. S XXX-7. Notification to State. ^A, In the event that any New York residents are to be notified, the tTown shall notify the sState aAttomey gGeneral, the Slate eC'onsumer pProtection bBoard, and the sState eOfficer of eCyber ^Security and eCritical iinfrastructure eCoordination as to the timing, content and distribution of the notices and approximate number of affected persons. Such notices shall be made without delaying notice to affected New York residents. fb4-B. In the event that more than five thousand New York residents are to be notified at one time, the tTown shall also notify consumer reporting agencies as to the timing, content and distribution of the notices and approximate number of affected persons. Such notice shall be made without delaying notice to affected New York residents. October II. 2006 > j Section 2. 11' any provision ol' this local law is found invalid by any court of j ^ competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions of this local law, which shall remain in full force and effect. Section 32. This local law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State of the State of New York. I / ^ r> I i ( 1 October 1 1. 2006 f October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 15 UTILITY LINE EASEMENT THIS INSTRUMENT WITNESSETH THAT CORNELL UNIVERSITY, an education corporation chartered by the State ofNew York, c/o Real Estate Department, Box DH - Real Estate, Ithaca, New York, 14853, hereinafter called the "GRANTOR," being the owner of certain lands situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York, in consideration of the sum of One and 00/100 Dollar ($1.00) lawful money of the United States, and other good and valuable consideration recited herein, does hereby grant and release unto the NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS CORPORATION, a corporation organized under the laws ofthe State of New York, having an office at 18 Link Drive in the Town of Kirkwood, County of Broome, State ofNew York, hereinafter called the "GRANTEE," Grantee's lessees, licensees, successors and assigns forever, a permanent easement approximately twenty-five feet in width over the following property (the "Premises"): Portions of Town of Ithaca Tax Map Parcel Number No. 61-1-7.2, as more particularly shown on Exhibit A (Permanent Easement, NYSEG Service Line) and as more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto. The easement granted hereunder lies principally within the area designated as Easement Area 1 on a map entitled "Survey Map Showing Waterline Easements To Be Granted To By Cornell University To The Town of Ithaca, Located at Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," dated March 30,2005, prepared by Lee Dresser, LLS No. 050096, which map was recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk's Office on July 13, 2005 as Instrument Number 475688. The easement granted herexmder is for the sole purpose of providing electric utility service to the Town of Ithaca water pump station and Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission water tank, located wiftiin Easement Area 2 on the aforesaid survey map. GRANTEE shall have the right to construct, reconstruct, relocate, extend, operate, inspect, maintain, repair, replace and remove any poles, supporting structures, cables, crossarms, overhead wires, guys, braces, communication facilities and other fixtures and appurtenances that GRANTEE shall require now and from time to time for the transmission and/or distribution of electric power to said water pump station and water tank. TOGETHER WITH the right of ingress and egress over the easement and right of way for the above purpose. Subject to all easements, rights of way and other encumbrances of record, specifically including, without limitation, a Water Tank and Utility Line Easement granted to the Town of Ithaca as agent municipality for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, and Water Tank and Utility Line Easement granted to the Town of Ithaca, which easements were recorded in the Tompkins Coimty Clerk's Office on July 13,2005 as Instrument Numbers 475688-01 and 475688- 02, respectively. The easement rights given to GRANTEE hereunder are to be coordinated with the easement rights given to the Town of Ithaca as agent municipality for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission and to the Town of Ithaca acting for itself, pursuant to the aforesaid Water Tank and Utility Line Easements. In addition, GRANTEE acknowledges that an existing private utility line serving WVBR lies within the easement area granted hereunder. , ' sGRANTOR (1) reserves the underlying fee title to the Premises, subject to the rights and privileges herein granted to the GRANTEE, and (2) GRANTOR reserves the right to use and enjoy said Premises provided that such use shall not create an unsafe condition with GRANTEE'S facilities or interfere with the rights granted to the GRANTEE hereunder. GRANTEE acknowledges that certain of GRANTOR'S buildings occupy portions of the Premises granted herein, and GRANTEE expressly covenants that GRANTEE will not disturb said buildings in any fashion. GRANTEE further agrees and covenants that, if at any time hereafter, the GRANTOR desires to make use of the Premises, then in that event, the GRANTEE shall, upon ninety (90) days' notice in writing from GRANTOR, make such changes in the location of the electric lines or other facilities installed on or occupying the Premises as GRANTOR may direct or require. The Town of Ithaca and WVBR FM Ithaca each agree for the benefit of GRANTOR and GRANTEE, jointly and severally, to be responsible for any and all costs or expenses associated with any relocation of the utility lines (and related appurtenances) serving their respective facilities upon demand from GRANTOR. Provided, however, that GRANTEE shall not be obligated to modify or relocate any of its electric lines or facilities pursuant to this paragraph unless and until the Town of Ithaca and\or WVBR FM, as the case may be, first provide GRANTEE with financial security, reasonably acceptable to the GRANTEE, to cover the complete cost of such modification and relocation in each instance. Whenever GRANTEE performs work on the Premises, it is agreed that, without expense to GRANTOR, upon completion of the work all debris will be promptly removed and the Premises will be promptly restored to substantially the same condition it was in before any such work was done. GRANTEE shall be responsible for any damage to GRANTOR'S property or to the property of the Town of Ithaca and/or the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, caused by GRANTEE in the exercise of its rights hereunder. GRANTEE shall indemnify and hold GRANTOR, its officers, directors, employees and agents harmless from and against any claims, actions, suits, judgments, liabilities, damages