HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1991-05-2140
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
I Date ✓ / a
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Clerk M..%rc�¢
MAY 21, 1991
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday, May- 21, 1991, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca,
New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, Stephen
Smith, Virginia Langhans, James Baker, John C. Barney (Town
Attorney), John Czamanske (Town Planning Technician), Dan
Walker (Town Engineer), George Frantz (Acting Town Planner).
ALSO PRESENT: Jack Roscoe, Thomas Bell, Mario Giannella, Sandy
Tallant, Lewis Roscoe, Dave Auble, Shirley Egan, Robert
Bland, Doug Brittain,. Bruce Brittain, Larry Fabbroni,
Judy James, Dennis Stein, David Stroud.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:30
P.M. and accepted for the record the Clerk's Affidavit of Posting and
Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the
Ithaca Journal on May 13, 1991, and May 16, 1991, respectively,
together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said
Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under
discussion, as appropriate,, upon the Clerk of the City of Ithaca,
upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Manager
of the Finger Lakes Region of the -NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, &
Historic Preservation, upon the Resident Engineer of the NYS
Department of Transportation, and.upon the applicants and /or agents,
as appropriate, on May 13, 19916
Chairperson Grigorov read the Fire Exit Regulations to those
assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State,
Office of Fire Prevention and Control.
AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD
There were no persons present to be heard. Chairperson Grigorov
closed this portion of?the meeting.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER 6, 1990
MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Baker.
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Meeting of November 6,.1990, be and hereby are approved as presented'.
There being no further discussion, the Chairperson called for a
vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Smith, Langhans,.Baker.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
46
4
Planning Board -2- May 21, 1991
. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - 'NOVEMBER 20, 1990
MOTION by James Baker, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Meeting of November 20, 1990, be and hereby are approved as presented.
There being no further discussion, the Chairperson called for a
vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Smith, Langhans, Baker.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 18, 1990
MOTION by Stephen Smith, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Meeting of December 18, 1990, be and hereby are approved as presented.
There being no further discussion, the Chairperson called for a
vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Smith, Langhans, Baker.
• Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be.carried_ unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF
APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE PLANNING
TO A PROPOSED CHANGE IN USE FROM
A MODIFICATION
BOARD ON AUGUST
STORAGE TO LIGHT
OF THE SITE PLAN
1, 1989 WITH RESPECT
INDUSTRIAL FOR A
PORTION OF BELL'S
ITHACA TAX PARCEL
BELL, OWNER; JACK
WAREHOUSE, LOCATED
NO. 6- 33- 3 -2.8, LIGHT
ROSCOE, APPLICANT.
AT 614
INDUSTRIAL
ELMIRA ROAD,
DISTRICT.
TOWN OF
THOMAS
Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the
above -noted matter duly opened at 7:35 p.m. and read aloud from the
Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
Mr. Roscoe addressed the Board and stated that he would like the
modification to apply to the entire building.
Chairperson Grigorov asked, for the record, how many Board
members had viewed the site. Ms. Langhans, Mr. Smith, Mr. Baker, and
Chairperson Grigorov responded that they had viewed the site.
Ms. Langhans wondered about the loading dock. Attorney Barney
stated that, if it is acceptable, the Planning Board should look at
the request as it is today. Attorney Barney noted that the Planning
Board had approved a prior site plan that did not have a loading dock
shown on the plan, and the Planning Board is being asked tonight to
•
Planning Board
-3-
May 21, 1991
approve a modification of a site plan which, obviously, has a loading
dock in existence.
Mr. Czamanske wondered when the extension to the loading dock was
constructed. Mr. Bell replied that the - extension was put on prior to
renting, and before the Certificate of Occupancy was issued. Mr.
Kenerson asked Mr. 'Bell if he had secured a building permit. Mr.
Bell responded that the dock was already there; all he did was extend
it. Mr. Kenerson said that the Board is hearing that what exists is
not what was originally approved. Mr. Bell said that it was in the
original construction. Attorney Barney commented -- not on the site
plan that the Planning Board saw. Mr. Czamanske stated, for the
record, that the "T" was not on the site plan that was approved by
the Planning Board, adding that Mr. Frost, Building Inspector /Zoning
Enforcement Officer,' will check on the matter. Mr. Bell mentioned
fill on the property. Mr. Czamanske said that there is a creek that
borders the parcel, and he did not know whether or not it would be a
good idea for the fill to extend all the way to the creek.
Mr. Roscoe said that as an occupant of the building, he thought
that the "T" in the loading dock greatly enhances the function of the
building for receiving goods.
At this point, Chairperson - Grigorov reviewed 'the comments from
the Environmental Review Committee.
• Chairperson Grigorov asked if the warehouse was ever used as a
warehouse. Mr. Bell answered that Jack Roscoe has been his original
tenant. Mr. Roscoe said that the woodworking business commenced in
the warehouse in August 1990, and the land is owned by Mr. Bell.
The ERC noted a correction in the Short EAF, Part I, No. 10, in
that the present land uses are also commercial and agricultural. The
ERC also commented that in Part II, C1, of the Short EAF, there
should be something in writing regarding the handling of hazardous
materials.
Ms. Langhans asked if the same type of operation was being
planned with a large percentage of storage. Mr. Roscoe responded
that they are contemplating using the facility as a light
manufacturing facility for woodworking and employing ten people.
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if anyone present wished to speak. No one spoke. Chairperson
Grigorov closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter back to the
Board for discussion.
The Board held a brief discussion on the matter.
There appearing to be no further
Board, Chairperson Grigorov asked
• motion.
discussion or comments from the
if anyone were prepared to offer a
MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Baker.
Planning Board -4- May 21, 1991
• WHEREAS:
1. This action is the consideration of a Modification of the Site
Plan Approval granted by the Planning Board on August 1, 1989
with respect to a proposed change in use from storage to light
woodworking and finishing for a portion of Bell's Warehouse,
located at 614 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
6- 33- 3 -2.8, Light'Industrial District.
2. This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in
environmental review for site plan considerations. The Zoning
Board of Appeals has been legislatively determined to act as Lead
Agency in environmental review for any variances which this
action may be contingent upon.
