Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1991-10-15F It TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 15, 1991 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA .. .� _l. .. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, October 15, 1991, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, Virginia Langhans, James Baker, Stephen Smith, Eva Hoffmann, William Lesser, Daniel Walker (Town Engineer), Floyd Forman (Town Planner), John C2amanske (Planning Technician). ALSO PRESENT: There were no members of the public present. Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM. PERSONS TO BE HEARD There were no persons present to be heard. closed this segment of the meeting. AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chairperson Grigorov o (matter at 7:35 p.m. Chairperson Grigorov and Virginia Langhans had regarding the Comprehens Building on October 14, 19 pened the discussion announced that Board attended the Public ive Plan held at the 91. Chairperson Grigorov on the above -noted Members Eva Hoffmann Information Meeting Women's Community It was noted that the Inventory Chapter and maps section of the Comprehensive Plan was well received by those present at the meeting. Robert Kenerson talked about procedure, in that part of his concern is that the Planning Board is going to have to take the Plan °,,and do something. Mr. Kenerson thought it would be helpful for the Board if they knew the extent of the procedure, the steps they would have to take, what they would be looking at and studying, as against the content first, so that the Board can see maybe what a timetable is, how much homewor have to do, and things of that sort, so that procedurally the Board knows what they are in for. Town Planner Floyd Forman stated that he was not sure whether the Planning Board was being adequately integrated into the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Forman commented that the silliest thing of all would be for the Comprehensive Plan Committee to get done with their work and hand the Planning Board a plan and then have the Planning Board spend another two years.re -doing the plan. Mr. Forman remarked that it makes no sense, and there is a need to figure out a mechanism to ,insure the Planning Board's involvement in the process. io TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 15, 1991 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA .. .� _l. .. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, October 15, 1991, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, Virginia Langhans, James Baker, Stephen Smith, Eva Hoffmann, William Lesser, Daniel Walker (Town Engineer), Floyd Forman (Town Planner), John C2amanske (Planning Technician). ALSO PRESENT: There were no members of the public present. Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM. PERSONS TO BE HEARD There were no persons present to be heard. closed this segment of the meeting. AGENDA ITEM: DISCUSSION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Chairperson Grigorov o (matter at 7:35 p.m. Chairperson Grigorov and Virginia Langhans had regarding the Comprehens Building on October 14, 19 pened the discussion announced that Board attended the Public ive Plan held at the 91. Chairperson Grigorov on the above -noted Members Eva Hoffmann Information Meeting Women's Community It was noted that the Inventory Chapter and maps section of the Comprehensive Plan was well received by those present at the meeting. Robert Kenerson talked about procedure, in that part of his concern is that the Planning Board is going to have to take the Plan °,,and do something. Mr. Kenerson thought it would be helpful for the Board if they knew the extent of the procedure, the steps they would have to take, what they would be looking at and studying, as against the content first, so that the Board can see maybe what a timetable is, how much homewor have to do, and things of that sort, so that procedurally the Board knows what they are in for. Town Planner Floyd Forman stated that he was not sure whether the Planning Board was being adequately integrated into the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Forman commented that the silliest thing of all would be for the Comprehensive Plan Committee to get done with their work and hand the Planning Board a plan and then have the Planning Board spend another two years.re -doing the plan. Mr. Forman remarked that it makes no sense, and there is a need to figure out a mechanism to ,insure the Planning Board's involvement in the process. • • ..Planning Board -2- October 15, 1991 Mr. Forman, noting that he had two items on his Agenda for tonight's meeting, stated that he wanted to discuss, very briefly, ,,the G /EIS meeting held last week, October 10, 1991, that Town Engineer Dan Walker, Town Supervisor Shirley Raffensperger, and he had attended. Mr. Forman, referring to Planning Board meetings, suggested jperhaps taking one -half of the second monthly meeting and simply turning that into a planning session. Mr. Kenerson commented on another thought in that, if the Planning Board agrees to adjourn at 10:00 p.m. and they are through ;with what they are discussing, he is still concerned as to whether the Planning Board, as a Board, has a good handle on the SEQR. process. Mr. Kenerson stated that he does not know if the Board is !comfortable, at least he does not feel comfortable, about implementing the whole SEQR process -- where it starts and the various parts of it. Mr. Forman stated that he would rather not deal with that tonight, only because he thought it would take some time. Mr. Forman said that that could be set for a specific meeting when everyone will know that that is going to be discussed and they will review it ahead of time. Mr. Forman stated that he thought the Board would be better off taking one or two planning topics at a time as opposed to trying to jump into four or five different things in an evening, and not discussing all of them thoroughly. Chairperson ; Grigorov inquired about the next Planning Board meeting. Mr. Forman answered that, as of right now, the only thing that is supposed to be ion the Agenda is the Cornell Tennis Facility. Mr. Forman, directing "his comment to Eva Hoffmann and William Lesser, stated that he had ,not gotten in touch with them simply because Cornell has not gotten in touch with him. Mr. Forman said that he informed Cornell if they want to come before the Board on November 5th they better get in ,touch with him; he has not heard anything from them since the September 17, 1991 Planning Board meeting. Ms. Hoffmann