Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2007-12-18FILE o`er DATE 2 REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2007 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET ITHACA, NY 14850 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Chairperson: Fred Wilcox Board Members: Eva Hoffmann, George Conneman, Rod Howe, Larry Thayer, Kevin Talty and Susan Riha, Alternate Board Member: Hollis Erb, STAFF: Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Dan Walker, Town Engineer (7:01p.m.); Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner; Christine Balestra, Planner; (8:30p.m.); Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Paulette Neilsen, Deputy Town Clerk. OTHERS Bill Palladino, 295 Main Street, Buffalo, NY Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, 1001 West Seneca Street David Herrick, TG Miller, Ithaca Paula Wedemeyer, 1120 West Moonlit Place, Tuscan, Arizona Christopher Alpha, 260 Hayts Road Michael Bennett, 645 Sheffield Road John Bosak, 1448 Trumansburg Road Doug Pokorney, 282 Hayts Road George Vignaux, 1470 Trumansburg Road David Parks, Schlather, Geldenhuys, Dunbar and Salk, 200 East Buffalo Street Mark Parker, Keystone Associates, 229 -231 State Street, Binghamton Kathleen Freidrich, 1201 Trumansburg Road Howard Blaisdell, Columbus, Ohio Amy Dake, SRF and Associates, 3495 Winton Place, Rochester Carl Sgrecci, Vice President for Finance and Administration, 200 Job Hall Herman Sieverding, Intergraded Acquisition and Development, 15 Thornwood Drive 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 December 10, 2007 and December 12, 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 December 12, 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. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 2 Chairperson Wilcox announces the first agenda item at 7:06p.m. PERSONS TO BE HEARD There was no one wishing to address the Board at this time. Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 7:07p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 330 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62 =1 -3.2, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/= 5.959 acre lot into two parcels consisting of a +/= 1.703 acre parcel, containing the existing Rite Aid Pharmacy, and a +/- 4.256 acre parcel located off Mitchell Street which would be available for future development. 1093 Group, LLC, Owner /Applicant. Bill Palladino, 295 Main Street, Buffalo, NY Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. And you wish to make a short presentation? Mr. Palladino — Yes. We've been before you for the subdivision previously and at that time there were a number of outstanding items which we've since went back and corrected, changed, modified, simplified...So at this point, we feel that we are ready to proceed. In terms of the property, we've finished the crosswalk, cleaned up the property, pursuant to the Board's comments last time. We've also redrafted or modified a number of different existing agreements and new agreements that will go into effect between us and a potential purchaser for the property in the rear. At this time, I believe the Town Attorney is satisfied with all those agreements and where we started to where we are now, and I think, it's my understanding we have answered all the questions and, hopefully, we're ready to proceed at this point. Chairperson Wilcox — Let me start with a nod of the head from the Attorney for the Town, Susan, you have reviewed the agreements? Ms. Brock — I have and made comments and all of the changes I have requested have been made. The agreements between 1093 Group and the Town have actually been executed, fully, by the 1093 Group and the Town. The agreements between the prospective purchaser and the Town have also been fully executed. And there are other agreements between the two property owners that also have been worked out. Chairperson Wilcox — I forgot to do something.... Kevin... Board Member Talty — I'll be abstaining from these proceedings. Chairperson Wilcox — As a result, the alternate, our alternate will be filling in for Kevin this evening, during this particular agenda item. I apologize for forgetting. Chairperson Wilcox — Is there, was there an agreement having to do with the stormwater management given the location of the detention pond? PB 12.18.07 Pg. 3 Ms. Brock — Yes. 1093 Group previously had an Operation, Maintenance and Reporting Agreement with the Town requiring them to inspect and maintain and repair the pond. Because that property, the parcel, the property is being subdivided into two parcels and the pond is located on the parcel that's going to be conveyed away, so, there are new Stormwater Operation, Maintenance and Reporting Agreements with both owners of both parcels and the Town; and, the owners of the two parcels also have an agreement between themselves as to who will be responsible between themselves for actually doing the work and how they will allocate the costs. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you very much. George, does that satisfy... Board Member Conneman —That was my question. It looked like the pond was out there with nobody responsible for it. Mr. Palladino — No, that's all been worked out. Board Member Conneman — Okay Bill, fine. Chairperson Wilcox — Discussion about the sign, since we also have before a another "simple 2 -lot subdivision" and this one now is asking the Planning Board to make a recommendation to the Zoning Board with regard to what will become an off - premises sign. That being the Rite Aid sign on Mitchell Street as that will be located on the parcel to be divided off. Questions... comments? Board Member Riha — I have a question; does that sign meet our standards? The Rite Aid sign that's coming off.... Chairperson Wilcox — Bill, would you like to answer that question? Board Member Riha — I saw it the other day and I was pretty astounded. Mr. Palladino — As it currently exists, it does meet your standards. Chairperson Wilcox — I can guarantee you all the signage is consistent with our sign laws. Mr. Palladino — We've been through them very thoroughly. Board Member Riha — But then what's our policy with respect to maintaining signs off the premises? Chairperson Wilcox — They are not allowed by right. They are not allowed. Board Member Riha — Okay, so the Planning Board would have to approve that. Chairperson Wilcox — No, we make a recommendation to the Zoning Board. The Zoning Board would have to grant a variance to allow an off - premises sign, yes. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 4 Mr. Kanter — And 1093 Group has submitted an application to the Zoning Board with, actually, Cornell University has a co- sponsor of that application for the sign variance. Board Member Riha — But the idea is that sign would be changed to a sign that contained multiple signs? Mr. Kanter — Well, this is a suggestion that we have for the Planning Board's recommendation as well as for the Zoning Board, should they choose to grant the variance. That, if a future sign becomes necessary for future uses on the property, that the Rite Aid sign become consolidated with whatever other sign goes up there, all of which would need t be conforming to the Town zoning, which means the size of the sign would not be able to be any larger than what's out there, really. Chairperson Wilcox — The key is, if we were to recommend that this off - premises sign be allowed to remain, that we don't wind up with two signs there... Board Member Riha — Exactly right. That's what I'm concerned about... Chairperson Wilcox -- ...right, and that's really what, essentially what Staff recommendation is, that's embodied in the draft resolution before us. We're kind of jumping around, we're kind of hemming and hawing about the proposed purchaser... it's Cornell University... Mr. Kanter — Yeah, I made it clear in our Memo, which is a public document, that it is Cornell University Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, it is Cornell University. Board Member Riha — But they seem to want to have signs over there, remember... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, yeah, so the question is, one are we, and again, we make a recommendation to the ZBA, are we comfortable with an off - premises sign, given the proposed language in our recommendation that, should Cornell University, or whoever owns that property want to put a sign there, that the Rite Aid sign and the new sign would be combined and would be subject to review. Yeah, yeah...) remind all of us that we have been very, very strict in regard to signage in that area. Mr. Palladino knows that, knows that very well, we have not varied much if at all from the sign law along that stretch of, that area of East Hill Shopping Plaza and Mitchell Street and Pine Tree Road, Alternate Member Erb — I was going to say that I am in favor of this suggestion that the sign be allowed but with the understanding that should additional signage be needed, they all become consolidated. I think that for the public to know that that is a correct driveway to get to the Rite Aid is a reasonable public good. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Yeah. Board Member Conneman — Will that be in the resolution? PB 12.18.07 Pg. 5 Ms. Brock — It is. It's in the draft resolution. Chairperson Wilcox — It's in the resolution as drafted, yes, and again, I remind everybody, including the public, that we are only making a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Kanter — I think that portion, George, is in the part with the sign recommendation because it's a recommendation that the Zoning Board condition it that way. Board Member Conneman — Okay. Ms. Brock — And of course, should Cornell develop the property in the future, they would very likely need site -plan approval so they would be coming back here, and at that point, if they are proposing to change the sign in any way, that would be part of the site - plan approval as well. So what's happening right now is that the sign is just permitted to stay where it is, which will now become off - premises because of the subdivision. That's why that whole issue is before you right now. Board Member Hoffmann — I just wanted to bring up that I feel a little uncertain about which are the 10 parking places, shown on the subdivision plat, which would remain with the Rite Aid parcel? Ms. Brock — I can answer that, because I labored long and hard to understand that myself. So, if you look at Parcel A, at the one -story building which is the Rite Aid building, which is sitting right in the center of the map, off the northwest corner of that building are 15 parking spaces that are just south of what used to be the Courtside building... look at the western boundary of Parcel A... Board Member Hoffmann — Is that shown by the line which has a little arrowhead up at the top? Ms. Brock — Yes, and if you count the spaces, there will be 10 of them there... Board Member Hoffmann — I count 9... Chairperson Wilcox — You have to count the one with the E. Board Member Hoffmann — Oh, okay. Ms. Brock — So those are now, because of the way the property is being subdivided, fully on Parcel A's property. And then you'll see, just to the west of those, are another 5 which are now on Parcel B and then right below that there's a notation "easement for 5 parking spaces granted to Courtside Racquet and Fitness, in this area, with an arrow, those 5 are also, because of the way the line is drawn, now on Parcel B. So the effect is that Parcel A gets 10 of the 20 shared spaces, Parcel B gets the other 10 spaces. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 6 Board Member Hoffmann —Yeah, I understood the text saying that, but I didn't see it on the map and I wanted to be sure that the map actually showed what we are talking about. And if you feel this shows it sufficiently then I'm happy too. Ms. Brock — Yes, I'm fine with this. Chairperson Wilcox — And the net is that the Rite Aid parcel winds up this the required number of parking spaces, plus 2, if I remember correctly. Ms. Brock — And then, should Cornell ever want to develop the property or a subsequent owner, obviously again, they would need to come in with a proposal and at that time you would make a determination as to whether the proposal contains adequate parking. Chairperson Wilcox — Any other questions? There being none, Bill, I will ask you to take a seat and I'll give the public a chance. Ladies & Gentlemen, this is a public hearing this evening, if you wish to address the Planning Board on this particular agenda item, we invite you up to have a seat, be comfortable, give us your name and address and we'd be most interested to hear what you have to say this evening. There being no one, I will close the public hearing at 7:17p.m. Board Member Thayer — I'll move the resolution. Board Member Howe — I'll second. Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by Larry Thayer, seconded by Rod Howe. Susan, any changes? Ms. Brock — I don't have any changes. Chairperson Wilcox — There being no further discussion, all those in favor please signal by saying aye, anybody opposed...no one is opposed, there are no abstentions, the motion is passed. Thank you Bill. Mr. Kanter — One note to Bill is that we do need the mylar original for signing, so if you have it here, leave it with us. Thank you. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - 135 Final Subdivision Approval, 1093 Group, LLC Two -Lot Subdivision 330 Pine Tree Road Tax Parcel No. 62 -1 -3.2 Planning Board, December 18, 2007 Motion made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Rod Howe. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 7 WHEREAS. 1. 1. This action is consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two- lot subdivision located at 330 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62- 1 -3.2, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 5.959 acre lot into two parcels consisting of a +/- 1.703 acre parcel, containing the existing Rite Aid Pharmacy (Parcel A), and a +/- 4.256 acre parcel located off Mitchell Street which would be available for future development (Parcel B). 1093 Group, LLC, Owner /Applicant, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in conducting an uncoordinated environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has on September 18, 2007, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, and 3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, after holding a public hearing on September 18, 2007, granted preliminary subdivision approval for the requested two -lot subdivision with three conditions that had to be met prior to consideration of final subdivision approval, and said conditions have been met by the applicant, and 4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on December 18, 2007, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a survey map entitled "Subdivision Map Showing Lands of 1093 Group LLC, No. 322 -350 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," prepared by Darrin A. Brock, LS, dated 8/2/2007 and revised 8/8/2007, and other application materials, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Final Subdivision Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot subdivision located at 330 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62- 1 -3.2, Community Commercial Zone, as shown on the survey map entitled "Subdivision Map Showing Lands of 1093 Group LLC, No. 322 -350 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," prepared by Darrin A. Brock, LS, dated 8/2/2007 and revised 8/8/2007, subject to the following conditions: a. Submission of one original or mylar copy of the survey map, signed and sealed by the licensed surveyor who prepared the survey with the required PB 12.18.07 Pg. 8 surveyor's certificate, to be recorded, for signing by the Planning Board Chair, and b. Granting of the necessary sign variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow the freestanding sign located on Parcel B adjacent to the Mitchell Street entrance to the subject site to remain in its current location as an off - premises sign, where Section 221 -4 of the Town of Ithaca Code prohibits off - premises signs, said variance to be granted no later than February 25, 2008, or upon failing to receive the necessary sign variance by said date, then the current or future owner of Parcel B shall remove said freestanding sign no later than March 25, 2008, and c. Submission of the receipt of filing of the plat in the Tompkins County Clerk's Office to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, and d. Unless otherwise stated in this resolution, all conditions and elements of the Planning Board's Final Site Plan Approval in PB Resolution No. 2005 -121, dated December 6, 2005, shall remain in effect unless otherwise modified by the Planning Board, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, hereby recommends to the Zoning Board of Appeals that a sign variance be granted to allow the freestanding sign located on Parcel B adjacent to the Mitchell Street entrance to the subject site to remain in its current location as an off - premises sign, where Section 221 -4 of the Town of Ithaca Code prohibits off - premises signs, subject to the following condition: a. In the event that further development is approved and constructed on Parcel B of the subject site, any freestanding sign on Parcel B that includes a reference to the Rite Aid or subsequent building or use on Parcel A shall be a single sign for multiuse facilities, as described in Section 221- 6.B(2)(b)[2] of the Town of Ithaca Code, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby acknowledges and supports the termination of the shared parking easement between 1093 Group LLC and Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club, L.P. referenced in the Easement Modification Agreement between 1093 Group and Courtside filed in the Tompkins County Clerks Office on January 12, 2006, in which 1093 Group and Courtside would have the right in common to use twenty parking spaces on the property owned by 1093 Group, as shown on the "Subdivision Map Showing Lands of 1093 Group LLC, No. 322 -350 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," prepared by Darrin A. Brock, LS, dated 8/2/2007 and revised 8/8!2007. Cornell University now owns Tax Parcel No. 62 -1 -5, formerly owned by Courtside, and consents to the termination of the above - described parking easement. The Planning Board finds that the termination of PB 12.18.07 Pg. 9 said parking easement does not affect the required number of parking spaces on the developed Rite Aid site (Parcel A on the site owned by 1093 Group). A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Riha and Erb. NAYS: None Recused: Talty The motion passed. Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 7:20p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Equestrian Center located between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -1- 19.12, Agricultural Zone. The proposal involves the development of an equestrian center including pastures, outdoor hunter - jumper and dressage arenas, paddocks, an interior arena and stalls ( +/- 33,000 square feet), and a hay storage and machinery barn. The project will also include a future residence for the owners, stormwater facilities, lighting and parking. Robert & Paula Wedemeyer, Owners /Applicants; Peter J. Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Agent. Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, 1001 West Seneca Street David Herrick, TG Miller, Ithaca Paula Wedemeyer, 1120 West Moonlit Place, Tuscan, Arizona Mr. Trowbridge — I'm Peter Trowbridge, landscape architect here in Ithaca, New York, 1001 West Seneca Street. David Herrick from TG Miller is here this evening if there are specific questions about stormwater issues, septic, well ... and also, I would like to introduce Paula Wedemeyer, Owner, who is here this evening. Ms. Wedemeyer — Good evening, I'm Paula Wedemeyer, we're the owners of the property. Mr. Trowbridge — So what I'd like to do is give you a little bit of overview about the site for people who, I know there are a couple of new people since we started the process, and to give you a little bit more background. We came before the Board starting almost two years ago, with sketch plan and we've gone through preliminary site - planapproval. Just want to give you an overview of the site and tell you what is the same and what's different since we were here for site - planapproval. I think most of you know, the parcel is a large open area, for the most part, with woodland access on Trumansburg Road, this is the Lucatelli house here, for orientation... If you look at the parcel, this dark green line represents an old tractor driveway which approximates the driveway location that's currently located for the arena PB 12.18.07 Pg. 10 and barn and home. We'll reference this map this evening ... Back here in the woods there's designated wetland ... all of our development and proposals are outside of the woods and subsequently outside of any of the mapped wetlands in the area. To give you a big overview, again, this is Trumansburg Road, this is the Lucatelli house that you see again, this white house here, for orientation... We've engineered a driveway and have been working with DOT and the drive primarily negotiates its way up the hill, and as I think most of you know, despite the fact that the grade continues to rise, there's somewhat of a plateau and it would be very difficult to see these buildings from Trumansburg Road given the topography. So, we're suggesting a 14 -foot wide gravel driveway that would work its way up, again, for orientation, approximately along that line that was used for farm vehicles, up to the arena building. In addition to the arena building, there's a small sort of hay storage and if you know something abut equestrian facilities, you try to get any sort of flammable materials, hay, equipment, outside of the paddock and arena area so there is a small circle building and I believe you have color copies of both the barn and arena, which we'll talk about in a minute, and also this small hay barn. There's also, at this point, an un- designed but located primary residence for the Wedemeyer's that is located more towards the south. To look at this in greater detail, I'll just pop up some drawings that show this in more detail...and then the quality of this place is really very much like the photographs we're showing here. As you come up the driveway there will be pastures on both sides of the driveway, we're looking at a couple different kinds of fence details, but, the nature of this is really, very typically equestrian facility. A lot of fairly well maintained pastures and as you move up, there are a couple of other outdoor training facilities. One for hunter /jumpers, and if you've seen this on television, you'll understand there's a whole series of jumping obstacles, I'm not going to go into great detail, but, there's a fenced area that would allow that to happen. There's a second smaller fenced area that would allow for outdoor dressage training and exhibition. Primarily though, especially off- season, like now, training would happen in an indoor arena facility that's located here. Stalls are located to the west but connected to the arena space there's a small parking lot since many of the horses will be borders; those people will come, on a regular basis, to either ride, train on, visit their horses on -site so there will be ... and having family that owns similar facilities, people tend to sort of come on weekends, not every weekend, to work with their horses, so it tends to be somewhat of an infrequent activity. One thing that has been brought up and we wanted to discuss is that there is an apartment that is proposed in the arena area and again, it's not been ... it's been my experience in most facilities like this, that given the nature of the animals and the expense of the animals, there really is a 24/7 sort of occupancy of that space. It's a small apartment in that facility that is also being proposed. Again, the driveway is gravel. There is some small carriage lights and the lights along the driveway and the lights associated with the outdoor training facilities are all compliant with the Town light ordinance, as we've interpreted it. In addition to that, there has been a very serious look at stormwater. There's a small existing pond that sometimes has water in it, sometimes not. A couple of summers ago, we had a dry summer and there was really no water there at all. However, we're using PB 12.18.07 Pg. 11 that facility, TG Miller has worked with the team to use that as our stormwater facility, our practice on the site, it would both be an amenity, it would improve upon that small pond that is currently, as it exists right here, would enlarge that, but also it would be a way to capture stormwater before it would leave the site. We'll be using wells and septic systems. There is public water in Trumansburg Road; however, we did do a preliminary cost estimate at bringing public water to the facility and it is substantial, so we are going to be using wells and storage on site and septic. Obviously we will be working with Tompkins County Health Department on septic design and (inaudible). I know there was interest last time as well in the nature of the facility and the colors and right now both the hay barn and the arena have sort of a buff /cream color base to them with a reddish -brown roof and detailing on the doors, shutters. We see this as a working farm as intended in the agricultural zone and, however, there are lots of farm possibilities out there, we feel that an equestrian facility in this location, you know, really would be a good neighbor as compared to many other things that could legally happen within the agricultural zone. We think this is probably a very good use for this piece of property. Just as an aside, I'm trying to remember, it's 20 years ago, we brought to the Town Board, a very dense housing project, seniors housing project for the same parcel. Since then, as you know, it's been rezoned, but there were lot's of different opportunities to do different things at different times so we think this is an exceptionally good use for this piece of property now having been zoned agricultural. Chairperson Wilcox — All set Peter? All right. Questions ladies and gentlemen. Okay, while you formulate yours, I'm going to look over at Dan ... good evening Dan ... pardon my phone call to you earlier today, I figured it out ... just a slight difference in spelling... sorry if I caused some consternation... We have your memo, having reviewed the proposed stormwater pollution plan, any other comments you want to make? Mr. Walker — No. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, and we should, for the record just mention that we have a stormwater- management study prepared by TG Miller and we have a stormwater pollution prevention plan or SWPP for construction activities also prepared by TG Miller. Board Member Hoffmann —The questions come first ask you, there's a dashed circle on the plan area marked woods, it's west of the parking lot, marked. in sort of a random order, but let me called C101, over in the woods, in the ind I'm wondering what that is, it's not Chairperson Wilcox — It might be, actually, the one on the bottom, Peter, the one that you just covered up. Board Member Hoffmann — It's the erosion and sediment control plan, construction phase, C101... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 12 Chairperson Wilcox — We could show you the one we have here ... there's a little circle out there... Mr. Trowbridge — That must be a floating CAD image, there's nothing in the middle of the woods. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay, fine. Could you take that off the drawing, the final drawing so that we don't have any questions about that. Mr. Trowbridge — I'm sure what that was, there's a compost image and it looks like in the CAD image it's just floating. Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, it appears on some but not others. Mr. Trowbridge — It should not be there. Board Member Hoffmann — Near there, not on this plan, but on some of the other plans as well, there are two compost and manure piles are supposed to be and I imagine that when you are talking about making sure that there is nothing coming out of that that drains to the east, you're also making sure that nothing drains to the west and to the wetlands and the woods. Mr. Trowbridge — They can't, because it goes uphill. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. That's what I wanted to be sure of. Let's see ... I was wondering about this living unit in the arena building. Does the Town have any regulations about that? Ms. Brock — That was something that I wanted to bring up. Because I looked at the zoning in the agricultural zone and I don't believe it would be permitted under the permitted principle uses part of the agricultural zone. It does allow one - family dwelling, but they are proposing a separate home for that; and in addition, the zoning ordinance defines dwelling in a way that I don't think this apartment above the arena would qualify as a dwelling. A dwelling is defined in the zoning ordinance as "a building design or use primarily as a living quarters for one or more families." But the arena is the primary use of that building, so it's not a building designed or used primarily as living quarters. There is a provision in the agricultural zone that perhaps may apply. It could be an "accessory use authorized by special approval" which would need to be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. It states that "if the property is not used for agricultural purposes, a second dwelling unit in the building other than the principle building on the lot is permitted by special approval provided that" and then there are a number of criteria that apply and when I looked at it, briefly, it looked as if they could qualify for all of those criteria. So, I had spoken, briefly this afternoon, with both Mike and Jonathan about it and I think we're going to propose an addition to the resolution that would make site - planapproval contingent on receipt of any necessary special approvals or variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the apartment. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 13 Board Member Hoffmann — Good because I can see that it makes sense to have some sort of living quarter in there because of what we just heard, about the horses being very valuable and needing to have somebody on the premises all of the time, but at the same time, it might be, just that there's maybe a fire hazard associated with the hay storage, that might be a fire hazard in the arena area because of things being stored there too. So, you know, there are pros and cons. Ms. Brock — There would be other, separate, building code issues and fire and... Board Member Conneman — It is fairly typical on horse farms to do exactly that, and I know something about that because I used to teach an appraisal course and we did horse farms, and that's fairly typical to have somebody there. Chairperson Wilcox — And if it's fairly typical in agricultural uses to have a primary residence and have other residences on the property for temporary workers or even full - time employees who may be working in the agricultural pursuits, so, it's not unusual. Ms. Brock — So another option could be that the ZBA could make an interpretation that the apartment is actually a typical use and falls under the definition of equestrian facility and equestrian facilities are permitted uses. So, perhaps, the resolution can be conditioned on receipt of the interpretation or special approval or any necessary variance, so we could make it broader. But, I guess I'm not comfortable today, on this record, telling you yes, this clearly is a use that's absolutely authorized by the zoning without any further action by the ZBA. Board Member Thayer — Is the house eventually going to be there, in that location? Ms. Brock — You'll have to ask the applicant. They have indicated it on the plans but I think their materials have said that it wouldn't be built immediately. Mr. Trowbridge — That's right. It's not in the first phase, so there will be the apartment and the arena would be in the first phase and the house would be built subsequently. The owners would like to be on -site during the development of this project, as you can imagine, having personal oversight. So that is the intent of having some place to occupy. Also, I would like to talk to Staff some time ... There is a specific reference in Ag & Markets law regarding having a residence within an agricultural buildings and so, sometime we should take a look at this as well. Ms. Brock — We need to look both though, at the Ag & Markets law but also the way our own zoning ordinance is written. But it may be that that information would then inform the ZBA so that they could make the interpretation, yes, this type of residence is something that is part and parcel of an equestrian facility. I guess, you know, not having any information about what is typical and what isn't, that was why I just wasn't prepared tonight to tell you, yes, absolutely, you can state that this is an appropriate, or permitted use, without any further action by the ZBA. Chairperson Wilcox — But I get the sense from the Board members that this is certainly a reasonable part of an equestrian facility. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 14 Alternate Member Erb — Yes, it's expected, in a very high - class... Chairperson Wilcox — Eva, the floor is still yours. Board Member Hoffmann -- Okay. Thank you, yes. I was wondering about the lights, in general, and I am having trouble finding this among all the papers now. ..there were too many papers to read ... but it looks like the lights along the driveway will be on low poles and they will be shielded, though I thought I saw a picture of a light that looked more like a glass all around kind of thing, that wasn't shielded, but I was wondering about... anyway, I think the lights along the driveway seem to be okay as far as not disturbing the other residences around here with light spillage, but I was more concerned about the lights on the fields, because they...it sounded like they would be on taller poles. Mr. Trowbridge — But they're on ... they're shielded lights, Eva, so the lights also comply with the Town lighting ordinance. We did, we do have lights that are black -sky cut -off fixtures that you would typically sort of want, or what your ordinance suggests you are looking for. And that's what we proposed around the arena building. Chairperson Wilcox — Hold on ... Mike... Mr. Smith — Yeah, I was just confirming the same thing. In looking at it, it looks like all of the lights, the driveway or the field ones are all meeting the Town lighting law, and beyond that, I think from what Peter told me too or is in here, the ones on the field aren't going to be on all the time, it's a quite limited time period when they would actually be used. Chairperson Wilcox — Just for the record, we do have cut - sheets for the proposed lights. Board Member Thayer — I see why Eva is asking ... it appears that the bulb is in full view there... Mr. Trowbridge — The carriage light that you have has a shield over the bulb, so it looks like it is exposed, but it actually has a little shield around the bulb itself. Like a little toilet paper roll, you know, so there's illumination but you don't see the bulb. I think some of the fixtures you are seeing too, the cut - sheets, where they are actually trying to show you the fixture, so it's tipped up, you're not necessarily seeing it the way it would be positioned on the pole. Board Member Thayer — This is straight up here. Mr. Smith — A lot of times the actually fixture up there, you're not looking at the bulb, you're only looking at a fake chimney so that during the daytime it looks like there is a bulb in there, but the actual bulb that's making the light is located higher up in the shielded part of the fixture. Board Member Hoffmann — And that's what these fixtures are like? PB 12.18.07 Pg. 15 Mr. Smith — I believe so, yeah. Mr. Trowbridge -- In fact, we've been using them in lots of different places ... in Aurora New York, it looks like a traditional fixture, and that's the intent, we want to have a facility that has historical like qualities but the bulb, Mike's absolutely right, is up in the housing, and so you get the appearance of antiquation without necessarily having an exposed bulb. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. My additional question about all of these lights is, since the whole site is on a slope, and the lights up on the field are fairly high with comparison, compared to the houses that are along Route 96B, where they might have problems from those lights, is there still no spillage, having the lights up there and coming down on the residences? Mr. Trowbridge — When I go up on the site Eva, I am trying to imagine even seeing the barn because of the way the topo goes up and then it flattens out. When you're on Trumansburg Road, I think it's going to be difficult even to see a 30 -foot high structure. The barn is up on sort of a plateau area, so it's not a continuous grade. What you'd see is that it's steeper, and then you can actually see the grades on the driveway, and then it flattens out. So we've done everything that we believe that is responsible in terms of reducing, making sure that we conform to local law. Alternate Member Erb — If I were one of the neighbors who lived in one of the homes just south of the property, I would be on almost the same elevation though. (no) I'm still going to be at a different elevation? Mr. Trowbridge — Well, though, certainly the home, there's one home up here, and Lucatelli's certainly are, and Lucatelli's, we did put in an evergreen buffer between their house and the property, realizing the their house is probably the most exposed. It's close to this elevation. Most of the homes are down at the elevation of Trumansburg Road and this location. Alternate Member Erb — And there are no homes on the property to the south? Mr. Trowbridge — The property to the south is a vineyard. It was, actually parceled from this bigger Babcock property and if you've driven up there, it's where the new vineyard is going in. Chairperson Wilcox — Something about the appropriate micro - climate in that area. (tape switch) Eva, the floor is still yours I believe. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay ... let me see what other questions I had... Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Susan. Board Member Riha — Yeah, I had a question about the stormwater management plan, either you or Dan could answer, about the culvert sizing. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 16 Chairperson Wilcox — Go for Dan. Board Member Riha — Because it says, it sounds like this, the stormwater retention pond is going to have an outlet, but then, it implies that there's this 12" driveway culvert on the Lucatelli property that's going to have to be replaced... Mr. Walker — I believe it's a driveway culvert and that will be replaced and up -sized to carry increased flow into the catch - basin. Board Member Riha — But that's the only culvert in this whole system? Mr. Walker — Well there's a culvert ... I don't know if you want to call it a culvert ... it's the outlet for the pond basically, which ends at the driveway... Board Member Riha — Right so that's a pipe coming out, but otherwise it enters a swale, alongside the driveway, and so the only culvert it is going through is on that Lucatelli property. Mr. Walker -- It's actually... Board Member Riha — Until it enters the DOT... Mr. Walker -- ...in the State highway right -of -way I believe. Mr. Trowbridge — And the intention is to try have storm drainage surface for as much as possible and sheet drain, as you would expect. I mean, we're trying not to concentrate. Board Member Riha — Okay. That's just what I wanted to make clear. Chairperson Wilcox — It's going from a 12" to a 15" pipe if I remember right. Board Member Thayer — Question either for Dan or Peter, if they have a problem with the wells or they can't get water for some reason or another, is there enough pressure from the street to get it up there without a pumping.... Mr. Walker — Yes. There's plenty of pressure. Board Member Hoffmann — I think that's almost it. I have a couple of questions having to do with the resolution. The previous resolution asked to have the "building designs, elevation finishes, colors" and so on, "other usual building details prior to final site -plan approval, and the submission of materials showing the size, location and design of all proposed signs, prior to site -plan approval ", and now in the current resolution, it says "submission of those things prior to issuance of building permit" in the first case, and "issuance of sign permit" in the second case, but it doesn't say who would be approving those things. Mr. Smith — The one res...the first condition there could probably be taken off because they were provided at your desk tonight when you came in. It had the colors of the PB 12.18.07 Pg. 17 buildings and the sign permit would just be...if it needed a variance or something, it would have to come back to you anyway, so, if it meets the requirements, it would just be going to the code enforcement to issue the sign permit. Mr. Trowbridge — (inaudible) ... clearly though, we weren't prepared this evening to actually give you a sign design. In the letter, we did spell out the size and we do understand the sign ordinance and the lighting ordinance that would be associated with it, but we didn't have a design to bring to you this evening. Board Member Hoffmann — Do you have more information about the building materials other than just the drawing showing the colors? Mr. Trowbridge — It is going to be fundamentally a pole barn with metal siding. Board Member Hoffmann— Pardon. Mr. Trowbridge — A pole barn with metal siding and there's a lot of wood detail as well. The doors, shutters, other materials. Board Member Conneman — Peter, why Eva's raising the question is that usually we have a sample of the roof, the sides, and so on and so forth. Mr. Trowbridge — Yeah, yeah ... we can ... certainly we can provide that if Staff would like to see that but it's going to be a raised level roof and metal siding basically on a pole - barn structure. Board Member Hoffmann — I noticed that on the first drawing, let's see, is there a number here ... the top drawing in the packet ... it doesn't say preliminary, but, on the other two it says "preliminary ", does that mean those designs could change? Mr. Trowbridge — I think that was just the stage that those drawings were at and rather than modify someone else's drawing, we didn't do that. So that the drawing that you see on the top is the final drawing. Chairperson Wilcox — George, I'm going to ask you a question, given your expertise in this area ... If horses of significant value are going to be boarded here, then my presumption is that the building itself has to be built in such a way that one protects the horses and two, probably the owners of those horses would probably want their horses in a nice looking building, wouldn't they? Board Member Conneman — Absolutely. And I can envision what the building looks like but I think since there's seven members of this Board, they ought to have a chance to look at the materials Peter, that's the issue. Chairperson Wilcox — Right. If you own a $100,000 horse or a $1,000,000 horse, I'm not sure they are going to be boarded here, you certainly want your horse boarded in the proper facility, right. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 18 Board Member Conneman — Absolutely. Mr. Kanter —The horses won't care... Mr. Kanter — Yeah but you know what, the owners care I think. Board Member Conneman — It's very important for the horse to be able to socialize in the barn and all kinds of stuff like that. That's why they build windows in horse barns, and...I just raise the question because I... Chairperson Wilcox — No, understood, and we applaud applicants who come in and bring in samples of shingle and ...don't we... Board Member Conneman — Absolutely. It just makes it simpler, Peter, for everybody. Chairperson Wilcox — But nonetheless you've represented the colors, from the cream color of the building to the brown used in the shingles and that should be referenced, these three documents should be referenced in the resolution, though the first one doesn't have any identifying sheet number on it, so I'll let you deal with that. Chairperson Wilcox — Any other questions... Hollis... please. Alternate Member Erb — If I may, as far as the two outdoor arenas go, they both have bleachers and they have some lighting, and will you be able to assure the neighbors that the frequency of nighttime lighting past 8 or 9 o'clock in the evening is not going to be more than X number of nights per year or anything like that? Ms. Wedemeyer — To answer your question, the activities that we plan to conduct on this property are within reason and normal activities of an equestrian facility and I am a little taken aback that some of these issues are such an issue because to me a horse person would assume these things. Most people that are involved in horse activities, nowadays, are of my generation. We're a bit longer of tooth and we work for a living, so in situations like this, if there was not snow, then I would assume that the lights would be on if they were riding outside. That the lights would be on from say, 5:00 or whenever it gets dark here, it seems like it gets dark at 3:00 but, let's say from 5:00 until the barn closes and you do have to set a time to close the barn. Most people, like, let's say that if the barn closed at 10:00 which is probably what the operating hours would be, is at 10:00 you need to be off the premises, that it takes approximately an hour to forty -five minutes to unsaddle the horse, groom the horse, prepare him to put him back in his stall. You know, most people really enjoy taking care of their animals, fluffing the bedding, filling water buckets, that type of things. Could it happen every night? It could. There's a whole spectrum, a whole continuum of horse people and how involved they are. Some people board their horses, come to see them once a month, some people would live in the barn if you allowed them to, guilty ... So, it could happen. Will there be lights on on the weekends? Probably, weekends will probably be very active. Again, when there is normal daylight hours would you leave the lights on? No. The lights do need to, the riding areas do need to be illuminated well enough to prevent any injuries and you don't want them coming back to me as the property owner, to you as the Town PB 12.18.07 Pg. 19 Board, saying you know, you did not allow enough light to be safe. That safety, unfortunately, horseback riding is a bit of a dangerous sport, that safety needs to be the number one concern. So, the bottom line to your question is, you know, I can't give you definite hours. It would be normal, you know, we do have an indoor facility, so in situations like this where the weather is inclement, they would probably be riding indoors, otherwise the lights would be on. Alternate Member Erb — If I lived in this neighborhood, I think I would prefer to hear that on most nights, those lights were going to be off by a certain time, it was coherent with your 10:00 closing time. I would also like to know that there wouldn't be a public - address system being used in the arena every weekend and a couple of nights every week... Board Member Hoffmann — Or ever, perhaps. Alternate Member Erb — Or even, perhaps, forever. I completely understand the need for safety in these two arenas. The issue is light and noise spillage into the surrounding neighborhood, and I think especially public- address systems at a show might be a problem yeah, and I simply, I raise that. If you are a very active and very successful barn, it might get to be enough shows or activities that it would become very tiresome were I a neighbor. I raise that for this... Board Member Riha — A point of clarification ... I mean, I'm not saying it's not an important point, but isn't that a SEQR issue, noise? Or is that a final site plan? Wouldn't that have been brought at SEQR? Alternate Member Erb -- Well, a mitigatible issue can be final site plan. Chairperson Wilcox — It's generally a SEQR issue, yes. Alternate Member Erb — Well, I wasn't here. Chairperson Wilcox — That's right, you weren't here two years ago. Before I go on, there is some discussion going on here ... this is in a Town of Ithaca agricultural zone... Mr. Kanter — Correct. Chairperson Wilcox.. ....which permits equestrian uses... Mr. Kanter — Correct. I believe it's also in a County agricultural district, which is the other issue we were sort of talking about. Chairperson Wilcox — When you say County agricultural district...? Mr. Kanter — That means under the State Ag & Markets law, there are certain protected rights for farm operations... Chairperson Wilcox — And this is considered... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 20 Mr. Kanter — We.. .1 think it, that an equestrian facility in an ag district is considered a farm operation. It may not be considered that in our zoning, per se, as a use, but... Chairperson Wilcox — But under the State... Mr. Kanter — I believe under the State law it would be considered a farm operation and would have certain protected rights. Chairperson Wilcox — I want to look at this from another way real briefly if I can ... this is a 72 -acre parcel, what's the minimum lot size for a residential development? In an agricultural zone? Is it 30? Mr. Kanter — No, actually, for a residential lot it's between one and two acres, about that. Chairperson Wilcox— Okay. So if they were.... Mr. Kanter — Not more than two acres, actually. Chairperson Wilcox — So let's assume, I can divide two into seventy -two but we need to leave room for other things like depth ... so it's possible you could get twenty -five, thirty lots, if not more... Mr. Smith — This is not a 7 -acre density, so... Chairperson Wilcox — Oh, so, I'm sorry, so what you're saying is it would be 10 residential units could be built, but they would have to be clustered on 2 -acre lots, would be the maximum density permitted under the Town zoning, okay, thank you. Alternate Member Erb — Don't get me wrong, I'm a horse owner and I think it's a beautiful looking. facility and I understand it's a permitted use, I'm just looking to, I'm raising the issue of whether we can craft the fact that it is a permitted use and yet a public address system after 10:00 at night is a no -no. Board Member Hoffmann — And it is in other cases that we have talked about fairly recently, like sports fields. The ones that were built off of Game Farm Road for Cornell University and other similar ones before, we have put limits on ... when the lights can be on, when they can go on and when they have to go off and whether that can be public address systems at all, and if they are permitted, the hours that they are allowed to operate, and for that matter, noise created by trucks in the construction of something. Those hours that noise can be made by the trucks, we limit. Chairperson Wilcox — Be careful... Susan... Ms. Brock — I would need to look at the Ag & Markets law to see whether this is a type of farming operation that's protected... Board Member Hoffmann —Yes, I understand that... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 21 Ms. Brock -- ...So I can't tell you right now, because I haven't looked at that, but if it is protected, I think we would be very restricted in what we could do regarding noise and requiring them to turn off lights at a certain time. I mean, when you think about it, a farmer would be permitted to run his tractor, with lights, making noise, without the Town's ability to say you must stop at 10:00 at night, you must turn off your lights, you must not make noise ... So I think you would have to think of it in those types of terms if in fact it's protected. Let me take a real quick look ... Mr. Trowbridge just handed me and we'll see if in fact this... Chairperson Wilcox — If indeed it is an agricultural use under New York State law, then we are very restricted in what we can do. Alternate Member Erb — And sometimes when we have raised this issue, the applicant has been kind enough to make some declaration, and I was hoping that perhaps that would happen. I did hear her say that probably the barn would be closing at 10:00. Ms. Wedemeyer — And don't forget also, we are going to be living on the property and one of the goals that we have is a quality of life. This is something that we've spent the last 20 -some years working towards, so, and I think that we've demonstrated that we are willing to be good neighbors. We do understand the issues. We understand. Mr. Smith — I was just going to add that in the new outdoor - lighting law, it does have time restrictions for recreational facilities which allows them to be on until 11:00. So it does have that, which would cover these types of facilities. Alternate Member Erb — I had another ... I just wanted to make the comment that I hope that you work very carefully in crafting the trails, on the back of the property, because my experience riding trails is that as soon as you are anywhere near a wet area and it begins to get a little bit muddier, every horse wants to avoid it, and where we had a wetland, then we just have a mud pit as, you understand what I'm saying ... as all the horses say 'I don't want to step in that' and it just, it deteriorates rapidly. And so, if there's any way that you could restrict horses and trails from some of that wetlands area and be very firm about where the trails are going to go and maybe even some trail repair, I think that would be lovely, in the future. Chairperson Wilcox — Kevin. Board Member Talty — I just, I, one question and one concern. The question is, architecturally, isn't there a way to almost eliminate the amount of noise from the inside of the equestrian center? I gotta think that nowadays, whether it's foam insulation or whatever the case may be, it could certainly dampen the effect, going forward. Have you looked at that? Mr. Trowbridge -- I think unless the doors were open in the summer, its wintertime use and for most of the year, when the doors are closed, you're going to have very little noise and the building will attenuate most of that noise. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 22 Board Member Talty — Okay. And secondly, I don't know exactly how to say this, we have vineyards, we have an equestrian center, but, Dan, what's the available water in the well system? Is there a way to measure that? Because horses drink a lot of water, right, and vineyards use a lot of water as well ... I'm just worried about the surrounding area and the water table. Mr. Walker — Well for one thing, you've got these two wells in the middle of a 70 -acre lot. The next well is probably the house to the north which looks like it's probably 500 feet and I'm not sure where their well is located, but, the aquifer on the west hill is very inconsistent. You can have ... I used to live on Van Dorns Road which is just, on the same strata but over a little ways, I had a 30 -foot deep well, we had unlimited water, we had no trouble. My neighbor across the street, the house was 500 -feet away or 400 - feet away, he had a 200 and some foot well and he had sulfur in his water and very low water. So there's a lot of ... there's some pockets of gravel and so on, I've not seen a map on this ... I would say they may have problems with water up there. Now, they are going to store some I believe. If they run out of well water, the public water main is available. Public water is available up there. Board Member Talty — I guess I was concerned about the aquifer underneath and if it is inconsistent, would that exacerbate the situation, given the ... Mr. Walker — No, generally I think that there's not a lot of connectivity between them. I mean, maybe in the deep -rock aquifers there might be, but generally, the deeper -rock aquifers would have a much wider area so that the draw -down would not extend beyond... Unless we did a number of well tests and draw -down tests, I couldn't be sure exactly what the yield would be. You're planning 30 stalls? Mr. Trowbridge — Yes and as Dan said, we were just talking earlier today about having a cistern. I know that my sister - in-law's, brothel's farm, where they have 100 horses, they have a, the cistern is not just about water storage, but, if we had an ice storm and lost electricity for several days, we need a water capacity, so they have a 30,000 gallon cistern that's gravity fed to their barns, so in off hours they're pumping. And I can just, live on the same strata, on my house on West Hill, and I can just tell you from experience, I have two wells, one pints —per- minute, sulfur and one, 50 feet away that's perfectly good 20 gallons -a- minute, 50 feet away. There's so, I concur, there's so much variation on West Hill in that one geologic stratum. Board Member Hoffmann — By the way, Dan, you mentioned in your letter one well at the arena and one well at the residence, but the plans C201 shows two wells by the arena and one by the residence, which is the correct one? Mr. Trowbridge — The (inaudible) shows two wells by the arena. Chairperson Wilcox — Any other questions while Susan I know is doing some research over here ... I want to give the public a chance to speak. They have been very quiet and very patient and very attentive. Hollis. Alternate Member Erb there be something like there and summertime and somebody is there don't think that there is thought it was an under PB 12.18.07 Pg. 23 —I'll just comment that I was surprised at the suggestion that one person a day coming to and from the barn. With 30 horses and trainers as well as boarders and some horse gets injured twice a day to hose it down, unless your offering that service, going to be a major traffic problem, but I was a little surprised, I estimate. Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody else at this point? Okay. Very good. If you would take a seat, we will give the public a chance. Ladies and Gentlemen, again, thank you all for being very patient this evening, this is a public hearing, if you would raise your hands, I will call upon you in no particular order and we invite you to the microphone and we invite you to let us know what you have to say on this particular agenda item this evening. Michael Bennett, 645 Sheffield Road My name is Michael Bennett, I live on 645 Sheffield Road which is directly behind this property, and my concern is with the, one of my concerns would be with the runoff. The property does reach a point where it does slope down to the wetlands which I own a large part of and I'm not sure by looking at the map how close all of this is going to be to that part of the property where it begins to slope down towards the west. Chairperson Wilcox — Dan, you want to take that one. Mr. Walker — What was the question? Chairperson Wilcox — It had to do with the impact of the facility on the wetlands, either on the property or adjacent to the property. To the west. And I don't know if you, based upon your review of the stormwater management plan or whether Mike as sort of the staff person... Mr. Walker — Everything on the developed part of the property is draining east, and unless we can get water to run uphill, it isn't going to run back to the west. It looks like the topography, there's got to be a break in grade, but that's not shown on the survey information that we have at this time. So it's not going to drain towards the wetlands. Chairperson Wilcox — And we've specifically, the resolution as drafted specifically says no development near, in the DEC wetlands to be allowed. Does that answer your question? Mr. Bennett — I think so. I'm not sure. Can someone answer the question how far away from the west side of the property will the barns be? The riding trails and all of that. Mr. Walker — Okay, just picture, this is only about a 30 -acre portion. This is less than half of the property so I am assuming that the distance from the barn to Trumansburg Road is probably the same distance from the barn to the back of the property, so you are looking at over a 1 ,000 feet there. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 24 Mr. Trowbridge — Just to point out, this is the woodland edge, so everything is east of that woodland edge. Everything occurs in the open, in that open area there. Dan's right, the open area probably occupies half of the property. Board Member Thayer — What is the distance to the Sheffield Road, to that barn? Do you have any idea? Mr. Trowbridge — A long, long way. Mr. Walker — Trumansburg Road, it's at least a mile from Trumansburg Road back to Sheffield. Board Member Thayer — So there should be plenty of buffer distance there. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, let's get back.. potential impact on the wetlands, which we've been working to ensure that they're not impacted. Mr. Bennett — And I guess the only other thing I wanted to say is I am concerned about noise that would be coming from, and the lighting, from a facility of this size, with 30 horses. Chairperson Wilcox — As have we been concerned, obviously. Christopher Alpha, 260 Hayts Road I am probably going to be your closest neighbor, I'm on the south edge of your property, the long rectangular piece coming up against your south edge. I'm delighted that it is going to be a horse farm and not a retirement community or something like that. When the leaves are down, I am going to have a great view of everything that you are doing out there so my concerns have been somewhat relieved a little bit tonight but it looks like things are going to be fairly tastefully done and to a high level...l have some concerns with lighting, noise, because I am going to be looking right at your paddock there. I assume it's a horse paddock I am looking at, that's going to be on the southface, is that correct? I missed some of the earlier... Mr. Trowbridge points out the paddocks and points of interest on the map. Mr. Alpha — Can you describe the (inaudible) or any kind of fencing you're going to use? Mr. Trowbridge shows pictures to Mr. Alpha, Mr. Alpha — How far off the property line are you going to be putting that, would you say? Mr. Trowbridge — It is about 20 -30 feet off the edge. Mr. Alpha — Are you taking any trees down off that edge? I hope not. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 25 Mr. Trowbridge — The trees that are shown on the survey on boundaries and also the trees that are in the pasture (off microphone, couldn't hear the rest) Mr. Alpha — Okay. And my well is 233 feet and I've got sulfur and good luck. It's a 50/50 shot, see what you get. Also, obviously, concerned about taking water out from under me a little bit, or over time, how ever you want to look at it, where ever you drill to, but good luck with the water, it's not fun. The stadium lighting for the... Chairperson Wilcox — Chris, I've got to ask you to address us. Mr. Alpha — Oh, sorry.. the stadium lighting for the arena section, I assume is going to be fairly directional. Meaning lit towards into the interior that will shine in ... we'll see what we get, I guess... Chairperson Wilcox — Mike, if you will, the sign law, or the sign law ... the lighting ordinance not only requires that they be shielded so that there is no escaping of light up, but also that the light be directed down on the area of which they are intended to light to minimize the spillage off -site. Doug Pokorney, 282 Hayts Road live on, my property would be the 24 ... right across from where they are proposing for their house would be my property, from that corner up towards the swamp of the designated wetlands... They're going to have basically three - quarters of a mile of a driveway to get back into their house and it's in the middle of a mile square, so as far as a lot of the questions and activity, there's really only one house that I see might be affected and that's in the corner off the barn where a gentleman built way back up in the pines, but the perimeter is all houses and there's no way for hardly anybody to build backland when they put this in here, so as far as affecting houses on the road and stuff, they're in the middle of a mile- square. I don't see where lights and noise is really ...except for the one house that's off, that would be off from where that shed would be, where the indoor arena would be, all the houses are on the perimeter and they've all got great big backdoor yards. I don't see where the lights and some noise is going to be ... affect most of the neighbors. And I am a horse shoer and I work in these barns and the noise is not generally that bad. Chairperson Wilcox — Before I let you leave ... if you will, have a seat please...you were here two years ago, when we went through the preliminary approval. The plan that is before us tonight has dropped the duplexes that you may remember on the original plan. Mr. Pokorney — Right. Right where those ponds were gonna be. Chairperson Wilcox — I want to make sure that everybody is aware of that, those are no longer part of the plan...l want to make sure everybody is aware of that. Anybody else? George Vignaux, 1470 Trumansburg Road I was concerned about the duplexes at the last meeting. I see that they're gone. would point out that anybody north of Lucatelli on Trumansburg Road is totally shielded PB 12.18.07 Pg. 26 by trees, bushes, shrub, whatever, from lights, noise, anything else. I welcome them to the neighborhood. I am pleased to see the facility going in and I hope that I will be a good neighbor to them. So, as one of the contiguous landowners, I am pleased to see the plans, I like them. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you sir. John Bosak, 1448 Trumansburg Road We are in the property that adjoins just to the east hearings on this and I am really glad to see the way and I, given our druthers, would rather that no devek of land, but of all the things that could happen here, I and we're glad to see it and we look forward to having and I have attended most of the this proceeded. I'm sure my wife )pment ever happen on this piece think this is one of the best things the Wedemeyers for neighbors. Chairperson Wilcox — It is unusual for that many people to show up and speak in favor of something ... (laughter) ... it just is. Would anybody else like to address the Board at this time? Peter, is anyone behind you....no ... there being no one, I will close the public hearing at 8:21p.m. Susan ... are you still researching? Ms. Brock — I'm finished. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Why don't you tell us what you've been researching. Ms. Brock — I was trying to determine whether this proposed equestrian center is considered a "farm operation" as defined by the State Agricultural and Markets Law because the law states that "local governments shall not unreasonably restrict or regulate farm operations within agricultural districts unless it can be shown that public health or safety is threatened." And so the key is whether this equestrian center would be a "farm operation ". "Farm operation" is defined in the law to include "a commercial horse boarding operation." That term is defined as an "agricultural enterprise consisting of at least seven acres and boarding at least ten horses, regardless of ownership, that receives $10,000 or more in gross receipts annually from fees generated through the boarding of horses. They can also receive the fees through producing sale of crops, livestock, and livestock products." So it appears to me that this equestrian center would be considered a farm operation and Jonathan, are we certain it's located within a County agricultural district? Yes, both Jonathan and Mike are nodding yes, so it would get the protections of the Ag & Markets law. Chairperson Wilcox — This is County Ag District 2. The one we just recently discussed. Ms. Brock — So that does limit our ability to impose conditions involving noise and... Chairperson Wilcox — Hours of operation. Ms. Brock - ....hours of operation and things like that. And I also wanted to point out that the Town's noise ordinance that the Town comprehensively revised a year ago, specifically exempts "lawful farm operations on lands, the principle use of which is a farm and which are located within a County agricultural district, created un the Ag & PB 12.18.07 Pg. 27 Markets law." So, even our noise ordinance doesn't apply to "lawful farm operations ". Which, I think, should inform your considerations too. Now, you do have the ability to impose regulations if they don't "unreasonable restrict or regulate farm operations", however, Ag & Markets tends to take a very ... I don't know what the word is ... stringent view of that and considers many types of regulation to "unreasonably restrict or regulate" farm operations, but if you can show that public - health or safety is threatened, then you also can act. So, for example, if you're looking at ingress and egress from the site out onto the highway and things like that, that's a public- safety issue and you certainly have every right to look at that type of thing or circulation of traffic on site, that type of thing, certainly. Or, public - health issues, so if this were near a drinking water reservoir and you had concerns about runoff into the reservoir, things like that, you know, you could have more latitude too, but, you need to be thinking about are there public - health and safety implications here with this particular facility in this location as proposed. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Appreciate it. Ms. Brock — Certainly. Board Member Conneman — I'd like to move the resolution, because all the complaints, all the issues were I think solved by Susan's research and with such favorable people, I move we approve the resolution. I don't know what Susan wants to add to it, but... Board Member Riha — Second. Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by George Conneman, as drafted, seconded by Susan Riha, Okay. We're going to have lot's of changes I think... Ms. Brock — Yes. In the fourth whereas, we're going to add references to the drawings, the three drawings that were on the desk tonight. At the end of the fourth whereas, after the reference to the "water supply and sewage disposal plan, C201, dated 11/28/.07" add "rendered elevations" dated 8/8/07, "Wedemeyer hay storage" (3.01)(undated), and untitled drawing 3.02 (undated). Then we go back to the text; prepared by Trowbridge and Wolf, LLP, delete "and" retain TG Miller, PC, and then add the following "and Finger Lakes Construction Co., Inc." and then go back to the text, and other application material. In the resolved, I would propose adding a new paragraph one that reads as follows, and let me explain it before I read it to you ... There have been changes to the project since preliminary site - planapproval was granted in November of 2005, and under SEQR, you have the discretion to reassess whether the negative determination that was made is still appropriate or whether you should amend it. So, I've drafted a finding or a determination by you stating that the changes are not substantive and therefore, at least regarding potential adverse impacts, environmental impacts, and so there's no need to reassess or emend the negative determination. So I wanted to... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 28 Chairperson Wilcox — Can it be stronger than that? Actually the project has been scaled down by removing the duplexes, I just want to say that for the record. Ms. Brock — Well there's been some other elements. The fact that this has been moved around and things like that too, so, that's why I am wording it the way I am. So, new paragraph one: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board determines that the project changes proposed after the November 15, 2005 preliminary site -plan approval are not substantive regarding any potential adverse environmental impacts and therefore, there is no need to reassess the appropriateness of the November 15, 2005 negative determination of environmental significance or amend such negative determination. So what was paragraph one then becomes paragraph two, and we'll need to add to the end of the first paragraph, the references to all the additional documents... Chairperson Wilcox — ...that were added to whereas number four. Ms. Brock — Yes. Are we deleting entirely paragraph A? Chairperson Wilcox — Submission of building finishes and colors... yes... yes... we' re deleting A. Ms. Brock — Okay, so we'll renumber everything so, obviously beginning with, b becomes a etc. What was f becomes a and I want to just make some changes in there. .. "submission of record of application for' and insert the words "proof of receipt" and delete "approval status" and then it continues on "of all necessary permits", so that we are requiring them to submit proof of receipt of all necessary permits. Do we, I want to ask Jonathan and Mike, do we want to make that condition prior to any issuance of certificate of occupancy? I think that's what we often do. Okay ... So add to the end of that "prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy." Mr. Kanter — I'd say especially since this one involves Health Department approval for water and septic. Ms. Brock — Then I would add a new f, "Receipt of an interpretation from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals that the proposed apartment in the arena building is part of an equestrian facility use, or receipt of special approval or a use variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the apartment." Chairperson Wilcox — If I may, could a staff member make that determination? Wouldn't a staff member make that determination? Would they interpret the zoning and then if the applicant did not like the interpretation, then they would go to the ZBA? Mr. Kanter — Well, that's what we're doing now, interpreting it such that we don't know the answer to that. Ms. Brock — Unless you feel that, you know, the information you have received tonight is enough that you're comfortable saying that it is part of an equestrian facility use. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 29 Chairperson Wilcox — I don't want to overstep a Planning Board's authority as granted to us, so... Ms. Brock — Let me read you the definition, in Zoning, of what an equestrian facility is, and I think you will see why I'm not comfortable... Chairperson Wilcox — No, no, I'm not objecting that they need to go to the ZBA, my question is, who makes the determination? Ms. Brock — I think this...) think because of the way this has all developed, it would be the ZBA. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, don't bother then. Don't bother looking it up. Would you re -read that last one again for me please. Ms. Brock — Receipt of an interpretation from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals that the proposed apartment in the arena building is part of an equestrian facility use, or receipt of special approval or a use variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the apartment. Chairperson Wilcox — Susan that's okay ... George that language is all okay? Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion? There being none, all those in favor please signal by saying aye ... anybody opposed ... no one is opposed... there are no abstentions... thank you very much. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - 136 Final Site Plan Approval Wedemeyer Equestrian Center Between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -1 -19.12 Planning Board, December 18, 2007 Motion made by George Conneman, seconded by Susan Riha. WHEREAS. 1. This action involves consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Equestrian Center located between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -1- 19.12, Agricultural Zone. The proposal involves the development of an equestrian center including pastures, outdoor hunter - jumper and dressage arenas, paddocks, an interior arena and stalls ( +/- 33,000 square feet), and a hay storage and machinery barn. The project will also include a future residence for the owners, stormwater facilities, lighting and parking. Robert & Paula Wedemeyer, Owners /Applicants; Peter J. Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, 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 Site Plan Approval, did on November 15, significance, and 2005 make a negative determination PB 12.18.07 Pg. 30 of environmental 3. The Planning Board, on November 15, 2005, did grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval, with conditions, for the proposed project, and 4. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on December 18, 2007, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, plans entitled "Survey Map Showing a Portion of Lands of Bruce M. Babcock and Dorothy D. Babcock" dated 9/7/2005, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C., "Overall Site Plan" (L101), "Layout Plan" (L201), "Grading Plan" (L301), "Planting Plan" (L401), dated 9/18/2007, "Details & Schedules" (L501), dated 11/28/2007, prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, "Proposed Horse Arena & Stall Barn ", "Floor Plan" (2.01), "2nd Floor Plan" (2.02), "Elevations" (3.01 and 3.02), prepared by Fingerlakes Construction Co. Inc., "Ithaca Equestrian Center' dated 9- 11 -07, "Preliminary Site Plan" (SP 1 of 1), dated Nov 2006, "NYS DOT Driveway Permit - Driveway Geometry Plan & Details" (DW 1 of 2), "NYS DOT Driveway Permit - Traffic Maintenance Plan" (DW 2 of 2), dated July 2007, prepared by Plumley Engineering, "Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Construction Phase" (C101), "Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Stabilization Phase" (C102), "Details" (C103), "Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Plan" (C201), dated 11/28/07, "Rendered Elevations" dated 8/8/07, "Wedemeyer hay storage" (3.01) (undated), and untitled drawing #3.02 (undated), prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, T.G. Miller P.C., and Fingerlakes Construction Co. Inc. , and other application material, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board determines that the project changes proposed after the November 15, 2005 Preliminary Site Plan approval are not substantive regarding any potential adverse environmental impacts and therefore, there is no need to reassess the appropriateness of the November 15, 2005 Negative Determination of Environmental Significance or amend such negative determination, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Final Site Plan Approval for the construction of the equestrian center located between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24 -1- 19.12, including pastures, trails, a hunter -jumper exterior arena, paddocks, an interior arena and stalls ( +/- 23,000 square feet), a hay storage and machinery barn, a residence for the owners, stormwater facilities and parking, as shown on the plans entitled "Survey Map Showing a Portion of Lands of Bruce M. Babcock and Dorothy D. Babcock" dated 9/7/2005, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C., "Overall Site Plan" (L101), "Layout Plan" (L201), "Grading Plan" (L301), "Planting Plan" (L401), dated 9/18/2007, "Details & Schedules" (L501), dated 11/28/2007, prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, "Proposed Horse Arena & Stall Barn ", "Floor Plan" (2.01), "2nd Floor Plan" (2.02), "Elevations" (3.01 and 3.02), prepared by Fingerlakes Construction Co. Inc., "Ithaca Equestrian Center' dated 9- 11 -07, "Preliminary Site Plan" (SP 1 of 1)1 PB 12.18.07 Pg. 31 dated Nov 2006, "NYS DOT Driveway Permit — Driveway Geometry Plan & Details" (DW 1 of 2), "NYS DOT Driveway Permit — Traffic Maintenance Plan" (DW 2 of 2), dated July 2007, prepared by Plumley Engineering, "Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Construction Phase" (C101), "Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Stabilization Phase" (C102), "Details" (C103), "Water Supply and Sewage Disposal Plan" (C201), dated 11/28/07, "Rendered Elevations" dated 8/8/07, "Wedemeyer hay storage" (3.01) (undated), and untitled drawing #3.02 (undated), prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, T.G. Miller P.C., and Fingerlakes Construction Co. Inc. , subject to the following conditions: a. submission of a stormwater "Operation, Maintenance, and Reporting Agreement" between the property owner and the Town of Ithaca, satisfactory to the Director of Engineering, prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, and b, submission of materials showing the size, location and design of all proposed signs, prior to issuance of a sign permit, and C, submission of one final set of the final site - plandrawings on mylar, vellum, or paper, signed and sealed by the registered land surveyor, engineer, architect, or landscape architect who prepared the site - planmaterials, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and d, no disturbance shall be permitted within the NYS mapped wetland in the northwest corner of the property and only the proposed trails are to be permitted within the National Wetland Inventory wetland on the west side of the property, and include labeling on "Overall Site Plan" to reference this, prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, and e. submission of record of application for and proof of receipt of all necessary permits from county, state, and /or federal agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent for NYSDEC and water and sewage system approval from Tompkins County Health Department, and f. receipt of an interpretation from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals that the proposed apartment in the arena building is part of an equestrian facility use, or receipt of special approval or a use variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the apartment. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty and Riha NAYS: None The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 8:30p.m. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 32 PUBLIC HEARING Continuation of consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding three proposed local laws associated with the enactment of the new Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Law, specifically. ➢ a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law deleting Chapter 228 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Storm Water Management," and adding a new chapter 228 titled, "Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control;" ➢ a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning," to add Storm Water Plan Submission Requirements; ➢ a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 234 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Subdivision of Land," to add Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submission Requirements. The three local laws are intended to implement the NYS mandated Phase 2 Stormwater Regulations for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System's (MS4). Chairperson Wilcox — In front of us this evening when we came in, or distributed shortly thereafter, was a memo on the subject from the Cornell University Environmental Compliance and Sustainability Office. I know we have it and we have all read it, given when it was delivered, but I think Susan Ritter is going to give us a brief, a brief summary of its contents. Ms. Ritter — Well, I thought I'd just give a quick update on there we're at ... Just last week we had a public meeting and we had a pretty small turnout but I was happy to report that we probably spent maybe 45 minutes of presentation and well over an hour of discussion with these folks., asking good questions, providing comments ... it was just a good discussion that we had. Since that time, and at that meeting, we did not, we have not heard any negative comments on the main, general concept of this local law. What you have in front of you that I distribute were the only formal comments that we've really received thus far, and I think with ... her comments are mostly getting to quite a bit of the details of the law itself, and I don't expect ... I don't know if you want to read through them. They are the details and I can just give you the flavor of one of them...it just talks about Cornell being concerned that the law is not written such that the ag fields at Cornell would not be exempt, unlike other ag fields. So it's sort of you know, some details that we may, I think what should probably happen is that these comments should be considered the COC who has looked at this and talked about it in detail. Again, there's not been any negative comments on the main body of the law itself, more just the details. Board Member Howe — So was the discussion more points of clarification last week... Ms. Ritter — it was a mix of clarification ... the Cornell representative was there and she made these comments verbally and we talked about some of these comments. And, yeah, I'd say clarification, and then just discussing stormwater to some extent. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 33 Chairperson Wilcox — Ladies & Gentlemen, this is a continuance of the public hearing that was originally opened two weeks ago on December 4th. This Board decided to continue the public hearing until this meeting as the presentation in Town offices was held last week, after our original public hearing, so we thought it appropriate to hold open the public hearing. If someone wishes to address the Board this evening on this particular recommendation that we would be providing to the Town Board, once again we ask you to please step up the microphone and give us your name and address. There being no one, I will close the public hearing at 8:35p.m. What's the bottom line on this? We protect our land better... Ms. Ritter — One is we are required to do it by New York State DOT... Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, the Feds required the State and the State's requiring the Town. Ms. Ritter — But, too, we needed to do this because it is a way to protect the water quality of our streams and lakes and reservoirs. Chairperson Wilcox — And the Town of Ithaca has to act because of the impairment of the southern end of Cayuga Lake.... Ms. Ritter — Not just that, no, it's because we are designated an MS4 we are required to do this... Chairperson Wilcox — And why are we designated an MS4? Ms. Ritter — We are designated, as many other communities in Tompkins County, because of density of population and. ..mainly density and population. Chairperson Wilcox — All right. Thank you. Any further discussion? Would somebody like to move the resolution as drafted...So moved by Susan Riha, seconded by Rod Howe. Susan, we're okay? Ms. Brock — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — All right. Further discussion? There being none, all those in favor, please signal by saying aye ... anybody opposed ... no one is opposed...there are no abstentions... the motion is passed. Thank you very much. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 34 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2007 - 137 Recommendation to the Town Board Regarding the enactment of a Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control Law along with modification to associated sections of the Town Code Town of Ithaca Planning Board December 18, 2007 Motion made by Susan Riha, seconded by Rod Howe, WHEREAS: The enactment of the Town of Ithaca Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control regulations would include the following actions in these three separate local laws: a. deletion of Chapter 228 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Storm Water Management," and adding a new chapter 228 titled, "Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control;" b. amendment of Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning," to add Storm Water Plan Submission Requirements; c, amendment of Chapter 234 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Subdivision of Land," to add Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submission Requirements, and WHEREAS: The above - described modifications to the Town Code would help protect the water quality of streams, lakes, and reservoirs in the Town and in downstream locations by establishing regulations to control sediment and other pollutants from entering stormwater runoff, and WHEREAS: The Town Board has considered the above - described proposed local laws at its meeting on November 19, 2007 and has referred this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation, and WHEREAS: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed and discussed the proposed laws and modifications to the Town Code, and has held a public hearing open starting on December 4, 2007 through December 18, 2007 to provide adequate time to consider comments from the public regarding the proposal, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town Board adopt the above- referenced proposed Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control Local Laws, to include the following specific actions: a. deletion of Chapter 228 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Storm Water Management," and add a new chapter 228 titled, "Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control;" b. amendment of Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning," to add Storm Water Plan Submission Requirements; PB 12.18.07 Pg. 35 c. amendment of Chapter 234 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Subdivision of Land," to add Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submission Requirements. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty and Riha NAYS: None The motion passed unanimously. Board Member Howe — Fred, maybe while they are setting up, you could just clarify what we are doing tonight and what we are not doing. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah. I could ..'while the agents of the Holochuck subdivision are setting up...Ladies and Gentlemen, what is before the Planning Board this evening is... the Planning Board considering designating themselves as the Lead Agency for environmental review and making a positive declaration of potential significant... environmental significance, which would lead to the preparation of an environmental impact statement on the part of the applicant. The next agenda item, by the way, has to do with the preparation of an environmental impact statement... this is the one we got from Ithaca College, which is about 2 '/2 inches thick (holds it up), not to imply that the agents and representatives of the Holochuck subdivision would have to produce something nearly that voluminous, but nonetheless, what is before us is that determination that an environmental impact statement is required, if that designation is made, then work begins on a scoping document, which outlines the potential significant environmental impacts that will be addressed in the environmental impact statement. We'll get into that more as we get going here, and talk about the procedure involved and the work that has gotten us to this point. Are you set to go? Okay, let me do the formality here then... Chairperson Wilcox announces the next agenda item at 8:39p.m. LEAD AGENCY DESIGNATION Consideration of designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board to act as Lead Agency, and the determination of a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance for the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96) and Taughannock Boulevard (NYS Route 89), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24 =3 -3.2, 25- 5 -5.1, 25 =2 -4115 26 =4 -379 26 =4 -38, and 26 =4 -3, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Conservation Zones. The proposal involves the construction of +I= 106 town home type units in a clustered development with two entrances proposed from Trumansburg Road. The development would be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to Trumansburg Road, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The eastern portion of the property will be conveyed to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic. Preservation. Holochuck Homes, LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 36 Chairperson Wilcox — I have just been handed two changes ... two corrections to the list of tax parcel numbers, which I will read them out loud. Parcel numbers 25 -5 -5.1 is changed to 25 -1 -5.1 and the last one, 26 -4 -3 is changed to 26 -4 -39. If this were a public hearing, and by public hearing, a legally mandated opportunity for the public to speak, we may have a.. 'we may have an issue... Mr. Kanter — Might have had... Chairperson Wilcox — We might have had an issue ... But this is not a public hearing as defined by New York State law, therefore... Ms. Brock — We may proceed. Mr. Kanter — All the other documents had the correct numbers. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Very good. The floor is yours gentlemen, name and address, professional address always works....and I say the floor is yours, I assume you want to make a short presentation. David Parks, Schlather, Geldenhuys, Dunbar and Salk, 200 East Buffalo Street What we have before us is a depiction of what our proposal is. Again, to refresh everybody's memory... Chairperson Wilcox — David, I am going to interrupt you for a minute. Again, Ladies & Gentlemen, if you wish to be able to see the visual that is being used here, you are welcome to come up to the side of us and sort of behind us so that you are better able to see it. Bring your chair too, if that's appropriate. Mr. Parks — Okay. The area that is ... actually starting at the lot lines, the light gray, correction, the light green back into the gray is an area that we are proposing to have the New York State Parks & Development take over. It would be dedicated, and they would be using it both as, keeping it, maintaining it as vacant land, but also to connect some of the upper trails that exist over by the hospital to the Diamond Trail, which is this down at the bottom right here. They have suggested that they would like to have some, either bicycle or pedestrian trails that connect Route 96 with the Diamond Trail and it would most likely go through this development and then down, connecting down at the bottom there to the Diamond Trail. We are here today, at this point, asking the Planning Board to act as Lead Agency. We believe that there is at least the possibility because of the location of the development and the size of the development that there is, at the minimum, the possibility of an adverse environmental impact and as my request to the Planning Board states, we are asking you to designate yourself as Lead Agency. We would like to go through the process of determining the scope of the issues that we will have to address and to provide you with sufficient information so that you can make an informed decision. And if you have any questions about the proposal or anything, I'd be happy to answer your questions. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 37 Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you David. Again, I remind the members of the public who are here that the Board will not take any action tonight with regard to approving the subdivision or anything like that. I don't want anybody to think that that's what's going on. Simply, this is apparently, and I say apparently only because we haven't acted yet, this will be the start of the process to do a rather detailed environmental review focusing on those potential impacts. Potential large impacts and the ability to mitigate them, hopefully mitigate them in some way. So having said that, the floor is open to members of the Board. Board Member Howe — Fred, I think it makes perfect sense. I just want to make sure, we're not here to really get into elements of the site -plan at this point, we're just ... right? Chairperson Wilcox — Correct. Board Member Howe — Okay. So it makes perfect sense. Board Member Conneman — Except, can we recommend to them that they do certain things? Chairperson Wilcox — You can, it might be a little early in the process, and here's why say that; We have Ithaca College coming up next, and one of the things that we found out with Ithaca College is, when they did their environmental impact statement, which we'll get into, they changed the plan, as a result of doing the detailed environmental review, which frankly was a wonderful result, So we can suggest changes now, but I would not be surprised if their plan might change anyways as part of the environmental review, but nonetheless, if we have, if we want to steer them in a certain direction... Board Member Conneman — My direction would be that you need a real traffic study. (everybody laughs and starts talking at once) ... I have a lot of respect for engineers, my daughter happens to be an engineer, civil engineer, and I, let's just say that this in inadequate, it doesn't address it, and they are just pure wrong and they get these things out of a book, these traffic engineers tend to take, I don't know if you guys are the traffic engineers, but, you better get somebody who really measures what goes on in Ithaca New York, on Route 96 not something that goes on in Cleveland or some place else. That's what this sounds like. So, Board Member Thayer — Particularly when the colleges are open. Board Member Conneman — And you better do it when Cornell University and Ithaca College are here and not in June. Board Member Talty — That's ... well, you guys stole all my thunder.... Chairperson Wilcox — Repeat it for emphasis... Board Member Talty — The one thing that drives me crazy is traffic studies and I am in total alignment with George. First of all, it says on the front cover, it says "along the east -side of Route 96 and immediately south of the Cayuga Medical Center' I got to tell PB 12.18.07 Pg. 38 you, it's north, south, east and west. You've got to incorporate every single element of that area, that's number one. Number two is, I'm echoing what they said, June is probably the worst time to develop a traffic study because everybody's gone, from Cornell and Ithaca, and as we've seen from other detailed plans, there are plenty of staff at Cornell and Ithaca that utilize Route 96 on a daily basis twice if not four times a day. That's a huge altering of these statistics. And thirdly, can I have a clarification on what is "alligator cracking" because when I read that, I didn't know what that was. Can somebody tell me what that is. (people talk over each other) Board Member Talty — So, anyway, those are the three things that... Chairperson Wilcox — I thinks it's clear that at a subsequent meeting when the scope of, let's assume that we're going to take the action tonight, that we're going to be the Lead Agency and that the declaration of potential positive environmental impact, this Board is going to require a much more detailed traffic study... Board Member Talty — The last thing I wanted to say... Chairperson Wilcox -- ...that will come up in the scoping session, yeah. Board Member Talty — I did have one more issue, is that, one thing we've always asked for and it always seems as though, I don't know why people don't take it into account, but there's a lot of activity in this area right now, with development. What I'd like you to do is to ask Staff to alert you and identify the other projects because we're getting traffic reports from all different places and it seems as though nobody is correlating all the development. So this is inadequate because, not because you guys didn't try hard, but you don't know about all the activity that is going on in and around that area within a couple of miles. So how could you possibly know if this data is correct or not. Mr. Parks — And based on my discussions with the meeting that we had with some of the members of the Town, we had already decided, at a minimum, that we had to beef that up, but based on my discussion with the traffic engineer, we will probably not be using that particular engineer to conduct the beefing up of the ... Board Member Conneman — The other thing, a tip, is to figure out where the traffic is going and coming from because it doesn't go through a 4 -lane and a 6 -lane highway, it goes through a 2 -lane road. I mean, that's the other thing. He should really drive the road, please. Board Member Talty — Quarterly. Like seasonal. Chairperson Wilcox — Let's be careful how far we go... Board Member Talty — But Fred, it's out of control on 96... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 39 Chairperson Wilcox — We understand that but I just... understand that when we get to the actual scoping session where we determine what's going to be there, we're going to say this all again... Board Member Talty — Let's get it on the record now, so there's no, oh, I didn't know, and then we have to send them back and it's a big waste of time. Board Member Thayer — Can I ask a stupid question, and that is, is there any possibility of an access road to Taughannock Boulevard? Mr. Parks — I believe, based on the slope of the hill, that that would be extremely difficult and the way to do it would be to cut through the majority of the land which we are attempting to preserve. So that was indicated that that would not be a good solution. Board Member Thayer — It certainly would eliminate a lot of problems... Chairperson Wilcox — Keep that thought when we come back to this, because the traffic study,. We don't know what the final traffic study will look like, on the assumption that, I know we are going to ask for a detailed traffic study, we have to, the question is, is that, if some of the intersections degrade significantly, c to d, c to f, for example, there might be ways to mitigate the impacts and one of the ways.... Board Member Thayer — Who knows... Board Member Riha — But you'd have to put a switch- back... Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah I know... Board Member Riha -- ...which would increase the... Chairperson Wilcox -- ...and there's always a trade -off of course, the amount of impervious surface you would have to create... Mr. Kanter — I think we all want to make some comments... Mr. Walker — From an engineering standpoint, you know what Route 13 looks like coming down the hill, you would basically have that kind of a cut to get...you'd start at the north end of this lake and end up going all the way across that... Chairperson Wilcox — You're talking about the Cayuga Heights exit where there's a ... Mr. Walker — Right, because we...Many years ago, there was a study on a connector to go from the hospital, from Dates Drive, down to the railroad grade and then around down into the City, and that basically cut right across this whole lot. There were cuts of 3040 feet in some areas. So, basically, you would totally devastate the unique natural area, from an engineering standpoint. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 40 Board Member Talty — I am very impressed that he used the terminology, unique natural area, because that's exactly what it is and that's exactly why, many years ago, when those proposals for a connector between 96 and 89 were contemplated, that they were totally rejected and that's why they did not go in our Transportation Plan, because it would just be a disaster for that hillside. It is a unique natural area, it was zoned into a conservation zone, it's proposed to be conveyed to state parks, it would have to cross the Black Diamond Trail ... And so, there are just many reasons why that is just not a good idea. So, sure you would have the environmental impact statement look at that as a possibility, but I can tell you right now that if you look at it and that's the only alternative for access to the site, then you're probably not going to want to approve the project. Alternate Member Erb — I would like to make sure that the transportation study we finally see also considers where the closest bus stops are and those sorts of considerations. Whether there's any consideration of TCAT having a bus stop anywhere nearby to service this... Chairperson Wilcox — Less the members of the public get the wrong opinion ... we haven't said anything about drainage...) mean, there are obvious ... some of these things are so obvious, they may not even get mentioned tonight. The reason we mention traffic tonight is because we have a traffic engineering report which is considered to be inadequate, but we are certainly aware of the other potential environment... significant environmental impacts, whether they be the drainage, the water courses, the scenic views, and potentially others as well as have been identified in the full environmental assessment form that we have in front of us. Board Member Hoffmann — I actually think that we could, and should, make some corrections to the first part of the environmental assessment form. There are some problems, ranging from very small ones, like, on page 3 of 21, point 5, the percentages there add up to 102 %, that's a tiny little mistake but it might be a good idea to correct that. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, rounding to integer can do that sometimes. Board Member Hoffmann — Yes but then you can ... you have to be consistent to make it come out to 100% in the end. And also things that are missing, like, under 4, it says there are bedrock outcroppings, but then it doesn't say what is the depth of bedrock, because there are not bedrock outcroppings all over the whole parcel I imagine, so, things are not completely filled out. We need to go over that and make sure. But then there are some bigger problems, like page 4 of 21, point 15, it says "stream within or contiguous to project area: none" and yet, in the second and third part of this environmental form, it talks about the streams that go all across that lower part, the downhill part of the parcel, and those are important, so that's the wrong answer there. It shouldn't say "none" because there are streams. Board Member Riha — And 13 too, Eva, it seems like it is... Chairperson Wilcox — Can I get you closer to the microphone, Susan... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 41 Board Member Hoffmann — I don't know about that, but maybe that's something that... Board Member Riha -- ...(inaudible) it is used currently by some of the community /neighborhood as open space and recreation area. Board Member Hoffmann — That's possible... Chairperson Wilcox — Certainly the lower part, yeah, certainly the part along 89. Board Member Hoffmann — But the streams I know are there, that I can say with certainty. At the top of the next page, page 4, public utilities, I seem to remember that in the past there have been problems with water pressure up there. Has that been taken care of? Mr. Walker — We're building a new water main to take care of that. Board Member Hoffmann — Has it been taken care of or it will? Mr. Walker — Well, it's under construction, it's about 80% complete, so, by spring it will be finished. Board Member Hoffmann — All right. At the top of page 6, it talks about the "any mature forests or other locally important vegetation be removed by this project, say no" and we did have a letter, I think both last time and tonight we had one waiting for us, with photos of some clearing that has happened already, and maybe that should be included... Chairperson Wilcox — Can we ... I want to, want to have a separate discussion on that, if we can, when you're done: Board Member Hoffmann — Okay, let's see what else ... on page 9, it does mention, under point 7, "what are the predominant land uses and zoning classifications within a quarter mile radius of the proposed action "...Now, I'm assuming that the proposed action includes the whole piece of land, in which case, one should also mention Cayuga Lake, one should mention a number of other things that are not mentioned here, like the nursing home; I think that's mentioned in some other papers, Alterra, various doctor's offices and such, the residential development across from the hospital, I've forgot what it's called....no, no, across from the hospital... Chairperson Wilcox — Overlook.... Let's be careful here. Let's be careful. The question raised, let me look over your shoulder, "What are the predominant land uses." It does not require us to list, or the applicant to list, every subdivision or named entity. So, let's just be careful ... so let's just be carefuI...there's what we want and what's required. We'll have maps that will show... Board Member Hoffmann - I think the lake is a very important one to be mentioned... Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely, I agree. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 42 Board Member Hoffmann — Let's see ... what else did I have here ... those are things for you to look over and correct as needed... Chairperson Wilcox — Can we deal with the letter from Ms. Friedrich right now, if we can... I am actually aware of some other correspondence from her that was received previously by the Town. Starting with, actually, June 28th of this year and then subsequent communication from her with regard to the clearing that she has pictures of, which was November 20th. Now we have a letter from her...) believe she's here this evening... there we go, thank you ... dated December 12th with some pictures ... I guess we'll describe it as limbs and brush sitting on the ground with leaves. Daniel, I want to, again, could you comment on this, because I know at some point, when this was first reported, we sent someone, the Town sent somebody out to look at it. Mr. Walker — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — What was the determination? Mr. Walker — Originally, I had a report that there was a significant amount of excavation going on behind the property, so, I had an inspector right on the site during the water main construction and I asked him to take a look and he said there's no evidence of any excavation activity. So when I, 1 went up myself that afternoon and looked and saw that the brushlot had been bushhogged, which is what you're seeing here. If it ... there was a lot of dense shrubbery in that area. Part of the are, I'm not sure if it shows in these photos, but part of the area that runs behind the houses and apartments there is the Town sewer line, we have a sewer easement in there, and we mow that at least once a year, probably twice a year, because the dense vegetation over the brush, it's a heavy brush lot. Yes, it was mowed, we have no restrictions on that kind of mowing. People want to maintain their property. It is outside the natural area, it's in the flatter part of the slope, and it was quite overgrown and I would not characterize it as a ... woods anymore, it's successional growth of a variety of different species of brush and they did, apparently, that area that, the centerline of the road is, was mowed, so that they could survey it, which is a very typical practice. Chairperson Wilcox — Did any activity take place there that should not have? Which might be regulated by... Mr. Walker — There was no regulated activity that took place there, by the Town, or any other entity, that I am aware of. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Okay. Because there certainly is some concern that what happened there...there was some concern that what happened there was the beginnings of construction of some approval that hadn't been done in front of the public, you know how these things start, when these sort of things happen, so, as far as we know, the actions taken were within the... Mr. Walker — The landowner had every right to do that. They're basically maintaining the vegetative cover. They did not disturb the ground cover, other than, I'm sure there were some, with vegetation that heavy, the tractor may have left some slight PB 12.18.07 Pg. 43 disturbance as it got stuck in certain areas. It was fairly dry when that was done, so I did not observe any extensive soil disturbance when I looked at it. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Mr. Parks — No, and for purposes of clarification only, the reason that that was done was precisely because the surveyors could not survey the area because of the dense brush. Board Member Hoffmann — Another thing that I wanted to ask about, and I actually want to ask Staff first, it said in the papers that plans C100 and SKCO20 showed how if the land was laid out with a traditional subdivision, there would be room for 53 houses and each house would have two units in it and that's what they based this number of 106 dwelling units on, which they are now clustered on part of the land, and I couldn't find the C100 is here, but it doesn't show that, it show's the layout of what they are proposing and the SKCO20, I couldn't find. Mr. Kanter — That was actually the sketch plan map that was submitted for the sketch plan review. Board Member Hoffmann — Right, but did they lay out traditional lots on that? Mr. Kanter — Yes. Board Member Hoffmann What I don't' remember, if we saw that, is whether it was laid out over the whole piece of land or if it was laid out avoiding some of the areas that couldn't possibly be developed, Mr. Kanter — I don't know...could you... Chairperson Wilcox — If you speak, I need two things, a name and an address and I need you to have the wireless microphone. That way, we can hear and members of the public can hear as well. Mark Parker, Keystone Associates, 229 -231 State Street, Binghamton I'm going by memory, but the conventional subdivision was primarily on the top part. Some of the lots did extend down into the conservation zone, but if I remember right, the roads that we had were either on the borderline of the conservation line or unique natural area. I tried, purposely, to stay out of those areas with the road and I may have just been at the cusp of that line and the lots extended down into here. Board Member Hoffmann — The reason I am asking that question, in part, is because couldn't remember myself what the layout was like and I know previous develops who have come with proposals to develop this land, it's been two or three times, at least, I think, have laid out lots over the whole parcel, even in areas where it would be impossible to put a house or a road or anything else that you need to develop. So, those proposals were denied because we just couldn't permit development in those.... %.A 1Q11 PV1 AV1 1 V V IILAJR - 1 1 IGy VVGI rill l UU111UU1 U IOy UIU11 l lJUL 11 IQl 101 ... Mr. Parker — And I believe the situation has changed quite significantly, because the areas that you're speaking of are now 7 -acre zoning, and the way that they were laid out, those areas wouldn't actually, you know ... the lot lines run from where the road was located and they ran all the way back down to Route 89 so it wasn't ... Mr. Park s— So each lot was at least 7 acres. Mr. Kanter — I think what Eva was bringing up as an issue is something very relevant to the environmental - impact statement, and that is this Board has never made a determination as to the appropriate number of dwelling units on that site, so, that's one of the things that the environmental- impact statement is actually quite a good tool to do, because there'll be a number of things in the studies, such as a natural features analysis of the site to determine whether that original conventional lot layout actually would be appropriate or not and whether maybe some other number might be more appropriate for that site given the constraints. Chairperson Wilcox — For the members of the public, let me just point out that under the cluster subdivision regulations within the Town, the applicant is required to lay out a more conventional subdivision based upon the existing zoning in order to determine the maximum number of dwelling units. Since clustering does not allow greater density, it's simply a lot of units on the property, it simply allows us to cluster those in a smaller footprint and leave more open space and as Jon Kanter said, we have been shown by the applicant that they believe that 53 lots could be carved out on their land that would be consistent with the zoning, and from that they get the 106 units. We still need to, yeah, we still need to make that official determination. In fact, when I discussed the agenda with Mike Smith he had put down 106 units and I had him change it to plus or minus 106 just because of that. The number may turn out to be 106, it may turn out to be less, we don't know yet, but that's approximately the number, at this point, based upon this conventional layout. Mr. Kanter — And these are the lots in the conservation zone that are at least 7 acres in size, actually, most of them are probably larger than that, so, those were used in the calculations. Alternate Member Erb — How many of them? Mr. Kanter — Well, I don't know how many there. There were actually 53 lots shown on the sketch -plan map and the applicant actually used the calculation of up to two dwelling units allowed for each lot so 53 lots times two is a maximum of 106 units plus or minus. Chairperson Wilcox — It looks like about 7 lots in the area zoned conservation, roughly, as I count from here. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 45 Board Member Hoffmann — Now have you, on staff, has anybody had a chance to look at that to determine whether some of those lots are in fact unrealistic or are they all reasonable and possible? Chairperson Wilcox — I think that's our determination based upon the... Mr. Kanter — I think because an environmental impact statement is going to be done, we didn't feel it necessary, at this point, to get to that level. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. Alternate Member Erb — But we're feeling cynical. Board Member Howe — Fred, I think we are probably going to be talking about all these issues in more detail later ... I'm ready to move the resolution, but are you going to give the public a chance to speak? Because if we are, we should probably go in that direction. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah ... I would ask....Normally we would give the public a chance to speak ... can I get a show of hands of who would like to address the Board this evening... understanding that you will probably be right back here at some time in the future, possibly within the next 2 -4 weeks or 6 weeks, saying the exact same comments a second time, when we go through what's called the scoping session where we make the determination of what actually must be analyzed in the environmental impact statement. If there's not a lot of people, I'm willing... okay... I've got one... okay... why don't we give the public a chance to speak, which we try to do. The fact that there's only one, we'll do it, because we still have one more agenda item we have to get to tonight, which is the Ithaca College Center, so, Gentlemen, if you would take a seat, we'll give Ms. Friedrich a chance to speak. Kathleen Freidrich, 1201 Trumansburg Road Which is right at the end of Bundy Road. (she points it out on the map) and it's also at the end of the proposal, the proposed development, where the largest cluster of housing would be. I just, I, I, it's just too much. We're overwhelmed. Those of us along Trumansburg Road now are overwhelmed by the traffic situation. I just can't even imagine the impact of the lighting and that kind of development right on top of Candlewick which is right next door, as well. And as far as the, what do you call it...brush hogging ... (yes) ... I'm afraid there was a lot more than brush along that area and I find it difficult to understand how they needed a 75400t wide swath to just do the surveying. This thing was done along the property lines all through there when it was cleared earlier, along the lines, property lines ... It looks very much, and the pictures I provided were because I was so astounded that they were doing this to good -sized trees, you can see the tree, the size of the tree trunks, it's not all shrubbery. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, I also have your email, as I mentioned, from the end of November, November 20th, where you... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 46 Ms. Friedrich — Well, Mr. Engman did walk through with me as well, and he, he was rather disturbed to see ... well, I guess I expressed most of my concerns in the letter. And a lot of them have to do with the traffic situation, which is really problematic. It's very difficult even to leave my driveway, sometimes, because of stopped traffic, because people are turning up Bundy Road and they are stopped for oncoming traffic. There's been, there have been a lot of issues that you say you want to get into next time, that you'd rather not get into this time...? Chairperson Wilcox — Well, we still have a motion in front of us that was drafted where we will declare ourselves Lead Agency... Ms. Friedrich — So there will be a statement. Chairperson Wilcox -- And, and, we will make the determination that there is the potential for a significant environmental impact. Ms. Friedrich —And that will include traffic... Chairperson Wilcox — The next meeting, which will be the public scoping session, is where we will identify or, I think the applicant has agreed to begin putting together the list of items that would be covered in the environmental impact statement, I believe that I've read that they've agreed to begin that process. But the scoping document that's developed would list all those potential environmental impacts that need to be addressed in the environmental impact statement. Ms. Friedrich — Okay, so... Chairperson Wilcox — And that's done up front, and that would be done at a subsequent meeting. It will be a public meeting, there will be a public hearing, absolutely. Ms. Friedrich — Okay. That... Chairperson Wilcox — But that will not be done tonight. Tonight we're simply going to make the determination that there is a significant... there's a potential significant environmental impact. Ms. Friedrich — Huge. I think there's a huge... Chairperson Wilcox — Well, I am using State language. Ms. Friedrich — Okay... Chairperson Wilcox -- I'm using State language, is what I'm using. Alright. Just ...Please stay involved. Ms. Friedrich -- I don't think I have a choice here. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 47 Chairperson Wilcox — And I say that because I also have a couple of your other letters and there are things like...l'm going to read what you wrote... "At the very least, such plans need to be made more widely available to the public before being pushed down our throats." And ... hold on ... I'm going to read one more... "We deserve to be kept informed and allowed to have input during the process." I want you to understand, we're not pushing anything down your throat, number one, and two, we're going to be as open as we can. Ms. Friedrich — Okay. That was in response to... Chairperson Wilcox — Which includes allowing you to speak tonight. Ms. Friedrich — pardon me? Chairperson Wilcox — Which includes allowing you to speak tonight. Ms. Friedrich — I appreciate that, but, that was in response to the fact that these required announcements of the agendas to adjacent property owners come out,, only days ahead of the meeting, and it's very difficult to always make that.... Chairperson Wilcox — Let me address that. Those are not required. What is required is the posting of the public hearings on the bulletin board here and the publication of the legal notice in the paper. That's what's required. The fact that you get something in the mail is because the Town does that but is not required to. Ms. Friedrich — Oh. I appreciate that, but, you do realize that many people work during that same hours that it's possible to be here. Chairperson Wilcox — I understand that. Yes. Ms. Friedrich — To see these postings, most people. Chairperson Wilcox — Yes, but we will do what we can to make sure that everything happens right out here in front of you and to everybody else here. You may not agree with what we do, but we'll do it right out here in front of you. Okay. Ms. Friedrich — Well, alright. I do want to see that impact statement and I would look forward to having everything included in it. Chairperson Wilcox — That determ ... we'll make that at some subsequent meeting, we will make that determination as to what will be included in the environmental impact statement. The reason New York State law works it that way is because it's important to determine, at the beginning, what potential environmental impacts need to be studied and analyzed and that the determination is made at the beginning of the process and the scoping document becomes very important because, unless there is something unusual, some new information, the scoping document limits what the applicant has to study with regard to the environmental impacts and I believe the State did it that way to prevent citizens from adding on stuff during the process, in order to either make the PB 12.18.07 Pg. 48 process longer, or more expensive, so, what we have is this very important, up -front setting of the scope of the environmental impact statement. And that will be a public meeting. I don't know when it will happen, could be...l don't know...l'm not sure the applicants know when it's going to happen, but, it will be a public meeting, there will be a public hearing scheduled, we will get the input from the public, we will take that into account when we decide on the environmental impacts that need to be addressed. Ms. Friedrich — And would it be possible to have more than three days notice? Chairperson Wilcox — Uhhhmmm. If you look at the legals in the paper on Wednesdays, you will at least have 6 days notice. Here's another problem. I can't call you up and say there's going to be another meeting because then I am treating you specially. I can't do that as a member of this Planning Board.... Ms. Friedrich — Well I will get some very special treatment there, if that goes through. Chairperson Wilcox — But you see I can't do that. I have to treat, We as a Planning Board need to treat everybody special. I don't even want to talk to you on the phone about this and hear your opinion because I would say `you need to address us in public so that we all can hear your opinion at the same time', it's a little bit different than the way I think the elected officials can operate. We're an appointed board and we operate under, I think, rules and regulations that are a little bit different, and I don't want you talking to me in a grocery store. I want you talking to all of us here. Yeah. Alternate Member Erb — Would it be fair to tell the public that in January we are meeting on the second and fourth Tuesdays and thereafter we are meeting on the first and the third, and can't the public phone the Town Clerk, on a regular basis to discover what the agenda is? Mr. Kanter — Preferably not everyday, but... laughter... Alternate Member Erb — Preferably not every day, but, bearing in mind that in January it's going to be second and fourth, but ordinarily it's first and third, a week ahead of time, you could always phone the Clerk's office and see whether this was scheduled on the agenda. Board Member Howe — Do we post the agendas to the website so that folks who want to get on the website, they can... Mr. Kanter — But again, they don't always get on that far ahead of time because the agendas are often times only produced the week before the meeting. Chairperson Wilcox — I mean generally if the meeting is on a Tuesday, then roughly ten days before that, I'll work with a member of staff to set the agenda... because we have to wait, we can't put something on the agenda until we're sure that all the materials are in or are most likely to be in so that, you know, we can look at that particular agenda item. So, it's usually the Friday where I talk to Mike about the agenda, I believe you send it off to the newspaper on Monday, we get the email on Monday, and it appears on PB 12.18.07 Pg. 49 the website Tuesday, Wednesday, certainly it's in the ... any public hearings are in the Ithaca Journal on Wednesday, which is the six days before the meeting. Board Member Hoffmann —Well, I was going to add something similar, because of the timing of these things and because applicants need time to get their papers ready to bring in to the Town Staff, Town Staff needs time to go over them before they set up the agenda, and then you heard how the agenda gets set up and we, on the Board, don't get all these materials until less than a week before the meeting. So, even if you were to meet us in the grocery store, we wouldn't be able to tell you anything... laughter.... Chairperson Wilcox — The chance meeting in the grocery store... Board Member Hoffmann —That's right... Ms. Friedrich — Well, I found out about this by actually having to take a day from work and go down, because the only hours they were open were the times that I'm at work, and I went down and I looked at the map and got the information that way. But, it seems like a lot more than you should have to do just to find out what's happening in your backyard. And it's quite a big proposal. Chairperson Wilcox — You've been heard. Thank you much. Okay, nobody else indicated that they wanted to speak, so let's bring this matter back to the Board here. Let me find my papers here ... we have a resolution... while I'm looking for the resolution that was drafted for us, we should point out, just for the record, that we have received letters form the New York State Department of Transportation, Region 3, they have no objections to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board assuming Lead agency status. We have a letter from Tompkins County Department of Planning which is a little bit stronger, they agree with the designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as Lead Agency, but, go on to state that "the County Planning Department has reviewed the proposal as submitted and has determined that it may have negative inter - community or countywide impacts." For the members of the public, that means if the County makes that determination, we can only approve projects by a majority -plus one vote which would be five out of the seven instead of four, but the recommended modifications all have to do with sidewalks and rights -of -ways. So we'll leave it at that right now. I think it's a little early in the process, though we value their input, as we always do from the County Planning Department when they review these things. Okay. I am still trying to find the draft resolution... there, I have it ... would someone like to move the resolution as drafted ... so moved by George Conneman, seconded by Larry Thayer. Okay. Any changes? Ms. Brock — Well, like Eva, I found some inconsistencies between the submittal and the long environmental- assessment form. The first whereas states that the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern part of the property, but in the long environmental- assessment form, in Part I, it says three times that the Finger Lakes Land Trust would be the entity that would actually receive the property, so I need to know which it is. Do we need to change the draft resolution or the LEAF? PB 12.18.07 Pg. 50 Mr. Kanter — It will actually be State Parks. Chairperson Wilcox — It was earlier thought that it was going to be the Land Trust... Mr. Parks — They were going to do it jointly, depending on where they were able to get their funding. At this point, the Land Trust has bowed out of the situation and the State Parks has taken over. Ms. Brock — Okay. So the resolution is fine... Board Member Thayer — Do we need to change the numbers like we did in the beginning? Ms. Balestra — No, actually all of the documents are correct except for the public - hearing notice. Chairperson Wilcox — Except for the agenda -item notice, thank you. Ms. Balestra — Right. It's not a public- hearing notice, I apologize. Chairperson Wilcox — Should I ... for the benefit of the public, I'm not going to read the whole thing ... let me just read the resolved clauses, just so that everybody is aware of that we're doing here. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby establishes itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, as described above, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a positive determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed for the reasons stated in the EAF Parts II & III, and, confirms that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will be prepared, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby requests that the Town Planning Department duly file and publish a Notice of Positive Declaration pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617.12, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That Holochuck Homes, LLC and the Town of Ithaca Planning Board have agreed that a public scoping process will be initiated to determine the scope and content of the DEIS, and that Holochuck Homes, LLC will prepare a draft written scope of issues to be addressed in the DEIS, and that the Planning Board will schedule a public hearing on said scoping document to be held before this Board at the earliest practicable date upon receipt of and acceptance by the Planning Board of said draft scoping document. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 51 Chairperson Wilcox — So moved and seconded. Anything you want to say David, at this point? Mr. Parks — No, not prior to the... Chairperson Wilcox — All right. Any further discussion? Ms. Brock — Do you have any changes to the long environmental assessment form, that you want to make? Because you'll be signing the positive declaration, right. Chairperson Wilcox — Let's go back to Eva's comments. Board Member Hoffmann —That's up to them to do that, isn't it? Chairperson Wilcox — We can make changes, just like we do ... I mean, we generally make small changes on short forms, so we can make changes here as well. Let's go through them Eva. Board Member Hoffmann — So the first one is on page 3, point 4; the depth to bedrock is missing. But they might not know that. That's why I think they may need time to do it. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, I can assume it's zero. Ms. Brock — We can get that in the EIS. As existing environmental conditions, that could be one of the things that they could provided us. Chairperson Wilcox — So we can make that part of the EIS. Board Member Thayer —Yeah. Chairperson Wilcox — Go ahead Eva. Board Member Hoffmann — And the next one was point 5, where the percentages don't add up to 100. Chairperson Wilcox — They add to 102. I'm not concerned about that right now ... granted, it shouldn't be more than 101 1 think, but I think that's more of a technical issue... Board Member Hoffmann — I just wanted it mentioned. Next page, point 15, it says "none" where it asks about streams that are contiguous to the project area and I have written C page 12 of Part Ii and number 4, page 2 of Part III where it talks about those streams. Chairperson Wilcox — Before we go on, are there... Gentlemen, your all crowded up there ... are there named streams, water courses, on the property? Mr. Parks — There are not and I guess that distinction. I e i'tt% 1p 4 w s( L = t t p �"' ot-„ . xt r.,f Gt ,t r .r !' ! '( s J 1 t N -ice' I .1 I t L t 5 n r• L.. C r 1 S. ! s '�` 2 t to O x w r B 12.18 07 r I rI I I . I I I I w LI I I LI Y - Pg 52 I I x € I I . t. o I I F I I o Lo o - I o LI A l I I t L I I o II L I I I I F I l I I oI I I I I I L 1 I L t I I . I I I II I 1 . I I I L I I I o '' Ufa '" - I ti Chairperson Wilcox That's the issue :here, that's whatI figured, that none of them are I - named, although we all agree that there , - I hnamed courses f A, Unknown =- Drainage ditches /water courses - _ r C Board Member,Hoffmann„ They actually become .little gorges when they get closer to ; Route 89, .so they.are not trivial j I I I . Chairperson Wilcox 'But they are unmarried, that's the. problem t II - a - .i:' f,' ': g- s a s r - 9 - - Board Member Hoffmann No, :no, no point 14 doesn't say anyt ., 'pout names y .. . I 'S 1.y { u.