or costs of any kinds whatsoever (including, without limitation, reasonable attorney's fees) arising from personal injury (including death) or property damage caused by the negligence of GRANTEE hereunder, except to the extent such claims, actions, suits, judgments, liabilities, damages or costs (including reasonable attorney's fees), arise directly from the negligence or willful misconduct of GRANTOR. Provided, however, that, notwithstanding the foregoing or any other term or condition of this easement, GRANTEE shall not be responsible for, nor shall GRANTEE indemnify GRANTOR, its officers, directors, employees, and agents, or any of them, against any claims, actions, suits, judgments, liabilities, damages or costs (including attorney's fees) for and to the extent arising from, or caused by, failure of electric service, interruptions in electric service, and\or irregular or defective electric service from forces beyond grantee's control as provided in PSC Tariff 119, Subsection 5. This instrument shall bind the parties hereto, and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR and GRANTEE have hereunto set their hands and seals this day of 2006. ' ^ I \ Exhibit B Description of the Premises ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York, being bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point in the centeriine of Hungerford Hill Road, located approximately 966 feet southerly of the present centeriine intersection with Ellis Hollow Road, said course being further described by the following four chords and distances: South 06M r 36" West 223.71 feet; South 00° 54' 12" East 273.57 feet; South 04° 34' 45" East 241.12 feet; South 03° 51' 17" West 227.20 feet; Which point is also shown as the point of beginning on a map entitled "Survey Map Showing Waterline Easements To Be Granted To By Cornell University To The Town of Ithaca, Located at Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," dated March 30, 2005, prepared by Lee Dresser, LLS No. 050096, which map was recorded in the Tompkins County Clerks Office on July 13,2005 as Instrument Number 475688; , ^ RUNNING THENCE North 04° 01' 22" West for a distance of 25.00 feet to a point; RUNNING THENCE North 85° 58' 38" East for a distance of 262.45 feet to a point; RUNNING THENCE South 59° 02' 49" East for a distance of55.75 feet to a point, passing through an existing utility pole; RUNNING THENCE South 85° 58' 38" East for a distance of 312.39 feet to the point and place of beginning. Said parcel containing 0.165 acres. SECTION 61 BLOCK 1 LOT 7.2 (portion) CITY OR TOWN Ithaca by her signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument. Notary Public ! ) / \ I » Exhibit A Permanent Easement, NYSEG Service Line ( \ TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT fA 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, N.Y. 14850 / Jonathan Kanter, A.I.C.P. (607) 273-1747 Director of Planning FAX (607) 273-1704 Planning Director's Report for October 16.2006 Town Board Meeting DEVELOPMENT REVIEW September 5.2006 Planning Board Meeting: Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Sign Variances, St. Catherine of Siena Church, 302 St. Catherine Circle: The Planning Board issued an affirmative Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the proposed replacement sign for the St. Catherine of Siena Church, 302 St. Catherine Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71-1-10, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes replacing the existing 24 square foot, six-foot tall sign with a new +/- 32 square foot, seven-foot tall sign for the church. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner; Patricia Cote, Applicant. Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Sign Variances, Overlook at West Hill, West Hill Circle: The Planning Board issued an affirmative Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the proposed installation of one sign on each parcel f ^ for The Overlook at West Hill complex, located at the intersection on Trumansburg Road and West Hill Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.*s 24-4-14.23 and 24-4-14.24, Multiple Residence. The proposal includes installing two +/- 28 square foot signs at the entrance from Trumansburg Road. Overlook at West Hill LP, Owner; Stacey Whitney, Agent. T-Mobile Wireless Telecommunication Facility, Cornell University McConville Bam Water Tank, 756 Dryden Road: The Planning Board granted a Special Permit for the proposed wireless telecommunication facility on the existing water tank at the McConville Bam of Comell University, 756 Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65-1-5.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves installing 9 panel antennas on the walkway handrail of the existing water tank and 3 base transmitter stations on a concrete pad near the base of the tank. This project originally received Site Plan Approval from the Planning Board and Special Approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals in 2003. The Zoning Board Special Approval expired in 2005. The Telecommunications Law was updated in 2004 to require Special Permit from the Planning Board, rather than Special Approval from the Zoning Board. The applicant is therefore required to obtain Special Permit from Ae Planning Board for the project. Comell University, Owner; T-Mobile, Applicant; Matthew T. Kerwin, Agent. Brainard 2-Lot Subdivision, 132 Pine Tree Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision located at 132 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 58-2-15, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 1.12 acre lot into two parcels with Parcel A being +/- 25,549 square feet ^Town of lihacaPldmmg'DireciBf^^epW October 16, 2O0^-^g^^[^Board (containing the existing house) and Parcel B being +/- 23,220 square feet. C. Michael Brainard & Lynette K. Dean, Owners/Applicants. The Confection Connection, 821 Danby Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed "The Confection Connection" to be located in an existing building at 823 Danby Road (Rogan's Corner), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40-4-2, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal involves converting the former storage space (+/- 806 sq. ft.) into a dessert delivery service for items such as cookies, brownies and ice cream. Except for a new awning over the door, there are no exterior changes to the site or building proposed. James & Julie Rogan, Ovmers; Kevin Sullivan, Applicant. October 3. 