wondered if the 5th of November would be an additional 60 days. Mr. Forman stated that he thought everyone agreed to the 5th of November, with Mr. Kenerson responding that it sounded familiar. Mr. Forman, in response to Mr. Kenerson's comment, stated that he does not have all the answers on how best to integrate the Board with the Committee. Mr. Forman stated that part of it is Stephen Smith and Carolyn Grigorov, as part of the Committee, and also himself, informing the Planning Board as to what is going on and getting the Planning Board's input to forward to the Committee. Mr. Forman commented that it is up to the Board members to get back to Mr. Smith, Ms. Grigorov, or him, and saying -- here is what we feel about that. Mr. Forman noted that the CPC needs to listen to the Planning Board, because the document that comes from them is a document that the Planning Board, not the CPC, is going to hold public hearings on. Chairperson Grigorov stated that the CPC, specifically, did not want to give things to the Planning Board before the public got "them. Mr. Forman stated that that may become a bit of a problem at ,the end, adding, if the Planning Board feels comfortable with everything they have received, if they feel comfortable with the l% • a Planning Board -3- October 15, 1991 goals and objectives, if they feel comfortable with the Inventory Chapter and where things are proceeding, then that is fine; there is no problem, but if there is any kind of discomfort whatsoever it is going to wind up coming back to haunt everyone, with additional time being spent on the Plan. Mr. Forman stated that the Planning Board 'is the legally delegated responsible Board that is going to hold, not the public meetings on this, and they may hold those as well, but the public hearings. Ms. Langhans offered that she and Robert Kenerson were on the ,,original committee regarding the initial involvement with the issue g g g , and it was very difficult to come back to the Planning Board and "explain what was being done; she does not think that was ever really done. Ms. Langhans thought that the Planning Board received minutes of the CPC meetings. Chairperson Grigorov noted that the CPC meetings were described, but there was not enough information to really say anything about it. Ms. Langhans noted that this was the time the Planning Consultant Ron Brand was being chosen, also a charge had to be determined for the Consultant. Ms. Langhans stated that it was difficult to involve the Planning Board, even at that time. Mr. Forman said that it makes sense for Planning Technician John Czamanske to copy, not just to members of the CPC, Mr. Smith and Ms. Grigorov, but to copy the Planning Board on all things that are sent to the CPC. Mr. Forman stated that copying to the Planning Board would give them a chance to know what is going on, and if there are any problems, anything the Board wants to express to Mr. Forman or to the CPC Chairman David Klein, then the Board would have an opportunity to do it; not when the Plan is done but while the Plan is being prepared. Ms. Langhans commented that the Planning Board does ,not even know what the CPC is working on now. William Lesser brought up the matter of a timetable. Mr. Forman responded that, in a way, he did not want to talk about timetables, adding, a comment was made at the October 14, 1991 public information meeting stating that the Comprehensive Plan would be done at a ,certain time. Mr. Forman commented hat he could not really be sure at this point when it will be done. Ms. Langhans noted that the timetable mentioned was the first quarter of 1992. . Mr. Forman stated that he was not sure it would be done then because there is the Cornell G /EIS process and that is going to take a significant amount of everybody's time. Mr. Forman said that he would rather tell people later than sooner and complete it when he said rather than make people promises that he cannot keep. Mr. Lesser wondered if there would be public hearings on the overall document or is it anticipated that it would begin when some substantial portions of the document are done. Mr. Forman responded that public informational meetings will be held after each Chapter of the,Plan is completed. Mr.. Forman stated that the Plan will continue to be refined and continue to be used as a guide. Mr. Forman offered that the October 14, 1991 meeting was a Public Information Meeting -- it was simply to keep the public informed. x Planning Board -4- October 15, 1991 Mr. Kenerson wondered, without putting a date on it, about the anticipated sequence of periods that the Planning Board will be reviewing sections. Mr. Kenerson wondered if the Planning Board would be taking the Goals and Objectives first. Mr. Forman replied that when the Planning Board gets the Plan they will be looking at a whole document, and assumes the Board will go through the Plan chapter by chapter. Mr. Forman noted that when the Board gets to Chapter III, which is Goals, Objectives and Policies, he sees more controversy arising. Mr. Forman said that when that will happen and `how the Board will proceed with it is up to the Board as a body in terms of what sequence to be used. Mr. Forman said that any comments, questions, or thoughts the Board may have will be forwarded `to him or John Czamanske, adding, any questions relating to water or sewer should be forwarded to Town Engineer Dan Walker. Mr. Forman said that he hopes the section [Inventory and Maps, Chapter Two] before the Board tonight will be done to everbody's satisfaction by the time the completed document gets to the Planning Board, whether it is the first quarter of next year or the second quarter of next year. Mr. Kenerson said that since there does not seem to be a thing in a distance then the Planning Board should decide how they want to receive an overview. Chairperson Grigorov wondered what kind of overview. Mr. Kenerson responded, things the Board should look at. Ms. Langhans mentioned getting each Chapter as the CPC is finished with it. Ms. Hoffmann stated that there is some concern that the Planning Board get the material, in draft form, early enough so that it is not finished. Ms. Hoffmann noted that the Board might go • through the Chapters individually and discuss them and when the Board gets it all put together they may find that they want to make other changes, but at least they have had a chance to look at it in depth. Mr. Czamanske stated that he had hoped', instead of simply receiving things, that at some point the Planning Board would take part in creating things. Mr. Czamanske stated that CPC member Ellen