Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2007-08-21REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, August 21, 2007 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA NY 14850 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Chairperson: Fred Wilcox Board Members: George Conneman, Rod Riha, Alternate Board Member: Hollis Erb. EXCUSED: Eva Hoffmann FILE DATE Howe, Larry Thayer, Kevin Talty and Susan STAFF: Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning (B:OOp.m.); Dan Walker, Town Engineer (7:15p.m.); Mike Smith, Environmental Planner; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Paulette Neilsen, Deputy Town Clerk. OTHERS PRESENT: John Keefe, 102 Humphries Service Building, Cornell University Bruce Akey, Animal Health Diagnostic Center, Cornell University Glynnis Hart 1505 Danby Road CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Wilcox declares the meeting duly opened at 7:05 p.m., and accepts for the record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on August 14, 2007 and August 15, 2007 together with the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of Danby, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the, applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on August 15, 2007, Chairperson Wilcox states the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. Chairperson Wilcox — Welcome everybody. For the record, Hollis will be filling in for Eva Hoffmann who is not here this evening. Chairperson Wilcox announces the first agenda item at 7.05p.m. PERSON TO BE HEARD There was no one wishing to address the Board. Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 7:06p.m. SEAR PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 2 Proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located at Caldwell Road. Chairperson Wilcox — Before you begin, Hollis, there is something you'd like to say at this point... Alternate Member Erb — Yes. We had a discussion about whether I needed to recuse myself, and we decided that the Deans associated with this are not in the direct line of chain of command and faculty salary decisions for me and so, although there are members of the Animal Health Diagnostic Center who are in my department, neither my workspace nor anything about my job will be affected by the building... other than the noise. And it's also true that my committee influenced one little room's designation in the building. They're laughing...and the Attorney for the Town explicitly asked me whether I would be using the room ... bigger laughter... because it's a breast pumping station for working, nursing mothers. And beyond that, I have.... Board Member Riha — I guess you're not going to be using that... Alternate Member Erb — I'm not going to be using it. Chairperson Wilcox — Very good. You all set? I assume you have a presentation to make. John Keefe, 102 Humphries Service Building, Cornell University Bruce Akey, Animal Health Diagnostics Center, Cornell University Mr. Keefe — As I stated, my name is John Keefe, I'm the project manager for the Animal Health Diagnostic Center and tonight, along with Dr. Bruce Akey, the Associate Dean and Director of the Animal Health Diagnostic Center, we're going to present the proposed building for SEQR determination and Preliminary Site Plan Review, Chairperson Wilcox — Before you begin, I will point out to members of the audience, and there really is only one, which is the young lady form the Ithaca Journal... Ms. Brock — No, there's more...they're behind the board... Chairperson Wilcox — Oh, they're behind the board and I can't see them...) .apologize for that ... You are welcome to come up behind us if that would allow you to see the visuals that much easier. So having said that, Doctor, the floor is yours. Mr. Akey — Thank you very much. The room that Dr. Erb was referring to is labeled on our drawings as the "Lactation Room" and several people have confused that thinking it has to do something with cows, and you know, milk quality testing and so on and so forth... laughter... so I'm glad she clarified that for us. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 3 As we've talked about before here, the Animal Health Diagnostic Center has a fairly broad mission which centers around diagnostic services for animals. We do do a little bit of research on animal diseases. Being a University, we have both the research component as well as teaching and diagnostic service component. The teaching is both in -house to students and others in- house, and also a considerable amount of outreach education to producers, to veterinarians and so on on the outside. We're also involved in the arena of animal health policy development in conferring with folks at the State and Federal level on the development of good animal health policy. And then, finally, we work, not only in the animal health arena, but also in the public health arena because many of the diseases that we help find and prevent are also potential public health disease, whether it's rabies, whether it's West Nile virus and so on. Environmental stewardship is also an area that we get involved in. As I'm sure your aware, environmental concerns with runoff from farms and such, one of the potential things in that runoff can be diseases, parasites, bacteria and such and we've been involved, specifically, down in the New York City watershed area with research projects down there to try and ameliorate those kinds of contamination problems. And last but not least, all of that activity serves to promote economic growth of the agricultural industry and companion animal industries and not just in the State of New York but in your community and all over the Northeast and throughout the United States. It's a fairly busy laboratory. We currently get about 140,000 cases a year. Each case can be one tube of blood, it can be 200 or 300 tubes of blood ... that results in about 300,000 samples a year coming in with those 140,000 cases and about 900,000 tests a year being performed in those facilities. We are a founding member of what's called the National Animal Health Laboratory Network which is a nationwide consortium of State and Federal laboratories. They were put together largely as a result of the foot and mouth disease outbreaks in the United Kingdom back in about 2002 when it was realized that the Federal government could not possibly respond to a widespread disease outbreak with a single Federal laboratory. They would just simply be overwhelmed and that's what happened in England during that FMD outbreak, so, instead, they signed up a group of State laboratories to form this National Animal Health Lab Network to allow us to do surveillance for foreign animal diseases as well as a surge capacity should a disease actually occur here. We're the only such facility in this State and animal diagnostic testing and such a broad matter, we're really the only such facility within states are small enough, if they do have a lab, of regulatory testing and by and large, they do testing that we do. only such facility that doe array of diagnostic testing several states. Most of the it's a very small lab, doing n't offer anywhere near the s this kind of and for that New England just a little bit wide array of We have over 5,000 veterinary clinics or practices, or veterinarians throughout the country that are our clients and veterinarians are our primary clients most of the time. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 4 We like to deal directly with them because we depend on them to know best what's going on on the farm, what's going on with their clients, the individual producers, the individual animal owners ... So we deal with them and depend on them to interpret the results, help interpret the results that we come up with, back to the animal owners. As I said, comprehensive veterinary diagnostic services, a whole bunch of different disciplines. ,viruses, bacteria, you name it. So why do we need a new facility. Well, there's a number of reasons that we've been through before. The current facility was built back in.the mid - seventies. When it was built, it was built to handle a staff ... I don't know, about a quarter of what's there now, perhaps. For instance, in the bacteriology lab back then there may have been 5 or 6 people, now there are 25, 26 people in that same laboratory. So, we're outdated in terms of the infrastructure itself. We're certainly crowded in terms of fitting in all of the equipment and all the people that we need for the scope of the work that we do now, and we need to consolidate many of our operations. I think John will show you, perhaps P little bit later, but, currently we have facilities that are not only in the "main" old diagnostic laboratory in the middle of the vet complex, but actually scattered around abut 12 different locations across the campus as well as some off -site locations up by the airport and up on Snyder Hill. I mentioned that we're over crowded, but we also need an increase in what's called bio- containment laboratory space. Over the years, there are more and more emphasis placed on having sufficient containment for different things that you work on and with the advent of things like West Nile virus that have come into the state that needs to be handled under certain conditions. We do that now, but the space we have to do that in now, it meets all those bio- containment requirements, but it's a very small space and we just need more space to be able to do the sort of work that we do. We also have a situation where we are nationally accredited by a national body called the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, which gets really hard to say a little bit later in the presentation ... These folks come in and they do a site visit every 5 years and in fact, we have another site visit coming up from them this November, and one of the things that they look at, as most accrediting bodies do, are your facilities. Are they good enough to provide the workspace you need, the safety you need, and so on and so forth. The last visit that they made, one of the things that they criticized was our space and specifically, they thought it was overcrowded at that point. That was 5 years ago, we've continued to grow a little bit since then. So in order to make sure that we can maintain that national level of accreditations, we need facilities that give us more room, better working environments for our staff and for ourselves. Mr. Keefe — I'll talk a little bit more about the building itself now. The building as designed is approximately 126,000 gross square feet. It's going to be a 3- story..1the proposed building is a 3 -story building and the building height.is about 70 feet. That does not include some of the stacks, which will increase that height from between 10 and 8 feet. It's proposed to be in the northeast corner of the complex up in the area indicated by the circle here. 5 or 6 buildings that were constructed in 1954, cinde shape and not of much use to the University at the are actually State buildings on State land and they prior to us and prior to this project taking place. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 5 College of Veterinary Medicine's Right now there are approximately �rblock construction, not in the best present time. And those buildings are going to demo'd by the State These two shots give you an idea of the aerial view, you can see over here as it exists today and then we have sort of superimposed the new building on the site at this point so you can see that the different very small outbuildings here that will have to be removed. One of the positive aspects that we feet is, in actuality, our building is going to be set back a much greater distance than the current buildings are right now in this area. Back from that rather deep dropoff area behind the building itself. This gives you an idea about what the proposed site plan is. As you can see, the building is an in L shape configuration. It has a penthouse on this portion of the building itself so that adds, that brings it up to 70 feet on... Chairperson Wilcox — Excuse me... Joel, can you do me a favor ... either take a seat someplace on the side, or you can even come back behind us ... YOU 're welcome to grab a chair and come up behind us ... okay ... go ahead... Mr. Keefe — The building also has an all- weather connection to Schurman Hall and the reason, that being, is that 3 of the elements of the diagnostic have to remain in Schurman Hall. Originally the building was proposed to be about 225,000 square feet and with the financing from the State and Cornell University, we couldn't afford to move everybody in there, so the option was to build this all- weather corridor in here to basically connect it to Schurman Hall. We're taking the existing gravel parking lot in this area as well as a number of parking spaces located back in here, co- locating them in that one main parking area which will put, basically parallel to Caldwell Road, so that it is in a similar position where the one is today. One thing we did do is eliminate the exit which currently exists right here onto Caldwell Road, because of the steepness here, we're gonna have people come in, come off of Farrier Road to get into the parking area. Also, it will be landscaped on either side. There will be some core landscaping up in this area which is sort of where the atrium is and the main entrance of the building is as well as some landscaping and great picnic type area out behind the building itself. As I stated, we are pulling the building back from the wooded area and we think that is a positive aspect and we're also creating more of a quad —type entrance in this area. These 2 boards give you an idea of what the building's gonna look like. On my left is, the upper one is the north elevation and the west elevation down here ... over here are the south and the east elevations. We're trying to carry the theme of Schurman Hall and what the rest of the Veterinary School looks like in the coloration of the brick with PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 6 the sort of the tan brick and the red brick which sort of brings that across the other buildings in the area. This is basically a lot of office space and open space that will have a curtain wall glazing protruded aluminum style curtain wall as well as in this area here. So, if you're looking, in the building and you're looking out towards the Fall Creek area or towards the Caldwell Road area, that will primarily be some type of glazing so that it gives the occupants the ability to look out. What we attempted to do in these pictures is give an idea look like and of course, these are both the winter scene. across the bridge, Caldwell Road here, and you're lookii complex. As you can see, in the winter, some portions from that area due to lack of vegetation on the trees, looking, basically, from the east into the west view. That's Caldwell Road, of what the building is gonna This is a view if you're right ig up towards the veterinary of the building will be visible This view right here, you're what you're gonna see along This is the view from 366 and Caldwell Road. We are basically showing you that it's not really going to be too visible, especially in the summertime with vegetation on the trees. Chairperson Wilcox — I'm sorry ... Did you even try to superimpose the building? Mr. Keefe— We tried, it's basically behind this grouping of trees over here. Chairperson Wilcox — Alright. Mr. Keefe— And again, that's the same picture we had at Caldwell Road here ... put this one up ... these were done from the exact same position. Unfortunately, when we took that position, the camera was zoomed, so you're getting more of a zoom picture. This is a normal view of it. When vegetation is on the trees, you can probably get a glimpse of it here and maybe a little bit of it at the tops of the trees there, looking up. Again, this is from over the water filtration plant and the houses down there in Forest Home. Just talk a little bit about the building itself and the floor plan. It's pretty much the second and third floors are almost identical. We've got the second floor over to my right and the first floor on my left. The first floor is basically where the entrance... everything comes in this way. You've got an atrium, an entrance, right here. You've got a night drop off for any people dropping off samples that would come in in the evening, which is fairly infrequently but it does happen on occasion, on those off -duty hours. You have, right here is sort of the heart of the facility which is called the accessioning and that's where any samples would go in to and from there they get distributed through out the building to all the various laboratories, be it bacteriology, mycology, parasitology, toxicology... Right now they have the same accessioning function, but unfortunately, when things come in there, they have to be dispersed to a number of the outlying areas up in Warren Road and Brown Road area, but now, with this location, they would be distributed within the building. This far end here is going to be the area where.. it's the P$ Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 7 necropsy area so that also feeds into the accessioning area with samples, which again, would be distributed throughout the building. This all- weather connector allows any sample coming from the college of veterinary medicine to come in through this way, into accessioning and then get distributed throughout the building in these service elevators here. Around the outside is primarily the area where we keep most at the second and third floor, what we've done is tried to keep and these are smaller labs that need a closed environment tc Offices again along the outer edge and then the main core, open lab and we've gone more to the open lab concept amongst the various workers within the laboratory. Chairperson Wilcox - Where's your room Hollis? Alternate Member Erb - First floor, next to medical records Mr. Keefe- It is right down here. Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you very much. of the offices. If you look what we call °closed labs" work in, along this edge. inner area is a very large to facilitate collaboration Ms. Brock - Hold on a minute. Hollis, you don't have an office in this building, right? Alternate Member Erb - No, no. The room for which my committee asked. I assumed that the chairperson was asking me abut that room. The one that caused the giggling from the audience. Ms. Brock - I just want to be clear. Alright ... It's important that the record be clear that Hollis does not have an office in this building. Alternate Member Erb - I will not have office space nor... Chairperson Wilcox - She already stated that. Ms. Brock - I know, and then you said something which created confusion. Mr. Keefe-- The third floor. Pretty much the same as the second floor with the closed labs here...open lab in here ... offices around the outside...and also some laboratory support space here. This ... down at this end ... this end is our most secure area and that's what Dr. Akey was speaking of. That's the bio- containment area for level 3 down on the end of the 3rd floor here, close to the mechanical penthouse. We've obviously done a number of studies with the building and one of them that we did was our traffic and transportation study. And our traffic engineer did a very, very nice job of putting his appendix together, however, I think it was a bit confusing so I want to PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 8 elaborate a .little bit on it and also the reproduction didn't come out well at all, which is my fault. We believe there is certainly going to be an improved pedestrian... and I'll put the site plan back up ... both pedestrian, bicycle and road network into the area because what we've done is we've added this new road coming in like this, so presently, right now everything comes in Farrier Road, comes into the clinic and the backside like this. This will give us an alternate means for coming in and going out. Alleviate some of the congestion we have in that area. We also plan, in this area, to have 2 sets of bicycle racks capable of holding 30 bicycles each and we do have shower facilities in the building itself for people who want to take alternate modes of transportation in. The parking lot itself will be .a 70- space parking lot in this area and that takes the 60 spaces that were in the original lot plus the 10 spaces used throughout the Vet School and 10 of those spaces will also be reserved for Health Diagnostic Center vehicles itself. We are adding 4 short-term drop -off spaces right here. And the purpose of those, again, is if a veterinarian is coming in or a client is coming in to drop off samples, they'll park there for 15 minutes, bring the sample in and leave. And due to the nature or the remoteness, the fairly remoteness of the parking area, we've established 4 handicap spaces more in closer to the building to accommodate that. Our traffic analysis looked at the fact that we have, currently, a population of 185 people. A hundred and forty -nine of those folks already work and live,. well not live but work somewhere within the complex there. Thirty -six new people will be coming in. They'll be coming in from various locations to the north south east and west. Our transportation engineer was able to identify those individuals and pinpoint where they're coming and determine their most likely route, and his conclusion was there's going to be very, very little change to traffic patterns throughout the University and coming into Cornell. He highlighted that there will be 6 new vehicles paths coming in, probably through Forest Home. This is of course going to be off -set by the fact that the diagnostic lab now no longer has to take all these, take their service vehicle, run the samples up to the 4 labs up in the brown Road/Warren Road area which is 6 to 7 trips a day so that sort of offsets that number there. Dr. Akey, I'll let you talk a little bit about some of the health safety policies and .procedures. Dr. Akey — Thank you John. So we have a laboratory up there now. We're a little bit spread out but we're currently doing the same kind of testing that we will be doing at the new facility and as part of both the University, the College, the University and the wider community, we have and we take very seriously, our safety policies and procedures and responsibilities. We have a departmental Safety Committee. We have written procedures and SOP's for laboratory safety, how we handle samples and agents and so on and so forth. We have the standard laboratory control measures you would expert to find in most laboratories in terms of people wearing safety gear, you know, coats and gloves and so on and so forth, and not taking those things outside the laboratory, not PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 9 eating in the laboratory, so on and so forth... Emergency preparedness...we do have plans for various types of emergencies, I think John pointed out earlier, one of the features of the new building is an emergency generator which is being sized to be able to make. sure that any of the critical equipment in the building, primarily freezers, refrigerators that hold organisms, reagents and things like that, will be able to function in the event of an emergency. We won't lose those things in that case. It's not sized so that the facility keeps operating during emergencies, so it's not like .a hospital operating room where we want to be able to keep the building completely running, we just want to preserve things that would be very difficult to replace or very expensive to replace. All of our employees are provided with safety training and information. In fact they're required to signoff that they have viewed safety videos about different aspects of chemical and other biological lab safety when they're hired and then there are occasional new safety videos and new safety training that comes along for these folks. If we get a new piece of equipment, the representative from the manufacturer generally comes in and sets it up and part of his training includes any safety aspects of handling that equipment. We have a chemical- safety plan for handling what we do use in the way of chemicals throughout the laboratory. We don't have huge amounts of flammable materials or anything like that, we do have some, and again, those are handled according to standard safety guidelines, that the University and the College has. And then bio- hazards. Certainly that's part of the job that we're in, the business that we're in. We are looking for organisms, bacteria, viruses and things like that, but we have in place the procedures for how do we handle those organisms while they are in the lab as well as safe waste disposal through the standard medical waste disposal practices through the university. That includes an alkaline digester which is still trying to be put in place. Currently we have an incinerator as part of our waste - disposal stream, but the College is putting into place an alkaline digester just across the corner form where we're going to be and there is some space, actually, within our new building to put a second alkaline digester into the building so that we'll have our own and will increase the capacity and provide backup capacity for the whole college in that case. Chairperson Wilcox — Before you go on. Explain the digester. Dr. Akey — Explain the digester... Chairperson Wilcox — In laymen's terms. Dr. Akey — You bet ... perhaps you remember the pressure cooker that Mom used to use occasionally, you know, the thing you clamp the lid on it and it heated up until it got really hot, hot enough for steam to blow out of the top of it ... alkaline digester just uses steam, so it uses heat and high pressure, together with alkali, lime, if you want to, think of lye rather essentially. Those ... that combination of the heat, the pressure and the high alkalinity essentially digests everything that's in the vessel and turns it into a soup of carbon, constituent molecules, carbon and so on and so forth ... all you are left with, for instance, from the whole cow, is just the shadow of the bone remnants, bones that PB Minutes 08/23/07 Pg. 10 you can pick up and crumble in your fingers and then a soup mixture that's left over. It completely destroys everything that we know of that's infectious, up to and including things like mad cow disease that are known to be very hard to destroy by other means. So just think of it as a big pressure cooker with a high alkalinity content to it and between the pressure, heat and alkalinity, it breaks down all the organic compounds, including the bugs, the viruses and bacteria that might be in that soup. Board Member Thayer— How big is it physically? Dr. Akey — They come in various sizes. The one that they're planning for, I think it's 5,000 pound capacity, the one that they are planning to put in currently, I'm not sure if that's exactly right, it's approximately that size, to hold up to 5,000 pounds at one time, so, it's and the one's that I've seen are approximately the diameter of this internal space here (pointing to the inside of the u- shaped Boardroom set up) perhaps. Pretty good size. You can put a couple of cows in there at a time, a cow is 1,000 pounds or so, you can put 2 or 3 cows in there at one time, maybe, and digest them down and maybe do another one. Voice from the audience ... Chairperson Wilcox — You may not ask questions. You get your chance later. Dr. Akey — Other questions from the...alright... Ms. Brock — I do have another question, actually ... So is the second digester part of the. ..was that considered under the EIS that was done for the first digester? Mr. Keefe — The second digester is not going to be part of this project because it's not within our budget, we're just allocating space for it. The EIS was done for the original digester, which is part of the Waste Management facility which is soon to be installed. Ms. Brock — So any approvals that you are seeking here would not-include the second digester? You're looking for approval for the space for them... Mr. Keefe — That's correct. Ms. Brock — And then if there is anything in the Town laws that would trigger additional site plan review or anything like that, you'd be coming back for that? Mr. Keefe — Correct. Yes. Ms. Brock — I just wanted to make sure that everybody here understood what's within the scope of what you're being asked to consider tonight. Mr. Keefe — We have conducted all noise, light and wind analysis of the building itself. We used a firm, RWDI, a subcontractor, out of Rolfe Ontario. For our noise modeling of PH Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. I I the building, what we did is we put receptors out at a couple of locations, one at the closest in building.. down at the Forest Home area and due to the topography, we put one on Fairway Drive because that's almost an equal height distance, elevation wise, and we felt there may be some impact there. What we do is we do ambient noise measuring and then we model the noise created by the building, which is primarily the fans and the emergency generator, and we compare that to the NYS Department of Environmental Compliance guidelines and basically their guideline says if it's anything more than a 6 decibel increase, it may have an impact. When we modeled it, and if you're not familiar with decibels, I'm speaking at about 60 decibels, a whisper is 25 decibels and rustling these is about 18 -20 decibels, so 6 decibels is very, very small. Unfortunately, when they did the initial modeling on it, they did not model the generator with sound attenuation on it, in other words, without a muffler, and we've since remodeled it with the muffler on it, and it is below the 6 decibel level, so we feel pretty confident that the building operating at full tilt will not have any noise problems at all. We also did an exterior lighting model of the building and confirmed that there is no large wash of light outside of the building. All the fixtures have cutoffs. The building itself, the interior lighting will all be on occupancy settings so, when people leave the buildings at night, the. lights will automatically go off and they wouldn't come on unless someone else was going inside the building, so, that, from an energy standpoint makes sense, and it also makes sense from the standpoint of keeping the lights off and not creating such a visual effect. So far we've done what we call a numerical exhaust model and in every case, all of the exhausts we are recommending using do meet dilution criteria. Numerical exhaust model is one that is very, very conservative, so if that says we're okay, it really means we're okay. We're also in the process of doing a wind tunnel analysis.' Unfortunately that has not been conducted yet, it should be done in the next week to ten days and what that, the only thing the wind tunnel is gonna do is help us refine our stack heights. We're trying to bring them down to the 10 foot level which is pretty much normal. We have a couple right now set at 18 feet and we think with the wind tunnel modeling, we can show that we don't have to go that high to get dilution criteria. One thing we're pretty excited about is with the building we are trying to get a LEED Silver rating and LEED. is Leadership in Environmental Energy Design by the Green Buildings Council. So we are trying to work as much as possible into the job or into the project that is both environmentally friendly and energy conservation. So some of the things we've looked at in our incorporating is, as I have mentioned, the occupancy sensors. We're also using occupancy sensors for the ventilation because a lab itself, when it's in operation, has to have 100% outside air, 8 air changes an hour, so that's a lot of air running through the building, which means a lot of energy being consumed. So when the lab is unoccupied we can scale that back, so we will have a sensor in there that would scale that back when the lab is not in use. We're looking at also, heat exchangers within the building to save energy. The building is going to have a white roof to avoid any heat islands or reflectivity there. We're also planning a pretty aggressive recycling program. The ... as you can see, the building, there's gonna be a PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 12 lot of asphalt removal in this area and the buildings itself. We're going for a 75% retainage of that recycled material on the site. What we're actually requiring in our contract documents is that any of the asphalt or concrete that the contractor rips up, he's required to grind that up, mix it with the soil and use it for structural fill. So I mean, it costs us a little bit more money, but in the long run, it saves the transportation and the trucking of the materials off the site and it makes a good use of some of the materials that we have because there is some fairly steep grade changes right in this area we have to compensate for. Board Member Howe — John, just a quick question ... Did you just say a Silver designation... is that the next ... I forget the levels ... is that... Mr. Keefe — It ... I guess there is a Platinum, Gold, Silver, Bronze and then just meeting these criteria, so, we're sort of somewhere in the middle. We were just shy of Gold, so we may, I don't want to say we're gonna go for a Gold, but we'd like to. Our current schedule right now is the next step would obviously be the Zoning Board for our height, for being over the required height in the area, come back for Final Site Plan review, finish the design sometime in the December timeframe ... the buildings will be, they have asbestos in them so we will be doing some abatement to them prior to demolition. As I mentioned earlier, those buildings will be demo'd by the State before us taking over, it's not actually part of this project itself. We'd like to begin construction sometime in the spring of 2008 which goes well, should all the snow be melted at that time and complete construction at about 24 -26 months. Chairperson Wilcox — You're done ... Thank you very much. Questions with regard to the environmental review? Board Member Conneman — Well I have questions about the height of the building. You said 70 feet, but then you said 10 or 18 feet higher ... that makes it, in my opinion, a 4- story building rather than a 3- story ... is that right? Mr. Keefe — The only part that's going to be above the 70 foot level will be our stacks, will be exhaust stacks. Board Member Conneman — Just exhaust... Mr. Keefe — Just exhaust stacks. The building itself is... Board Member Conneman — Now there's nothing else up on that roof except exhaust stacks? Mr. Keefe — That's correct. The ?enthouse, the top of the penthouse is 70 feet. Most of the stacks are actually on the 3` floor so they would go that much higher, but there are a couple that are on top of the penthouse which would raise above that 70 foot level. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 13 Chairperson Wilcox — The question (inaudible) or I will ask ... how tall is the building, therefore...to the top of the stacks... Mr. Keefe — The highest will be 88 feet. Board Member Conneman — Eighty - eight... Chairperson Wilcox — Eighty - eight, correct, that's an important number. Board Member Conneman — The problem...) admire lots of things you are doing including the LEED designation. The question is, how that affects the Plantations and how that affects Forest Home? That's a big building. I've been over there for the little ones, and I agree with you, they're crummy buildings that you ought to take down, but, the affect of that on Forest Home and the Plantations, it seems to me, is considerable. That's a big building for... Mr. Keefe — You're referring to the size and the massing of the building? ;Board Member Conneman — Yes, what they will see. And of course, at the present time, the one -story buildings that you have there aren't seen, but... Mr. Keefe — Well, we've tried to depict that to the best of our ability. Obviously the building is not there yet so we've asked the architects to prepare the drawings ... the photographs and the overlays of the drawings that you can see and based on those, you know, obviously big difference summer and winter. Summertime the foliage should hide virtually all of the building. One of the big benefits of this building, it is taller, certainly, but it's being pulled back quite a few feet from the edge and that gives you much more of an angle from down below as you are looking up there. If you're going to see it at all, it's going to be in the wintertime, obviously, when there are no trees on the...no trees...no leaves on the trees, and you might be able to see it from down below to some degree. So, the best we can do at this point to try to estimate what it may look like, and again, this particular shot is zooming in and it gives a little bit of a false impression, but', you notice that from that angle, the building is not taller than the trees, so, although you maybe able to see some of it through the trees, it certainly doesn't loom over the top of the trees or anything like that. Board Member Conneman — I think that's a very tricky picture. Mr. Keefe — I'm sorry?? Alternate Member Erb — But I think some of the question might be how visible will it be from the overlooks that are up high on the top of the bowl around the Arboretum, for example. Looking from there across to the west are there other structures and trees that will obstruct the view of this new building or will this new building be visible...be more visible than some of the existing buildings? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 14 Mr. Keefe — I'm not exactly sure how to answer that other than to say there are other buildings in the complex that are considerably taller than this building will be. Our research building is considerably taller, the teaching hospital itself I think will, is a little bit taller than this is ... so it certainly will not be the tallest building you could see from any of those vantage points. It will be the tallest building close to that edge and certainly it is going to be taller than those little one -story facilities that are there now that are going to be demolished. Board Member Thayer — As a matter of clarification ... do we count the stacks as part of the height of the building? Ms. Brock — Well, I was just looking at that. Our code actually defines height as it relates to structures other than buildings. So we can't look at that definition. We then have definitions for height from lowest interior grade and height from lowest exterior grade and in doing those measurements, our code says that you "measure to the highest point of the roof, excluding chimneys, antennae and other similar protuberances." So in terms of when we're measuring from lowest interior or exterior grade to the roof, we do not include the stacks, would be my interpretation of this. Board Member Thayer — So we're back to the 70 feet. Chairperson Wilcox — Well that's the... okay... so 70 might be the legal height as under our code, but, I think we should ... we can look at it as, if we choose, as at the highest point, it's 88 feet tall. Board Member Thayer — But as far as the Zoning Board goes, I would think that 70 feet would be what they'd be looking at, right? Board Member Conneman —Well, it depends... Board Member Thayer — It depends on our recommendation, I suppose. Ms. Brock — But they'll be looking at, this is the low density residential zone and so the height limitations are that "no building shall be erected to exceed 38 feet in height from lowest interior grade nor 36 feet in height from lowest exterior grade, whichever is lower." So, when they're making that calculation as to what the height of the building is, they will be ... they won't be looking at the height of the stacks, would be my understanding. Board Member Conneman — But the stacks are not shown on that diagram either. That picture. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, they're there. You can't see them. Board Member Talty — They're there. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 15 Board Member Thayer — They're small. Board Member Talty — If you put the other one back up there. Chairperson Wilcox — Which may be on that side or this side, I can't remember ... I think it was... Board Member Howe — While we are waiting for them to do that ... I will just join in with George ... I'm a little concerned about the height and maybe this is one of the cases where at some point we'd want to see balloons flown so we get some sense, because I think pictures can be deceiving. Mr. Keefe — One thing we did do since the sketch plan review was to take one floor off the building. We tried to get it as short as possible. We took a floor off and increased the footprint. Board Member Conneman — I agree with Rod, that's where I was heading. It seems to me that we ought to know what.that would look like. And the other thing is, even the balloons, you got to realize the mass of the building is also a factor. Mr. Keefe — Right, Board Member Conneman — Well I have another item. I guess you have great faith in your engineers but, the second thing, on the long environmental assessment form, under transportation, your engineer can't add. If you go to page 5 if you add all those percentages of employees who come to Cornell, it adds up to 115% and I wondered if there was a mistake there or whether I couldn't read it correctly. It's in the paragraph that says Traffic Operations and Conditions, 2.3.5. 1 had 115°/x. My question is, we have, or we try to respond to the public, always ... we do have a letter from Ed Marx that raises the question about whether there would be more traffic on Dryden Road and Forest Home Road with this new facility under the ... and he suggests that you actually do, he says a transportation study, which I assume he thinks is different than a traffic than a ... I mean a traffic study as opposed to a transportation study. Mr. Keefe — We should ask the questions. I believe he was looking at the fact that we said in our analysis that approximately 185 various employees work at the Animal Health Diagnostic Center and I think he was assuming that 185 new were coming in. Board Member Conneman —.Oh. Okay. So you don't think this will create any more traffic on Forest Home Drive? Dryden Road I'm not worried about. Mr. Keefe — No. Worst case model and he had 6 new people coming through that area. That's the map on page 6 or 7 there, it shows that you look right down, right at the Forest Home area, it gives you the percentage and then the number in parentheses is 6. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 16 Board Member Howe — And as I think you said, that might be offset by the fact that there would be less traffic to your offsite location now, between those facilities. Mr. Keefe — Right. I think you run 6 or 7 trips a day right now. Dr. Akey — That's correct. Board Member Howe — And that probably goes through Forest Home... Dr. Akey — Yes, to get out to Warren Road to those facilities out there, it goes right through Forest Home now and those won't be needed at that point. Alternate Member Erb — Well there's also faculty that make that trip back and forth to get to meetings at the main campus and then go back out to their laboratories, and go back and forth. Dr. Akey — That's correct and obviously that won't be happening either, so. Chairperson Wilcox — So at best it is probably a wash and potentially could be a small benefit but probably so small you couldn't measure it, given the other traffic that already exist. Again, I am less concerned about Dryden Road as well, given the amount of traffic there... Board Member Conneman — Well, it's just that, as you know, Cornell has a Master Plan Committee and that committee has been looking at where cars come and go, how to reduce traffic through neighborhoods and so forth, at least, that's one of the things they say, and Forest Home does have a problem that way and there are ways to mitigate that if you use Plantations Road instead of Forest Home Road to get to campus. What everybody does of course is just go through Forest Home to get to campus. Well, that might be nice for the commute and that might be nice for meeting to go to, but it doesn't help Forest Home any. Chairperson Wilcox — I am one of the people who commutes to the office right through Forest Home. I do it as well. Anybody else? Board Member Riha — I was going to ask you about your stormwater management plan. You indicated that you were going to be somewhat reducing the impervious surfaces, but when you gave the talk, maybe I got this wrong, but I thought you said that right now, the parking area was gravel? Mr. Keefe — It's a hard paving gravel, yes, it's not ... it's considered impervious... Board Member Riha — Oh it is ... okay ... so was there any consideration of permeable pavement, that kind of thing, for the parking lot? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 17 Mr. Keefe — We considered it for various areas and then shied away from it because of snow removal problems. We are decreasing, I think it was 12 %, decreasing the impervious area by 12% is the plan. We've also got, according to the Department of Environmental Conservation, we don't have to restrict the quantity, but we have to treat the quality (inaudible) decreasing it by 33 %. So what we're proposing, and this is a particularly difficult area, we ran into a similar problem in the East Campus Research Facility in that the soil in that area is just silty clay, impervious soil. So we've had to create these underground structures to treat that quality. And we did look at some of the stone dust in certain areas and some of the pervious pavers and frankly, because of the maintenance and the snow removal requirements, we've kind of shied away from that. Board Member Thayer — You mentioned that the roof was going to be white? Is there any place that you can stand and actually see the roof? We don't see it in any of your pictures, but... Mr. Keefe — No, you will not see the roof... Board Member Thayer — You will not see it... Mr. Keefe — Nope... Board Member Thayer — That's a good thing. Chairperson Wilcox — I assume there's a reason it's white. Board Member Thayer — For reflective purposes? Mr. Keefe — Yeah, reflecting and it prevents heat islands from develop. ,energy conservation is what we were looking at when we did that. First time I've done a white roof,. so... Board Member Thayer — Back to the digester. You called it soup, I sort of hesitate to call it that, but, the remains of whatever is left there, is going to go into the wastewater system? Board Member Riha — I was going to ask that, but a clarification ... We're not, we're not in any way voting on that tonight, right? That's what we just clarified, because I was concerned about that too, but then, if they were going to put in this ... the other one has already been approved, the larger one, and if they were gonna put one in this building, they would have to come back... Chairperson Wilcox — Or may have to come back. They may not have to. It depends on whether it exceeds the thresholds which would require them to come back. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 18 Mr. Keefe — Right. Just to clarify. We're planning to use the digester that had already been approved and installed at the Vet College initially. We are leaving just some shell space within our building if we are able to come up with the money to build a second, put a second digester in. Board Member Thayer —Then you'll come back ... I gotcha ... okay. Chairperson Wilcox — I'm sorry, I've got to put this in perspective here ... what's the estimated total cost of the building... roughly. Mr. Keefe — $80.5 million. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. $80 million. What's one of these digesters cost? Dr. Akey — About $2 million. Chairperson Wilcox — Ooohh. Okay, now I understand. Dr. Akey — Yeah. Chairperson Wilcox— Now I understand. I figured about $100,000, you know.... Dr. Akey — I wish. I'm afraid so. The current digester, the one that's being put in, it will be right here and our building will be right there, so, there will have to be some movement of items across the alleyway there. It would, obviously, be nice to have one in the Health Diagnostic Center to avoid that travel but at this point in time, we can't afford that. Board Member Riha — And yours would be smaller, than the one that's... Dr. Akey — I'm not sure. The space that's being reserved is for one approximately the same size as what's down there. Actually, it could be a little bit smaller because of, well, various considerations but, it certainly won't be any bigger than the one that's already being put in down there. Mr. Keefe — And it is only a space for the vessel itself because it will be totally connected to the other one through the underground, so, that's where all the mechanicals would be...it would be like a satellite almost. Board Member Thayer — Are there any State or Federal guidelines for the safety on the 3rd floor? Dr. Akey — Yes in fact, there are. CDC publishes strong guidelines on that constitutes bio- safety levels 2, 31 4, etc and those are very much being figured in to what's being done here. In fact, the architectural firm that we have, all they do is architecture for PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 19 laboratories, including bio- safety 3 and 4 laboratories. So they are very familiar with those requirements at the State and Federal level. Board Member Thayer — So they police that with you? Dr. Akey — Absolutely, and we have our own folks who do it as well. We have an internal bio- safety officer who is reading these plans as they go along and making sure that they meet the standards as far as the University is concerned, as well, in case the University standards are stricter than any State or Federal standard. Board Member Talty —So I am to understand that there will be nothing above a level 3 going into this facility? Dr. Akey— That's correct. We don't want anything.... Board Member Talty — I understand, but things change ... And are there any plans currently underway that would allow you to have something increased to a level 4 or above? Dr. Akey — No sir, definitely not and actually, you can not build a level 4 laboratory without the federal government's approvement in this country, so, we have no plans and no desire to go to that state. The level -3 stuff that we want is for the safety of our folks and your folks for things that are already coming through the door on a routine basis. If the situation were to arise where we got a sample in and we even suspected it was actually a level 4 pathogen, the whole place would shut down, everything would be wrapped tight, we would contact the Federal government and we would have nothing more to do with it except screwing the cap back on the container, we're not touching it, so... Board Member Talty —The other question is, you said you were putting a generator in, right? Dr. Akey — Yes. Board Member Talty — As a safety mechanism in the event that power were to be interrupted, my question is, what is the energy to be used to run that generator? Dr. Akey — It's meant to be a diesel generator, I think, at this point, with a tank under it. I think it's being set at 8 — 12 hours. Board Member Talty — Okay, so diesel fuel will be the primary, or only energy to run that generator, correct? Dr. Akey — Correct. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 20 Chairperson Wilcox — While we're on the subject, level 3, safety level 3 substances, for lack of a better word, are currently being tested on the Cornell campus or in Cornell University research buildings today... Dr. Akey — That's correct. Chairperson Wilcox — So that leads me to the question, what can you do in this building that you can not do in the existing buildings? Dr. Akey — Mostly it's just a matter of how much space you have to do it in. We currently do have ... the College of Veterinary Medicine has only 2 bio- safety level 3 rated facilities. One we have for West Nile virus diagnostic work, there's another one that's a research lab for tuberculosis work that's being done. Chairperson Wilcox — Is there, going back here, was it on Game Farm Road, the Raptor Facility... Dr. Akey — There is a separate, up on Snyder Hill Road, up by the other institute... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah that's right... Dr. Akey — There is a separate facility that the College is looking at remodeling to gain some DSL3 space, up there. That's actually right next to where our current West Nile lab is located. It's up on the hill there. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, and there's another facility where you can diagnose level 3... Dr. Akey — Well, the rest of the laboratory currently is bio- safety level 2, in general, however, you can, under the guidelines, Federal and State guidelines, you can handle level 3 organisms in a level 2 environment if you are inside a bio- safety contained hood, that has laminar flow and so forth and so on, so, we can deal with things in there if we need to. We prefer to not only have the hood to work in, but for the whole room to be bio- safety level 3. Chairperson Wilcox — Because I am thinking if the reduction in the service runs from the outlying facilities, you've got some pretty nasty stuff in those vehicles being carted back and forth... potentially nasty stuff. Board Member Howe — I have a question about exhaust modeling that occurred by RWDI Consultants... If I am reading their chart ... it says that there is the potential for one of the stacks to be 25 feet above the penthouse. It lists different ... I might just be reading this incorrectly, but it has different feet above the penthouse that some of these things might need to be, and for E, it says potentially 25 ... am I reading that incorrectly? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 21 Mr. Keefe.— You're correct, but that actually is not going to be installed in this building because that would actually be for the tissue digester so we are not putting that in at all at this point in time. And in that case, when you get to something that would just be absurdly odd looking to the building, we would go to an air reducing centrifical fan like a strobe, which would bring that fan down to about 12 feet, rather than that centrifical fan which is what they were modeling. But exhaust stack E will not be in the building. Chairperson Wilcox — Dan, welcome back ... We have your memo dated the 13th ...anything you'd like to add to that in regard to... Mr. Walker — No. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. When they were here for site plan review, one of our primary concerns was the slope behind, which has now been identified as UYA 131, 1 think it is ... You're comfortable with the facilities that would be in place during construction? Mr. Walker — As long as they follow the plans that they are talking about... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah. Mr. Walker — And since they've pulled it back from the slope, that will be helpful. The main concern I have is that they monitor what the contractors do because sometimes, what's drawn on the plans, if you don't watch the contractors, but I think they will be watching the contractors very closely. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, if you put up the silt fence, and then you drive, I mean, we've all see it, I think, the silt fence is put up, but the next day it's got a hole in it or silt is flowing underneath it, yeah, yeah..: Mr. Walker — I know that they will be watching them closely because we will be watching them closely. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Susan, anything from you? Ms. Ritter — there's a couple ... Susan had pointed out a couple numerical... But I guess I wanted to, before we get into, you know, these kind of little details, you guys had mentioned that you want a balloon test... Chairperson Wilcox — Two people have mentioned that, yes. Ms. Ritter — Yes, and I am wondering where we're going with that because that's part of the SEQR approval, obviously. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. That's fine. George and Rod had mentioned that... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 22 Board Member Conneman — I think it's only fair to the people .of Forest Home to show them that your pictures are correct. Show me too, but, I mean, that's ... I think that makes a lot of sense because it is an awfully big building to shove in that kind of a place. I realize the other buildings are higher, but they are in a different spot where you can't see them. Chairperson Wilcox — Now, I'm going to put you on the spot. When you say "balloon test" what specifically would you want to see? Board Member Conneman — Well, I'm not an expert on that but there are experts who do balloon tests... Chairperson Wilcox — Well, what do you think we are missing? Let me ask you what you think we're missing? Board Member Conneman — We're missing the height of the building and the height of the exhaust. On that picture it shows zero, and you said that's accurate. Rod and I are saying we'd like to see it. Board Member Thayer — The exhausts are on there, but you just can't see them. Board Member Conneman — Well, that's... Chairperson Wilcox — Obviously it's a reproduction and it is...clearly they put the building there and are showing... Board Member Conneman — We've .done it before, on other buildings... Chairperson Wilcox — Right, but what ... I'm just trying to get you to point out what is it we're trying to get out of this balloon test? Board Member Conneman — I'm trying to see what the view, what the visual impact of the building is on the Plantations and Forest Home, Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, so you would be interested in having the balloons put up, potentially, at the corners of the building... Board Member Conneman — And maybe at the middle, since it's long. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, and then you would want to have pictures taken from various sites ... Just on East Hill? From South Hill? This is where I am going. You can't just say I want a balloon test. If you are going to say you want more, we have to say what we want. That's important. Board Member Conneman — There are also experts who know how to do balloon tests and I don't, except where we have used them before. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 23 Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, I know, but if we sit here and say, I've seen this Board before say, we want more visuals, and then they come in and they give us visuals, and some member of the Board will say 'But how come they didn't give me one at this intersection' or 'how come you didn't...' We've done it. So, my point is, if we want more, we have to state what we want. Board Member Howe — I think the concern here is primarily the Plantations, the lower part ... I mean, they've got the picture there ... I mean, I think it's that view right there that's the concern. Board Member Riha — I know, so I want a clarification, I mean, if the balloon test comes back and shows that's the view ... is that acceptable or unacceptable? Chairperson Wilcox — The balloon won't show the mass, it will show the height. Board Member Riha — Right. Let's just say that picture is a fairly accurate representation, and the balloon test ... you 9re saying that somehow that picture may be off.. so is it that that you object to, or if that is all that the balloon test showed, then it'd be okay? Alternate Member Erb — I think this picture from the north is very reassuring. My concern is more a view of you standing to the east and looking across the bowl of the Arboretum. Board Member Conneman — I'd like to see both because ... and I... and that's what the test would show. It seems to me you'd have to put a balloon on the other side of the building too, right. Alternate Member Erb — I think if you ... I think....) have no concern whatsoever from the south, because of the mass of the current buildings, between the Veterinary Medical Center, the East Campus Research Facility and the Vet Research Tower, and the rest of Cornell, the views from the west and the south are already blocking this view. I think that if you were to come up to the left of the picture over there, and go across... Chairperson Wilcox — Who's left? Alternate Member Erb — That ... look at that picture and look across to where Mr. Smith is seating... Chairperson Wilcox — Yes, thank you... Alternate Member Erb - ....okay, that becomes the top of the bowl of the arboretum... Chairperson Wilcox — Top of the sled hill. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 24 Alternate Member Erb — of the sledding hill and some of the overlooks and down at Mr. Smith's feet are some more residences and Forest Home and this view doesn't show what it would be like for them. I strongly suspect that for the homes down to the ... going towards the east, that the hill and the woods are going to completely block the view, which is why I keep mentioning the overlooks and things from the top of the Arboretum bowl. They already have the big water tower there and some other things. Chairperson Wilcox — Right. We understand that the balloon test.. Board Member Riha — So you're just saying for the users of the Plantations..: Alternate Member Erb — I'm saying for the users of the Plantations ... I believe the structure will be hidden for the people who live to the east along there, I completely believe that it will be hidden. Chairperson Wilcox — The advantage of the balloon test is it allows you to get an actual picture of how high the building will be from the various positions rather than creating this visual image. Unfortunately, what it doesn't do is give you the impact of the mass, and that's what you lose is the mass. Mr. Keefe — We did do, when we decided to take the pictures, shots from out here, and there was actually no visibility at all. My folks went out there, and that's why we didn't even bother to present them because this area is actually fairly low when you compare it to ... this road goes, I used to run it a lot of times, it goes up quite steeply and then... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, but you realize, showing us that there was no visibility is a great thing, rather than sitting here saying that it's not visible. Yeah. So, what's the Board's feeling? Board Member Thayer — I'm satisfied with the pictures that they've presented. Board Member Talty — I think that's a great... Board Member Riha — Yeah. Board Member Thayer — excellent, excellent pictures. Board Member Talty — ...as good as I've seen. On any project. Board Member Thayer —Yeah, I agree. Chairperson Wilcox — At least they took it in the winter and not.. .they used a winter photo and not... Board Member Thayer — Yeah exactly... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 25 Board Member Talty — Summer and winter, they came with both. Alternate Member Erb — Yeah, and I am only mentioning the bowl of the Arboretum just because it's the only possible place left, but I don't have a big strong concern. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, if it was site plan related, it would be one of those things here I'd say, you know, well we'll grant preliminary approval subject to doing some visuals so we can see. But this is environmental review, so we better make the decision now, whether it's important to the Board as a whole to do a balloon test and get photographs taken from various points in and around. Board Member Conneman — It's important to the community. Chairperson Wilcox — It's important to the community... that... Board Member Conneman — And it's part of SEAR. Chairperson Wilcox — It is part of SEQR, that is correct, it is part of SEQR to judge the visual impacts and I ... the members of this Board have collectively issued, you know, have said that they have judged the impacts and that that is sufficient. You and Rod, disagree. Board Member Conneman — We're allowed to vote no. Chairperson Wilcox — You're allowed to do whatever you want. Board Member Howe — It's just that sometimes I have a little mistrust of pictures, because it might not tell you the full picture. I still, I think part of my reaction is that when I still go up Pine Street and still, the new Cornell Office tower, it has much more visual impact than I thought we thought it was going to have. So now that the building is built, I'm like, wow, that's a totally different... Chairperson Wilcox — Right as you come up the hill and right as you go around the corner, you can see behind, the size of the building, yeah, and you see it for a brief moment, and then it hides behind the Sizer building. Alternate Member Erb — May we consider that where the stacks are being shown on A1(4) is pretty much where they are going to be. That they're not going to be able to creep closer to Caldwell Road and become more visible? Chairperson Wilcox — When members of the Town go out and inspect developments, or site plans, to ensure that they are in conformance with the approved plan, would you look at the location of the stacks on top of the buildings? Would someone do that? mean, I don't know the answer to that and maybe it would be dependent upon the individual or whether it was important to a specific project or not. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 26 Mr. Smith — I think the building permit needs to match the plans that are being approved here. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, no, I understand that, but does one go so far as to ensure that the stacks are located on the rooftop exactly where the plans showed they would be. I mean, does it go that far before issuing a building permit? I mean, I don't know, that's why I'm asking. Alternate Member Erb — But I'm just asking because if they were to creep towards Caldwell Road, towards the Caldwell Road edge of the building, they would slowly become more visible. I don't care if they creep towards the center of the complex. Chairperson Wilcox — See, my understanding is that they have to build what we approve and that's ... and that's... mostly it's the outside of the building and the impacts that are caused by it and you know, the landscaping has to go where they said they were going to put it and they've got to use exactly what they said etc. etc, etc. . ... Do we check where the stacks are on the top? I assume somebody does. Ms. Ritter — I assume the stacks are in very specific locations. Chairperson Wilcox — It'd have to be because of the interior architecture. Ms. Ritter — So unless they are going to reorganize things within the buildings themselves and they kind of change this, then I would think the stacks would be where they are. Chairperson Wilcox — because you have to leave room in the building itself in order to vent all those gasses and other up to... Ms. Ritter — Yeah, you don't just arbitrarily put stacks up. Alternate Member Erb — I assumed that too but you know, I just want to make sure because even if 70 feet is the legal definition, the stacks are going to be, potentially, part of the visual impact if they were in the wrong places. Ms. Ritter — But if there is a concern about where the stacks are because perhaps there would be another round of modifications that would occur with a big project. Internal things that may not be site plan review, so if you wanted to ensure that if there was a big change in where the stacks were located, that... Chairperson Wilcox — We could... absolutely. We could condition... let's assume we get beyond the environmental review ... we could condition preliminary approval, and any other approvals, such that any change to the exterior, any of the four basic elevations, have to come back to this Board. We could do that because we believe it has a potential impact given the site where it's being built and it's proximity to either Forest Home or other areas. We could do that, absolutely. Yeah. And that would allow, if they PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 27 make changes to the external part of the building, they have to get approved, yeah, rather than letting the zoning thresholds take over. Ms. Ritter — You might want to be somewhat specific because with a big building like this, there might need to be some modifications that you guys do not want to see. So you might want to be specific as to what concerns you would have. At least that's my understanding, with a big building. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, the concern is the location and the height of the stacks. Anything that changes the height or the location of the stacks. Board. Member Thayer — In this front picture, it doesn't appear that these stacks are 18 feet above the penthouse. Mr. Keefe — That's correct. Even actually on the ... not on top of the so they are actually even lower. about 8 feet. in the new plans where you see 1.4, those stacks are penthouse but on top of the 3rd floor roof of that wing, So what you'll see above the 70 foot level is probably Mr. Walker — Is the picture on the front the same as... Mr. Keefe — No. Mr. Walker — Okay, so don't go by the picture because it's not right. The cover is not what you are seeing and I'm sure this cover has been on there for several iterations. Now, the penthouse plan A1.4... Chairperson Wilcox — Hold on, I gotta stop you because I am overhearing George... George, say out loud what you just said... Board Member Conneman — I said that this picture is not what you're gonna build. Chairperson Wilcox — The one on the cover of this book. Board Member Conneman — On this book. It's not what you're gonna build. Chairperson Wilcox — This is important. This is an important point. Is that (pointing to the large picture on the easel) a picture of what you're gonna build? Dr. Akey -- Yes Mr. Keefe — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 28 Mr. Keefe — And the renderings that we gave you, the 11 x17 color pictures is what the building looks like today. Chairperson Wilcox — Accurately looks like what you will be building: Okay. Okay. Sorry. Just want to make sure. Go ahead. Mr. Walker — I guess, when we go through site plan I'm assuming that the level of the design development is ... that the floor plan is set at this point? So A1.4 may have some minor revisions but will not have any major revisions on it, prior ... when we get the building permit application... Mr. Keefe — That's correct. Board Member Conneman — I'm not questioning that's the building you're gonna build, I'm questioning what it looks like from afar. That's what I'm questioning. Of course you're gonna build that, you've got architectural plans for it, I mean... Mr. Walker — I can be sure ... I can reassure the Planning Board that if these are the footprints that you are approving and these are the basic building layouts that you're approving, that when the actual building permit review process starts, I will make sure that the code enforcement officers look at these plans and then compare them to the actual building permit application plans and can concur that they are the same drawings. If there is a difference, then they will come back to you and we will talk to the applicant to see what's going on. But I am assuming at this point you've already spent way too much money to change designs, right, and I ... will those stacks move 6 inches one way or the other... Chairperson Wilcox - Sure... Mr. Walker — It's life, in construction, but, basically, they are showing that the stacks are north. of column line 8. As long as they are north of column line.. on the north side of column line 8, the Board's satisfied that they are in the same place. Mr. Kanter — Section 270.191 of the Town Code says that if, in the judgment of the Director of Planning there is a significant change in the aesthetic appearance of the site plan, compared with what was approved by the Board, the Planning Director can send it back to the Planning Board. We've had that provision since Big AI's... Chairperson Wilcox — Oh yeah, that's right ... post Big Al's ... Big AI's law, thank you. Okay. Susan, the question comes back to you with regard to the technical changes. Ms. Ritter — Yeah, there were just some ... I mean, the numbers are pretty small in terms of the initial amount of impervious, and then the after completion impervious. But there was some discrepancy and that was brought to my attention. So I made a mistake in my Part 11 but I think you guys might have made a mistake and I'm not sure which is PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 29 correct. Soon page 3 of Part 2 of the LEAF ... under Site Descriptions ... number 2 ... and it talks about ... and this may be... Chairperson Wilcox — So where are you Sue ... let me just make sure...oh...okay... Ms. Ritter -- ...reports the numbers of... the amount of the meadow and brush land presently and then after completion... so currently it's 1.91 and after completion, 2.36 and then as far as impervious material, it's 2.65 and then after completion it's 2.20...well, what I wrote up was different because in the ... John, in the LEAF, attachment 3, the stormwater management section reports something different and I sort of interchanged what I saw in there with what I saw in this page form ... So on the stormwater management, that person said currently, under existing conditions, 2.2 acres is impervious and the new project will have 1.91 ...they kind of transposed some numbers, and I guess I need to know, for the record, which one is correct, if you know... Mr. Keefe — The numbers in the LEAF are what we scaled it off the CAD drawing, that's what we have... Ms. Ritter — Okay. So I guess I'd go with number 2, that that's the correct information, so I would correct what's in my description, Part 2, under impact on water. Because I was using some of those numbers. I still used the right amount of change in impervious coverage, .45, but I was using the wrong numbers from the stormwater section. Chairperson Wilcox — So what would you change? Specifically. Ms. Ritter — So what I would change then, so nothing is changed in theirs, I would change page 3 of mine, in the first paragraph, where I state 22 acres and then 1.9 acres in the second line ... I would change that to 2.65 and 1.91 becomes 2.20. Chairperson Wilcox — Hold on ... so 2.2 becomes... Ms. Ritter — 2,65 ... and 1.91 becomes 2.20...1 think that's the only place I recorded those actual numbers. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Alright ... I've made the change on the form ... on the original. Ms. Ritter — And then just another ... I think, again, on the LEAF Part 1 of the application form, under Project Description B, so that's on page 5 ... it would be number 1, Physical Dimensions and Scale of Project, but it's F, number of off - street parking spaces existing, there would be 60 but I think proposed is now 78. So I would change the 60 to 78. Ms. Brock — For proposed. Ms. Ritter — For proposed. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 30 Ms. Brock — Is the existing 60 correct or is it existing... Ms. Ritter — 70 ... that's right... Ms. Brock — 70 is what's correct? Chairperson Wilcox — 70 existing, 78 proposed. Ms. Ritter — Yes. Ms. Brock — Because there was quite a discussion in Attachment 2 of the LEAF on parking, Attachment 2, page 4, section 2.3.4 which indicates there are 60...50 existing parking spaces plus another 10 scattered around which makes a total of 60: Mr. Keefe — Which should be 60, changed to 70. Ms. Brock — Okay, so it should be 60 spaces plus another 10 scattered around to make a total of 70 that are going to be eliminated and then another 70 space lot built, plus two 4 -space lots... Chairperson Wilcox — I'm sorry. I'm confused now. Somebody state this. Mr. Keefe — There's a 60 -space lot and then 10 spaces scattered for a total of 70 existing. Chairperson Wilcox — So the number of off - street parking spaces existing is 70, 60 in a lot, 10 other. Mr. Keefe — Correct. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, and when you're done, or the proposed number is 78 ... the net gain is 8 ... correct... Mr. Keefe — Correct. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Board Member Riha — Sue, another question I had ... on page 3 of the long environmental assessment form, question 5 said approximate percentage of proposed project site with slope 0 — 10 % were 100 %, but then somewhere. in there you mention that there is a very steep area and yet... Ms. Ritter — I guess when I did the calculations, I saw that they said 10% and my calculation was in the 10 -12 but I think they might have better data than I did, so maybe should have just left it at 10, so as not to confuse things. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 31 Board Member Riha — Okay. It seemed like there was a slight amount of area that slopes, so, but they're going to fill it right ... I think... Ms. Ritter — Off of Caldwell Road. Chairperson Wilcox — It won't even be impacting that area at all. So the slopes in that area are... yeah... the question is not phrased I think, to ask what every potential slope is on the site, it's what is the overall... yeah, it's a tough one ... Sue, you all set, for now... Ms. Ritter — I'm all set. Chairperson Wilcox —What areas want to talk a little bit more about you would require a contractor to existing buildings and potentially which is a great idea, for lots hundreds of truck trips carting th removed from or brought to the utilized on site? haven't we addressed. I mean, I want to bring up.. .1 fill, cut and fill and demolition... You've mentioned that take the construction debris, i.e. the demolition of the asphalt and other surfaces... crush and use on site... of reasons, one of which is eliminating potentially e stuff away ... Is there any cut or fill that needs to be site, assuming that the construction debris will all be Board Member Talty — I don't think they said all, Fred. Chairperson Wilcox — You're right. Mr. Keefe - There certainly will be some portions that can't be due to. the condition of the asphalt or the condition of the concrete and the like. I have not done a ... I have not had the desire to do a full take up of where the cut and fill is yet, but my feeling is that it's gonna be minor because, basically the elevation where the buildings are now is going to be the elevation of the new building. There's gonna be some movement over at the parking area where we tried to get those grades correct to avoid any sediment or erosion problems. Chairperson Wilcox — When you say minor ... can you quantify that in some way. Mr. Keefe —The parking lot itself... Chairperson Wilcox — No I'm talking about the number of truck ... when you say minor, are you talking 1,000 cubic yards? I'm trying to get you to put... Mr. Keefe — I can't give you an exact number at this time because we haven't done a cut and fill analysis. Chairperson Wilcox — Because you could think 300 truck trips is minor where I might think that's a major impact. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 32 Board Member Riha — I thought there was an inclusion of the number ... you guys had estimated the number of truck trips... Chairperson Wilcox — How many would be saved by ... yeah, there's some estimates of number of truck trips that would be saved by using the ... by pulverizing and mixing in the construction debris on site. I would be concerned, and I think Susan mentioned it, Susan Ritter mentioned it, that any construction, any fill brought to the site or any construction debris removed from the site has to go east, excuse me, has to go south to Route 366 and then from there... Lighting... some concerns about lighting were brought up in the environmental impact statement... Board Member Thayer —Their lighting... their cuts look fine. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Not every ... I'm trying to remember here ... not every light was shielded properly? Mr. Smith — It wasn't clear, looked like they had the full or you couldn't tell exactly fr within the fixture ... If it was in higher up into the fixture it information on that. There wasn't shield and the om the cut sh( one location it probably did.. enough information. Some of them didn't (inaudible) .., either they were tilted slightly %et where the light bulb was actually placed probably didn't need it but if it was a little bit .I think we're just looking for a little more Chairperson Wilcox — Is there something in the resolution as drafted. Or we can get to that... Mr. Keefe — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — Lighting details. I am somewhat stumped by the DEC regulations with regard to stormwater runoff on a site that's being redeveloped as opposed to a new site ... I read what was written, I understand it, but I'm not sure I agree with it. Ms. Ritter — Redevelopments occur often in urban city areas and there is not a lot of room for detention or retention facilities.... Chairperson Wilcox — Tough luck is what I say... Ms. Ritter — Well, no I think the attitude is that it is better to do a redevelopment than to go out in the woods and level a natural area to put in a building, so, to give them a break and to take the understanding that they can not hold all that water on site, the regulations say, as long as you're in ... YOU 're not creating more impervious surfaces as part of redevelopment, they are not required, as far as state law, to construct holding capacity for stormwater. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 33 Mr. Walker — Currently, on this site, it's all owned by Cornell and it all ends up in Beebe Lake one way or the other. There's not a major drainage problems with the Town roads as far as volumes. They will be mitigating the flows because they are going to be treating some of the stormwater in the sand filters which will reduce the flow off the site as it's being treated, so they are providing some volume, plus the reduction in the impervious surfaces will mitigate... will not increase any discharges from the site. Chairperson Wilcox — As you said in your memo, you're satisfied. Mr. Walker — I'm satisfied. recycling of materials, bec be in the place where you in the whole ... and this is facilities, such as Precinct The only thing that I want to make sure of ... on this ... on the ause very often you recycle materials but they can't physically have to work to make the hole before you can put them back a pretty tight site ... are there any plans to use other Cornell 7 for temporary storage... Mr. Keefe — We certainly could if we needed to. Mr. Walker — Okay. That's not stated in this plan at all and I'm not sure if that's covered.. We created a staging area for contractors and this Board approved a staging area over in Precinct 7 but it was mostly for new materials and it was not for so much recycled materials...l guess it gets into the situation where if you start putting more than 50 yards of material someplace else, you need a fill permit form the Town, unless it's been approved by this Board as part of the site plan approval. And right now, the only construction area we have in front of this Board is within this site, so, Chairperson Wilcox — How many cubic yards? 50? Mr. Walker — 50. Chairperson Wilcox — Five truck loads. Alternate Member Erb — Where is this staging site? Mr. Walker — Well, right now, the only site I see is the site that we're looking at here. Alternate Member Erb — Right, but the one to which you're referring. Mr. Walker — It's over on Palm Road, near the library annex building, there's... it's... the paint shops are there I believe ... they previously ... a contractor's staging area, with staging areas and gravel surfaces and material lay -down areas, temporary storage areas for different projects on campus. Alternate Member Erb — So that would be using Caldwell Road's lighted stop- lighted connection on paved roads across 366 ... and they would not be going towards the residential areas at all? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 34 Mr. Walker - They will probably be parking contractor's cars over there so they can go back and forth with a shuttle bus type of set up because that's why they created that, that's a good plan. I guess ... I don't remember if that approval included temporary storage of fill materials" And... Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not sure we would have given a blanket approval... Mr. Walker — I don't know that we would have. I know that it was laid out so that they could have 2 or 3 different contractors set up with fencing between them to separate the projects, and the flexibility to move their fences around was built into that review, so... Chairperson Wilcox — So suffice it to say right now, they may not be able to move, essentially, no more than 5 truck loads of fill from that site to an off site facility without the permit. Mr. Walker — Within the Town of Ithaca. Chairperson Wilcox — Within the.Town of Ithaca, without a permit... Mr. Walker — Without a fill permit. Chairperson Wilcox — Without a permit.. And that either can be dealt with as part of this site plan approval... Mr. Walker — If they knew what they were going to do, we could do it as part of this site plan. If not, then we just...) want to make sure you have enough lead time so if you want to make a pile of 10,000 cubic yards of crushed stone that you are going to be bringing back on the site, it's just going to have to sit there for 6 month, somewhere in Precinct 7, just keep in mind that you are going to have to have the lead time to come to this Board to have the approval to do that and to the Zoning Board of Appeals, because, up to 250 yards I can approve, up to 2,500 yards the ZBA approves without this Board reviewing it, and over 2,500 yards this Board reviews it before it goes to the ZBA for a permit. Just so you're clear on that, because I don't ... And if your hauling it off the site, then I don't care, .because I don't have to enforce anything. Alternate Member Erb — But I'd care for the traffic through Varna. Mr. Walker — They probably wouldn't go through Varna, they'd probably go down Gamefarm Road and then ... then Ellis Hollow Road ... well, those are our issues... Mr. Kanter — Is it likely that you will know more specifically the volumes involved you come back for final site plan approval? Because they could be addressed of final site plan approval. Mr. Keefe — Perhaps at that time we could take a deeper look at that. before as part Mr. Walker — That would be helpful. I think the Palm Road site.. opportunity there for storage and that's probably the best place to because there's not much of a haul... Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else? Board Member Thayer — Let's do the public hearing... PB Minutes 08/21/07 P& 35 there's a lot of keep it for you Chairperson Wilcox — We'll get there. I just want to make sure we've covered all the basis regarding the environmental review. Ms. Brock — Fred, I had a couple of questions of EAF ... on the LEAF Part 1:..First, if l calculate the number correctly, because we are using the numbers in the Par 1, towards the beginning of the packet, for the amount of impervious surfaces both presently and after completion, it looks to me as if there is a 17% decrease in impervious surfaces, not 1.2 %, which was stated in your stormwater report... Mr. Keefe -- That's right. Ms. Brock -- ...okay. On page 5 of the LEAF, there's a question on how many acres of vegetation would be removed from the site and you said zero acres ... is that correct? I just wanted to make sure because I think there's something in the Part II which said there would be some small areas of vegetation that would be removed. Mr. Keefe — Yeah... obviously less than an acre... Ms. Ritter — There were a couple of small sites and I reported that in my section, our section of the LEA... Mr. Keefe — It might not be necessarily be removed from the site. It will be stockpiled and set aside and used as groundcover again, normally is the case. Ms. Brock — Well the question is how many acres of vegetation, parenthesis, trees, shrubs, ground covers, will be removed from site. Mr. Keefe — To the best of my knowledge right now it will be zero acres. Ms. Brock — Okay. So Sue, does that... Ms. Ritter — I'm sorry... Ms. Brock — So you're comfortable with that answer? Ms. Ritter— What did you say? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 36 Mr. Keefe —.That you strip the topsoil and you stockpile it anyway. It would be stripped right with it... Board Member Riha — You mentioned that there is going to be several trees cut down... Ms. Ritter — Yeah, it was just ... I forget why I said that ... I guess I was just saying that overall it seemed like there was going. to be an addition of vegetation but I noticed 2 areas on one of the many millions of maps that you gave us... Mr. Keefe — There are some trees that will be removed, yes. Ms. Ritter — Yeah, there was a small area of identified vegetation removal and it was sort of in the area maybe north of the parking lot. So I just reported that I saw while that was being removed, it seemed as thought there were additional areas of increased vegetation but it might ... but they were quite small so it could have been that it was less than... Board Member Riha — It would be less than a 10th of an acre... Board Member Talty — Why don't you put less than a'/ of an acre... Ms. Ritter — I (inaudible),, .given that these numbers are so small to begin with, to point to what..I Board Member Talty — I think what you're saying is zero is zero...right Susan? Ms. Brock — Well I just want ... when you read it, on it's face, there appears to be an inconsistency, so I just wanted an explanation... Board Member Talty — Less than a '/ acre. Ms. Ritter — You need it to say less than .1 or something like that, might be more appropriate. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Board Member Thayer — Sounds good. Ms. Brock — And on page 6, number 9, numbers of jobs generated after project is complete and there is nothing filled in there. Mr. Keefe — I should have hand written it in there, that's the problem with the PDF, you can't, it won't let you put anything in there. Number of jobs after the project is completed is zero. PH Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 37 Board Member Talty — That's not what I thought you said. I thought you said that there was going to be 6 or 8 or something like that that were going to be added. There was something you said... Mr. Keefe — Six or eight trips through Forest Home by people that live out that way coming into this facility but there are no new jobs added to it. It's the existing people just being rearranged coming into this facility instead of the outlying facilities. Board Member Talty — Oh I see, so they're being reallocated. Mr. Keefe — Right, they're just being repositioned. Board Member Talty — I understand. Mr. Keefe — Instead of being in those outlying facilities, they will come into this building. Board Member Riha — But you're going to have more space, right? Than you do right now. Mr. Keefe — That's correct, yes. Board Member Riha — So you have the potential to... Mr. Keefe — We do have the potential, sure, we're trying to build a building that will hopefully stand for 20 years or better, and so... Board Member Talty — Are you maximizing this project? In other words, when this building is completed, will it be 100% used or will it be 90% used, with the expansion of another 10% through t6he course of 5 years or what's the strategy or the long -term plan? Alternate Member Erb — Excepting the digester. Mr. Keefe — Right, excepting the digester. The best I could give you is somewhere between 95% and 100% use. In other words... Board Member Talty — Right out of the chute? Mr. Keefe — Yes sir. Unfortunately $80 million doesn't buy as much as it used to 3 or 4 years ago and so, yes, the only real space that we are gonna have in there that will be any kind of expansion space, other than decompressing some of the space we currently have into a better working environment, safer working environment for folks, the only other "extra" space in there is we're going to put in a little bit of space for methods development work which we don't currently have any separate space for and that, what I mean by methods development is, if one of our people gets a bright idea for a brand new test and wants to work on it, instead of having to squeeze that work in amongst all PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 38 the routine diagnostic service work, we're going to have one lab space in each major lab section where they can say I want to work on this project for 6 months, I can go in. there and work it. Again, that's not necessarily looking at more people to do that work, but it does give us space to get out of the way of the hundreds of thousands of tests that are coming through routinely to do this methods development work. Board Member Talty — I understand. Chairperson Wilcox — Kevin, just for your benefit and mine, the notes that I made were 185 employees, 149 are currently onsite, 36 are currently off site, Brown Road for example, and other facilities, and it's those 36 who obviously will have to travel to the veterinary complex now, and 6 of those, given their current address, would likely travel through Forest Home to get there. So the net number of new employees is zero. Ms. Brock — Okay. Page 8 of the Part I, number 25...approval is required ... the first line, City/TownNillage Board, you've got both yes and no checked. I assume it should be no, is that correct? Mr. Keefe — Correct. Ms. Brock — And similarly, a few lines down, other local agencies, you have both yes and no checked... Mr. Keefe — That should be yes. Chairperson Wilcox — It says fill permit, how interesting. Ms. Brock — And finally, on Attachment 5, 1 believe, section 5.2, it says there was a meeting coordinated with the Town Fire Marshall on December 22, 2007...1 assume that should be 2006? Chairperson Wilcox — Who is the Town Fire Marshall? Mr. Walker — I don't want to get into it, but the City Fire Marshall thinks he's the Town Fire Marshall but he isn't. But they represent themselves that way so I can understand why that misrepresentation got into the paperwork. Our Senior Code Enforcement Officer is our fire authority. Chairperson Wilcox — So the meeting was held with the City Fire Department. Mr. Keefe — We held meetings jointly with both of them, actually. Mr. Walker — I think Kristie has been at the meetings with the fire department, just understand that certain jurisdictions try to spread their authority further... Chairperson Wilcox — I don't need to hear it, not now. Alright. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 39 Ms. Brock — That's it. It's 2006, is that right? Mr. Keefe — Correct. Chairperson Wilcox — Would someone like to move the SEAR motion? Rod ... so moved by Rod Howe... seconded.... seconded down on the end by Hollis Erb. Any changes to the resolution as drafted? Ms. Brock — Yes. On page 1 in the first whereas, paragraph 2 says that the Town Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in a coordinated environmental review with respect to site plan approval, special permit and the height variance... strike site plan approval, special permit, and height variance and say the project. Your coordinated review covers all aspects of the project... Chairperson Wilcox — Not just those three. Ms. Brock — Right. There are other items that need approval such as fill permits, things like that...they're going to be covered by this coordinated review. And the same change will be needed to be made in paragraph 4 ... strike site plan approval, special permit and height variance, and insert the project after the word proposed ... I'm sorry, with respect to the proposed project. And that's it. Chairperson Wilcox — Changes acceptable Rod and Hollis...okay ... any further discussion? There being none ... all those in favor please signal by saying aye...all those opposed ... (nay) ... George is opposed....any abstentions...the motion is passed. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION No. 2007 - 088 SEAR Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center Caldwell Road Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, August 21, 2007 MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Hollis Alternate Member Erb. WHEREAS: 1. This action-is consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off Caldwell Road in the northeast corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine Complex, Town of'Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the demolition of several small cinder block buildings for the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, +l- 70 foot tall, facility to include laboratories (rated with Biological Safety Levels of 2 and 3) PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 40 and office space. The primary use of the facility will be for veterinary disease diagnostic programs associated with necropsy and histopathology, and will also include teaching programs and other research and support activities. The building will be physically connected to the existing Schurman Hall, associated with the Veterinary College. The project will consolidate 70 existing parking spaces currently scattered throughout the site, and add approximately 8 new spaces (4 handicapped spaces and 4 short term drop off spaces). The project will also include development of new stormwater management facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; John M. Keefe, Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has indicated its intent to act as Lead Agency in a coordinated environmental review with respect to the Project, and 3. The Planning Board, on August 21, 2007, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, two bound packets containing plans, details, and other information titled "Animal Health Diagnostic Center — Preliminary Site Plan Review" and "Animal Health Diagnostic Center — Long Environmental Assessment Form", date stamped July 5, 2007, prepared by Cornell University, and other application material, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Project. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, having received no objections from other Involved Agencies, hereby establishes itself as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the above described actions; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Thayer, Howe, Talty, Riha and Erb NAYS: Conneman ABSTENTIONS: None PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 41 The Motion was passed. Chairperson Wilcox — Sit right there gentlemen, we're only half way done... Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 8:44p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off Caldwell Road in the northeast corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine Complex. Town of Ithaca tax parcel numbers 67.- 1 -2.2, 67. -1 -10.4, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the demolition of several small cinderblock buildings and the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, _/- 70 foot tall facility to include laboratories rated with Biological Safety Levels of 2 and 3 and office space. The primary use of the building will be for veterinary disease diagnostic programs associated with necropsy and histopathology, and will also include teaching programs and other research and support activities. The building will be physically connected to the existing Schurman Hall, associated with the Veterinary College. The project will consolidate 70 existing parking spaces currently scattered throughout the site, and add approximately 8 new spaces (4 handicapped spaces and 4 short term drop off spaces). The project will also include development of new stormwater management facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicants John M. Keefe, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox — One of the longer Public Hearing Notices we've had in a long time. Alternate Member Erb — Just for the record, there is an r in the name Schurman. Chairperson Wilcox — Schurman... Alternate Member Erb — Schurman. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you very much, and I believe you pointed that out. ..alright. Do you want to do questions with, regard to site plan or do you want to give the public a chance at this point? Board Member Thayer — Let em go. Chairperson Wilcox — Let em go ... gentlemen, if you will take a sear, we'll give the public a chance to speak. Then we'll bring you back and we'll probably have more questions. Ladies and gentlemen, once again, this is a public hearing this evening. If you wish to address the Planning Board, we ask you to please step to the microphone. We ask that you give us your name and address and we will be very interested to hear what you have to say this evening. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 42 I don't see any ... is there anybody back behind... Board Member Thayer — Nobody has a hand up... Chairperson Wilcox — Young lady, you wanted to ask a question before...you can at least ask it now and...if you come to the microphone, you can ask us, and then we'll ask them. Let me help you out ... it may seem silly, but if we have a room full of people, we can't just have people asking questions out of the audience... Audience — Well I didn't understand... and he did ask my question already... about the expansion because this seems like this building will cover you're current needs, .but at the rate ... excuse me ... my name is Glynnis Hart and I'm at 1505 Danby Road ... at the rate you've been expanding ... (the woman was talking facing Mr. Keefe instead of the Board and it was not being picked up) Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah... okay... Do you have any other. questions? It's easier just to get all the questions on the table and then we will have them come up once the public hearing is over ... it's just easier to do it that way. Ms. Hart — Okay. Question #2 was about the alkaline digester, which as I understand digests biological waste or animal carcasses... what happens for non4ologial waste? Say you had a flock of ducks which you were testing for a virus and they were all contaminated with lead, what happens to the lead? Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Anything else? Ms. Hart — That's it. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. What we'll do is we will give other people a chance and then we will bring them back up. It's just easier that way. Thank you. Anybody else? There being no one, I will close the public hearing at 8:48p.m. Gentlemen, if you want to come back up. Now you get our questions and the ones from the public. I didn't hear the first question very well. I assume you heard it very well... She was kind of facing away from us and towards the ... You can come up and around as well, if you can see, it's your choice, but you can certainly come up because I think they are going to use one of these visuals to answer your question. Dr. Akey — I believe the question was related to the fact that we stated back when we built the existing facilities, we had a quarter of the staff and we've grown in the last 30+ years to now needing something that's much bigger than that and so what's gonna happen in the future. And then later we said well, you know, the new building is going to accommodate our existing staff, there'll be a little bit of room for expansion but not a great deal, so what happens in the future if we need to expand again. Actually, we took that into consideration and we very deliberately looked at that on the south end of the PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 43 east wing of this building, where John is pointing at on the board there now, you can see there's some space there and there's actually one more building just south of there that's in grey there, that's another barn building. The plan is, the notion is, if, 10 years, 15 years, whatever, down the road we decide we need another 15,000 - 20,000 square feet or whatever for the program, we are deliberately designing that end of that wing of the building so that there is nothing major in the way of building onto that end of the building. So we can, in fact, expand in that direction and don't have any water mains ... big problems that would prevent us from just making that a fairly easy place to do that add -on should we ever need to do it. Chairperson Wilcox — And the second question had to do with the suggested... the question was raised with what do you do with like ducks that may have lead shot in them or something ... or lead poisoning? Dr. Akey — Right. As you pointed out, the alkaline digester is designed to destroy biological materials, that sort of thing.. certainly lead shot, it would have no real effect on solid lead shot ... If we knew, ahead of time, that these ducks were that contaminated with lead to where it might constitute a real problem, our medical waste facility supervisor, Paul Jennette, would be called in to say how do we deal with this particular situation. Not something we routinely deal with. Most of the samples we get into the laboratory, out of those 140,000 cases, those 300,000 samples ... the vast majority of those samples are little tiny tubes of blood. That's mostly what we get. We do get some carcasses every year, but not a lot of them. But again, if we had something like that that we knew the alkaline digester was not designed to handle, then we would step back, call in the other experts that handle medical waste on the campus and say, "What's the right way to get rid of this ?" Chairperson Wilcox — Questions with regard to site plan from the Board ... that we haven't already dealt with as part of the environmental review. We have some concerns ... my notes ... we have some concerns about lighting details... wanting to make sure that all of the light fixtures are in conformance with the Town lighting law ... We talked about location and height of the stacks. Are we still concerned about that? Do we want some verbiage in there or are we ... given that ... we could craft something like if the location or the height moves more than 2 feet or 16 inches, or something like that ... of we can let the Planning Director use their authority and the current zoning, knowing our concern, that if it moves significantly,. Susan's saying that that's reasonable... Board Member Talty — I would like to put in a provision or a statement at least on the color of the stacks. We haven't really discussed that. I know that in the past, when we have looked at water tanks and stacks and things of that sort, that we want them to be very benign so that they blend into the skyline, the treeline, things of that sort. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 44 Chairperson Wilcox — We can actually write ... color, color is very important for a building of this mass and the height and choosing colors that don't contrast with the surroundings or... Board Member Talty — And we don't. put cellular things on stacks do we ... or anything like that? I just want to ask that question. Chairperson Wilcox — You know what... Board Member Riha — They have them on Bradfield. Chairperson Wilcox — Correct. I mean, somebody could come along in the future, but I suspect that there are taller veterinary buildings within 3 /8th of a mile... Board Member Talty — I just had to ask that. Board Member Riha — Bradfield's the tallest, and they do have the police communicator. Chairperson Wilcox — Bradfield, I don't think, has any more room for any communications equipment. I have heard that there is just no more room on top of Bradfield Hall, Board Member Talty -. So that would be a no. That would be a no ... right. Alternate Member Erb — Well, in Eva's absence, I'd like to ask why I really only see 8 evergreens in the proposed landscaping. In the wintertime, that's what the greenery is, the evergreens. Chairperson Wilcox — You'd like to have less deciduous and more... Alternate Member Erb — Yeah, or just more .... I mean, in Eva's absence... Board Member Howe — Well we always talk about variation too. I didn't pay attention whether there's a variation... It's more natural looking than all the same set of trees or what not, so... Alternate Member Erb — Yeah, I mean, I love the fact that we're planning for a lot of landscaping, but, the bulk of it right now seems to be deciduous and... Board Member Riha — I kind of like that... but... it seems strange because it is the natural type of vegetation for the area ... but... Alternate Member Erb — It just seemed like the 8 evergreens were in sort of plunked in one place and there was nothing else to soften the building in the winter time. Chairperson Wilcox — The front of the building, specifically. Yeah. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 45 Alternate Member Erb — Yeah, that's just a comment that I am going to make. Board Member Talty — I would like to say that I agree ... I don't know if evergreens I am really in favor of because they're all pretty at the beginning, and then as they grow, they have to be meticulously groomed and trimmed, otherwise, they're not so nice. So, if you could look into it, that would be. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, can we provide ... I mean, if we're going to put something in the resolution, I need something more than... Board Member Talty — I've seen more dead pine trees that we've asked people to place, on top of berms, and in front of buildings, and ....like every other one is dead, so I just want to make sure ... and the ones that do live, end up being trimmed from the bottom up and it defeats the whole purpose, 15 years later. Chairperson Wilcox — Right, but when I hear you say can you look into it... Board Member Talty — Well I don't know what else ... I don't know what we're looking for. Chairperson Wilcox — Same issue here. If we really want to have them do something, we need to put it in the resolution. Board Member Riha — I think they do, generally they do a pretty good job with their landscaping. Chairperson Wilcox — Cornell does a good job on their landscaping. I will admit that we have seen other developers skimp ... scrimp on the landscaping because it is not necessarily expensive ... or not maintain it. They plant what we call for but then they don't maintain it. Alternate Member Erb — I'm just saying I only saw 8 spruces, I think it was, and they were kind of in one compact area. Board Member Riha — Hopefully it won't be spruce... Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else? I'll look over ... down staff row over there... Board Member Thayer — I'll move the resolution. Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by Larry Thayer. ..seconded by Kevin Talty .... Susan, changes... Ms. Brock — ...paragraph 1, as Hollis pointed out, Schurman Hall should have an 'Y'. S- c- h- u- r- m -a -n. Paragraph 2, make the same change we made in the SEQR resolution, strike the words 91 site plan approval, special permit and a height variance" and insert the PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 46 words "the project" instead. On page 2, condition 2b should read, "submission of record of application for an approval status of all necessary permits from any county, state and or federal agencies prior to final site plan approval ". Chairperson Wilcox — I am waiting for Shirley to jump up on this one. Ms. Brock — "...with receipt of all necessary permits required before issuance of Certificate of Occupancy". Chairperson Wilcox — What was the debate we had before with regard to that clause when Cornell was here and Shirley Egan was here as well representing Cornell. Was it that? It wasn't that one? Alternate Member Erb — I thought the original debate had to do with showing us that they didn't need to get a negative statement... okay. So it was very convoluted. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah. Okay. Alternate Member Erb — So it was very convoluted. Like, who do we know to go to, to say you don't need to be involved. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, thank you. All right. Go ahead, Susan. I'm sorry. Ms. Brock — Condition 2c. There are a few technical changes. The phrase section 173 should read, "chapter 173 ". In a few lines further the reference to outdoor lighting section should say, "outdoor lighting law requirements' . Condition 2d, the reference to the underground sandfilter facility should be a reference to plural, "underground sandfilter facilities there is more than one. I also have two potential additional conditions. One was based on Dan's memo in which he said that additional erosion and sediment control plan details would be necessary. So I would propose an additional conditions h reading, "submission of erosion and sediment control plan details satisfactory to the Town Engineer ". Unfortunately he's not here right now to comment. Ms. Ritter - ...(not audible).. we can leave it at and if he looks at the plans or sees there's something is lacking we can address that for final site plan approval. Ms. Brock — And one additional condition that you haven't discussed, but I wanted to ask whether you wanted is regarding the noise modeling results. The Long Environmental Assessment Form showed that without any mitigation, without any generator muffler or enclosure that the noise from the generator would produce increases over the ambient noise levels in excess of 6 decibels at the 2 receptor locations that they were studying and Mr. Keefe said tonight that they have now done additional modeling, which includes those mitigations, which shows that the increase in ambient, over ambient noise levels does not exceed 6 decibels. So I would propose that... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 4.7 Chairperson Wilcox — We see those results. Ms. Brock — Exactly. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Ms. Brock — So I would propose adding a condition it "submission of additional noise modeling results incorporating a generator muffler and or enclosure showing that the increases over ambient noise levels do not exceed 6 decibels at the 2 receptor locations described in LEAF attachment 8". Chairperson Wilcox — Those changes acceptable, Larry and Kevin? Board Member Talty — Yes. So am I to understand, just to make sure, that the generator if its fired up its going to be 6 or less? [several talking at once] Ms. Brock — At the receptor location. Board Member Talty — I want to be there when it's fired up. Ms. Brock — But its at the receptor locations. One is on Fairway Drive... Board Member Talty — I understand. Ms. Brock — Okay. Board Member Talty — I would love to be there when that's fired up. I've never heard a generator in my whole life that sounded like rustling of leaves. Chairperson Wilcox — Fairway Drive is one, a good distance away. Board Member Talty — I know. [several talking at once] Alternate Member Erb — And Town law takes care of construction hours? Ms. Brock — There is a noise ordinance provision that does deal with construction, but let me look at it very quickly. Alternate Member Erb — Again, I'm just thinking of the Forest Home neighborhood. Ms. Brock — Let me look at that and I can tell you what it says. During the nighttime hours, as defined in the law and that's defined as beginning at 9:01 pm on any day and PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 48 ending at 6:59 am on the following day. So basically between 9 pm and 7 am the next day. So during those nighttime hours it shall be unlawful for any person within a residential zone, which this is, or within 500 feet of a residential zone to operate or cause to be operated any pile driver, steam shovel, pneumatic hammer, derrick, steam or electric hoist, electric drill, front - loaded garbage collection vehicles performing commercial pickups, or other commercial industrial equipment, except to perform emergency work. Then there is a provision regarding domestic power or hand tools, which I don't believe would apply. Board Member Talty — Well the generator is considered emergency. I mean it is the only time you would be utilizing that, in the event of a power failure, correct? Alternate Member Erb — Or tests, which you would do in the daytime. So how come the Town.,. Chairperson Wilcox — Can I get you closer to the microphone? Alternate Member Erb — So how come the Town, when doing Pine Tree Road, started up all its equipment at 20 minutes to 7? Chairperson Wilcox — Oooh. Ms. Brock — When was that? Alternate Member Erb — Repeatedly. Ms. Brock — When was that. Alternate Member Erb — Last week or the week before. Ms. Brock — Oh. Alternate Member Erb — In other words, if someone from Forest Home asks us, they are shut down from heavy equipment from 9 pm to 7 basically. Chairperson Wilcox — Interesting, you mentioned the 500 foot limit, Susan. I looked at the ... before the meeting, as I often do now, I looked at the list of recipients of the public hearing notice through the mail. One residence in Forest Home, this within 500 feet of the...300 Forest Home Drive I think was the address. Right on the corner. It was the only one within 500 feet. Board Member Conneman — That's not right. Board Member Riha — And they get that bridge noise. So I don't think... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 49 Board Member Conneman — I know you can't put it in the motion, but I would like to have a picture of the building when you get it done to see how much the visual impact on the neighborhood. Ms. Brock — Fred, so I then have 2 questions about whether I should be adding any language based on the Board's discussion. Do you want any language regarding stack color and any language regarding revisions to the landscaping plan? Chairperson Wilcox — We seem to be all set with the landscaping plan. Hollis made her point. Everybody sort of said you made your point, thank you very much. And I'm sorry the other one was? Color. We should put something in there. Kevin, you brought it up so I'll look to you. Board Member Talty — I would say some type of agreeable neutral color that is ... I don't know, would that be put in Jonathan's hands when they come back to say... Chairperson Wilcox — We want to see it. Since they have to come back for final, let us see it. Alternate Member Erb — And not shiny. Board Member Talty — You can bring in a stack. Alternate Member Erb — Not shiny. Board Member Talty — Well, what's shiny to you is shiny to me... [several talking at once] Mr. Keefe — The proposed coloration right now is identical to the metal along the top, which is a dull anodized aluminum. Chairperson Wilcox — Can you bring a piece of that dull anodized aluminum with the color on it? Can you do that? Board Member Talty — We often ask for that. I don't want you to think we're putting you out. Chairperson Wilcox — Two weeks ago a guy brought in a 4 foot sample of the fence and we thanked him because it was perfect one, after a long night, but, too, the gentleman had learned his lesson and did it. It really would help. So we have to phrase this some how. Color of the stacks to be neutral so that they blend in with the surroundings. Board Member Talty — I'm good with that. Chairperson Wilcox — Whatever that means. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 50 Board Member Talty — You get the point, right? Chairperson Wilcox — Is that too wishy- washy? I mean is that... Mr. Kanter — You would want to say submission of whatever it is you want to say to the Planning Board. Chairperson Wilcox — Submission of documents showing proposed colors... something like that. And frankly, documents is a minimum but if you could bring in a sample of the material that would be better. It really would be because you can print it ... I mean you can print the color on a piece of paper, but it may not be exactly what it looks on the actual surface. Are you happy with that? Is that better, Susan? Ms. Brock — So we'll say j, submission of documents and or samples showing the color of the roof stacks. Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. Thank you. Gentlemen, that's okay? Alright. Mr. Kanter — The submission being part of the final site plan. Ms. Brock — Right. I think that is all prefaced by ... subject to ... oh, we need to say, okay prior to final site plan approval. Add that phrase to the end. Board Member Talty — I do have a follow up question on the stacks. When you dispose of the materials and its fired up, is there steam that knocks down the ash? Is that how it works? In other words, what is emitted out of the stack visual? Dr. Akey — Are you talking about the alkaline digester? What are you talking about? The V- stacks? Board Member Talty — Whatever. The stacks are attached. Mr. Keefe — These are HVAC heating, ventilation, air conditioning stacks. Its just... Board Member Talty — So in the wintertime if it was cold and the air is warm, do you see anything being emitted into the air? MALE — Not that I have seen. Board Member Talty — Okay. I was just wondering if...as my daughter, my 5 year old daughter calls it the cloud making machine out at AES. I was just wondering if there was going to be anything above and beyond the stack that will be emitted that will be a visual impairment. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 51 MALE — Incorporating heat exchangers, you know, try to recover as much of that heat as we possibly can. So certainly I don't see that routinely on any of the buildings around the college. Board Member Talty — Okay. Just covering all bases. Okay, Fred. Thanks. Chairperson Wilcox — I want to double check. Larry and Kevin, are all those changes acceptable? Board Member Thayer and Board Member Talty — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — Susan, we are all set? Ms. Brock — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — Any other discussion? There being none, all those in favor please signal by saying aye. Wilcox, Thayer, Howe, Talty, Erb — Aye. Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody opposed? Conneman — Nay. Chairperson Wilcox — George is opposed. There are no abstentions. The motion is passed. We will see you when you come back. Thank you all very much. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION No. 2007 - 089 Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center Caldwell Road Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, August 21, 2007 MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Kevin Talty. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration for the proposed Cornell U Caldwell Road in the nort Complex, Town of Ithaca T; of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit iiversity Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off least corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine x Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the demolition of several small cinder block buildings for the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, +/- 70 foot PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 52 tall, facility to include laboratories (rated with Biological Safety Levels of 2 and 3) and office space. The primary use of the facility will be for veterinary disease diagnostic programs associated with necropsy and histopathology, and will also include teaching programs and other research and support activities. The building will be physically connected to the existing Schurman Hall, associated with the Veterinary College. The project will consolidate 70 existing parking spaces currently scattered throughout the site, and add approximately 8 new spaces (4 handicapped spaces and 4 short term drop off spaces). The project will also include development of new stormwater management facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; John M. Keefe, Agent, and 2. This is a Type. I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect to the Project has, on August 21, 2007, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on August 21, 2007, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, two bound packets containing plans, details, and other information titled "Animal Health Diagnostic Center — Preliminary Site Plan Review" and "Animal Health Diagnostic Center — Long Environmental Assessment Form", date stamped July 5, 2007, prepared by Cornell University, and other application material, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Permit for the construction of the Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center as described above, finding that the standards of Article XXIV, Section 270 -200, Subsections A — L, of the Town of Ithaca Code, have been met; I . AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off Caldwell Road in the northeast corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine Complex, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4, which includes the demolition of several small cinder block buildings for the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, +/- 70 foot tall facility, along with associated parking, landscapinc shown in the two bound packets titled "Animal Health Diagnostic "Animal Health Diagnostic Center stamped July 5, 2007, prepared conditions: PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 53 lighting, and new stormwater facilities, as containing plans, details, and other information Center — Preliminary Site Plan Review" and — Long Environmental Assessment Form", date by Cornell University, subject to the following a. granting of the necessary height variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and b. submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from any county, state, and /or federal agencies prior to final site plan approval with receipt of all necessary permits required before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and c. submission of additional lighting details to show that all proposed outdoor lighting meets the requirements of Chapter 173 (Outdoor Lighting) of the Town of Ithaca Code, or submission of details for similar replacement lights that meet the outdoor lighting law requirements, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and d. submission of an operation and maintenance plan for the stormwater management facilities, including the underground sand filter facilities and the drainage swale /sand filter facility, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and e. submission of a stormwater "Operation, Maintenance, and Reporting Agreement" between the property owner and the Town of Ithaca, either as a specific agreement for this project or included in a broad agreement to cover all campus stormwater facilities, satisfactory to the Attorney for the Town and the Town Engineer, prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, and f. all demolition and construction traffic shall access the site from Caldwell Road by way of NYS Route 366 (Dryden Road), and shall not travel northwest of the project site on Caldwell Road, and g. all buildings being demolished will require individual demolition permits from the Town of Ithaca Building Department, and h. Submission of erosion and sediment control plan details satisfactory to the Town Engineer, and i. Submission of additional noise modeling results incorporating a generator muffler and /or enclosure showing that the increases over ambient noise levels do not exceed 6 decibels at the two receptor locations described in LEAF Attachment 8, and PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 54 j. Submission of documents and /or samples showing the color of the roof stacks prior to final site plan approval. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Thayer, Howe, Talty, Riha and Erb NAYS: Conneman ABSTENTIONS: None The Motion was passed. Chairperson Wilcox — Alright. Before I lose my agenda here, ladies and gentlemen, if you would be as quiet as possible we have some other business to do. Alright ladies and gentlemen at 9:10 our next item is: Discussion and possible resolution to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding current zoning regulations and student housing in the Pennsylvania Avenue / Kendall Avenue area. Chairperson Wilcox — You have in front of me a revised draft. Alternate Member Erb — Excuse me, you know we never discussed Brittain's letter. Chairperson Wilcox — We did. Well, we did because it was visual. Alternate Member Erb — We didn't mentioned their letter. Chairperson Wilcox — Right, but we did have the letter and the pictured, the colored picture from the Brittain's. They would be proud... Board Member Conneman — That was my... Board Member Talty — Which we normally do read into the record, Fred. We usually do that. Board Member Conneman — Do you guys remember you voted for Briarwood II? Chairperson Wilcox — In front of us is a proposed Planning Board resolution that I drafted based upon what I thought was appropriate and some input from members of the Planning Board who provided feedback. Since I drafted it...well, I'll give you a chance to read it since its there in front of you. I'll be quiet for a second. Well, look who shows up late. Were you at the County meeting? Okay. Board Member Riha — This is what you sent around, right? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 55 Chairperson Wilcox — It has only minor wordsmithing changes. I mean, Eva ... for example, Eva used the word "disorderly conduct" the way the kids acted so I threw that in there. I did make some changes based upon what she had provided and the input that I got from those who responded. Alternate Member Erb — I would always hyphenate two- family structure, that sort of thing. Board Member Riha — I like it. Board Member Conneman — I'll move it. Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by George Conneman. Board Member Riha — I'll second it. Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by Susan. Changes other than the suggestion that two- family be two "hyphen" family. We have the Attorney for the Town and the Assistant Attorney for the Town reviewing it over to my left. [laughter] Chairperson Wilcox — Jonathan, someone would have taken your copy because I put one down in front of you, or at least in your spot. So somebody has two. Alternate Member Erb — I would also say single - family with a hyphen. Board Member Howe — I'm having a hard time ... I mean I think it makes sense, but I'm having a hard time following the logic because isn't high density residential zones where you actually want to encourage ... so I... . Chairperson Wilcox — Well, they're 9,000 square foot lots. So what do you want to encourage? Let's have a discussion. What do you want to encourage in a 9,000 square foot lot? Smaller homes? Smaller lots? Board Member Howe — I mean I like the not sure its worded correctly that it flows for everyone else... premise of this ... that's not ... the logic, I'm just with where we are trying to get, but if it does Chairperson Wilcox — I'm, you know, I put this together as a starting point for discussion. I'm not wedded to what's there and Paulette actually has the word document so if we want to start wordsmithing it, she can make the changes to the word document very easily, sort of pretty easily. No, I'm open to any suggestions. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 56 Mr. Kanter - Could I ask a question about the intent of the resolved? It sounds like you are saying two different things. One is further limiting the number of unrelated individuals that can occupy each. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, I'm saying ... I'm saying... here's what I was thinking when I wrote ... I want to further limit because the limit is not four. I want to further limit the number of unrelated individuals who can reside in a ... I have to be careful of the words "structure" and "unit" here. In a building on a lot and I think one of the ways to do it is to make sure you don't allow two - family residences to be built. Therefore, you only have one- family residences, therefore you only get two unrelated individuals. Mr. Kanter — So you are not saying two different things. You are saying one thing that stems from... Chairperson Wilcox — I was saying one thing and then I kind of threw in that last sentence saying here's how you can accomplish it. Yeah, yeah. But the way I was thinking was is that we have these neighborhoods where affordable homes are possible. 9,000 square foot lot makes building or buying a home much more affordable than a 15,000 or 20,000 square foot lot. Just to begin with and odds are you are going to have a smaller house on that lot rather than these McMansions that people are building today. So we have the opportunity... this is not the only what used to be called R -9 zone or high density residential zone, but if you have landlords, like Mr, lacovelli, who buy those lots or see an opportunity, as when he was here last, to buy an 18,000 square foot lot with a single - family house on it, tear it down, split it into two 9,000 square foot lots and build duplexes on both of them, then you have displaced the possibility for a single family with 8 unrelated individuals. I mean ... [tape changed] have two other related individuals living there or a family unit, or something... that's what I would prefer. mean, that's what I am hoping, that that would help protect the Pennsylvania Ave /Kendall Avenue, by having families live there rather than the density that we get by two - family units with two unrelated individuals on both sides. That's where I'm going with it. That's how I feel we can... Mr. Kanter — So the real recommendation is the last sentence, basically, that says it could be accomplished by... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, I mean, the recommendation to the Town Board is that they revise the zoning in a manner that would protect the neighborhood. That's the general, a specific way to accomplish that is... Mr. Kanter —To not allow... Chairperson Wilcox — To not allow... Board Member Thayer -- ...two family structures... Mr. Kanter — To get there, it was a little bit confusing. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 57 Chairperson Wilcox — I know, I'm not good at writing resolutions, I don't do it, I don't' get paid to do it. Mr. Kanter — Yeah, but the real intent was... Chairperson Wilcox — Would someone like to change the way it's worded? Board Member Conneman — It does make the case the way it's written, and that's the important thing. You're trying to convey to the Town Board what the situation is and offer a solution. If They've got a better solution, they can offer it. Ms. Brock — So, currently, two - family dwellings are permitted in low density and medium density residential zones as well, so... Chairperson Wilcox — I don't have a problem in medium density. You've got big lots, the lots, the house... Ms. Brock — Okay, so... Chairperson Wilcox — You're not... Ms. Brock — So to you the (inaudible) fact is the size of the lot? Chairperson Wilcox — Yes, it's the size of the lot and the fact that 9,000 square foot lot minimums offer affordability in the Town of Ithaca and if the Town Board has collectively made a statement to wanting to provide affordable housing. There's a good spot to do it, because your cost of land acquisition are less. Ms. Brock - Are there areas in the Town besides the Pennsylvannia Ave /Kendall Avenue neighborhood that are zoned high density residential? Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. Sure. Ms. Brock — So, all of those... Chairperson Wilcox - I'm thinking Coy Glen Road, for example, Glenside, thank you... Ms. Brock — So are you proposing... Chairperson Wilcox — Well, my concern is this area, so a solution, a possible solution, is to change the zoning in high density zones throughout the Town. Ms. Brock — Alright, so what you're proposing would apply throughout the Town to all the areas that have this same zoning. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 58 Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah Ms. Brock — As opposed to creating a different zone for that one neighborhood. Chairperson Wilcox — I am not proposing creating a different zone, no. Ms. Brock — Okay. Just asking to... Board Member Howe — Could this be interpreted that your actually reducing the number of affordable housing units that could be built? Board Member Talty — That's what I'm seeing... economics... if you can make more units on x amount of land, Fred, economics dictate's, you know, supply and demand, there's a lot more supply, it should drive down the price. Chairperson Wilcox — I wrestled with that, I wrestled with that, and if you could build a duplex and put in a party wall, between it and sell both sides individually, then you have the potential for offering more affordable housing. The problem is, in that area, at least that particular area... Board Member Talty — Yeah, that particular area, I'm with you ... I'm just saying all inclusive though, I don't really agree with that whole concept. Chairperson Wilcox — In that area, the builder can make more money by renting it out to students at $400 a piece, $500 a piece, $1,000 a month each side. Board Member Howe — I guess I am just worried about us ... can we do something, can we make a recommendation for that specific area... Chairperson Wilcox — We could, I mean... Board Member Howe — I am just worried about unintended consequences by trying to draft something for this area, but that's gonna have... Chairperson Wilcox — We could change this to say in this, in this specific high density residential zone, we would ask that this change be made, or something else... Ms. Brock — That would create a different zone. You can't... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, I know... Ms. Brock — It's in the requirements ... make the requirements apply to... Mr. Kanter — You could ask them to create a specific zone for this area that says what you can and can not do. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 59 Alternate .Member Erb -- Right now, the way the resolution reads, it would be a recommendation against having such a duplex and having two real families, one on either side. It isn't really ... isn't the problem really that we wouldn't want a total of two, two unrelated persons... Board Member Talty — Or 10... Alternate Member Erb —Okay. And I mean, to say... Chairperson Wilcox — We'd rather have mom and dad and one kid on each side... Alternate Member Erb — Okay, rather than saying not permitting two - family structures, isn't it that what we really want is that if there is a two - family structure in such dense, in such a zone, we would like it, we would recommend an amendment that only one of those sides could have more, could have two unrelated people... Chairperson Wilcox — We have a legal issue. Yes, see, there's the problem. We run into a legal issue. Ms. Brock — Right. Chairperson Wilcox — Hold on, hold on ... (everyone talking over each other) ... explain the legal issue, briefly. Alternate Member Erb — But I am trying to get to what you... Chairperson Wilcox — I know, but I realize that legally you have a problem trying to do that. Ms. Brock — .There are some State Constitutional protections given to unrelated people who live together who may be the functional equivalent of a family. I know that we have some standards in our Code for people to apply, to be deemed as such. I would have to go back. I actually researched this whole family issue a while ago and I just haven't looked at it in about a year, so I can't tell you today, off the top of...but I think you would have real problems if you tried. to say that in one of the units the people must all be related. I think that that probably would not pass muster. Legally. Alternate Member Erb — So our only alternative then, is to say no duplexes. I mean, is that the only way out of this? Chairperson Wilcox — Well I don't know Hollis, it's the one I came up with. (inaudible) ... but it's the one I came up with. Mr. Kanter — Another approach would be to say that one of the units in the duplex has to be owner - occupied. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 60 Board Member Riha — Yeah, that's what I was thinking. Chairperson Wilcox — That's a good idea, but I also know that we have, we have required owner - occupancy in a couple of other developments, one along Sapsucker Woods Road, originally, there were owner - occupancy requirements for some of Lucente's units along Sapsucker Road, and then we also did it for the Vista, Vista Lane ... Cayuga Vista, up on South Hill. Both of which caused problems and I thing we rescinded those... Mr. Kanter — Not the Cayuga Vista ones... Chairperson Wilcox — Not Cayuga Vista but... Mr. Kanter — The Sapsucker Woods one, the Town Board rescinded after they all were converted into student housing. And that was, that's largely a monitoring and enforcement problem, not,.. Chairperson Wilcox — But you're right. Owner occupancy is another way to solve... Alternate Member Erb — I'd be much happier with that. I wouldn't mind allowing a family here, and they deal with whomever they decide to rent to, or letting there be two families. Because the whole point was the 4 unrelated kids. Chairperson Wilcox — Owner occupancy is a... Board Member Talty -- ...cuts down on issues... Board Member Conneman — Remember that this is unlikely to occur in another location. Location, location, location is still important. It's Ithaca College that's there and you've got kids that want to live there. That's the issue and that's a location issue. This isn't gonna happen in... Board Member Riha — Right, you've got a lot of undergrads. Chairperson Wilcox — Fine. There would be opportunities. I mean, you can own your house and have a small accessory apartment down in the basement, you know, less than, what is it ... less than 50% of the square footage of the main and a lot of the...l lived on South Hill and a lot of the homes had that small accessory apartment in their basement, or in the back. Board Member Thayer — I do. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, absolutely, for ... and a graduate student, $500 or $600 a month, whatever it is, it's great. Board Member Thayer — Exactly what I got. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 61 Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah. Board Member Riha — We also have houses on our road where they are renting out to 6 vet school students. Mr. Kanter — That's another quirk in the zoning, currently, in all the residential zones that allow the two family, you, the way you think it reads is that the second unit has to be no more than 50% of the principal unit, but, unless it's in a basement, in which case, it can be any size. Chairperson Wilcox — That's right. Mr. Kanter — And that's exactly what the most recent houses that we saw were designed as, so they, in effect, were stacked duplexes of equal sizes because one was in the basement. That's another thing that could be looked at. There's no reason it has to say that, and I have always thought that maybe it shouldn't say that. Board Member Conneman — Jonathan if you can solve the side yard problem with a diagram... maybe you can do the same thing here. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, how do we want to change this? I am very happy with the owner - occupancy... Board Member Thayer — I like that... Chairperson Wilcox — I'm very happy, but... Alternate Member Erb — I'm more comfortable with the owner - occupancy... Chairperson Wilcox — As am I ... Alternate Member Erb — To keep them ... to keep a little bit more idea of affordable housing going and yet solve... Chairperson Wilcox — So tell me how to change it ... guys ... gals... Alternate Member Erb — By requiring owner - occupancy within one unit of such duplex. Board Member Talty — How is this going to be enforced? It's ridiculous... Mr. Kanter— Well this is a recommendation ... if the Town Board adopts it... Board Member Thayer — the Town Board will draft the language... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 62 Mr. Kanter - -... doing something, then it would be up to the Code Enforcement Office to make sure that happens. Board Member Talty — I mean, Dan's plate is full, how are you going to enforce this? Chairperson Wilcox — It's been an enforcement problem in the past. Board Member Talty —That's right. Mr. Walker — It's been an enforcement problem in the past, but we have been enforcing it. That's where Susan got so much experience in what a family unit is. ,and do we allow 3 people in there now, if they prove that they are a family unit? Ms. Brock — No, it's 2... Mr. Walker -- ...if they have two unrelated people and they can prove it, then there's a third one... Ms. Brock — No ... some of the zones allow 2 unrelated people who.. Mr. Walker —And a boarder... Ms. Brock -- ...who live and cook together as a housekeeping unit, I think is how it's worded, plus a boarder. So some units could have 3 unrelated people, but, that's in certain zones and not in others. Board Member Riha — So how can we have 6 students in these... Mr. Walker — Well, the enforcement is usually by complaint. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, that's too many students or noise, but how do you enforce owner - occupancy? Nobody can ... you know ... Cayuga Vista... Mr. Walker — What we do for owner - occupancy, if it's a Cornell professor, they have somebody unrelated living in their accessory apartment up in Perry Lane say, and then they go on sabbatic for a year and a half and they rent the other half of the house out ... so do they have to sell their house to one of those people? Mr. Kanter —There can be provisions.... Mr. Walker — Those are the kinds of things you have to consider. Chairperson Wilcox — What about the Cayuga Vista townhouses where they have an owner - occupancy requirement? Most of them are vacant anyway still aren't they. PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 63 Mr. Walker — We do not have the staff resources to go knocking on everybody's door and do an inspection and then you have to have their permission to do an inspection, unless you have some basis for going in, even if there is a complaint, you still have to have their permission to enter the building... Chairperson Wilcox — So, the point being, enforcing owner - occupancy requirements is difficult. Mr. Walker — Right, and I think you'd see a real big issue about that in this Town. Board Member Riha But enforcing this only 2 unrelated people in these units is also very difficult. Mr. Walker — It's also an issue, and ... again, it's usually done by complaint, and then we go and then we ... because if they don't comply, then you have to write them an appearance ticket, take them to court, and if they're not scared of you there, then you go to court and you've gotta get somebody to prosecute it, and the Town Attorney's never like to prosecute those things because the courts always see these poor starving students that don't' have a place to live and ... Chairperson Wilcox — It's not their fault, it's the landlord's fault... Mr. Walker — Right. And actually, we had, we did get occupancies reduced somewhat voluntarily. We had to use some leverage, but, fortunately, the owners had some other vacant apartments, I think it was in Vista Lane, so they, you know, those are issues. The whole student population issue is really the problem and Ithaca College has been working on that, along with Cornell in their areas. Enforcement is a problem and if we change the law, I am going to be asking for 1 or 2 more enforcement people, because we'll need em. Chairperson Wilcox — Not my problem. So how did you want to change the language? Hollis? Board Member Talty — I know it's not your problem, Fred, but passing laws that aren't going to be enforceable is a common complaint across this country, so let's put the brakes on, you know what I mean, and... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, we can take the recommendation out on how to accomplish it and simply say, here's what we would like done, which is to further protect the R9 zone and encourage single family occupancy rather than students, and we can let it go at that. And not even propose a possible solution. Board Member Conneman — But would you share with the Town Board some of the discussions? PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 64 Chairperson Wilcox — It would be in the minutes. Board Member Conneman — It would be in the minutes ... and let them figure it out. Chairperson Wilcox — It would be in the minutes. Susan is aware of the discussion and so is Jonathan and both, and so is Dan and all 3 of them attend the Town Board meeting. Board Member Talty — Any potential recommendations from the Staff? Mr. Kanter — Well, one thing you could also do to highlight the different things we talked about is to put them in the resolution as illustrative examples of what could be. done without selecting one or the other. I mean, of all of these things we've talked about, I don't personally like the idea of totally not allowing two - family structures in the high density zone because of the housing things we talked about. I kind of like the owner occupancy thing, but recognizing there are monitoring /enforcement issues with it, but if you limited that requirement to the high density zone and not all the zones where two= families are allowed, then at least you would have a better chance of ... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, my concern is not, I'm sorry, I was going to say R15, medium density or low density, it's high density... Mr. Kanter — And again, I think the one most straight forward, easiest one, because it requires coming for approvals, is the size of the basement unit. I mean, that one, I think is almost a no- brainer. If we really want to ... you know, you're still not going to limit, necessarily, the number of people who will be in it, but you're going to provide a disincentive to somebody who wants to build two equal sized units and put as many people in there as they can. I mean, that's already an enforcement issue, where two unrelated individuals are the maximum allowed, you're still getting three, four, and more people in each unit anyway, in many cases so, the smaller size unit, the less chance that's going to happen. Although, maybe, code officers might argue that where you are going to provide smaller units and still have the same number of people, it might make for less safe conditions, I guess... Mr. Walker —Well, also, if you ... There's fire /safety requirements for multiple occupancy, so I think, if we have a zoning, a zone that says you can't have more than two unrelated people, now if they build a two bedroom apartment, that's pretty easy to assume that they are only going to have two people living there ... (laughter) ... (inaudible) then never mind ... But... Chairperson Wilcox — You have a narrow view of the world, sir. (laughter) Alternate Member Erb — It's kind of sweet, but ... (laughter),.I Chairperson Wilcox — It's idyllic but... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 65 Mr. Walker — That's what happens you get older and senile, right... Fred... Board Member Talty — What's the penalty... what's the penalty if you get a... Mr. Walker — The penalty, basically, the penalty is we issue an appearance you go to court. And the ... we don't have fines set....l don't know if we have set for those violations specifically... Ms. Brock — Well a violation of a zoning law would trigger fines... Mr. Walker — Is like a $500 fine or something... Chairperson Wilcox — a month's rent... Board Member Talty — I was just going to say, not even... Chairperson Wilcox — A month's rent... ticket and any fines Mr. Walker — But we will never cover the costs of prosecuting with the fines that... Board Member Talty — Right, right, I understand. Mr. Walker —And, again, it's a staffing issue. Mr. Kanter — Although what has happened, on occasion, and I know this has happened in the last couple of years, where the over the limit occupancy has occurred, some of the students have been forced to move out. The landlords have been told to not allow those people to stay in the units and so they have had to go and find them... Mr. Walker — They basically voluntarily, so they wouldn't have to deal with the courts, moved the students out. Especially when they already had other apartments that they wanted to rent. Ms. Brock — And violating of our zoning ordinance can be prosecuted criminally. There is imprisonment that can occur. Board Member Talty — I know, but, I got the plea bargain system down... Ms. Brock — Right, but I think it does give the owner's some incentive to actually comply once it's brought to their attention and then they know they're in violation... Board Member Talty — All you got to do is whack a few landlords, you up the fees, or the fines and the problem goes away. It's like speeding. If you whacked everybody at $500 for 10 mph over the speed limit, it'd be over. Ms. Brock — We can't... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 66 Board Member Conneman — and you publish their names under the violation, it has a tremendous effect... Chairperson Wilcox - We're gonna be here for ever unless we get some closure on this. Board Member Talty — I'm just, well, we're trying to narrow this done, because... Alternate Member Erb — One unit of any such two - family structure to be occupied by the owner of the two- family structure. Chairperson Wilcox — George, is that change acceptable? Board Member Conneman — That's acceptable to me. Chairperson Wilcox — Who seconded it? Board Member Riha — I did, but we are still talking with Kevin's thing of not being, maybe, that specific. Board Member Talty — I mean, I don't want to ramrod this through, Fred. I'm really disagreeing with you, I mean, just to put another law on the books or ... I'm not ... I am in total disagreement with that, because if you can't enforce it and they're not going to court, the whole thing is ridiculous. I know what you're trying to do, but unless we get something really cemented down here, I'm not voting at all. I'm going to abstain, because it's just, it's not right. Another law on the books is not what we need. Or even a recommendation to the Town Board. Board Member Conneman — What if you enforced it? Board Member Talty — That's a different story. Board Member Conneman —Well, that's what we have to do. Board Member Talty — Give him two more guys, let the taxes go up, let the rents go up, then we don't have affordable housing, then we're screwed all over again. Alternate Member Erb — But if I were a neighbor and my neighborhood were under assault, just having this on the books so that if there was a reason to complain, there was a law that we could use, that would make a difference to me. Mr. Walker — Well there is a law that we can use. The law is there and we can prosecute. Do we find every case without a complaint, probably no, because we don't have the staff to go around and do, you know, like the dog licenses, you know, you got a dog ... is he licensed ... you go around ... okay how many people are living in the PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 67 apartment, give us your names, that becomes somewhat of a police state and that's not something we want to do. Alternate Member Erb -Yeah, you're not going to do that. I understand. Mr. Walker — I think what John's suggestion is, which is tightening up the definition of a second unit being less than 50% of the primary unit and not having that basement clause in there is one tool that we can easily enforce, because that, that takes physical changes. It's not just like, open the door and ...Like now we have a lot of units up there that have been built as two - family units and each unit has four bedrooms in, plus a living room and a kitchen and one or two bathrooms. Now, the owners of those say, oh, there's two libraries there, two studies, so that the students need a place to study separate from the bedroom ... I mean, how do ... unless we go in and catch, oh there's four sets of clothes in the house, and that takes a lot of time to enforce. Mr. Kanter — But at least the size limit would give you some... Mr. Walker — But there's something there that we can do and we can pursue that. Now, you're probably going to get these landlords going, especially for the houses that already exist, there's going to be a lot of variances asked for, in that one particular area, because the houses are already there, all of sudden you've taken a way a quarter or a third of their income and it becomes a hardship to them. Ms. Brock — Well, they would be prior nonconforming uses. Mr. Kanter— Yeah, they'd be grandfathered... Mr. Walker — They'd be grandfathered, right, so, there aren't too many lots left up there... Chairperson Wilcox — Well, Mr. locovelli found an 18,000 comes the single - family home and split into two ... I mean, he Mr. Walker— Right.:.no...no...l understand that, but we also without legal access too, which can't happen anymore und( the new building code. In other words, we allowed five frontage on a Town road... Chairperson Wilcox — Who did? Mr. Kanter - Back in the old days... Mr. Walker — This Board did. And the Zoning Board did. Chairperson Wilcox — Was I born then? square foot lot and down found one.., allowed him to build homes %r the new zoning, or under houses to be built without PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 68 Mr. Walker - Less than 10 years ago ... you were here.. Mr. lacovelli's... Chairperson Wilcox — It's been a while... Mr. Kanter — It's been a while, the most recent one Alternate Member Erb — Hey, we learn, we. learn.... Mr. Walker — There was a way to fix that, and that was to have them dedicate that to the Town as a Town road, but, he didn't want to spend that much money to do it, so now, we have a parking lot, instead of a Town road. So, you know...the whole enforcement thing starts at...it doesn't start at one place, it's throughout the whole thing. Board Member Conneman — But you have to start someplace. I mean, you can not solve all of the problems of the world at once, but you can solve them one at a time. Board Member Talty — I'd be more than happy to take on Jonathan's statements, that he said tonight. As a starting point. Chairperson Wilcox — Such a reduction could be accomplished by limiting the size of the basement apartment... Mr. Walker — of the accessory apartment, don't say basement... Chairperson Wilcox — By limiting the size of the accessory apartment... Mr. Walker — Not withstanding the location of it in the building... Chairperson Wilcox — Not withstanding the location of it in the building... Board Member Riha — That seems enforceable... Ms. Neilsen — And where are you putting that in? Chairperson Wilcox —That would be at the very end....Such a reduction could be accomplished by limiting the size of the accessory apartment, not withstanding its location. Ms. Neilsen — And leaving this whole paragraph as is... Chairperson Wilcox — For now.... yeah... no, no, no... Ms. Brock — Are you including the owner occupancy requirement? Chairperson Wilcox — No, we're taking out the owner occupancy and replacing it by limiting the size of the accessory apartment no matter where it's located...okay ... who PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 69 moved it...you moved it ... is that change acceptable? Who seconded it....Susan ... is that acceptable... Board Member Riha — But is there a conflict by promoting increased occupancy as single - family residences... that... but that doesn't fit with, then, what we just said ... so we have to kind of reword that... Alternate Member Erb — Maybe it should just end at structure... Board Member Riha — Yeah, that's what I would say ... right... Alternate Member Erb — By further limiting the number of unrelated individuals that can occupy each structure period. Board Member Riha — Right. Alternate Member Erb — Such a reduction could be accomplished by limiting the size of the accessory unit. Chairperson Wilcox — Gotcha ... George that work for you? Susan ... your happy now ... Attorney for the Town Susan ... you don't care... Ms. Brock — I do care and it's fine... Chairperson Wilcox — It's just a recommendation to the Town Board, it doesn't have much... Board Member Talty — It will be interesting to see what finally gets... Mr. Kanter — It ultimately will get forwarded to Codes & Ordinances and ... Chairperson Wilcox — I know. And we are removing one of the o's in the second paragraph, yes. Vote. ADOPTED RESOLUTION PB RESOLUTION NO. 2007 — 090 Recommendation to the Ithaca Town Board Town of Ithaca Planning Board August 21, 2007 Motion made by George Conneman, seconded by Susan Riha. WHEREAS the Town of Ithaca Town Board has expressed the need to preserve the character of existing residential neighborhoods, and PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 70 WHEREAS The Town of Ithaca is committed to providing affordable housing options within the Town as evidenced by the approval and construction of Linderman Creek and Overlook at West Hill apartment complexes, and WHEREAS the small lots (9,000 square feet minimum) permitted in High Density Residential Zones allow for the existence of affordable housing, and WHEREAS two family structures are permitted in High Density Residential Zones, and WHEREAS each unit can be occupied by two unrelated individuals, and WHEREAS four unrelated individuals can occupy each two family structure, and WHEREAS the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on July 17, 2007, heard from residents of the Pennsylvania Avenue /Kendall Avenue neighborhood about issues related to concentrated student occupancy including noise, parking, public urination and other disorderly conduct, and trash, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board recommends that the Town of Ithaca Town Board consider revising the current zoning regulations in High Density Residential Zones to protect existing residential neighborhoods by further limiting the number of unrelated individuals that can occupy each structure. Such a reduction could be accomplished by limiting the size of the accessory unit. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Thayer, Conneman Howe, Talty, Riha and Erb NAYS: None ABSTENTIONS: None The Motion was passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Deferred to the next meeting. OTHER BUSINESS Next Meeting's Agenda Chairperson Wilcox — Mike, I will be out of town Friday so we have to do next meeting's public hearing notice Thursday, thanks. Mr. Kanter — Actually, the September 4th meeting, which is right after Labor Day, is not very big. There happens to be a proposed moratorium local law coming to this Board for a recommendation... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 71 Chairperson Wilcox — How ironic. Mr. Kanter — And the other one is the Montessori School Field of Dreams, Site Plan Phase I. Chairperson Wilcox — Ah. Good, Mr. Smith — We did the Master Plan early in the spring. Chairperson Wilcox — Yup. A plan that we all liked. It was a very good, nice plan, for the Montessori School... That's it? Good. Okay. Any other business from that side of the table? Mr. Kanter — Did everyone get... Chairperson Wilcox — Everyone said no, except you.... Mr. Kanter — I just happened to see this bright orange... Chairperson Wilcox — Planning Association News... everybody's got one... good... conference coming up in October ... good way to get this year's training credits., next year's training credits... Mr. Kanter — The more that can go the better, but in terms of training credits, I think a lot of people have now, gone to some training, and there are also going to be something sponsored by the City, bringing in the State... Department of State people ... I think it's going to be toward the end of the year ... I don't have a lot of information about it yet, but they're going to have another training session and that's going to be here in Ithaca... Chairperson Wilcox — Do you, Ladies and Gentlemen know that there...sorry Rod, embarrass you ... there are about 20 members of the Board of Directors of the New York Planning Federation and two of those Board of Directors sit right here on this Planning Board ... Rod and myself... Board Member Talty — So we can come to you... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, more volunteer work, and trips to Albany and all over the place for Board of Director's meetings and things like that, though we were in Syracuse last time, just a short drive ... better than being in Albany and Troy New York at 10 in the morning on a Saturday, in the winter. Okay ... so no other business? Thank you all. Anything from this side? You're holding up... Alternate Member Erb — We had this letter from Ms. Freidreich? We're just noting it? Chairperson Wilcox. — It's ... I think it's relative, once Cayuga Cliffs comes back ... so, hang on to it... PB Minutes 08/21/07 Pg. 72 Alternate Member Erb — And the same for this one? Chairperson Wilcox — The EMC's comments on Briarwood Il, yeah, save it, when and if it comes back to us. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion, meeting adjourned at 9:44 p.m Su N, Paulette Neilsen Deputy Town Clerk TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, August 21, 2007 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center, Caldwell Road, 7 :05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off Caldwell Road in the northeast corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine Complex, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the demolition of several small cinder block buildings for the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, +/- 70 foot tall, facility to include laboratories (rated with Biological Safety Levels of 2 and 3) and office space. The primary use of the facility will be for veterinary disease diagnostic programs associated with necropsy and histopathology, and will also include teaching programs and other research and support activities. The building will be physically connected to the existing Schuman Hall, associated with the Veterinary College. The project will consolidate 70 existing parking spaces currently scattered throughout the site, and add approximately 8 new spaces (4 handicapped spaces and 4 short term drop off spaces). The project will also include development of new stormwater management facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; John M. Keefe, Agent. 8:00 P.M. Discussion and possible resolution to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding current zoning regulations and student housing in the Pennsylvania Avenue / Kendall Avenue area. 5. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 6. Approval of Minutes: August 7, 2007, 7. Other Business: 8, Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, August 21, 2007 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, August 21, 2007, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Animal Health Diagnostic Center located off Caldwell Road in the northeast corner of the College of Veterinary Medicine Complex, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 67 -1 -10.2 and 67 -1 -10.4, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the demolition of several small cinder block buildings for the construction of a new +/- 126,000 square foot, +/- 70 foot tall, facility to include laboratories (rated with Biological Safety Levels of 2 and 3) and office space. The primary use of the facility will be for veterinary disease diagnostic programs associated with necropsy and histopathology, and will also include teaching programs and. other research and support activities. The building will be physically connected to the existing Schuman Hall, associated with the Veterinary College. The project will consolidate 70 existing parking spaces currently scattered throughout the site, and add approximately 8 new spaces (4 handicapped spaces and 4 short term drop off spaces). The project will also include development of new stormwater management facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; John M. Keefe, Agent, Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matter or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, August 13, 2007 Publish: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 Wednes day; Aug ust 15;2007 1 THE ITHACA JOURNAL Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street August 21, 2007 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN4N Please Print Clearly, Thank You 0 IT, Maw Address �r_�j _ dA TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Sandra Polce, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday, August 21, 2007 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting: Date of Publication: August 13, 2007 August 15, 2007 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 15`h day of August 2007. �tl, ti - I- (2 //1 �L Notary Public CONNIE F. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No. 01 CL6052878 Qualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 26, 20 J o