3. The Planning Board, at Public Hearing on May 21, 1991, has
reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form, an
environmental assessment prepared by the Town Planning
Department, comments regarding the proposed action submitted by
the Environmental Review Committee of the Conservation Advisory
Council, a site plan as originally approved by the Planning Board
on August 1, 1989, a drawing generally showing the condition of
the site as it presently exists, and other application materials
for this submission, including a Letter from Mr. Roscoe regarding
the use of the building.
• 4. The Town Planning Department has recommended that a negative
determination of 'environmental significance be made for this
action.
THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board make and hereby does make a negative
determination of environmental significance for this action as
proposed.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
MOTION by Virginia Langhans, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the consideration of a Modification of the Site
Plan Approval granted by the Planning Board on August 1, 1989
with respect to a proposed change in use from storage to light
• woodworking and finishing for a portion of Bell's Warehouse,
located at 614 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
6- 33- 3 -2.8, Light Industrial District.
4
Planning Board -5- May 21, 1991
• 2. This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board, acting
as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed site
plan, has on May 21, 1991 made a negative determination of
environmental significance.
3. The Planning Board, at Public Hearing on May 21, 1991, has
reviewed the application submissions, environmental assessment
form, review and comments for this action, and a letter from Mr.
Roscoe regarding the use of the building.
THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED.
That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final Site
Plan Approval to the project, with the following conditions:
a. Granting of any required variance by the Zoning Board of
Appeals.
b. Approval by the Building Inspector that the building is
suitable under the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention
and Building Code for the proposed use.
c. Approval of final site landscaping, drainage, sedimentation,
erosion control, and access plans by the Town Engineer and
Town Planner, and completion of all such items no later than
September 30, 1991.
d. Agreement by the owner to grant_ easement for water and /or
sewer main installation within the area abutting the
"private drive ", if, upon further determination by the Town
Engineer, such easement is necessary for proposed area water
and sewer improvements.
e. That this approval is granted solely for the woodworking
operation as presently conducted at the site and for no
other use except storage as originally approved August 1,
1989.
f. That the owner and applicant agree to modify and make
appropriate application to the Town of Ithaca if in the
future any other uses are contemplated for the site beyond
those hereby approved.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith.
Nay now None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the Bell's
• Warehouse /Roscoe Woodworking, Inc., Site Plan Approval Modification
duly closed.
Planning Board
-6-
May 21, 1991
AGENDA ITEM: CORNELL UNIVERSITY G /EIS:
a. CONSIDERATION OF LEAD AGENCY STATUS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW.
b. CONSIDERATION OF DETERMINATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE.
c. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED SCOPE OF G /EIS.
Chairperson Grigorov opened the discussion on the above -noted
matter and read aloud from the Agenda as noted above.
Consideration of Lead Agency status for environmental review.
Chairperson
Grigorov stated
that the
Town Board designates
and
concurs with
the
the
designation of the
to the
Planning
for review
Board as Lead
Agency.
Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a
motion.
MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Baker.
WHEREAS.
1. Cornell_ University has requested that the Town Board rezone its
lands in the area bounded by NYS Rte, 366, Game Farm Road, and
• Cascadilla Creek from Residence District R -30 to a Special Land.
Use District,
2. Cornell. University has. an understanding of the need for
preparation of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (G /EIS)
that will include the area between NYS Rte. 366 on the north and
the vicinity of Snyder Hill Road and Honness Lane on the south,
and extending from the City of Ithaca to the Town of Dryden.
3. The
Town of
Ithaca
Town Board, on
March 11,
1991,
has referred
the
matter
to the
Planning Board
for review
and
recommendation.
4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, under Article IX, Section 46 -a
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, is empowered to review
and approve, approve with modifications, or disapprove proposed
site plans for uses within a Special Land Use District,
5. On April 16, 1991 the Town of Ithaca Planning Board proposed to
designate itself Lead Agency for environmental review for the
above - referenced matter, and has requested concurrence with such
designation by other involved agencies as required by 6 NYCRR
Part 617,
6. The Planning Board has received notice of concurrence with said
designation from a number of involved agencies, and no other
• involved agency has requested lead agency status for
environmental review for the above - referenced matter.
•
•
Planning Board -7- May 21, 1991
THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED.
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby designates itself
Lead Agency for the environmental review associated with the request
by Cornell University for the rezoning of the area bounded by NYS
Rte, 366, Game Farm Road, and Cascadilla Creek from Residence
District R -30 to al',Special Land Use District, and with the proposed
future development of!;University lands in the Town of Ithaca between
Cascadilla Creek on the north and the vicinity of Snyder Hill Road
and Honness Lane on the south, and extending from the City of Ithaca
to the Town of Dryden.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Consideration of determination of environmental significance
Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to make a
motion.
MOTION by Stephen Smith, seconded by Virginia Langhans:
WHEREAS:
1. Cornell University has requested that the Town Board rezone
certain of its lands in the area bounded by NYS Rte. 366, Game
Farm Road, and Cascadilla Creek from Residence District R -30 to a
Special Land Use District,
2. This is a Type I action for.which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board, on May 21, 1991, has designated itself Lead Agency in the
environmental review associated with the proposed future
development of University lands in the Town' of Ithaca between
Cascadilla Creek' on the north and the vicinity of Snyder Hill
Road and Honness Lane on the south, and extending from the City
of Ithaca to the Town of Dryden.
3. The Planning Board, at its regular meeting on May 21, 1991, has
reviewed and accepted as adequate the Long Environmental
Assessment Form, consisting of Part I as prepared by the
applicant, and Part II as completed by the Town Planning and
Engineering staff.
4. The Planning Board has determined, based on criteria set forth in
6 NYCRR Part 617, that there exist a number of potential large
impacts to land, water and air resources, agricultural land
resources; aesthetic, open space and recreation resources; the
local road system; energy use, and the growth and character of
the community, which are likely to occur as a result of the
•
C�
•
Planning Board
-8-
May 21, 1991
proposed rezoning and activities associated with the subsequent
development of the University lands within the study area.
5. The Town Planning Department has recommended, based on the
information presented and its completion of Part II of the Long
Environmental Assessment Form, that a positive determination of
environmental significance be madeiifor this action.