Harrison has suggested that the CPC have a retreat -- the idea being that if the Planning Board wanted to take part, they could, and hash out some of the things raised during the planning. Mr. Forman said that the Goals and Objectives are done, the Policies need to be done. Mr. Smith stated that he was not sure a retreat would help. Chairperson Grigorov stated that she did not think a retreat would help. Chairperson Grigorov stated that, however, there is a special committee that is supposed to write it, but they are not even writing it, the staff is writing it, adding that she did not think it was the Planning Board's function to be creative. At this point, Ms. Langhans mentioned that at a prior meeting she had suggested that she would like to see some light industrial, maybe ;computer -type businesses someplace in the Town. Mr. Forman commented that in the end it does not matter what the CPC says, because 'if that is what the Planning Board wants to see, and when the document is before the Planning Board the Planning Board will rewrite it in that kind of a mode, then go to a public meeting and see what the public ,says. Mr. Forman said that, being a Planning Board member, it is important to attend those meetings, so the CPC will know what is on the Board members' minds, because in the end the CPC has to Planning Board -5- October 15, 1991 understand that this document then goes to the Planning Board, and it is not going to be an official public document until the Planning At this point, Mr. Kenerson suggested that the ,Board holds their public hearings and accepts the document. Mr. Forman remarked that any changes the Planning Board wants to make they will be able to make, adding that it makes more sense for the CPC to listen to the Board now as opposed to later. Mr. Czamanske said that another way to do that would be for each member to write out what it is they want from a Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Hoffmann stated that it is really easier to react to something that is already written than try to adjust that to what one wants. At this point, Mr. Kenerson suggested that the Planning Board take a look at the whole process and say what it is they want to see first, second, etc., instead of getting it as it is done. Ms. Langhans said that it was noted that the Planning Board should contribute to the document before the CPC writes it. Mr. Kenerson responded, absolutely, but there should be a process that says these are the steps that are going to be taken. Mr. Czamanske commented, ,not so much before it is written, but as it is written. Mr. Lesser stated that it seemed to him that the really critical matters are. how much development, of what kind, and where. Mr. Forman said that step one is reading the inventory document and finding out what is in !the Town. Mr. Forman said that the CPC has already come up with Goals and Objectives, and in the near future he thought it would be worthwhile shipping the Goals and Objectives to the Planning Board, adding that the Policies would probably be looked at by the CPC the • ''beginning of November 1991, and there is no reason the policies cannot be shipped to the Planning Board . Mr. Lesser wondered what was meant by policies. Mr. Forman responded that the goals are very ,,broad in general, the objectives then become more specific, and the policies implement the objectives. Mr. Lesser wondered where the difficult matters were going to appear -- how much development and where. Mr. Forman replied, probably in the Plan synthesis, the policies will give one the 'overall guide, but the Plan synthesis is actually going to write the Plan -- that is Chapter Four -- right now we are in Chapter Three, Goals, Policies and Objectives; the "following chapter will be Analysis and Synthesis of the Plan, and ',that is where the so- called meat of the plan is, but the Goals, Policies and Objectives will be an outline of the Plan and Chapter 4 "will flesh it out -- after that it is implementation measures and a maintenance chapter. Mr. Forman stated that he thought Chapters 3 and 4 are the most important sections of the Plan, and Chapter 3 is being worked on now. Mr. Kenerson wondered at what stage the Planning Board would have ,their first public hearing. Mr. Forman responded, when the Plan is done. Mr. Czamanske stated that he thought the CPC was going to have a public information meeting prior to its coming to the Planning 1,Board. Mr. Kenerson wondered about Town Board involvement. Mr. Forman replied, only in the sense that once the Plan is accepted by the Planning Board and something is to be done within the Plan, then everything has to go through the Town Board. Mr. Kenerson stated that the Planning Board is the Lead Agency and what they accept becomes the Town Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Czamanske said that Lead Planning Board -6- October 15, 1991 ,Agency is a key word because there has to be a SEQR process. Mr. °Lesser wondered if it was being made clear at the informational meetings as to the Planning Board's role in the plan; are there going to be problems if the Planning Board should change it in any .way? `Mr. Smith offered that there are three members of the Town Board on the CPC. Mr. Kenerson stated that he does not recall, as a Planning Board Member, writing any instructions, guidelines, or anything else for the CPC. Mr. Kenerson said that the,CPC is doing everything and the Planning Board has not really been involved in it. Mr. Lesser ',noted that the Planning Board was not even involved in the structure of the way it was to be prepared. Mr. Kenerson commented -- how is the Planning Board to know what the CPC is working on? Ms. Hoffmann offered that the Planning Board is involved through the two members of the Planning Board. Mr. Kenerson felt that there should have been a charge from the CPC that said -- this is what we want the Planning Board to work on. Ms. Langhans said that she thought the Town Board gave the CPC a charge. Mr. Czamanske said that he thought the outline that was adopted was sent to all the Town Boards and Committees. Mr. Kenerson said that it has been a while; these things have to be initiated, and worked on, so the Planning Board is operating in an orderly, way. Mr. Forman said that he expected the ,,next public information meeting to be on Goals, Objectives, and 'Policies. Ms. Langhans, referring to the CPC, wondered if there was input from everybody; everyone seems to think that there are two people on • the Committee that are very strong, and:wondered if they were leading the group in the direction they want to