2006 Planning Board Meeting: Big AI's (Manley's Mighty-Mart) - Hours of Operation, 1103 Danby Road: The Planning Board granted modification of a Special Permit Approval for the Big AI's Convenience Store (Manley's Mighty-Mart) located at 1103 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-2.2, Vehicle Fuel and Repair Zone. The proposal involves modifying the previously granted approval to allow the store to operate 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. A Special Approval was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals for the convenience store on January 14, 1998, which restricted the hours of operation to 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m., Friday and Saturday, and 6:00 a.m. to midnight, Sunday through Thursday. Pursuant to the current Town of Ithaca Code, Section 270-138, convenience stores with gasoline sales are now regulated by Special Permit fi-om the Planning Board. Manley's Mighty-Mart, LLC, Owner/Applicant; Dwight R. Ball, Esq., Agent. Ellis 2-Lot Subdivision, 118 *& 120 Bundy Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision (lot line modification) located at 118 and 120 Bundy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 26-3-14 and 26-3-16.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing a 0.038 +/- acre strip of land from the western edge of 118 Bundy Road, which will then be consolidated with 120 Bundy Road. Melvin & Aileen Ellis and David & Melanie Rogers, Owners/Applicants. Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Westview Subdivision Sign, Schickel Road: The Planning Board recommended to the Zoning Board of Appeals denial of a sign variance to allow a +/- 18 square foot neighborhood identification sign on the southeast comer of Schickel Road and Larisa Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-2-3.44, Low Density Residential Zone. Boris Simkin and Igor Cheikhet, Owners/Applicants. The Planning Board then recommended approval of a variance for a neighborhood identification sign not to exceed 12 square feet. Cornell University Precinct 8 Athletic Fields Modification, Game Farm Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the modification of the previously approved Precinct 8 Athletic Fields project located off Game Farm Road, Tax Parcel No's 62-2-3, 62-2-4, 62-2-5, 62-2-6, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves decreasing the total size of the gravel parking lot to approximately 15 parking spaces, a decrease of approximately 15 spaces from the originally approved 30 space parking lot, along with a minor corresponding shift to the north of the west end of the entrance drive. Comell University, Owner/Applicant; Brenda Smith, Civil Engineer, Agent. TOWN OF ITHACA Public Works Department's Monthly Board Report ^ September for the October 16,2006 Meeting ROADS ¨ The storm water project on Ridgecrest Road was finished this month, including lawn restorations. ¨ Ditching on Bums Road and Tudor Road was begun. The spoils are being used to back up the edges of the Pew Trail to create the grass shoulders. ¨ Crosswalks were painted or taped, depending on the style used previously. ¨ Many roads were hot patched, as were driveways on Ridgecrest Road where our new piping crossed. ¨ Surplus equipment was taken to the municipal auction in Lansing. ¨ We worked with the Town of Ulysses helping them pave. ¨ We hauled gravel for stock pilings. ¨ All Public Works staff attended a one-day training session on Incident Management for First Responders on September 15^. ¨ We got delivery of our new 10-wheeler plow truck. Finishing touches are being made on it. ^0^ Repaved Renwick Place. , ARKS AND TRAILS □ We continued work at Tutelo Park preparing for the Grand Opening weekend festivities on September 23,2006, and September 24,2006. The celebration was a great success. □ A Sugar Maple tree was planted at the entrance to Tutelo Park for this year's Richard Fisher award to honor PRl. □ Grounds maintenance at all sites continued. Lawns continued to grow rapidly due to frequent rains. □ We installed temporary gates at all entrances to Pew Trail due to complaints of imauthorized driving on the trail. This seems to have eliminated the problem. □ We did some ditching along our sewer easement and future trail behind Saunders Road to alleviate some persistent flooding problems for residents on Whitetail Drive. WATER We repaired a leaking valve on Maple Avenue at Pine Tree Road intersection. We inspected the Cayuga Medical Center's waterline relocation and the boring under W. King Road for the waterline to Holly Creek. October Projects , 1) Continue work on Pew Trail. , . 2) Brush pick up starts October 16,2006. ^ 3) Defensive Driving training starting October 10,2006, through October 12,2006. 4) Cleaning ditches on Burns Road and streets in Eastern Heights. 5) Sickle bar trimming on bike trails. 6) Install new road crossing pipe on Northview Road. 7) Trumansburg water tank lawn restorations. 8) Fall cleanups and leaf blowing at parks and trails. 9) Finish hot patching. ghk 0 1 I I > October 16, 2006 Ithaca Town Board Meeting, Attachment 16 TOWN CLERK'S MONTHLY MPORT n J SEPTEMBER, 2006 PAGEl TOWN OF ITHACA, NEW YORK T^HE SUPERVISOR: Pi pt 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 a. payment of which are otherwise provided for by Law: A1255 il _3 _2 5 MARRIAGE LICENSES NO. 06101 TO 06113 MISC. COPIES ZONING ORDINANCE MARRIAGE TRANSCRIPT TOTAL TOWN CLERK FEES 227.50 10.80 25.60 50.00 313.90 A2544 DOG LICENSES TOTAL A2544 597.23 597.23 B2110 J » B^AS ii _2 __2 _6 _5 5 BUILDING PERMIT BUILDING PERMIT EXTENSIN FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS SIGN PERMITS ZONING BOARD MTG TEMP CERTIFICATE OCCUP TOTAL B2110 6,265.00 2,750.00 100.00 419.34 500.00 1,900.00 11,934.34 ASS. MTG. FEE P.H. PROCE TOTAL B2115 50.00 50.00 TOWN CLERK'S MONTHLY REPORT SEPTEMBER, 2006 page 2 / (====================================================================^ ^ DISBURSEMENTS PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR GENERAL FUND 911.13 PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR PART TOWN FUND 11,984.34 PAID TO COUNTY TREASURER FOR DOG LICENSES 113.27 PAID TO AG & MARKETS FOR DOG LICENSES 21.00 PAID TO NYS HEALTH DEPT FOR MARRIAGE LICENSES TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 13,322.24 OCTOBER 2,2006 ^ ^ SUPERVISOR CATHERINE VALENTINO 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 mondi above stated, excepting only such Fees the application and payment of which are otherwise provid^for by law. q Subscribed and sworn to before me this . "j day of_ f)rk)o^ 20 [OUlI Notary^blic Town Clerk CARRIE WHITMORE Notary Public, State of New York No. 01WH6052877 Tioga County Commission Expires December IN PRESENCE OF: CORNELL UNIVERSITY BY: John E. Majeroni Director, Real Estate Department NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS CORPORATION BY: TOWN OF ITHACA BY: Catherine Valentino Town Supervisor WVBRFM Ithaca BY: Matthew Leftwich STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) ss: On the day of.j in the year 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared John E. Majeroni, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument. Notary Public STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) On the day of., in the year 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared , personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument. Notary Public STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) ss: On the day of.