THEREFORE, .IT IS RESOLVED:
That the Town of Ithaca PlanningfBoard make and hereby does make
a positive determination of environmental significance for this
action, and
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board directil and hereby does direct the
applicant to prepare a generic environmental impact statement which
will identify and analyze the cumulative impacts of the request for
the rezoning by Cornell University'li and the proposed future
development of University lands inii the Town of Ithaca between
Cascadilla Creek on the north and the vicinity of Snyder Hill Road
and Honness Lane on the south and extending from the City of Ithaca
to the Town of Dryden.
There being no further discussion „!Ithe Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Discussion of proposed Scope of G /EIS.''
At this time, Chairperson Grigorov!Inoted that this segment of the
meeting is not a public hearing, but a work session, and anyone can
comment if they wish t'o .
Town Engineer Dan Walker stated that ten written responses were
received from the public regarding'i the G /EIS. Mr. Walker offered
that he reviewed the responses and produced a Cover Sheet which is
sort of a "Road Map ", adding, the listed items are the major sections
within the Scope of the G /EIS as outlined by the SEQR process and the
SEQR Handbook. [G /EI''S Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
attached hereto as Exhibit #1].
At this point, Mr. Walker presented the Amendment to Proposed
Scope of Issues and Outline for the Draft Generic Environmental
Impact Statement, which is attached asjlExhibit #2. The Board, along
with Mr. Walker, reviewed the Amendment with attached Proposed
Scope of Issues and Outline for the Draft Generic Environmental
Impact Statement attached as Exhibit #3.
Planning Board
-9- ii
May 21, 1991
Board Member Stephen Smith, referring to construction and
• operation of adjoining properties in the Proposed Scope of Issues and
Outline for the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement, stated
that he thought it was referring to things like the Pheasant Farm,
which is just over the boundary area into the Town of Dryden. Mr.
Smith did not see how the G /EIS area can keep being expanded.
Mr. Kenerson stated that he did not see anything in the Proposed
Scope of Issues and Outline for the1D /GEIS that locks the Town into
something frozen; as the document progresses and one thinks of things
then that is the idea of the whole process, it can be added to or
substracted from. Mr. Kenerson said that the document is a living
document and it is going to grow. +
Chairperson Grigorov asked if there were any other comments.
There being none, Chairperson Grigorov ,�,stated that further discussion
of the Cornell University G /EIS will continue at the next Planning
Board meeting scheduled for June 4, 19910
AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF A 11PLANNING BOARD POLICY WITH
RESPECT TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF PLANNING BOARD PUBLIC HEARINGS.
Chairperson Grigorov declared discussion in the above - noted
matter opened and read aloud from the Agenda as noted above.
The Board held a brief discussion on the above -noted matter.
Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a
motion.
ii
MOTION by Stephen Smith, seconded by James Baker.
RESOLVED, by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, that Notices of
Planning Board Public Hearings, at min "imum, shall be mailed by staff
to property owners adjacent to a property under discussion, including
those across streets,'roads, or highways, one deep, with the Town's
option of including more than such minimum for proposals which are or
may appear to become ..highly controversial, with the understanding
that those notifications required by law will continue to be mailed
in the same manner as,has been Town practice.
There being no further discussion, l' the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langh'Ians, Smith.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the 11 matter of the Planning Board
Policy in re Public Notification of Planning Board Public Hearings
closed.
0 AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS:
Planning Board -10 -ii May 21, 1991
PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE IRONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO
• POSTING PUBLIC NOTICES OF LAND USE CHANGE APPLICATIONS.
The Board discussed a Proposedl! Local Law Amending the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance Relating To Posting Public Notices Of Land
Use Change Applications, which is attached hereto as Exhibit #4.
Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to make a
motion. u
MOTION by Virginia Langhans, seconded by Stephen Smith.
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board endorse and
hereby does endorse' the proposed Local Law Amending the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance Relating to Posting Public Notices of Land
Use Change Applications, as presented,,land
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board recommend and hereby
does recommend that the Codes and Ordinances Committee recommend to
the Town Board the adoption of such proposed Local Law Amending the
Town of Ithaca Zoning.,lOrdinance Relating to Posting Public Notices of
Land Use Change Applications.
There being no further discussion,lthe Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith.
• Nay - None.
n
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Grigorov asked if there were any other comments.
There being none, Chairperson Grigorov declared the above matter
closed.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion, Chairperson Grigorov declared the May 21, 1991,
meeting of the Town of Ithaca PlanningY,Board duly adjourned at 10:27
p.m.
V
Respectfully submitted,
MaryilBryant, Recording Secretary,
Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary,
Town !of Ithaca Planning Board.
u
Pk:
h•`
TOWN OF ITHACA
ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM
T0: File
FROM: Dan Walker, Town Engineer
SUBJECT: GEIS Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
DATE: May 21, 1991
This summary and categorization of comments includes all written
comments that have been received by the Town of Ithaca Planning
Department as of May 20, 1991. As of'this date ten (10) written
responses have been received, with several comments included in each
response. The main topic outline of the Proposed Draft Scope of the
GEIS is:
I. COVER SHEET
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
V. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES
VI. ALTERNATIVES
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
VIII.GROWTH INDUCING ASPECTS
IX: EFFECTS ON -THE USE- AND- CONSERVATION-OF ENERGY - RESOURCES __
X. APPENDICES
The categorization of the comments received will be organized by these
main topics with one additional category which.will address the
comments regarding: SEQR PROCEDURES.,.-
67)(#0 tol
0
n
Pk:
h•`
TOWN OF ITHACA
ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM
T0: File
FROM: Dan Walker, Town Engineer
SUBJECT: GEIS Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
DATE: May 21, 1991
This summary and categorization of comments includes all written
comments that have been received by the Town of Ithaca Planning
Department as of May 20, 1991. As of'this date ten (10) written
responses have been received, with several comments included in each
response. The main topic outline of the Proposed Draft Scope of the
GEIS is:
I. COVER SHEET
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND TABLE OF CONTENTS
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
V. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES
VI. ALTERNATIVES
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
VIII.GROWTH INDUCING ASPECTS
IX: EFFECTS ON -THE USE- AND- CONSERVATION-OF ENERGY - RESOURCES __
X. APPENDICES
The categorization of the comments received will be organized by these
main topics with one additional category which.will address the
comments regarding: SEQR PROCEDURES.,.-
67)(#0 tol
GEIS Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
May 21, 1991
Page 2
SEAR PROCEDURES
I. COVER SHEET
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND TABLE OF CONTENTS
IIT. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION
A. Project Purpose, need and benefits
1. The determination of the actual growth rate of the
University should be explained.