go. Chairperson Grigorov responded that there is input from everybody. Mr. Kenerson said that they are receiving things from other Town committees, and that then 'gets incorporated into the plan. Chairperson Grigorov stated that she is not diametrically opposed to everthing the CPC says. ;Chairperson Grigorov said that some of the CPC views are that there is no such thing as light industry -- they feel 'it is all polluting. Ms. Langhans said that perhaps light industry is the wrong term to use. Town Engineer Dan Walker stated that, technically, all the industry in Tompkins County is light industry; there is no heavy industry in this Town; heavy industry is steel mills; Ithaca primarily has assembly industry and machining, which is considered light industry. Mr. Walker noted that sometimes light industry is more on the size of the company where 50 employees might be considered a light industry, although there is Hewlett- Packard with 5000 employees in one plant building calculators and computers; that is technically a light industry and it is not making automobiles or construction equipment or heavy steel. Mr. Czamanske said that he „thought it is difficult to discuss it because there isn't a definition of it. Mr. Kenerson said that it is a producing firm as against a retail. Ms. Langhans mentioned a light industrial park in Lansing, NY. Ms. Langhans said that the buildings themselves are quite modern, ,well landscaped, and she was sure it was bringing in lots of tax Planning Board -7- October 15, 1991 • lidollars. Ms. Langhans does not see why the Town can't have something like that. Mr. Forman replied that if that is .something the Board wants to see he would suggest that maybe the Planning Board suggest to the CPC that that is something they do want to see. Ms. Langhans noted that the Cornell Federal Credit Union moved to Lansing, adding, why didn't they stay in the Town of Ithaca? Mr. Smith said that there seems to be a kind of philosophy as to how the plan is supposed to work and one is that there would be goals and policies and everything which will guide development with no specific areas denoted to receive development, no matter what it is. Mr. Walker said that his understanding was that he thought the '.selection of specific plots, etc., in zoning one lot or one group of lots for a particular use, is the inappropriate part that people are concerned about, but by taking all the factors that are needed, such as transportation, utilities, population density„ nature of the land, ,slopes, all the characteristics that are suitable for development, no ,development, or different types of development, view aspects, and all those aspects that are important, selecting the areas that meet the different criteria within an environmentally sensitive way, but not in an environmentally unrealistic way, is appropriate. Mr. Walker stated that he would assume one of the analysis portions of the Plan li is going to say -- the Town needs a certain amount of taxable :industrial land and commercial land to remain viable. Mr. Walker ,said that there are a certain number of services needed to be provided to residential and a certain number needed to be provided to . commercial and light industrial; there is a break -even point where residential use only will not support those services; there has to be a higher tax base from some higher value commercial industrial basis. Mr. Smith commented- -- certainly not tax' free institutional. Mr. Walker said that if there is a lot of tax free institutional one has to look at how one charges for the services, adding, the Town water and sewer is charged for on a usage basis; it is not coming on ,the general tax basis, and the benefit assessments are applied to ,everyone. Mr. Walker said that one has to look at supporting the ,utilities that everyone wants because Cornell is a light industry; there is no question of that; Ithaca College its light industry. Mr. Forman noted that Mr. Walker has some very good ideas; he does not disagree with anything that Mr. Walker said,,but having attended a 'number of CPC meetings, he felt Mr. Walker's comments were not all .that well - received. Mr. Forman said that there is difficulty with even something like a neighborhood commercial. Mr. Czamanske offered ',that he thought the problem is that the nuts and bolts Mr. Walker was talking about have not been presented to the committee for them to see the black and the red. Mr. Forman stated that the CPC has addressed the Goals and Objectives; the Planning Board has the approved Goals and Objectives, and the Board will see it when the Policies happen as well. Mr. Forman noted that Policies will be discussed very shortly, and when the Policies come out the CPC should send the Planning Board a copy of each. Mr. Forman said that if the ;Planning Board does want, indeed, to see more industrial and more commercial in the Town, then they have to let the CPC know that. Mr. Forman stated that he agreed with Mr. Walker that we need a bit more balance than is being seen. Mr. Lesser wondered about the best way Planning Board -8- October 15, 1991 to go about doing that. Chairperson Grigorov said that she would • like to try to do it in more of a low -key way instead of pitting the two Boards against each other. Mr. Lesser stated that if the Planning Board is going to suggest light industry, then it is really incumbent on the Board to also suggest where it might be. Ms. Langhans suggested calling it a research park. Mr. Forman responded that he thought there is something in the Goals and Objectives that deals with research parks, and light industry. Mr. Forman said that maybe it is jumping the gun a little bit in talking about sites, adding, when getting further on in the Plan he thinks that one should begin to look harder about where the sites should be. Chairperson Grigorov commented that the criteria have to be in hand first. Ms. Hoffmann said that maybe the Planning Board could start by trying to come up with a list of qualities that such sites should have, then, having that, one could look at different sites and see if they would be suitable. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she does not really know what would be the best qualities for a light industrial site, adding that she would like to think about that. Mr. Smith commented that some people would prefer to just have criteria out there and leave it up to the potential developers to find a site. Ms. Hoffmann responded that she understood that. Mr. Kenerson stated that he thought it could end up with three different plans with the geographic problems that the Town has, adding, what does one do with agriculture? Ms. Hoffmann responded that we try to keep it as much as possible. Mr. Kenerson wondered if • the three plan possibility had been addressed. Mr. Forman said that, in essence, the three sections of the Town are being looked at, e.g., the working document known as the 2010 map shows much of East Hill as reasonably built up now, adding that much of the development, especially as the Octupus changes in the next five years, will be located on West Hill. Mr. Lesser, directing his comment to James Baker, wondered what he sees as the future of agriculture in the Town over the next decade or so. Mr. Lesser said that there is quite a. bit of land that is zoned and set aside for agricultural use, although it is no secret that throughout the nation and the State the total amount of agricultural land in agriculture is declining. Mr. Baker responded that there are several factors, including roads, because as traffic gets heavier it gets to be a real problem with the farming operation and the people that are moving through because they have absolutely no concern for anything that is moving slower. Mr. Baker said that there is a lot of land on West Hill that will never be farmed again, but is called agricultural land. Mr. Baker stated that the economy of agriculture, such as it is today, takes a real good, very efficient operation, and a lot of land to be able to continue farming. Mr. Baker said that he is fortunate to have land in Enfield Center, but he has land at the foot of Bostwick Road hill, and with the advent of sewer and water that will be developed. Mr. Kenerson stated that as the price of land goes up one cannot afford to stay • there. Ms. Hoffmann stated that there are ways of developing that one keeps part of the land as farmland, at least as field. Mr. Baker responded that that is a terrible problem because they are just not Planning Board -9- October 15, 1991 compatible. Mr. Baker stated that the people around the farmland think it is theirs, they tromp through; they drive through, and they don't want the farmer on the roads with machinery. Mr. Baker said that, for instance, when he puts up hay they make maybe 25 -30 trips „per day to a field that might be a mile up the road. Mr. Baker noted that the big operations, like in Cayuga County, go to trucks but then they are draging the mud and everything else on the road, which makes everyone unhappy. Mr. Baker offered that there is a big chunk of land on Mecklenburg Road that he felt would make a great place for an industrial park. Mr. Walker stated that there are some areas in Tompkins County that the Soil Conservation Service has classified as Type I soils. Mr. Walker said that he feels there is no prime farmland in Tompkins County, Mr. Walker commented that prime farmland in the Midwest is worth $10,000.00 an acre; in Tompkins County there is land worth $10.000.00- $30,000.00 an acre for development -- farming cannot compete with that. Ms. Hoffmann asked why would one have to assume that development is residential development, why not put a light industrial research park on a piece of agricultural land, but put it along the edges in one corner and have the 'rest be farmland. Mr. Walker responded that to maintain a viable farm now, to support one family, one would probably need 300 -400 acres. Mr. Baker offered that he has about 600 acres for two families. M's. Hoffmann said that what she is saying is that -- if development and farming can be allowed to coexist on a piece of land, the farmer can be given the • "benefit of the development value. Mr. Walker said that that is a short -term solution, but it does work well in areas where people are retiring, adding, unless someone inherits the land a new farmer is never going to get started on that land. Ms. Hoffmann mentioned the farming of produce that could be sold locally. Mr. Baker offered that the land in this area is not conducive to produce because of the rocks and soil types. Mr. Walker said that the economics of farming right now and the types of farms that are in this area, no matter how it is zoned, the farms are going to end up not being there anymore. Mr. Smith wondered if it was being said that the amount of land currently identified in the Comprehensive Plan as agricultural and desirable to remain as agricultural is too large an area or is it needed. Mr. smith offered that it might be smarter to identify the farms that are viable, that are active, and that have a good chance of making it reducing the amount of Ag land that is set aside, and giving the farmers that are there a.big benefit. Mr. Forman noted, for the record, that the information sent to the CPC will also be sent to the Planning Board. Mr. Forman stated that he hopes two or three meetings on Policies would do it, but his guess is it may be five or six meetings, adding, that will at least give the Planning Board a flavor of what is going on with the CPC. Mr. Kenerson mentioned the reading of the notes or minutes Mr. Forman had forwarded to the Planning Board members was kind of interesting. Mr. Forman said that he just read through one set and got the flavor • of what went on, but trying to understand it, if one did not attend the meeting, would not be of any use to the Planning Board. Planning Board -10- October 15, 1991 L • At this point, Mr. Forman stated that Town Engineer Dan Walker, Town Supervisor Shirley Raffensperger, and he attended a meeting on October 10, 1991 held at Cornell regarding the G /EIS. Mr. Forman offered that the meeting was more of an update informational kind of meeting and nothing major, or earth shattering came from it. Mr. Forman stated that the most significant thing that came from it was the fact that the deadline for the G /EIS is now early February 1992. Mr. Smith asked about ongoing projects with Cornell. Mr. Forman stated that it was agreed to, in the past, between the Town and Cornell, that ongoing projects like the Tennis Facility that had been introduced prior to the beginning of the G /EIS would indeed be part of it, in the sense that the impacts of the Tennis Facility would be integrated into the G /EIS, but the Tennis Facility would not wait until the G /EIS was complete; the Planning Board would be reviewing the Tennis Facility while the G /EIS was ongoing, and the impacts of the Tennis Facility, as an example, would be looked at as a part of the G /EIS. Mr. Smith commented that he felt that is the only way to "approach it, but it is hard to know the cumulative impacts of the Tennis Facility until the G /EIS is complete. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she is really puzzled by that too, because she had heard something about the Tennis Facility, first from a neighbor who had heard that the ground- breaking ceremony had happened, adding that she was totally perplexed because she, being on the Planning Board, had "not heard a thing. Ms. Hoffmann said that Assistant Town Planner ,George Frantz had a little map which was the 8:1x11 paper with a line drawn on the road for the facility that she had referred to at the • September 17, 1991 Planning Board meeting, and Mr. Frantz informed Ms. Hoffmann that that map was all he had; she asked him why the Planning Board had not heard about the matter. Mr. Frantz had replied that Cornell had not yet made a formal application. Ms. Hoffmann wondered how it could have been introduced. Mr. Forman said that the ground- breaking aspect was that apparently a gentlemen who ,was donating money was not going to be around to see it through. Ms. "Hoffmann wondered how one can talk about the project having been introduced before the G /EIS process if Cornell did not make a formal application and the Planning Board was not informed about it. Mr. Forman said that he thought it was because it was in the works before the process started. Mr. Forman stated that he did not know, at the time of the Planning Board meeting, when the Tennis Facility was discussed, what the Town's policy was as it related to projects in 'the G /EIS area. Mr. Smith wondered if there were a list of Cornell projects that are now covered by the G /EIS and cannot go forward. Mr. Forman mentioned statutory projects in that there is no control, many of the projects like the Fish Hatchery, and the Dog Facility at the Baker Institute, the Planning Board is not going to see anyway. Mr. Forman said that he does not know of anything other than the Tennis Facility that is in the works that the Planning Board is going to look at in the G /EIS area right now. Ms. Langhans wondered if the Board should look at the Cornell Plan and see what they have drawn on it. Mr. Forman stated that Cornell is looking to the future and they are trying to come up with thresholds, so that when certain thresholds are reached, whether it is this year or sometime in the future, when those thresholds are reached then the mitigation measures go into effect. Mr. Smith stated that it seemed to him this Planning Board -11- October 15, 1991 is going to be very difficult to get across to the public; they are going to wonder how the Board can vote on the issue when the G /EIS is not done. Mr. Walker stated that in discussions early -on with Cornell regarding the G /EIS process, the question did come up about individual projects that might not fit into the scope, timewise, of the major development plans. Mr. Walker, referring to the discussion, stated that there is no law or legal reason saying that Cornell can't put any project they want to before the Board; the questions that would be raised by the impact of the Tennis Facility would have to have an assessment and the cumulative impact would be looked at also, above and beyond the G /EIS. Ms. Hoffmann wondered, if the Board had to make a decision before the results of the G /EIS are in, like the Tennis Facility, what is the point of a G /EIS? Mr. Forman responded that if there are problems that need to be mitigated, then they will be able to be dealt with from the Tennis Facility, irrespective of the G /EIS, just as if it were any other project. Mr. Forman said that, for instance, if it greatly increases traffic, the Board will be able to deal with measures to mitigate that project in and of itself, then, in addition, it will be looked at cumulatively as part of the G /EIS. Mr. Forman said that just ,because the Board is looking at the Tennis Facility in a vacuum, whatever problems the facility creates in and of itself will have to be mitigated in and of itself, so it is not as though everything is • being pushed off to the G /EIS. Ms. Hoffmann wondered if Mr. Forman was saying whatever impact the Tennis Facility might create, the Board might actually be able to see before the G /EIS is finished. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she is not basing that on anything anybody said in this group, but based on what the Cornell people said. Ms. Hoffmann wondered if Mr. Forman was saying that the impacts of the Tennis Facility can be included in the other impacts when the Board looks at the G /EIS. Mr. Walker responded, definitely. Ms. Hoffmann wondered about the fact that the Board then says because this has had such an impact, such and such can't be built because it would be too much, commenting, what if at that point the Board thinks it would have been better if the later project would have been built and the Tennis Facility not. Mr. Walker replied that that is a risk Cornell is taking right now. Ms. Hoffmann thinks that is a risk the Town is taking of that not being developed in the best way possible. Mr. Walker replied that the idea is to evaluate the environmental impact at the local government level and the rezoning action that Cornell was suggesting for the Orchards area and the surrounding area is the way to do it. Ms. Hoffmann remarked that she thought it was going to be evaluated before anything happened, commenting, if there were any discussions going on before, they were not brought to the Planning Board, and that bothers her. Mr. Walker stated, that in the discussions in the early stages of the G /EI,S process, there is nothing that precludes that, other than the Board requesting Cornell not to bring any other projects forward, but, again, there is no legal reason to say -- you cannot bring a project forward. Mr. • Walker stated that one cannot tell Cornell -- you are doing a G /EIS for this development in the Orchards - and there is no legal reason under SEQR Regulations that says that -- you have to stop all other Planning Board -12- October 15, 1991 • development while the G /EIS is being done, adding, there is also no legal reason why the Board cannot require an EIS for other projects that are coming forward. Mr. Walker said that the environmental review of any individual project is not the case; the project has to be looked at standing alone, and then the problem being -- the Board has to speculate what could happen if they develop over "here ". Mr. Smith stated that any impacts and development thresholds would be applied resulting from the Tennis Facility; anything else would be applied to the G /EIS. Mr. Walker responded, absolutely. Mr. Forman offered that it is being looked at twice, the first time in and of itself, and secondarily, when the G /EIS is being done, it is being looked at cumulatively. Mr. Walker noted that when it is being looked at in and of itself one has to look at the impacts all around it as well. Mr. Walker said that the advantage to Cornell is: if everything is put on the table at once then it is a lot easier to review a small project. At this time, Mr. Forman pointed out the three issues discussed at the meeting held October 10, 1991 at Cornell. 