^ in the year 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Catherine Valentino, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument. Notary Public STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) On the day of.j in the year 2006, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared Matthew Leftwich, personally known to me or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that / ^ Building and Zoning Monthly Report 9/1/06 Until 9/30/06 \ '6709 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6710 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6772 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6740 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing Totals I $1,260,500.00 "I $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.(ra renovations to residential $5,005.00 I BP#Address Description CO Temp 6681 202 Pine Tree Rd Convert bedroom into waik-in closet 9/1/2006 □ 6515 131 King Rd W 16' X 24' detached 1.5 car garage 9/5/2006 □ 6352 110 Glenside Rd New 2 bedroom residence with deck 9/5/2006 □ 6514 131 King Rd W 1490 square foot, construct 3 bedroom single-family residence 9/5/2006 □ 6485 218 Rachel Carson Wy Common House assembly/oftice building 9/6/2006 6684 380 Pine Tree Rd Convert squash court #1 Into yoga/pilates studio 9/7/2006 □ 6656 326 Sunnyview Ln Pre-engineered Four Seasons sunroom 9/7/2006 □ 6415 212 Snyder Hill Rd Convert storage shed into outdoor dry sauna 9/12/2006 □ 6287 492 Five Mile Or New 3 bedroom home with attached garage 9/13/2006 □ 6414 618 Tower Rd East Campus Research Facility demdition 9/18/2006 □ 6414 618 Tower Rd East Campus Research Facility demolition 9/18/2006 □ 6414 618 Tower Rd East Campus Research Facility demolition 9/18/2006 □ 6374 106 Southwoods Or New 4 bedroom house with attached 3 car garage 9/21/2006 □ 6688 131 Honness Ln Install new asphalt shingles over eidsting shingles 9/21/2006 □ 6454 950 Danby Rd Create fire partitions for 3rd floor office tower 9/21/2006 □ Tuesday, October03,2006 Building and Zoning Monthly Report 9/1/06 Until 9/30/06 6678 219 Tudor Rd Construct front porch and rear deck cmly 9/21/2006 □ 6679 218 King Rd E Construct 480-sq ft rear deck 9/22/2006 □ 6184 138 RIdgecrestRd New 2 bedroom replacement home 9/22/2006 □ 6696 Campus Rd Reconstruct portion of Campus Road, including lighting 9/27/2006 □ 6572 1448 Trumansburg Rd Freestanding solar electric system 9/29/2006 □ bate Address Complaint Type Disposition 9/6/2006 901 Taughannock Blvd zoning use No Violation Found 9/7/2006 306 Tareyton Dr building code Pending 9/4/2006 1229 Trumansburg Rd building oode No Violation Found 9/14/2006 126 Kendall Ave building code Pending 9/5/2006 386 Stone Quarry Rd building code No Violation Found 9/1/2006 1044 Danby Rd building code Abated 9/13/2006 Danby Rd zoning use Pending 9/13/2006 Danby Rd zoning use Pending 9/13/2006 Danby Rd zoning use Pending 9/27/2006 123 King Rd E fire Pending 9/28/2006 390 Stone Quarry Rd sign Pending ( ) Existing Building GO Field Visits Hiiiiiiing Code Coiiqplamt/Inyestigation Fire Safety Fire Emergency Total 81 12 2 0 95 I \ Tuesday. October 03,2006 Building and Zoning Monthly Report 9/1/06 Until 9/30/06 6752 ^/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofIng ' N 6771 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6754 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6755 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6747 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6723 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6714 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6715 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6716 9/25/2006 6717 9/25/2006 6718 9/25/2006 6719 9/25/2006 6720 9/25/2006 6774 9/25/2006 6722 9/25/2006 6711 9/25/2006 6724 9/25/2006 6725 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6726 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6727 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 $45.00 renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential renovations to residential Tuesday, October 03,2006 Pages Building and Zoning Monthly Report 9/1/06 Until 9/30/06 6728 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6729 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6763 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6721 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6742 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6773 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6731 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6733 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6735 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6736 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6737 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6739 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6713 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6741 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6712 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6704 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6705 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovationsto residential 6706 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovationsto residential 6707 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovationsto residential 6708 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovationsto residential Page 4 ( ' / t f ^ / ^ Tuesday, October 03.2006 Building and Zoning Monthly Report 9/1/06 Until 9/30/06 Building Permits ^P#Date 6690 9/5/2006 6734 9/7/2006 6693 9/11/2006 6697 9/13/2006 6694 9/13/2006 6696 9/13/2006 6695 9/13/2006 6698 9/14/2006 6699 9/14/2006 Value Description $18,000.00 Remodel kitchen and remove tearing wall $8,657.00 Re-rooflng $1,500.00 Convert one-family into two-family with attached garage $65,000.00 Add telecommunications antennae aiKl base equipment to e}dsting tank $9,696.00 Tear off and replace roofing $367,167.00 Reconstruct portion of Campus Road, including lighting $5,000.00 Convert storage space to bakery (Confection Connection) Fi occupancy $125,000.00 New 3 bedroom single-family residence with attached 3-car garage $6,000.00 336 square foot addition 6702 9/20/2006 $22,200.00 Tear off and reroof existing structure 6700 9/20/2006 6701 9/20/2006 $300.00 Reroof over existing structure $7,500.00 138 square foot porch addition 6703 9/21/2006 $18,490.00 Inground pool with fence 6764 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6758 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6759 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6760 