Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1993-10-19TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 19, 1993 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, October 19, 1993, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7 :30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, Virginia Langhans, James Ainslie, Herbert Finch, Eva Hoffmann, Floyd Forman (Town Planner), Daniel Walker (Town Engineer),, John Barney (Town Attorney). ALSO PRESENT: Ken Gordon, Nancy Goody, John Gutenberger, Ellen Harrison, Peter Parashi, Bruce Brittain, John Whitcomb, Harold Craft, Gregg Bell, Rebekah Harrison. Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:36 p.m. and accepted for the record the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in the Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on October 13, 1993 and October 14, 1993, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the NYS Department of Transportation, upon the Tompkins County Assessment Department, and upon the applicants and /or agents, on October 12, 19930 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; segment of the meeting. f NAL TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD OCTOBER 19, 1993 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, October 19, 1993, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7 :30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, Virginia Langhans, James Ainslie, Herbert Finch, Eva Hoffmann, Floyd Forman (Town Planner), Daniel Walker (Town Engineer),, John Barney (Town Attorney). ALSO PRESENT: Ken Gordon, Nancy Goody, John Gutenberger, Ellen Harrison, Peter Parashi, Bruce Brittain, John Whitcomb, Harold Craft, Gregg Bell, Rebekah Harrison. Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:36 p.m. and accepted for the record the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in the Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on October 13, 1993 and October 14, 1993, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the NYS Department of Transportation, upon the Tompkins County Assessment Department, and upon the applicants and /or agents, on October 12, 19930 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; segment of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT UNIVERSITY IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE OF A PROPOSED REZONING AND FOR A PORTION OF AN 826 -ACRE SNYDER HILL ROAD, GAME FARM DISTRICT R -30. NANCY GOODY, OF THE DRAFT GENERIC (DGEIS) PREPARED BY CORNELL POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS POSSIBLE CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS TRACT OF LAND BOUNDED BY ROUTE 366 AND ROAD, AND JUDD FALLS ROAD, RESIDENCE PROJECT MANAGER. Chairperson Grigorov declared noted matter duly opened at 7:38 notice of Public Hearings a above. Chairperson Grigorov University to give the Board project. the Public Hearing in th e p.m. and read aloud f s posted and published and a then asked for someone from and public a brief description above - rom the s noted Cornell of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 Lewis Roscoe addressed the Board by stating that it was his understanding that this public hearing is not to be a discussion period, but one in which Cornell University would make a presentation and then there would be statements made by anyone who wishes to make any. Then over time, we would prepare responses to them. In that format we have not brought any consultants and are not prepared to enter into any discussion of details, except that we may be able to correct gross misconceptions that might come up. The University engaged in a major renewal of its planning process in the mid -801s. During this period the University developed a set of guidelines for the development of the campus which was published in 1985. It developed an expansion of it's campus planning committee which discussed policies and procedures and helped develop a campus plan which was produced in 1990. The Campus Planning committee has been involved since 1990 in the development of a precinct planning process which is the process of examining geographic subsections of the University campus in order to develop their planning criteria in greater detail. Cornell University also established a Special Areas Committee to look at the more special historic and aesthetically significant buildings on the campus, evaluate them, score them, develop an understanding about their protection and put those into the Precinct planning document so that they could be understood as well as other land use matters when considering new building sites. The University also with the guidance of its Natural Areas Committee looked at the priorities for natural areas preservation around the campus and adopted policies and procedures relative to the natural areas on and around the central campus and those two are identified in the precinct plans. All of this is just saying that there was a major planning process under way and that out of this process came two conclusions for possible ultimate distribution of the University's land uses and development; One of the conclusions was that the central campus can stand some densification, the central campus needs to be expanded in terms of certain facilities that are important to teaching and the ability of students to get from one class to another within the class break time; but also, the other land to the Southeast of the main campus could be