10 It will be early February 1992 for the G /EIS, as of the meeting held at Cornell on October 10, 19910 2. The issue that Town Supervisor Shirley Raffensperger raised at the Cornell meeting concerning on -going projects with • Cornell. 39 The threshold item, where Cornell said they were not telling the Town exactly what is going to happen in what year because they do not know, and things are changing and in flux. Cornell apparently felt that there would be less development early -on and much of it would be pushed back farther than they had initially thought. Their thinking as of the October 10th meeting was that there would be less development in the 901s, and more beyond the 901s. They were talking about the idea of thresholds, that whenever certain thresholds were met, whether it was 5, 10, or 15 years, at that point mitigation would kick in. At this point, Mr. Forman wondered if the Board wanted to make it a formal situation with the Board that from now on 1/4, at a minimum, of the time is devoted to planning, that 1/2 of one meeting becomes a planning meeting and the agenda would be adjusted accordingly. Mr. Forman suggested that, instead of it being for development review only, the Board take a look at the Comprehensive Plan, the SEQR process, and other issues. Ms. Langhans offered that Mr. Forman's idea has been tried before. Mr. Kenerson commented that there just isn't a demand on the development side right now. Ms. Langhans stated that she thought Mr. Forman's idea was a good idea. Chairperson Grigorov stated that she liked the idea of combining the two. Chairperson Grigorov closed the discussion regarding the Comprehensive Plan at 9:25 p.m. Planning Board -13- October 15, 1991 OTHER BUSINESS. Mr. Kenerson asked about Cayuga Lake Estates. Mr. Forman responded that they have not been heard from. Mr. Forman noted that one item the Board will be seeing in the near future is Chase Farm. Mr. Forman said that they have preliminary approval but not final approval. Mr. Kenerson noted that this would be the second phase for Chase Farm. Mr. Walker offered that Mr. Hallberg, from the Deer Run project, has started building Phase 3. Mr. Walker said that all the lots are built on in Phase 2. Mr. Forman reported on Peregrine Hollow, stating that Peregrine Hollow is on the Town line but it abuts Eastern Heights Park, so, literally, it has become the Town's problem. Mr. Forman offered that the project is a proposed 4 -phase subdivision, including both single family units and townhouse units. The proposal is for a total of 225 units on 114 acres. Mr. Forman said that Phase 1 is for 80 units, 2/3 of which are townhouse units. There is one entrance, and one entrance only, on Snyder Hill Road. Mr. Forman stated that, for the whole project, in ten years when it is supposed to be built up, there is basically a loop road that goes in one portion of Snyder Hill Road, loops around in the back and comes out another simply because • there are two access points on Snyder Hill Road. Mr. Forman stated that much of that area is already single family homes. Mr. Forman stated that he has dealt with the traffic issue in a broad sense, not site - specific in that -- does he have adequate site distance, etc? Mr. Forman offered that there are about 1000 trips per day on the location of the Ithaca /Dryden Town line, adding, the proposed project alone would triple the traffic and bring it up to about 3000 units per day on the Ithaca Town line. Chairperson Grigorov stated that at one point the developer was trying to get the Town to let the subdivision use part of the Town's Eastern Heights Park for their parkland necessity, commenting that she really objected to that. Mr. Forman commented that everybody else objected as well. * Mr. Forman said that there are 56 townhouse units in the first phase that abut Eastern Heights Park, with no dedication of parkland from the developer to the Town of Dryden whatsoever. Chairperson Grigorov commented that she feels it is ridiculous; why should he use the Town park? Mr. Walker noted that the Town of Dryden does not have any requirement for dedication of a park. Chairperson Grigorov wondered why they even asked the Town. Mr. Forman responded that it is through the SEQR process that the Town found out about it; they need to ask us; they need to discuss things with us -- water and sewer issues were certainly raised with Town Engineer Dan Walker, Mr. Smith noted that there is a leverage there, with Mr. Forman adding there is the SEQR process as well. Mr. Lesser wondered what was happening with water and sewer. • Chairperson Grigorov stated that the sewer was put in several years ago. Mr. Walker said that there is a water line there, but did not believe there is sewer there yet. Mr. Walker said that there is an k Add : 7'' ,,u.�.�. �V .B- c.v�t, �.d�e�/�. �d.v�SLBI� •�f;[.� . -(..2- .� ..'C.�¢J �%'•.w -.�- ;o/ Planning Board MEIC October 15, 1991 • existing water district off Snyder Hill Road that Dryden formed, and Dryden is a member of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, and they are also a partner in the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant; they own capacity and they are using more than they own right now; they own about 20 of the capacity of the plant and they are using about 30. Mr. Walker stated that to have the subdivision work in Dryden they would have to create a new sewer district. Mr. Walker said that as far as the water is concerned, that is supplied from the Hungerford Hill tank Pine Tree grid, and there are some weak areas in that grid right now; the Town can't supply enough fire flow to protect East Hill Plaza adequately, but 'that is being addressed in the G /EIS. Mr. Walker noted that there are some areas there that need reinforcement and possible modification. Mr. Walker noted that the Town is already supplying water to the Town of Dryden, and there is a supply agreement with them that they have to pay a surcharge to the Town for the use of the Town's water system to deliver water to their water system, adding, that has not been updated but the Town is in the process of doing that. Mr. Walker said that the