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6761 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing 6762 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing fee category $60.00 renovations to residenti£ti $45.00 renovations to residential $25.00 conversions of use $200.00 business $45.00 renovations to residential $850.00 business $35.00 business $350.00 new single-family homes $45.00 additions to residential $70.00 business $25.00 renovations to residential $45.00 additions to residential $60.00 miscellaneous $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential $45.00 renovations to residential Tuesday, October 03,2006 Pagel Building and Zoning Monthly Report mm Until mom 6765 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $46.00 renovations to residential 6766 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6767 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $46.00 renovations to residential 6768 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6757 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6770 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residentieri 6751 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing . $45.00 renovations to residential 6769 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 RerFpofing ;$45.00 renovations to residential 6749 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6730 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6738 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6743 9/25/2006 $8,657.00.Re-roofing $45,00 renovations to residential 6744 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6745 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6746 9/25/2006 $8,657.00.Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to .residential 6753 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residentid . 6748 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6756 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential . 6750 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential 6732 9/25/2006 $8,657.00 Re-roofing $45.00 renovations to residential Page 2 S / , / ' Tuesday, October 03,2006 TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 10/16/2006 N Public Works (Cheryl Nelson) Most all public works and highway department personnel have gone through the NIMS compliance training. Cheryl is also involved with the County's Emergency Management Strategic Planning Committee, which is currently looking at critical operations at the County level and their need for generator backup. County ITS will receive the first generator with plans for a portable generator for fte DSS building, and finally some system for the mental Health building. Departments have been asked to review and designate their "core" or "critical" functions and services. The group is also going to address the role of County employees during emergencies. NYS Emergency Management (Greg Firenze) Noted that there are still three assistance centers open in the Southern Tier and they are seeing 30 to 50 people per day. Individual assistance programs are not meant to totally replace personal losses; under the Stafford Act, $27,000 is die maximum amount of Federal money that will be paid to an uninsured individual or family. There is also a special NYS assistance fimd that pays up to $5000. Part of the application process is the completion of a SBA application; this is a loan at 2.9% interest. Under the hazard mitigation program, homes with 51% or greater of their value can be bought by the government. 714% of the allotted disaster monies can be used for these purchases. However, in Broome County there is an estimate of $48 million damages to homes, which is greater than 714% of the $200 million assigned to Southern Tier recovery funds. Greg noted that after Hurricane Katrina, additional per capita funds of .40/person were allotted for preparedness. This is supposed to flow through NYS to the counties. Greg also noted that a template pandemic flu plan called "Empire County Flu Plan" has been published and is available for use at die county level. SEMO is looking at the availability of lS-300 courses, which is currently limited because of the instructor availability. Currently, NYS Fire Instructors are not signed off to teach anything above the lS-200 level. It was suggested that SEMO think about developing and approving qualified local instructors in each county. EARTH FILL PERMITS No earth fill permits were issued in September 2006. WATER PROJECTS East Hill Transmission Main and Storage Tank Site restoration and fence installation has been completed. The Tank has been filled and has been put into partial service supplying water to a limited service area along Ellis hollow Road. The tank will be put into full service serving the transmission line after new pumps and controls are installed by Bolton Point. The Town is working with NYSEG and Comell to provide a new electric service line to the site. That work is scheduled for completion by the end of the year. Trumansburg Road Water Tank All painting and repair work has been completed on the tank. The Tank has been filled and has been returned to service. Trumansburg Road Water Main Improvements i Preliminary design is imderway for a capital project to replace the 80-year-old, 6-inch cast iron water main, which serves Trumansburg Road fi'om the city line to Harris Dates drive. This project has been on the capital plan for construction in 2007. Town Engineer's Report October 16,2006 Daniel R. Walker Page 3 10/11/2006 TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 10/16/2006 t ^ SEWER PROJECTS ' lAWWTF Phosphorus Removal Project The Town Engineer has been participating in meetings with the contractor and Steams and Wheler to attempt to negotiate a settlement of claims. Joint Interceptor Sewer Projects The First Street Interceptor constmction has been completed on the 100 block of Aurora Street. Continuation of the sewer on Aurora Street starting at Hudson Street is underway. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT The Town Engineers office is continuing to work on the watershed plan and model for the Town. Data that is being collected by the engineering interns is being processed and developed into a stormwater model for the Town. The Northeast area is a priority study area because of the proposed Briarwood Subdivision. Storm Water Working Group The Town of Ithaca is a participant in the Tompkins County Stormwater Working Group (SWG), which i^^N^ continuing to work on drafting an intermunicipal agreement to formalize the group. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CAYUGA MEDICAL CENTER Engineering staff is monitoring the sediment and erosion control practices. WEIDERMEIR SUBDIVISION Sediment and erosion controls are being monitored. The NYS stormwater monitoring regulations require a subdivision developer to maintain the sediment and erosion control components of the entire site until all constmction is completed on all lots in the subdivision. SOUTHWOODS Constmction of phase U improvements is complete except for final pavement. Legal responsibility for maintenance of the permanent storm water management measures is in the process of being finalized. WESTVIEW SUBDIVISION The Engineering staff is monitoring the sediment and erosion control program for the site, which is currei^thi.^ in compliance with the sediment and erosion control plan and general permit fi*om DEC. Several details ( the plan that includes detention located on several of the lots is being modified to better fit the topography and siting of the individual houses. ^ ^ Town Engineer's Report October 16,2006 Daniel R. Walker Page 4 10/11/2006 Town Engineer's Report for 10/16/2006 Town Board Meeting TOMPKINS COUNTY EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE The Town Engineer is a member of the Emergency Planning Committee. The reports of the various agencies participating on the committee are included for information Red Cross Update (Mike Raffe) Mike spoke about activities during September, which is National Preparedness Month. Red Cross representatives have been attending open houses at various schools in the area, presenting preparedness information to parents. He also noted that BOCES is now including flu preparedness and training to its staff during their right-to-know training sessions. He also handed out an Excessive Heat Events Guidebook and mentioned the National Hazard Observer^ a free resource fhttD://www.colorado.edu/hazards/o/ is the link for subscribing). At the last Special Needs Population Task Force, there was a presentation by local Red Cross shelter managers, focusing on their experiences both in Louisiana and the Southern Tier and the need to deal with both regular and special needs populations in the shelter situation. Mike also reported on the Red Cross sheltering exercise in Dryden. There was a question if the County has a policy on weather conditions and its workers, a health and safety concern. Tom Dorman stated that IFD does have one, but it is related to the wearing of turnout gear during certain weather situations. ITS Task Team (Beth Harrington) Beth noted that technology and technology support is one of the NIMS components, and that, while the County already has many technology resources, those resources are not readily available and/or accessible during emergency situations. There are also NYS databases that are currently not accessible. Beth has been working with Greg Potter from the County's ITS Department to look at how ITS could support technology in emergency situations. There was a recent meeting with ITS and the head of the County Hazmat team to look at hazardous materials databases. Beth recommended that this Committee support the development of an ITS Task Team. It was asked if Greg Potter could do a presentation at one of these Committee meetings. Public Information Officer Group (Julie Holcomb) Julie reported on a recent meeting of the core PIG group, stating that the group is taking a slightly new direction in the sense of restructuring the group to focus on County and City assets and personnel, since many of the previously included agency representatives might not be available during a later scale event because of commitment to their own organizations. The group is looking to establish a County Joint Information System (JIS) which is one of the components of NIMS. JIS includes policies and procedures, personnel, equipment and facilities and is a critical element in emergency management. The group is researching the development of an "on-call" schedule and a PIG kit. Julie mentioned that there is a new FEMA online course, IS-702 on PIG and JIS. Ithaca Fire Department (Tom Dorman) Tom reported that IFD continues to add to its hazmat equipment and emergency communications systems through grant monies. There is a Hickey radio system that allows for interoperability of different radio system. Each agency is requested to purchase their won cable for this system ($150-200.00); Guy VanBenschoten is the contact person for this. Through a CEDAP grant, a Smith detection device was obtained for material analysis and currently operators are being trained in its use. The City of Ithaca continues with NIMS training and will be doing an IS-200 course in the fUture. Human Services Coalition, Information and Referral (Ed Swazye) Ed stated that it is expected that about $140,000 will be received from the State to help fund and staff the 211 system. It is still undetermined how the 211 system will fit into emergency management and emergency/disaster events. Cornell University (Jeff Surine) Jeff noted that Cornell is looking at a more global approach to their emergency planning, instead of using smaller individual groups that they have in the past. Lee Shurtleff has been invited to sit in on discussions at Comell about emergency communications. Pandemic flu planning is underway at Comell. TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 10/16/2006 N Cayuga Medical Center (Amy Thomas) ( Amy said that it is planned to open the newly renovated Emergency Department in December 2006. Beginning in January, CMC will be using a new ED physician group to staff the ED and Convenient Care Centers. Ithaca Police Department (John Barber) IPD has assigned him to be the representative to this Committee. Pete Tyler will be the alternative. The Committee welcomes their involvement. Kendal-at-Ithaca (Dick Bucklin) Nursing homes in the area, in accordance with mandates from the NYS DOH, have been working on evacuation plans, as well as updating their emergency plans. Copies of these plans are being also sent to DoER to be on file. Dick noted that Kendal should also be considered as a resource to the community for possible sheltering. Currently the air conditioning is not hooked into the backup generator system, but that is being worked on. Dick is also going to make contact with the Ithaca Childcare Center, as they might be a potential resource to the community for employees' children during an emergency. He had previously initiated contact, but the then-director has left and the discussion was not continued. Department of Emergency Response (Lee Shurtleff) Has been in discussions with Cornell University about their potential participation in the County's new communications system. All have agreed that the use of cellular and satellite phones during emergencies have their own problems. It is possible that the County could hook into Cornell's fiber optic system for backup Internet services and video conferencing. Construction on the towers for the new communications system began about a month ago with the first of seven towers going up next week. It is