2. "The need for this project should be explained as
specific needs for space that Cornell University will
have for the next 20 years, not merely within the
context of historical trends".
C. Design and layout
1. b. Does the amount of land cleared in this section
permit Cornell to clear only only that amount of land
and no more? Should a maximum clearing limit be set?
3. a. Assumptions about public transportation services
and the effect on the estimate of future parking needs
should be included.
D. Construction and Operation
1. b. Adjoining properties in the Town of Dryden should
be discussed regarding potential development.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
B. Water Resources
Existing waste sites in the Orchards area including the
poultry wastewater lagoon, the old landfill adjacent to
Cascadilla Creek, and the orchard waste sites on the creek
slopes should be evaluated not just as development
limitations but also in regards to clean up that may be
required to protect surface and ground water quality.
2. b. Why has Cornell Chosen the USDA SCS TR-20 Model?
The TR-20 model is the accepted standard for small
watershed models and the Town Engineer has requested its
use.
GEIS Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
May 21, 1991
Page 3
E. Agricultural Resources
3. Operations
This section should include a discussion of the
Landfill above Cascadilla Creek, including content, past
use and current status.
Evaluation of the current and past pesticide use and
disposal practices in the Orchards, including
evaluation of pesticide residuals.
F. Transportation
1. b. The intersection of Stevenson Road and Game Farm
road should be included in the traffic evaluation.
1. c. "This paragraph discusses projected traffic levels
and future traffic conditions and should not be in a
section describing the current environmental setting".
G. Land Use and Zoning
1. a. Extend and clarify the boundary of the adjacent
area to be considered for study of traffic impact and
land use from 1/2 mile to 3/4 mile and include the
following residential areas: Pine Tree Road, Bryant
Park, Varna, and Forest Home.
1. d. Discussion of past waste disposal practices should
include cleanup and reclamation alternatives. An
evaluation of surface and groundwater contamination
should be included.
H. Community Services
8. Include distribution system analysis to include
computor modeling using the Ry-Pipe model.
J. Cultural Resources
3. a. Noise impact evaluation of traffic on Ellis
Hollow Road should be included.
GEIS Draft Scope Comment Summary and Categorization
May 21, 1991
Page 4
V. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES
"How would the zoning change (from R-30 to special land use) for
the Orchards area change the current restrictions on land use in
this area?"
Since construction and operation of facilities in the Orchard
Parcel would certainly have impacts on natural resources . . .
section V. should be greatly expanded.
The "threshold" approach and who determines the appropriate
threshold levels for impacts should be better defined.
Concern about the impacts of overdevelopment.
Needs to be expanded to include more specific items to be
discussed. Mention for specific consideration the "effects
(including the effects of traffic) on neighboring communities
within the 3/4 mile zone, such as forest home.
Improve the baseline for traffic impacts. It is appropriate that
comparisons be made with existing traffic levels.
VI. ALTERNATIVES
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
VIII.GROWTH INDUCING ASPECTS
The section is incomplete, CU needs to do a study of where the
impacts of growth will be felt. The GEIS should include a study
of surrounding areas including the Town of Dryden to determine the
range of "ripple" effects of the development.
IX. EFFECTS ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES
X. APPENDICES
GEISCOMI/ENGMEMO/05/21/91/DRW/
xc: Shirley Raffensperger, Town Supervisor
George Frantz, Acting Town Planner
John Barney, Town Attorney
-1#/
I
b . 4 h , ttpp
to to d
��f�71�4�If11141r'� 1 u� r �� IIY �' t .. I It It to
tAlo�S t, �)4 } -'Ap^+ t r IJ� III � 4 {.
N Yo�f 1 i t qN t(j °; ni ,t r.. ! ry t'
4 To
�! r .M'�1'iy Yi �t�li'� to tot
p I i.
J , I' „ {fi^ ,' I 7 ' Amendment to s I It
. I in� la r r,l 'd.,. Arco , \ ' to
to V
ti 11.1{
or to 4 L
Proposed Scope of Issues and
to t ' f '`! Outline for the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
o 1'1
11,
, It F;,,`, Cornell University; Ithaca;! New York
,I
o
t ;, 1 May 7,1991
5 q It
ill. stl' E . dfJr;T
to
to
p ct'..ul.:' 1
oo The • - _• _ e -a-provide to the infermation
Statement (DOEIS) -€er- certain tai }ds -of Eerell= Unfvtsily —The purpose of
this proposed Scope is to establish a framework for information regarding
certain lands of Cornell University to be included in the Draft Generic
Environmental Impact Statement ( DGEIS). These lands are the area known
as the Orchards area (Precinct 7) bounded by Route 366, Game Farm Road and
Cascadilla Creek, and other University owned lands to the south bounded by
Cascadilla Creek, the town of Dryden Town Line, Snyder Hill Road, Pine Tree
Road, Slaterville -Read; The City of Ithaca lineEllis Hollow Road and Judd
Falls Road as illustrated on the attached figure. Theo- purpeseof- the -I)G IS--is
frame-and }^ a� -
a� -� =�e- extent- passible; provide- in €e�rrratier- en- prepesed
development-fer- the - lands- south- of-the- Orchards — Portions e"heseiands -are
subject te- use - ley -New Yorl State -The purpose of the DGEIS is to present a
program for the anticipated development of the Orchards area (Precinct 7),
and provide information on proposed development for the lands south of
the Orchards area over a 30 year period. toot onsto- these- -lands -- are - subject to
use by New Yer1F--State. Portions of these lands are subject to use by the
statutory colleges and therefore projects on such lands are designed and built
by the state university construction fund. - As -part--of -this- Foees &, Con el -;will
supply -to the best e€- its- abi€itty-,avotailable informatie"n- state- prejeet&4h t4all
within- the area e-ever'e"y the GEIS. As part of the GEIS process, Cornell will
supply all pertinent and available information 'on statutory and endowed
projects that.fall within the area covered by the GEIS
too.
to
vt��ere- speeitie- plans- areknew -n; than -en � tlre� ands -te- the- serttlt -w#ieh
will be- used74y-New York -State .The level of detail of the analysis will be in
more depth on the Orchards parcel (Precinct 7), where the amount of
cumulative development impact is anticipated;! to be more extensive than
areas south of Cascadilla Creek. The total expected amount of development
has not yet been determined. Plans will be developed and further refined in
coordination with the environmental baseline'iiinventory and analysis
initiated through the GEIS, a State Environmental Quality Review Act
(SEQR) process. .
to, I; ,
too .1
)I�
:The followmg{rnformation shall be included in! the Draft Generic
Environmental Impact Statement,
y r jri' it r' "tr I
n 1,.. ,1�1 r4� ! :,r1 a1 Aiu Bey{ !I to
IAtiir ItF1 ,0.i l! ✓� �� - �.