other issue is the sewer, and the sewers proposed for the project would go down into the Slaterville Road sewer which goes into the City, adding that that sewer also has some capacity problems which the Town will be looking at in more details plus the issue that the Town is under obligation to pay the City of Ithaca for the cost of transporting the Town sewage through the City lines to the Wasterwater treatment Plant which is owned jointly. Mr. Walker said that all the agreements have to come together before Dryden can create their sewer district and make everything work. Mr. Walker stated that, from an engineering standpoint, it is primarily a matter of money for infrastructure improvements that the Town would be looking to Dryden to make appropriate contributions for, and also providing the funds, to maintain that. Ms. Langhans wondered if construction had started. Mr. Walker responded, no; it has not been approved; it has been back and forth at the Dryden Planning Board. Mr. Walker stated that the other issue is traffic.. Mr. Walker stated that Town of Ithaca Highway Superintendent Scott McConnell set up traffic counters on Eastern Heights for a week, adding, that was primarily a count to determine what the impact of opening Park Lane would have on traffic through the Eastern Heights development. Mr. Walker offered that Park Lane is a joint project between Bill Frandsen and the Town as far as the Frandsen subdivision. Mr. Walker said that there is concern from the residents in the Eastern Heights development that having Park Lane open would provide a quick path for some people to come across Rte. 79 and head toward Cornell. Mr. Walker stated that the developers of Peregrine Hollow have to deal with the Town as far as the water and sewer issues go. Mr. Walker offered that the Town is an interested agency in the environmental review, but from the standpoint of water and sewer the • Town might be able to be an involved agency. Mr. Smith wondered if the Town of Dryden was planning to forward information to the Town for comments. Mr. Forman stated that he thought they were going to • • • Planning Board -15- October 15, 1991 come in with a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance, as he spoke to the Chairman of the Dryden Planning Board this afternoon and those were her preliminary thoughts; she obviously can't speak for all members of the Board. Chairperson Grigorov announced that Board Member Eva Hoffmann's term expires on December 31, 1991, and noted that this is the only expiration on the Planning Board this year. Chairperson Grigorov stated that Ms. Hoffmann would like to continue as a member; she wrote a letter to that effect. Chairperson Grigorov stated that the interview committee consists of two Planning Board members along with two Town Board members. Chairperson Grigorov said that the interview is conducted in public. Ms. Hoffmann wondered if the interview was at a Planning Board meeting or at a Town Board meeting. Mr. Smith ,responded, the Planning Board meeting. Mr. Lesser wondered if that implied that those on the Board who are not among the two have no opportunity to question applicants. Mr. Smith responded, that is what it implies. Chairperson Grigorov said that it is important for elected officials to participate in the interviewing. Mr. Walker stated that the idea was that the elected officials are supposedly responsible to the citizens that elected them. Mr. Forman reported on the New York Planning Federation. Mr. Forman stated that there is money for two people to go, adding that Nancy Fuller may possibly go. Mr. Forman said that he thought ,another person might be Ms. Aronson, but he was not sure if she is able to attend. Chairperson Grigorov asked Mr. Forman if he would, like to attend. Mr. Forman responded that he does not have the time to go for three days, adding that he and Mr. Frantz will drive down for one day. Chairperson Grigorov stated that Ms. Aronson is the newest member and she should go, commenting that everyone should go at one time or another. Mr. Forman agreed with Chairperson Grigorov, ,but he was just saying if Ms. Aronson can't go he won't send in the money; that is his concern. Chairperson Grigorov wondered who chooses who attends the meeting. Mr. Forman responded that he would recommend to Town Supervisor Raffensperger. Chairperson Grigorov commented -- what if there are two people from the Planning Board who want to go? Mr. Forman stated that he would let Supervisor Raffensperger pick. Mr. Kenerson asked about the dates. Chairperson Grigorov replied, November 17 -20. Chairperson Grigorov asked if there were anyone else who is interested in going. Mr. Kenerson noted that he should go sometime. Mr. Forman stated that anyone interested should tell him. Mr. Kenerson said that if Ms. Aronson can't go he would go. Mr. Forman noted that he would put in for two people to go for the three days. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 19, 1991 MOTION by William Lesser, seconded by Robert Kenerson. RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of March 19, 1991, be and hereby are approved with the following correction. • Planning Board IL LIA -16- October 15, 1991 That the second paragraph on Page 13 under the Public Hearing for the proposed construction of a temporary parking lot at Cornell, be moved to Page 12 under the first paragraph. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Hoffmann, Lesser, Baker, Smith. Nay - None. Abstain - Langhans. APPROVAL OF EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1991 MOTION by James Baker, seconded by Eva Hoffmann. RESOLVED, that the excerpt from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of September 3, 1991, be and Meeting of September hereby is approved as presented. There being no further- discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Hoffmann, Baker, Smith. Nay - None. Abstain - Lesser, Langhans. APPROVAL OF EXCERPT FROM MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 17, 1991 MOTION by James Baker, seconded by Virginia Langhans: RESOLVED, that the excerpt from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of September 17, 1991, be and hereby is .approved as presented. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Langhans, Baker, Lesser, Smith. Nay - None. Abstain - Hoffmann. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion, Chairperson Grigorov declared the October 15, 1991, meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Mary Bryant, Recording Secretary, Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary, Town of Ithaca Planning Board.