developed for some facilities that didn't need the central campus location. There are other lands around the campus that were also explored, there are lands that were more heavily used for housing, agricultural and other facilities but the land to the Southeast seemed to be the most appropriate for consideration of development in the long term. Considering that the Town was also involved in a significant planning process and that the Town was undertaking a comprehensive planning process of its own; the University and the Town engaged in a joint planning effort described under the SEQR law as a Generic Environmental Impact Statement in which the Town would assume the role of lead agency and the town's people would 2 Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 develop a scope of :issues to be examined and a process of looking at intimate detail of the nature of the land in this area and come out with assessments of potential development possibilities, impacts of different threshold levels of development and mitigation for those impacts within this area. Out of the GEIS process one of the expected conclusions along with the Comprehensive Plan of the Town would be the development of a Special Land Use District or SLUD which would account for the University educational needs that are different from the current zoning of that area which is for residential uses and is described as R -30 in the Town Zoning Law. It should be noted that with the development of the Special Land Use District, the Town would not give up its review of detailed site plans or the need to develop special investigations of special conditions of sites as each project might come along. What does happen as a result of this process of the GEIS and the development of a SLUD would be the removal of the need for the Town and the University to go through a special appeal process with Zoning Board of Appeals for every project that comes along. The two things that are a byproduct of all of this are. a joint planning effort by the Town and the University and the development of a zone that is more appropriate for University and Town plans in the long range. In the long term development of this land, the University has no immediate plans for development, which is something worth stressing, for the GEIS purposes, we have anticipated how this land might develop over 20, 30 or 50 years, and we have imagined that there might be an ultimate development in this area, something like 4,000,000 gross square feet. By comparison the campus now has 13,000,000 gross square feet. The 4,000,000 gross square feet is not planned, but would be accompanied by a floor area ratio or FAR, which is a description of the amount of floor area to the amount of land, which is a mixture of open space, building height. The FAR for the Arts Quad is approximately 0.9. This is approximately the same FAR proposed for the GEIS area. The maximum height within the proposed SLUD would be 70 feet and the total ground coverage not exceed 31 percent for buildings, roads and parking lots and there be a setback for natural areas of 30 feet. Of this total 4,000,000 gross square feet over some long period of time by setting that number we were then able to identify thresholds of development, thresholds that would signal an impact on some of the different areas of scope that have been defined by townspeople of concern in this process. Traffic has been evaluated by our consultants and they have identified any possible problems and what the mitigation for that particular problem might be. All of the different possible items, which include; traffic circulation, including vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, geography, geology, air and water quality, flora and fauna, visual characteristics, historic characteristics, any number of things including planning alternatives are considerations for the development of this area. All of these things comprise the GEIS and the different levels of 3 J Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 impacts for these things are identified and their potential mitigations are the subject of the GEIS. The planning process which has taken place over the last two and a half years, has been very extensive; involving the Town, the University, and any number of consultants which are for the GEIS hired by the University directly for that project and are identified in the front cover of the volume. We also thank the Town, the Planning Board, the Town staff and their consultant, Ken Gordon and Larsen Associates for all of their involvement in this laborious undertaking. In some this has been a very extensive planning process for us all it is something that will help the University in many ways do logical planning if it proceeds to develop this area over time and it will help the Town in its logical planning processes to understand what University's development intentions might be and what the impacts of those developments might be over time. Mr. Roscoe then thanked the Board for their time. Town Planner Floyd Forman addressed the Board stating that Cornell and the Town are still discussing some of the numbers in the DGEIS, and that Mr. Roscoe had done a good job outlining the process that went into making the document, and outlining what is in the document. Chairperson Grigorov then opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone were present and wished to speak regarding the Cornell Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement, Ellen