J r nrl� Et t I lh< I '
�'',fpui;aI 1' "f to Moo,
,� ar ,4� rpd �r 4. �. a,� I� lk y,y �}� Fw- w rl. kr
:Y k 4f i ".'''� - biwkt jf�l �. �ay�(j.1 '11t �' , !..
ff; ;;;The cover{ sh et shad include: if
. {t�lr 1'Y ,it f,i {lplitd�. „ai rkt S.'.j�i �I il'!1iff19� A� c,(:�1111 1 : to
,
A •A.statement that it is a Draft Generic Environmental Impact
to I
1 •1 4
�'. r'J{�trp1<-
tpdo
to
to I B b The name of the project.
fed. { ! �,
„l
rr^�' d ' 'I�� t" - I' to
r1.Li' (, pj1 i It -1, it 0.
14 r 1 + tQ
to
'Y 1 I (p. 1
, 1' i)I It o e
to. 1 1, 'a11'filr:Rp1 l ' i �� u
t to
V too
too too a t
it
• `tl�
+'
lef
` V
I I
•
r I-
LJ I
Tj'. %l
,
i ,{
SS t I L
f�
it
IL I
!1 JSl�i vtt�l fib 4 ; ..
., iF ; Amendment to Pages 9 & 10
Transportation Services
1.1 t�.d .
;r
ll,
A
<
aIii.lo'l, complete description of existing facilities will be provided.
The description will include size, capacity and condition of
the facility. Descriptions of roadways, highways, traffic
controls, site ingress and egress and parking will be included.
b. The' current level of facility use will be fully described. The
existing AM and +PM peak hour traffic volumes will be
counted at key intersections, the vehicle mix will be reported
and current problems identified and described. The
following intersections will be' included:
o Caldwell Road and NYS (Route 366
Tower Road and NYS Route 366
Tower Road and Judd Falls Road
Judd Falls Road (north) and NYS Route 366
o Judd Falls Road (south) and NYS Route 366
a Judd Falls Road and Ellis IiHollow Road
Ellis Hollow Road and Pine Tree Road
c Dryden Avenue, Maple Avenue,Ithaca Road and
Oak Avenue (Six Corners)
Game Farm Road and Ellis Hollow Road
o Game Farm Road and Route 366
o Forest Home Drive and Judd Falls Road
East Avenue, Forest Home Drive, and Thurston Ave.
Pleasant Grove Road and'IForest Home Drive
Warren Road and Forest Home Drive
6'Snyder Hill Road and Pine Tree Road
I
c. The' trip generation of the proposed project will be
determined and added to the projection of future background
traffic. The future traffic conditions with and without the
project will be examined to determine the traffic impacts
.'J associated with the proposed project.
PPPPPP } v I
y 1 J ,
PP a
Ili t
I• k
1 n
f '
, I �
i
,
7
C:
T.i..'
r2f{+, 71 1 L I 1 y Ply. Iy a
,tae 4 kt lei, C ' j : JE �4V '
'+fir r- ��y el tt 7
,a � ij� �yt.R, �W , �' "Ilttk{
rP try zXY., ,
It i Fi���.t 1(IYti;g.y{•J•yrk��,�,1�`y!{ �, �I .p " ,�3 1 �i t' +�
it t ii
rp
11
it
+ �7
}ry I1
f S +8' zip '
I.
I,
$4
lei.: >•
Yj
',;y,. �•i'....
I,
•
•
•
Proposed Scope of Issues and
Outline for the Draft Generic
Environmental Impact Statement
Cornell University, Ithaca, New York
The purpose of this proposed Scope is to provide a guide to the information and
level of detail to be included in the Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement ( DGEIS) for certain lands ofliCornell University. These lands are the
area known as The Orchards bounded by Route 366, Game Farm Road and Cascadilla
Creek, and other University owned lands to the south bounded by Cascadilla Creek,
the Town of Dryden Town Line, Snyder Hill, Road, Pine Tree Road, Slaterville Road,
The City of Ithaca I ine, Ellis Hollow Road and Judd Falls Road as illustrated on
the attached figure. The purpose ofthe DGEIS is to present a plan for the
development of The Orchards over a Zi,O year time frame and, to the extent
possible, provide information on proposed development for the lands south of The
Orchards. Portions of these lands a`re subject to use by New York State.
Planning and development of statutory fa°cil ities is governed in part by the State
of New York. As part of this process,;�Cornell will supply to the best of its
ability, available information on state projects that fall within the area
covered by the GEIS.
The level of detail of analysis will be greater on The Orchards parcel, about
which more specific plans are known, thIan on the lands to the south which will
be used by New York State.
The following information shall be included in the Draft Generic Environmental
Impact Statement.
I0
COYER SHEET
The ccver sheet shall include:
A. A statement that it is
Statement.
Be The name of the project.
a Draft Generic
I-
Environmental Impact
March 19, 1991
A
•
•
•
Co The location of the project.,
D. The name and address of the lead agency and the name and telephone,
number of a contact person at the lead agency.
E. The name and address of the preparers of the document and the name
and telephone number of a contact.
F. The date of acceptance of the DGEIS.
G. The deadline date by which comments are due.
II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND TABLE OF CONTENTS
I
The cover sheet shall be followed by an Executive Summary providing the
following: u
A. A brief description of the action.
B. A listing of ,significant beneficial and adverse impacts and
specification of controversial issues.
C. A listing of proposed mitigation measures.
D. A discussion of the alternatives considered.
E. A listing of the matters to be decided including required permits
and approvals and funding.
lThe Table of Contents shall follow the Executive Summary.
III. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION I,
This section of the DGEIS will provide a generic description of the development
program planned for The Orchards. It will be as specific as possible given that
-2-
• the building
also be prov
project boun
Spec if ical I
mix
ided
dari
pro
wi'
of
es
vid
1`evolve within the development program. A description will
known or anticipated development plans for lands within the
south of The Orchards.11
ed will be. I
A. Project Purpose, Need and Benefits
1. n historic 11 al rowth trends at Cornell will
Backgrou d and g be
discussed. If
2. The need for The Orchards project within the context of
historic trends will be presented. The need for other
projects south of The Orchards will be discussed as appropri-
.ate.
3. The objectives of The Orchards development will be discussed.
• The objectives of other development south of The Orchards will
be 'discuss -ed as appropr °late.
49 The social economic, educational and other benefits of the
proposed action will be;llpresented as appropriate.
Be Location
1. The n
geographic boundarie'�s of the project utilizing g appropria�e
maps will be presented.! More detailed mapping may be avail"
able for The Orchards than for areas to the south.
2. A description of existing access to various parts of the
project will be provided.
30 A description of existing zoning of the project will be
provided.
-3
U
•
C. Design and Layout
The final design and layout of The Orchards area may not be
available for many years. The GEIS will present square footage,
types of use and will describe development program guidelines or
criteria,,for design and layout of the Orchards. Information for the
area south of The Orchards will be provided to the extent that it is
available.
1. Total Site Area
a. A general estimate of proposed impervious area will be
provided.
b. An estimate of the amount of land to be cleared will be
provided. C
c. An estimate of the amount of open space will be
provided. l
20 Structures
a. Gross floor areal'and type of use of structures will be
provided, for proljects that have been developed to this
level of detail such as the proposed tennis facility.
b. Schematic layouts and massing of buildings will be
provided, for projects that have been developed to.this
level of detail such as the proposed tennis facility.
c. Conceptual utility P lans will be provided.
3. Parking
a. Conceptual relationship of parking requirements to
• building uses and areas.
-4-
:7
•
n
U
D.
Construction and Operation
1. Construction
a. An estimate of +the total construction period will be
given and an estimate of construction phasing provided.
b. Potential development on adjoining properties will be
discussed.
2. Operation
a. A general discussion of the operation of each type of
facility under consideration will be provided.
E. Approvals
1. A discussion of zoning, and other regulatory approvals required
to construct the various project elements will be provided.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This section of the DGEIS will provide a "baseline description of the environment
in order that an assessment of potential project impacts can be made.
A. Geology, Soils and Topography
1. Based on published surveys and reports, this section will
discuss the depth to and type of bedrock material. Any
limitations to development or opportunities for use will be
noted.
2. Based on published surveys and reports, a discussion of soil
types, physical properties, engineering properties and
agricultural properties will be presented. A map of soil
-5-
•
U
•
types will be prepared„ Suitability for use and potential
limitations to development will be discussed.
3. Impact on soil from past agricultural management practices,
including pesticide application, will be investigated and
analyzed. Suitability for proposed uses and potential
limitations to development will be discussed.
it
46 A description of topography will be provided. Detailed
topography at 2' contoulr intervals will be presented for The
Orchards. USGS topography will be presented for the remainder
of the project. A slope map will be made for The Orchards.
Significant topographic',features will be described. Potential
limits to development will be noted. The topography of the
surrounding area will ble described.
Be Water Resources
1.
el
Groundwater
a. The location and description of any aquifers or recharge
areas under or nearby the project area will be noted.
ii
Depth to water tables and limitations as it may impact
retention ponds will be discussed from published
sources.
Surface Water
a. Users and levels
be provided util
b. Drainage charact
will be modelled
TR -20 model. 5,
-6
of use of relevant surface waters will
izing published data.
e'ristics of the J
ro'ect area watershed
P
using the US Soil Conservation Service
109 257 50 and 100 -year return storms
li
I
10
will be modelled to provide baseline information for
management of storm water runoff. Drainage patterns and
channels will be described.
c. Water quality issues of the poultry wastewater disposal
lagoon will be discussed and analyzed. Sediment at the
bottom of this lagoon will also be analyzed.
Limitations to development and alternatives will be
discussed.
d. Floodpiains and floodways will be illustrated utilizing
Federal Emergency Management Agency Mapping.
C. Air Resources
19 Cl imate
a. A discussion of climatic factors including wind,
temperature, precipitation and humidity will b.
provided.
2. Air Quality
a. National and state air quality standards for the project
area will be listed and the existing levels, based on
available data, and compliance status for each pollutant
noted. Existing pollutant sources and sensitive
recepte)rs will be noted.
D. Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology
1. Vegetation
a. Vegetation types in the project area will be listed by
species and mapped based on field investigation. Site
1' -
��
vegetation will be characterized by species presence and
abundance, age, size, distribution, dominance, community
types, value as wildlife habitat and productivity. Any
unique, rare, threatened or endangered species will be
noted.
2. Fish and Wildlife
a. Fish and wildlife species in the project area will be
listed based on field investigation. Species presence
and abundance, distribution, dominance and productivity
will be discussed. Any unique, rare, threatened or
endangered species will be noted.
3. Wetlands
a. Wetland areas will be delineated and mapped utilizing
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers criteria. Wetlands meeting
criteria for regulation by the NYS Department of
Environmental Conservation will also be delineated and
mapped. Wetland characteristics including acreage,
vegetative cover, classification and benefits will be
discussed.
E. Agricultural Resources
1. Soils
a. Soils will be listed by name, slope and soil group
ranking within the ISYS Land Classification System. The
number of acres within each group and the location on a
map will be provided.
2. Agricultural Land Management System
- 8 -
X
F.
a. An inventory of existing erosion control and drainage
systems will be provided and any existing soil and water
conservation plans will be discussed.
3. Operations
a. The number and
types of
farm
and
associated
operations
on and adjacent
to the
site will
of the facility.
be
listed.
b. Research and educational programs will be listed.
c. The type and proximity of agricultural facilities such
as storage sheds, barns, sorting and packing houses will
be listed.
Transportation
10 Transportation Services
a. A complete
description of
existing facil
ities will be
provided.
The description
will include size,
capacity
and condition
of the facility.
Descriptions
of road-
ways, highways, traffic
controls, site
ingress and
egress and
parking will be
included.
b. The
current level
of facility
use
will be fully de-
scribed.