hoped that this infrastructure will be completed by the end of the year. ^ ^ The FEMA team has been in the County since July after the June flood declaration. There are numerous small and large projec? ^ being undertaken throughout the County. Soil and water conservation personnel are also involved. NIMS compliance training has been ongoing during the summer with numerous multi-disciplinary and multi-agency courses being taught through the DoER office. Town of Ithaca (Dan Walker) Highway Department personnel have received both the IS-100 and IS-700 courses, with employees from other municipality departments participating. One of the "lessons learned" from the recent flooding is the need for MOUs (memorandums of understanding) between highway departments. It is hoped that a County-wide MOU can be worked out via the elected officials association and key municipal executives. It was noted that a "template" MOU for mutual aid can be found at the NYS OHS (Office of Homeland Security). City of Ithaca (Julie Holcomb) An IS-402 for elected officials has been offered to the appropriate City officials; the NIMS courses have also been taught throughout the summer. Department of Health (Carol Griep) The fourth quarter deliverables included a draft for a local pandemic flu plan. That has been sent to the NYS DOH, which be reviewed and returned with "comments." The new 2006-2007 deliverables focus on operations continuity and training, especially in the area of pandemic flu. Carol is currently working with local educational groups to help with their pandemic flu planning. The BT budget has been cut and clerical support is now .6 PTE. The NYS DOH has also mandated to local health departments to develop a plan for the sheltering of medical special needs population; this sub-committee is currently reviewing a template plan _ from Florida County. The health Department is also involved in public education about seasonal flu. Carol will be attending i week long national training session on the SNS (strategic national stockpile). \ j Town Engineer's Report October 16,2006 Daniel R. Walker Page 2 10/11/2006 !Toh'« 's Rept. October 16, 2006 Toy^n Board Meeting Reviews for Zoning Board ("ZBAV Six applications for the Zoning Board were processed since the September report as follows: September 18, 2006 ZBA Meeting: (1) sign variances were granted to permit the replacement of an existing sign with a new sign exceeding the 24 square foot maximum and six foot height permitted in Chapter 221 of the Town Code, located at St. Catherine of Siena Church, 302 St. Catherine Circle, Medium Density Residential Zone, Patricia Cote/St. Catherine of Siena Church, Appellant; (2) sign variances were granted to permit the placement of two identical signs exceeding the 24 square foot maximum permitted in Chapter 221 of the Town Code, located at Overlook at West Hill, West Hill Circle, Multiple Residence Zone, Stacey Whitney/Overlook at West Hill, Appellant; (3) area variances were granted to permit the construction of a kitchen bay addition and a second floor addition to an existing home, located at 105 Mclntyre Place, Medium Density Residential Zone, Alexandrine Crane, Appellant, Ernie Bayles, Agent; (4) a modification of a previously approved area variance was granted to permit the construction of an 18' X 20' detached garage not meeting the required rear yard setback, located at 970 Taughannock Boulevard, Low Density Residential Zone, Frank A. Bettucci, Appellant; (5) a height variance was granted to permit the construction of a new administration building on the Ithaca College campus that exceeds the maximum permitted height (36/38 feet permitted; 74 +/- feet proposed), located off of Danby Road,. Medium Density Residential Zone, Ithaca College, Appellant, Robert J. O'Brien, Agent; and (6) special approval was granted to permit the operation of a catering/lunch delivery business as a home occupation, located at 386 Stone Quarry Road, Low Density Residential Zone, Fumi Nagasaki- Pracell, Appellant. CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS/FUNCTIONS The following have been accomplished over the past month. Codes and Ordinances Committee tCOC): The Committee met on September 20, 2006 to continue review of existing regulations regarding docks and shoreline structures, proposed amendment to provisions in the Zoning Code regarding alternate Zoning Board members, continuation of discussion regarding possible wind energy facility regulations, and discussion regarding weekly rentals in the Lakefront Residential Zone. The next COC meeting is scheduled for October 18, 2006. Tentative agenda items include continuation of review of dock regulations, continuation of discussion regarding possible wind tower regulations, continuation of discussion regarding amendment to provisions in the Zoning Code regarding alternate Zoning Board members, and continuation of the matter regarding weekly rentals to transients (including a draft residents survey). Transportation Committee: The Committee met on September 19, 2006 and completed review of the draft Transportation Plan. The Committee has forwarded the draft Plan to the Town Board for consideration of adoption. A presentation and discussion is scheduled for the October 5, 2006 Town Board meeting at which the Town Board will be asked to forward the draft Plan to the Planning Board for a recommendation. The next Committee meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, October 19, 2006 at 4:00 p.m. (if a meeting is needed). Conservation Board: The Conservation Board met on September 7, 2006 to discuss a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the draft law allowing solar collectors, possible Newsletter articles, and October^ 6, 2006 Town Board Meeting attendance at the Conference on the Environment. Conservation Board member Larry Sallinger plans to attend the 2006 Conference on the Environment at Chautauqua Institution in western New York from October 13 - The next meeting is scheduled for October 5,2006. Ithaca-Tompkins Countv Transportation Council CITCTO Planning Committee: The ITCTC Planning Committee met on September 19, 2006 to discuss recommendations regarding a resolution of support for the TCAD Economic Development Strategy and Collaborative and a TIP amendment for the City of Ithaca's Aurora Street Bridge project (to increase the funding). The Planning Committee also discussed the process for the 2007-2012 TIP Update. The Policy Committee will meet on October 17*^ to consider the above items. The next meeting of the Planning Committee is scheduled for November 21,2006 at 10:00 a.m. Fall 2006 Newsletter: The Fall Newsletter was completed, sent to the printer, and delivered to residents early the first week in October. Articles included an overview of the Town Budget process, announcement of acquisition of the Dress Woods Preserve, an overview of new laws adopted or under consideration by the Town Board, an article regarding storm water management, presentation of the Richard B. Fisher Award, among others. Staff Performance Evaluations: Annual evaluations of Planning Department staff were completed. 