Harrison addressed the Board by stating that she was pleased and excited by the process. It is commendable of the Town and Cornell to enter into a joint process to look at long term planning and it fits well with the comprehensive planning that the Town is undertaking. Ms. Harrison felt that one of the motivations behind the DGEIS was to take look at cumulative holistic impacts. Once comments are received they would go to the Planning Board and then to Cornell to revise the impact statement, is that how it works? Floyd Forman stated that had not been fully decided, but that he would hope that once the comment period had come to a close, that the comments would be mailed to the Planning Board, there would then be a final environmental impact statement that would be written, but it would likely be the Town staff with input from Cornell through their consultant, Stu Messinger. Then from that, there would be findings that would be written after the final environmental impact statement. The time frame is unknown at this time. N Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 . Ms. Harrison then stated that she also did not understand the meaning of the word findings. Will there then be additional public review of the final impact statement. Town Attorney John Barney stated probably not. Ms. Harrison then asked what is the finding relative to approval of a final GEIS. Town Attorney John Barney stated that the approval of the GEIS makes it a final GEIS. As part of it or in addition to it there are then findings drawn up. There are environmental concerns noted and then as part of the findings a determination is made; has there been appropriate mitigation, are there appropriate thresholds here for mitigation, those kinds of things are findings. Once that has been done, then we'll move to what is really the subject matter of the whole project, which is the SLUD, and there will be a public hearing on the SLUD itself, at some point, if it is adopted by the Town. Ms. Harrison stated that the findings are things that say the protection and mitigation measures in that document are adequate to protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens. Ms. Harrison then brought up an additional question regarding alternative actions. Would it be a reasonable alternative to distribute the development differently on Precinct 7? Ms. Harrison stated that her interest was in the view protection from Route 366 across to Mount Pleasant. McGowan Woods is a treasure, if there is a lot of building around there, it would lose a lot of its beauty. What is the relationship between Precinct 7, the 271 acres which the SLUD is being sought, and the balance of the property? Ms. Harrison stated that if she understood the GEIS correctly, there was some analysis that there would be potential impact for a fairly low level of development in the rest of that area. Is there anything in the DGEIS that commits either Cornell University or the Town to what is discussed on the balance of the parcel? Town Attorney John Barney stated that Ms. Harrison was correct that there is no commitment made there. Ms. Harrison then stated that it is an incredible challenge to consider an environmental impact statement for a development program that could range from a little under 300,000 square feet to 4,000,000 square feet, the impact assessment needs to be on a worst case scenario. She also had several detailed comments that she wanted to better organize and submit them to the Planning Department in writing. 5 Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 Chairperson Grigorov stated that the Board must consider the worst possible impact:, but also the other possible levels of impact that could occur. Ms. Harrison requested a drawing or several drawings of the possible layout of development to show what it would look like if development was done. Ms. Harrison then stated that as explained by a DEC staff person on the phone, once the Environmental Impact Statement is adopted, it is the words of the Lead Agency, so it seems that if there was anything that the Board was not happy with that the Board would have to work to have it modified until the Board agreed with everything in it 1000. She has some particular concerns about some of the water quality impacts, which she will raise in more detail in writing. Chairperson Grigorov thanked Ms. Harrison for her interest and asked if there was anyone else present who wished to make any comments. Bruce Brittain addressed the Board stating that it was obvious that a tremendous amount of work has gone into the GEIS on Cornell's part and that it is a tremendous step forward. Mr. Brittain then stated that he had only a brief look at the document and that he had concentrated on the traffic issues. Is this a generic general impact statement and therefore we (the public) should not be concerned with specific detail at this point, or is this the one and only impact statement and if he has concerns should he raise them now. Floyd Forman stated that there would be a comment period that would go until November 29, 1993, unless the Board or Cornell University has a problem with extending that date. Mr. Brittain stated that the performance standards that were set up for development in that area and there was a whole list of development standards that any development would have to meet; noise, odor, and glare being notice off site. Traffic should be included in the list of