The existing
AM
and PM
peak hour traffic
volumes
will be
counted
at key
intersections, the
vehicle
mix will
be reported
and current problems
identified
and described.
The following
intersections
will
be
included.
• Caldwell Road and NYS Route 366
• Tower Road and NYS Route 366
• Tower Road and Judd Falls Road
-9-
0 I�S
• Judd Falls Road (north) and NYS Route 366
• Judd Falls Road (south) and NYS Route 366
• Judd Falls Road and Ellis Hollow Road
• Ellis Hollow Road and Pine Tree Road
•
Dryden Avenue, Maple Avenue, Ithaca Road and Oak
Avenue (Six Corners)
C. The trip generation of the proposed project will be
determined and added to the projection of future
background traffic. The future traffic conditions with
and without the project will be examined to determine
the traffic impacts associated with the proposed
project.
2. Public Transportation.
a. The existing components of the public transportation
system will be fully described.
b. Services currently available within the study area will
be defined and measures of current usage will be
reported.
?. Pedestrian Environment
a. Existing pedestrian activities will be described in the
context of overall transportation.
b. Future pedestrian activities generated by the proposed
development will be described in the context of the
overall transportation system.
4. Bicycle Facilities
a. Existing bicycle facilities will be described.
10 -
b. Future bicycle facilities will be discussed.
C. Land Use and Zoning
1 . Existing Land Use
a. A description and map of existing land uses on and
within 1/2 mile of the project area will be provided.
b. A description of existing zoning on and within 1/2 mile
of the project area will be provided.
C. The existing Town of Ithaca land use plan will be
discussed. The on-going plan update will be discussed
as it affects the project.
d. Past waste disposal practices on the site by Cornell
will be investigated and discussed. Limitations to
development and alternatives will be discussed.
H. Community Services
This section will present a discussion of existing levels, of usage
and projected future needs.
1 . Police and security services as provided by the Town, State,
County and Cornell University will be discussed. Manpower and
equipment levels and adequacy will be discussed.
2. Fire protection manpower and equipment levels will be invento-
ried. The existing and future adequacy of fire protection
services will be discussed.
3. Health care manpower and facilities provided by the Town and
Cornell University will be inventoried and assessed.
- 11 -
4. Recreational facilities provided by the Town and Cornell will
be inventoried and assessed.
5. Social Services provided by the Town will be inventories and
assessed.
6. Primary and secondary schools serving the area will be
inventoried and assessed.
7. Utility services provided by Cornell and regulated public
utility companies including electric power, natural gas and
telephone service will be inventoried and assessed.
8. Potable and fire protection water supply provided by municipal
systems and private (Cornell University) system will be
inventoried and assessed.
9. Sewage disposal options including privately owned "on-site"
systems will be inventoried and assessed.
10. Solid waste disposal facilities provided by the County will be
discussed. Collection and recycling programs by Cornell will
be discussed.
I . Demography
1. Population characteristics including household size composi-
tion and age will be discussed using the most recent available
census data.
2. Population projections will be presented using published data.
Cultural Resources
1 . Visual Character
- 12 -
Ic
•
•
I
a. The visual character of the project area including
Cascadilla Creek will be discussed and illustrated with
photographs. Surrounding roads from within the project
area which are visible will be noted. A zone of.
visibility map will be prepared.
2. Historic and Archaeological Resources
a. Historic areas and s
National Register and
tial for such el igbil
Local registers of hi
be consulted.
tructu
those
ity wi
storic
etes listed on the State or
structures with the poten-
11 be located and described,
places and structures will
b. A Phase lA Cultural Resources Survey will be conducted
to determine the potential for presence of archaeologi-
cal resources and the need to conduct field surveys as
construction progresses.
3. Noise
a. Existing noise sources in and nearby the project area
will be described and subjectively evaluated. Any
nearby sensitive receptors will be located and
described,
y. SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATING MEASURES
This section will describe the potential impacts of the project as described in
Section III and on the environment as described in Section IV. Impacts and
mitigating measures will be discussed for both construction and operation phases.
Mitigating measures will be presented for each significant impact identified.
The DGEIS will take a "threshold" approach to many potential impacts
- 13 -
�1�,
or
b
•
is
example, traffic impacts will be spaced out over
occurs. The DGEIS will recommend the specific ti
mitigate impacts as certain thresholds are
particularly those related to construction,
applicable throughout the life of the project w
VI. ALTERNATIVES
a number of years as development
•affic improvements necessary to
reached. For other impacts,
generic mitigation measures
ill be proposed.
This section of the DGEIS will present alternatives at a level of detail
sufficient to permit a comparative assessment of costs, benefits and environmen-
tal risks for each alternative. The level of detail of the discussion will be
greater for The Orchards. The following alternatives will be considered:
W
Q
C.
D.
Alternative Design and Technologies
19 Land Use Plan and Development Program
Potential alternative land use plans and development programs
will be examined.
Alternative Sites
16 Alternative sites which could meet the project objectives will
be discussed. Factors considered will include the availabil i-
ty of land, suitability of alternative site(s) to accommodate
design requirements, availability of utilities, compatibility
with zoning and land use plans, compatibility with natural
resource considerations and accessibility.
Alternative Size
10 An increase or decrease in project size will be considered and
discussed.
Alternate Scheduling
14 -
v
•
•
•
1. Alternate construction and operations phasing will be dis-
cussed.
E. Alternate Land Use
1. Use of the project area for other uses will be considered.
F. No Action
10 The no- action alternative will be considered, including its
effect on Cornell University's needs and possible displacement
of impacts.
VII. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
This
section will
identify those natural resources identified
in Section IV that
will
be consumed,
converted or made unavailable -for future use.
This section will also present a summary of unavoidable adverse iripacts.
VIII. GROWM INDUCING ASPECTS
This section will describe potential growth inducing aspects, including potential
increases in development pressure on other lands and various secondary impacts.
Specifically considered will be the following:
A. Population
1. Potential increases in population due
consequent need for housing, education,
support facilities,
B. Development Potential
to job creation and
commercial and other
1. Potential new development caused by expanded infrastructure
15 -
�� �
Ll
•
•
0
such as road improvements or utilities.
IX. EFFECTS ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES
A. Use
1. This section will
estimate the direct and indirect use of
energy attributable
will
to the proposed development.