10/02/2006 09:01:45 ? ?= ^ 'pe TOWN OF ITHACA B2110 - B2110 Transaction Report For the period 09/01/2006 through 09/30/2006 Date Comment Name Quantity Fee B2110 1.BP 09/01/2006 70.-10-1.144 2.BP 09/05/2006 71.-1-15 3.BP 09/06/2006 43.-2-8 4.BP 09/07/2006 70.-9-5 5.BP 09/11/2006 23.-1-11.5 6.BP 09/12/2006 71.-3-7 7.BP 09/12/2006 21-2-28 8.BP 09/12/2006 44.-1-7 (71 BUILDING PERMITS) 9.BP 09/18/2006 21.-2-28 10.BP 09/18/2006 53.-1-19 11.BP 09/19/2006 49.-1-17.4 12.BP 09/20/2006 61.-1-7.2 13.BP 09/20/2006 67.-1-2.1 14.BP 09/21/2006 41.-1-30.2 /^P 09/26/2006 39.-1-1.1 > P 09/26/2006 39.-1-1.1 1..JP 09/29/2006 24.-1-34.2 18.BP 09/29/2006 39.-1-1.1 CHIANG, HSIAO-DONG DAVE AND CONNIE PATTESON SKYRISE ASSOCIATES, LLC HUANG, HONG ZHONG FREEMAN, PETRINA JD ROOFING, LLC CROWLEY, JULIE KERSLAKE, LISA DEER RUN SUBDIVISION TALLMAN/DEMAREST FOR CROWLEY MOLINA, GLORIA GOODHEW, WILLIAM H CORNELL CCGR BUILDING CORNELL - BESS BROWN CENTER ITHACA COLLEGE SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS POKORNEY MORTON BUILDINGS SOUTH HILL CAMPUS 100.00 45.00 275.00 25.00 60.00 45.00 700.00 3,195.00 60.00 25.00 550.00 850.00 70.00 45.00 60.00 45.00 70.00 45.00 18 6,265.00 19.BPE 09/26/2006 63.-1-2.2, 67.-1-10.2,67.-10.CORNELL UNIV EAST 1 2,750.00 CAMPUS RES 1 2,750.00 20.FSI 09/01/2006 39.-1-15 ITHACA ESTATES REALTY 1 50.00 21.FSI 09/06/2006 54.-7-45.1 GROUT, BRIAN 1 50.00 100.00 22. SP 09/22/2006 62.-1-3.2 RITE AID 1 65.52 23. SP 09/22/2006 62.-1-3.2 RITE AID 1 80.00 24.SP 09/22/2006 62.-1-3.2 RITE AID 1 136.24 25. SP 09/22/2006 62.-1-3.2 RITE AID 1 39.42 26.SP 09/22/2006 62.-1-3.2 RITE AID 1 30.16 27.SP 09/28/2006 24.-4-14.24 OVERLOOK AT WEST 1 68.00 HILLS 419.34 09/05/2006 ECO VILLAGE, SONG 1 350.00 COMMON HOUSE TCO 09/05/2006 66.-3.3.521 ROY BUILDERS 1 500.00 XO 09/08/2006 33.-1-4.14 MCAFEE, KEVIN S 1 50.00 3i.TCO 09/28/2006 24.-4-14.23,121 WEST HILL CIR OVERLOOK AT WEST HILL 1 500.00 32.TCO 09/28/2006 24.-4-14.23, 111 WEST HILL CIR OVERLOOK AT WEST HILL 1 500.00 Page: 1 Type 33.ZBM 34.ZBM 35.ZBM 36.ZBM Date 09/06/2006 09/08/2006 09/08/2006 09/18/2006 Comment 19.-2-14 36.-2-3.49 54.-1-34, -35 65.-1-5.2 37.ZBM 09/26/2006 21.-2-28 Name NESHEIM, MALDBN C. SIMKIN, BORIS HILKER, WILLIS S. EGNER FOR CORNELL PLANT PROD CROWLEY, JULIE Quantity 5 1 1 1 1 Fee 1,900.00 .00^ lot ' 100* 100. 100.00 \ 500.00 Total Sales 37 11,93434 Page: 2 TOWN OF ITHAGA 215 NORTH TtOGA STREET; ITHACA, N.Y. 14850 www.tov^^iliiaica.jiy.us TOWN t;LERK1Z73i1721 HIGHWAY (Roads, Paiks, Trails, Water 4 Sewer) 273-1656 ENGINEERING 273-1747 I=1ANNING273-I74r ZONINa273^178S FAX (607) 273-1704 or (607) 273.5854 MEMORANDUM TO: Town -Board AAembers and Oepaitnent-Heads FROM: Judith C. Drake. PHR, Human Resources Manager DATE: October 11,2006 SUBJECT: September Human l^esources ieport The month of September was spent working oo: • Information for the development of the Tentative Budget This includes wages, benefits and programs planned for * Information and evaluation of2001-2(X)5 personnel t»jdget lines versus a<^al pay with Councilman Stein. Working with Paul Tunison, General Manager, . SCUWC, . on personnel issues. • On going work with benefits, insurance claims, The last two weeks of September i was working from home as much as 1 could ib complete tasks that could not be put off. On September t9^ I had elective back surgery. Since October 2"^ I have been: woddng in ttie office on: a limited pad time schedule. I plan to be backfull time by October 30^. I would like to thank my a8slstant .CQnniet Claik.fQr dQing asgieat .jQb, fielding calls fop me and: dealing with matters that I xx)uldhThandie from home. Tharikyou. Pagel of 1 TOWN OF ITHACA 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 www.town.ithaca.ny.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, Councilperson Will Burbank, Chair Recreation & Human Services Committee Peter Stein, Councilperson Pat Leary, Councilperson Jeff Cowie, Councilperson Herb Engman, Councilperson From: Mamie Kirchgessner, Recreation and Youth Coordinator September 2006 This months report is abbreviated, as it appears I contracted pertussis somewhere this month and was placed under quarantine when the report was due! Youth Employment • Support functions for recognition event • Authored article for newsletter • Recmited potential youth for data entry project (Change in ICSD hours has made this more "challenging".) • Attended County Youth Services meeting to support verbal report by Matt & Justin of their youth initiated project. • Met with potential youth applicant Joint Youth Commission • Recruited two individuals for vacancies on commission • Attended meeting with report from Rural Youth Services Worker Carissa Mann about potential future programming Recreation Partnership • Attended meeting where future funding concems were discussed • Provide point of contact to communicate with current appointees and alternate pertinent information such as determination by the Town of Ulysses determination to remain in partnership and request for resolution of support at agenda planning meetings J ^ Recreation and Human Service Committee • Lead Tutelo Park Opening Event Planning Committee • Did support work to make event happen successfully including many meetings, follow up, mailings, and publicity including media contacts • Completed provisions for "adopt a park" and pavilion fee rental policy to proceed to board for action • Other related activities as directed Related Activity • Supervised student intern Ben Bromberg (Volunteer Coordinator for Tutelo Park Opening) and Community Volunteer Barbara Goehner Network Additional; Network/Record Specialist Report October 16, 2006 New Page: 2007 Tentative Budget, Tutelo Park, Fall Newsletter. Brush & Leaf pickup Site of the Month page: Tompkins County Board of Elections Voting Machines The top 3 most downloaded files from the website are: • Zoning Ordinance • Building permit application • 2006 Town Budget MS Office 2003 upgrade for Town Hall computers delayed until 3 party vendor application incompatibilities are evaluated. Records Management Advisor Board Committee (RMABC) did not meet last month. However, per the recommendations from the last meeting, the Town's Local Law and Ordinance page has been revamped to include recently passed legislation. This enhancement was done to highlight newly passed local laws and ordinances. This page will be updated quarterly as the legislation is incorporated into the Town's full codification which is available on line. However, particularly relevant and topical legislation, such as the Noise Ordinance, will remain on the page with RMABC recommendations.