performance standards to be considered within the SLUD itself. Mr. Brittain then stated that there is an assumed annual growth rate of traffic of 0.8 %. That figure is too low for that part of the Town of Ithaca. The County traffic counts, that Mr. Brittain has seen, indicate that it's somewhere from 5 to 18% annual. increase. There was a paragraph put in the document which says that the County is not 100% willing to stand behind its traffic counts which indicates the 5 to 18 percent and therefore the 0.8% was assumed. That was not an adequate response, Mr. Brittain feels that there needs to be a legitimate attempt made to find out what the actual growth rate in traffic is in that general area to get a better idea of what is likely to happen as A J Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 the background traffic increases. Mr. Brittain then stated that he had other comments which were more specific that he would put in writing after taking a better look at he whole document. Chairperson Grigorov asked if there were anyone else present who wished to speak. No one spoke and the matter was brought back to the Board for further discussion. Board member Eva Hoffmann stated that the map of the area was very detailed including individual houses, However, Sugarbush Lane and her house were not located on the map at all. Sugarbush Lane is located just South of the boundaries of the property being discussed at this meeting. There were streets and houses that are located further away from the site than Ms. Hoffmann's house which were on the map and accurate, which is the reason why Ms. Hoffmann expected her house and street to be on the map. The other issue that Ms. Hoffmann noticed was the views and visual impact; Snyder Hill was mentioned, what is meant by that, the hill within the proposed area is Hungerford Hill. Mr. Roscoe stated that Ms. Hoffmann had written him a letter asking for the inclusion of surrounding neighborhood detail and houses; we certainly intended this to show the road and her house. Mr. Roscoe then apologized for missing that. Ms. Hoffmann stated that the GEIS mentioned that there was a spectacular view from Hungerford Hill and that there were no other views that were particularly important. Ms. Hoffmann disagreed with that statement because there is a great view at the stop sign at the intersection of Snyder Hill Road and Pine Tree Road. Board member ,Tames Ainslie stated that Ms. Hoffmann may have been referring to page 2 -176, which talks about views and visual impact. Ms. Hoffmann stated that it seems that the views have been discussed mostly as you see the study area and particularly as you see Precinct 7 from the outside of the study area, but she felt that one needs to consider the views as you see outside of the study area and from inside the study area and from the public roads as well. Ms. Hoffmann then referred to the top of page 2 -177 which says "the most long range and scenic views occur from Snyder Hill where the quality of the view increases toward the top of the hill." Ms. Hoffmann then stated that she would have more comments later. Chairperson Grigorov introduced Ken Gordon as the consultant to the Planning Board regarding the DGEIS. Chairperson Grigorov then thanked everyone for attending this meeting. Town of Ithaca Planning Board Minutes October 19, 1993 AGENDA ITEM. REPORT OF THE TOWN PLANNER. Town Planner Floyd Forman addressed the Board stating that the way the Planning Department normally handles its public hearing material is by sending something to the newspaper on a Monday to be published on a Thursday and the Public Hearing is then held on the following Tuesday. However, the notice had to have been in to the newspaper 14 days ahead of the meeting date to meet SEQR requirements, so you. will see the DGEIS on your agenda again for November 16, 1993 in order to meet the letter of the law. The second item that Mr. Forman wished to discuss was Ithacare. At the Planning Board meeting to be held on November 2, 1993, Ithacare will appear on the agenda for a rezoning discussion. Ithacare is coming before the Town and is requesting a rezoning. The current zoning is Industrial, the same as the adjoining property, which is NCR. They suggested an R9, an R30, and talked about a Special Land Use District. There: will be a very interesting discussion about that. Also, if the Planning Department receives the material necessary, Tom Murray from Courtside will also be on the agenda for November 2, 1993 for a revision to the site plan for Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club. They are talking about changing a portion of the club into a physical therapist area, but the important thing is that there are some real problems in the parking lot with cracking of pavement, some real drainage problems and Dan Walker, the Town Engineer, has given them some ideas about how to alleviate those problems. There being to no further discussion, Chairperson Grigorov declared this portion of the meeting duly closed at 8:26 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS. There appearing to be no further business, Chairperson declared this portion of the meeting duly closed at 8:28 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT. Upon the MOTION,, Chairperson Grigorov declared the October 19, 1993 meeting of the 'Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Respectfully submitted, StarrRae Hays, Recording Secretary Town of Ithaca Planning Board