Be Conservation
1. This
section
will
describe
the energy
conservation opportuni-
ties
available
for the
proposed development.
X. APPENDICES
The following technical appendices will be included. Additional appendices may
be prepared as necessary.
A. References, Including Published Materials and Person 'Consulted
Be Relevant Correspondence
Co Traffic Study
D. Storm Water Management Calculations
E. Util ities
F. Wetlands Reports
G. Cultural Resources Report
16 -
U
DRAFT -.FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY AT
CODES & ORDINANCES COMMITTEE
TOWN OF ITHACA
LOCAL LAW NO, OF THE YEAR 1991
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING
TO POSTING PUBLIC NOTICES OF LAND USE CHANGE APPLICATIONS.
Be it enacted by the TOWN BOARD of the TOWN OF ITHACA as follows:
Section 1, The Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca as
readopted, amended and revised effective February 26, 1968, and
subsequently amended, is further amended by inserting a new
section 78 -A entitled "Posting of Notices" reading as follows:
"78 -A. In addition to any other notice requirement required
by law, a public notice shall be posted on the property that
is the subject of certain applications as set forth in this
section.
l.. -The sign shall be so posted' in the following
circumstances:
(a) If a variance, special approval, special permit, or
determination is being sought from the Zoning Board of
• Appeals and the .• matter is not required to be heard by the
Planning Board beforelaction by the-Zoning Board of Appeals,
the notice shall b.e posted before . the initial, Zoning Board
of Appeals public hearing,on the matter.
(b) If a. variance, special approval, special permit, or
determination is being sought from the Zoning Board of
Appeals but ;a recommendation relating to such action must
first be received by the Board of Appeals from the Planning
Board. before othe Zoning Board of Appeals determines the
matter,; the notice' shall be ,posted, .prior to the first
Planning Board public hearing on the matter.
(c) If a subdivision or site plan approval is being sought
from the Planning Board, the notice shall be posted before
the first Planning Board public hearing on the application.
(d) If the application is for rezoning of a parcel or
parcels of land in conjunction with, a proposed development'
on same a notice shall be posted and it shall be posted
prior to the initial Planning Board hearing on the proposed
rezoning. If the rezoning is a rezoning generally of the
neighborhood independent of a particular application for a
particular project, or is a rezoning of an area of more than
300 acres, there shall be no posting requirement unless the
Town Board directs such posting. In such event the Town
IE7XI , # /7/
w
U
DRAFT -.FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY AT
CODES & ORDINANCES COMMITTEE
TOWN OF ITHACA
LOCAL LAW NO, OF THE YEAR 1991
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING
TO POSTING PUBLIC NOTICES OF LAND USE CHANGE APPLICATIONS.
Be it enacted by the TOWN BOARD of the TOWN OF ITHACA as follows:
Section 1, The Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca as
readopted, amended and revised effective February 26, 1968, and
subsequently amended, is further amended by inserting a new
section 78 -A entitled "Posting of Notices" reading as follows:
"78 -A. In addition to any other notice requirement required
by law, a public notice shall be posted on the property that
is the subject of certain applications as set forth in this
section.
l.. -The sign shall be so posted' in the following
circumstances:
(a) If a variance, special approval, special permit, or
determination is being sought from the Zoning Board of
• Appeals and the .• matter is not required to be heard by the
Planning Board beforelaction by the-Zoning Board of Appeals,
the notice shall b.e posted before . the initial, Zoning Board
of Appeals public hearing,on the matter.
(b) If a. variance, special approval, special permit, or
determination is being sought from the Zoning Board of
Appeals but ;a recommendation relating to such action must
first be received by the Board of Appeals from the Planning
Board. before othe Zoning Board of Appeals determines the
matter,; the notice' shall be ,posted, .prior to the first
Planning Board public hearing on the matter.
(c) If a subdivision or site plan approval is being sought
from the Planning Board, the notice shall be posted before
the first Planning Board public hearing on the application.
(d) If the application is for rezoning of a parcel or
parcels of land in conjunction with, a proposed development'
on same a notice shall be posted and it shall be posted
prior to the initial Planning Board hearing on the proposed
rezoning. If the rezoning is a rezoning generally of the
neighborhood independent of a particular application for a
particular project, or is a rezoning of an area of more than
300 acres, there shall be no posting requirement unless the
Town Board directs such posting. In such event the Town
IE7XI , # /7/
•
•
30
is
Board may designate the location and frequency of such
Posting, which may be different than otherwise required
hereunder. -
2. The posting shall occur at least seven and not more than
days before the first meeting of the Board at which the matter
to be heard as set forth above.
3. The sign shall be posted in a location clearly visible
from the roadway at or near the center of each of the property
lines of the property under consideration which property line
fronts on an existing public or private roadway. If the road
frontage exceeds 11000 feet, signs shall be posted at 500 foot
intervals along the frontage. When the Town Planner or Town
Building Inspector and Zoning Enforcement Officer finds that the
particular circumstances of an application warrants more signs
than required by this provision, the applicant shall post such
additional signs as may be directed by either of such officers.
4. Such signs shall be continuously maintained and
displayed facing the roadway until final action has been taken by
the Board involved approving or denying the application or
appeal.
5. The required signs shall be obtained from the Town
Planner and shall .contain the information set forth on the form
of sign supplied 1by, the Town Planner. .There shall be no fee for
one sign. If additional signs, are required the applicant shall
pay a non - refundable fee for each subsequent sign or replacements
thereof. The fee shall be $3.00 per sign.
6. Failure to post or maintain the signs as provided in
this section ishallL not be a jurisdictional 'defect and any action
taken by any, Board in connection with, the application shall not
be nullified or voidable by reason of the failure to comply with
this section. However, the failure to post or maintain the sign
shall be grounds, should the Board involved be so advised,-4 to
deny the application sought or to decline to' hear the matter at
the scheduled meeting date by reason of the failure to have the
appropriate signs installed and /or maintained. The appropriate
Board may, on good cause shown, waive the requirement of the
posting of signs as called for by this section."
.Section 2. If any section of this law is declared invalid
by a court of competent jurisdiction 'such invalidity shall 'not
affect the remaining provisions
of ths.drdin.ance which shall be
in full force and effect.
Section 3. This local law shall take effect upon its
publication as required by law.
WAA
2
R