� 4 �. I i .W cY A f ."l � Chairperson,Wilcox Right but how do you list them if you don't haI eaa name?° it } f to d , f .y ° > Z Y i :.}-c .;I ...° r ;,: Y- 0 _� : -u >,a = ; - 4r e tr v x s -.7 `a tt' Board Member Hoffmann Just say yes instead of none �s K :> I - 4.f J j5_v . C t.' .f 3 ryt. -fib 4�yf �N� z. �. 4. _ r ° t^ .. -.r' ." s^' f.. L .. 'c r; a, - - a_ , i.., or to s.. .. 'z tI ..�_- - > o .'• - s t _., .. Ms.`Brock ,Just state .there are everal unnamed streams. on the project; property, i jr ;ti 3 sor - _ ry j ! ii ,O... L ` CIS 9 i S Chairperson Wilcox = Yes,' nght so, I'.m sorry` we're looking at #15 Susan,` what. did ; t r r = a _ you say eo _ I 1 c t L - Y= I. { 1 ( } - - C i. .'t .. ;. i F ; .�. I A . _ _t il. `i �YY J j 1. -' -.. ..:! l Ms. Brock 'There are several unnamed streams °on the project property.. r .. _ y a r t .... t .r- i € Y { , p % -r c a F ''Chairperson Wilcox `Go ahead Eva r <, S Z A S.. - -- :. .: - Y 4 7 L iv -: Board Member Hoffmann -Well there was: at th'e top of page 6, point 5 I don't, LL . . I whether that brush- hogging should be•:mentiionedo.there _or not: _v . Y � d' i 'i� S r '[ j5. u: 0 , 1 _ -'c .V L' _ i _ h M F - _ Mr Kanter It wasn't mature forest N y , '° 1 it.; , r _ ' - e y r s ` Mr.- Kanter.. There was no mature forest that was brush hogged s. a- oni h _ _ S rd Member Hoffmann No, but its s ... , Boa ays "other locally important Vegetation and you . e I - i ,_ know, L:was going to say`this :before, 'I gust; .1 remembered it again,:' have actually never heard of -a surveyor:: coming . .here;` or body who's had rvey.. one; who -:has __ some a su - told. us; that any; vegetation had to be cleared for the._ survey to be.done So I don't ; s understand why it had to. be done m' this case >f� ° } ; Y 3` ,. Y_ 4- -< - - - - ._ _ . Chairperson Wilcox = It was Dan who`said that and Dan's not here nght now y ' Ms.-Brock No, actually r lT .t.; 5 c, i '.' f S I 1 'r' r i ). _ w _Chairperson Wilcox,- Well the applicant said atlas well, but Dan also said it - =_ at x; z ,, ..,. s f Mr:: Parker When ou use: the term surve , ;a ,lot of people confuse a survey as a Y Y Y ..'. I . - I., survey map I thinkiwhat"you're_refernng to !, hen we say °survey; we mean`su I. the I . I I I i I I I I ' land to. get data for engineering purposes ' The purpose' of the survey or the collection 3 -r t PB 12.18.07 Pg. 53 of data, sort to speak, was, as Dan mentioned earlier, for the design of the roads. We are designing roads through here and in order to do that, I need to know exactly what the elevations and the lay of the land is so I can do an accurate design. Then Dan's going to check my design and it has to be correct. Board Member Hoffmann — Does that sound right? Unknown — Yes. Board Member Hoffmann — Let's see, and then on page 9, 1 had this comment about including some more things than were mentioned here under the point 7, what are the predominant land uses and zoning classifications within a quarter -mile radius of the proposed action. And the proposed action happens on the whole parcel, including the part that's set aside as undeveloped land so we need to include, at least the lake... Chairperson Wilcox — Predominant land use, certainly Cayuga Lake is a land use. Board Member Talty — What does "predominant" mean? What does that actually... what does that term mean? Mr. Kanter —Well',,. Board Member Talty — Because, I know what Eva's saying, I know what you're saying, but, I think it's very subjective. Chairperson Wilcox — It is subjective, absolutely it's subjective. Board Member Talty — So, I would rather listen to what Eva's saying.. .if it's subjective, then you don't want to preclude... Chairperson Wilcox — Well it does say land use, it doesn't say.. ..my comment to Eva before was, it says "land uses ", not specific, named buildings. So a land -use would be medical facilities, that's certainly a predominant use within a quarter - mile... Board Member Talty — But you're being subjective to that. Chairperson Wilcox — Nursing home might, but I don't have to name Lakeside, Alterra...that's what I'm saying. It's the use, not the ... and it's predominant, whatever that means. Is it church, if in fact there is one church, does that make it predominant? I don't know. I mean, I'm willing to put church down... Multiple people — It says religious.... Chairperson Wilcox — Right, I just don't want to say 7th Day Adventist... whatever it is... Board Member Hoffmann — But the reason we want to see them included is, this is an environmental- impact statement and if we want to consider the environmental impact of this action, we need to know what other things are happening in this area, within the PB 12.18.07 Pg. 54 quarter mile radius, and for instance, the lake has certain uses which can be affected by stuff washing down those streams. The nursing home has more traffic than a regular residential home ... And I think it's better to be inclusive of everything we can think of. Chairperson Wilcox — I'm sorry.. the nursing home is more ? ?? Board Member Hoffmann — Has more traffic coming to it, I would guess, than a regular home... Chairperson Wilcox — To it? I would guess opposite but that's a different point... Board Member Hoffmann -- I mean the driveway would take more employees back and forth every day, for instance, to a place like Lakeside... Board Member Talty — There's truck and service vehicles and... Chairperson Wilcox — Okay...we9re getting.. 'so I've added Cayuga Lake. low- and medium - density residential, planned development... we didn't say include conservation zone, which is a land-use, .that's a land -use right? Board Member Hoffmann —Well it's a zoning... Chairperson Wilcox —These are land -uses right? What's the matter? Mr. Kanter -- ...and zoning classifications. So the first grouping is zones. So we have ..we need to Ms. Brock — So that's where you put conservation zone, and you should put Cayuga Lake under the second grouping. Board Member Hoffmann —And nursing home would include both Lakeside, Alterra and I think there is a private one across the street, right next to Bundy Road... Chairperson Wilcox — So, I hate the term nursing home, is there a ... be careful, I can't say adult -care facility because that's also a State term. Mr. Kanter — It's probably an assisted - living facility. Board Member Thayer — Adult care. Ms. Brock — Just say nursing home and assisted - living facilities. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, got it. Board Member Hoffmann — And there are a number of doctor's offices not too far away, and I would guess, I don't know, quarter mile ... I had to look up because I am not familiar with ... but a quarter mile is about 1,000 feet I think, a little more ... and then there is that, ..what is that residential development called.... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 55 Ms. Brock — You already have multi - family residences so that's covered. Chairperson Wilcox — Yup. Museum, religious, school, cemetery, hospital... okay. What else do we have Eva? Board Member Hoffmann — Fire station? That's a public facility. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Got it. Mr. Kanter — Don't worry, if you left something out the EIS will definitely catch it. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. And I think that was it. Oh, and this is the form where I wish there was a place for the person who signs it, on page 10, to print his or her name too. Chairperson Wilcox — Don't you love those attorney's signature you can't read... Ms. Brock — hey... laughter.... and we need Lakes Land Trust to New York State Parks. of action....the block on the bottom...the include" ... and the first bullet says "Finger York State Parks there. Chairperson Wilcox — Can I abbreviate it? Ms. Brock — Yes. to change those three references to Finger The first one's on page 2, under description middle paragraph starts "development will Lakes Land Trust and we should put New Chairperson Wilcox — Because it's actually... their official name is actually much longer. Ms. Brock — And page 5... Chairperson Wilcox — Hold on here ... see, I'm behind you now because I am actually modifying the original here, is what I'm doing and I can't find my, the New York State Parks letter that we had so I have their official name... Alternate Member Erb — Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, but I wa State... boy... Office of Parks Recreation else? Ms. Brock — On page 5, B1, c.... It the abbreviation. NYSOFRHP...New York and Historic Preservation. Okay. Got it. What Alternate Member Erb — And page 4, under 12... Chairperson Wilcox — Yup, thank you.... Ms. Brock — Page 9, the first block, #2 and then #3 also has it, the next block. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 56 Chairperson Wilcox — Is that all the changes Susan? Ms. Brock — Yes, Chairperson Wilcox — Eva? Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — Alright, so with those changes... Board Member Hoffmann — Doesn't mean there aren't any, there may be others that I didn't see. Chairperson Wilcox -- Yeah. I have a motion and a second.. 'any further discussion? There being none, ..all those in favor please signal by saying aye, ..anybody opposed ?... any abstentions ?... there are none. Good luck Gentlemen. ADOPTED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 138 Lead Agency Designation and Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance Holochuck Homes Subdivision Tax Parcel No's. 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 1 -5.1, 25- 241.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4 -389 26 -4 -39 Located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) & NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard) Town of Ithaca Planning Board December 18, 2007 MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Larry Thayer. WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is considering serving as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24 -3- 3.2, 25- 1 -5.11 25 -2 -41.29 26 -4 -37, 264-38, and 264-39, Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves the construction of 106 + /- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire the most of the eastern portion of the property for the future development of the Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent, and PB 12.18.07 Pg. 57 2. The proposed project, which requires Subdivision Approval by the Planning Board, is a Type I action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Chapter 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Environmental Quality Review because the proposal involves construction of more than 30 residential units that will be connected to community or publicly owned utilities, and 3. A letter from Schlather, Geldenhuys, Stumbar, and Salk, dated December 3, 2007, has been received, in which the attorney for the applicant states that ... "the Members of Holochuck Homes, LLC are all in agreement that there is the potential for at least one significant adverse environmental impact that may arise as a result of the proposed project. As a result, we are in agreement that a positive determination of environmental significance by the Town Planning Board is warranted." A Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part 1, has been submitted by the applicant for the above- described action, and 4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Department, on behalf of the Planning Board, distributed a Lead Agency concurrence letter to potential involved and interested agencies on November 16, 2007, and received no objections to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board serving as Lead Agency on this matter, and 5. The Planning Board has reviewed the Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, prepared by Holochuck Homes, LLC, and Parts 2 and 3 of the Full EAF, prepared by the Planning staff, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby establishes itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, as described above, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a positive determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed for the reasons stated in the EAF Parts II & III, and, confirms that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will be prepared, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby requests that the Town Planning Department duly file and publish a Notice of Positive Declaration pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617.12, and PB 12.18.07 Pg. 59 [many talking at once] Alternate Member Erb — I think we need a much longer period of time to make sure. Chairperson Wilcox — All right. I'm sorry. [continued talking] Alternate Member Erb— I think... Chairperson Wilcox - Why don't we put you at the end? No, do whatever you need to do. Alternate Member Erb — I think Larry's wife should have to do these until she gets them really right. [laughing] Board Member Hoffmann — Maybe I'll take 2 also. Chairperson Wilcox — No. No. No. I was just wondering if those were paper plates so that I could take the leftovers home with me. Oh, it's a glass plate. [continued talking] Chairperson Wilcox — Why do we always schedule Ithaca College for the very end of the meeting? Ithaca College Rep — We wanted to ask you that question. Chairperson Wilcox — Better ask me tonight. [laughter] Ithaca College Rep — Will we get an answer? [laughter] Chairperson Wilcox — Ladies and gentlemen, at 9:45 p.m. the next item is: Preliminary presentation and discussion regarding the determination of adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Ithaca College Athletic and Events Center located on the eastern side of the Ithaca College campus near the Coddington Road campus entrance, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 41 -1 -30.2, 41 -1 -24, and 42 =1 -9.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of +1- 300,000 square feet of indoor athletic facilities including an indoor 200M track with practice /game field, Olympic size pool and diving well, tennis courts, rowing center, gymnasium, strength and conditioning center, and floor space for large indoor events. Outdoor facilities include a lighted artificial turf field, a 400M track with open space for field events, and lighted tennis courts. The project is proposed in several phases and will also include the construction of TI- 1,002 parking spaces PB 12,18.07 Pg. 60 (687 displaced spaces and 315 new spaces), relocating overhead power lines, constructing a new loop road, walkways, access drives, stormwater management facilities, lighting and landscaping. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant, Richard Couture, Agent, Chairperson Wilcox — Welcome back ladies and gentlemen. Everybody. Welcome back gentlemen. I'm not sure if you want to make any statement at all this evening or are you simply here to answer our questions. I'm not sure if you had anything organized or planned. Rick Couture, Ithaca College Mr. Couture — I think what we were going to try to do first is just give you a very, considering the house, a very brief overview and presentation about what we have if that is all right. Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely. Mr. Couture — Just quickly I want to introduce a couple of other folks that are here with us. I think everyone knows Dave Herrick and Matt Hendred from TG Miller. We have also with us tonight Howard Blaisdell and Troy Sherard who are the architects from Moody Null and Associates. In addition, we have Carl Sgrecci who is Vice President for Finance and Administration. Amy Dake, who's our traffic engineer with SRF and Associates. And we have Herman Sieverding and Tim Colbert from IAD, who we have asked for their services to be the owners rep on this project for us. At this point I am going to turn it over to David and Howard and I think give a very brief summation and overview as quick as possible. Okay? Chairperson Wilcox — Once again, members of the public, if you wish to come up to the side, behind us so that you can see the visuals, you are more than welcome to, David Herrick, TG Miller Engineers and Surveyors, 203 N Aurora St, Ithaca. I think Fred and the Board, we could certainly shorten what we had as a planned presentation. If there are strong feelings about getting questions from the board out first. We can certainly move in that direction. Responding to staff comments, if you wish, given the time. We were willing to share with you our approach to answering those questions raised as potential significant impacts and I can do that if you like. Chairperson Wilcox -- How long was your planned presentation going to take? Mr. Herrick — Well, it would take at least a half an hour. Chairperson Wilcox — Go for it. Mr. Herrick — Very good. When we first came to the Town nearly a year ago with the plan that is here to my right; it's the December 16th site master plan and that was the college's original vision for the new athletics and events center. It aggregated all of the proposed improvements — field, parking, building at the eastern portion of the campus. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 61 We went away with a positive declaration to evaluate the environmental impacts. In the course of doing so, understood that we had certain limitations; those of the neighbors, through the concerns that they expressed over the project's proximity to their environment and the natural environmental itself. And by that I mean the presence of wetlands that we further delineated and found had to be avoided to the maximum extent practicable. So the drawing further to my right, which is the site master plan, phase III, dated September 17`" of '07 is how we morphed the original vision to come up with a project that first of all minimized the influence and interference with a neighborhood and also minimized our disturbance on natural features. What that meant is that we had to make some improvements or modifications in how we dealt with parking and instead of aggregating all of our parking at the eastern end of campus we found that there were benefits in moving it around to satellite locations. So as you have understood with the presentation of the EIS, we now have multiple sites that will be impacted in concert with the main building all the way over to the western extremities of campus, next to 96B. So in doing so we have distributed parking that will benefit more than just the A &E center. It will help us minimize our physical footprint within that portion of the property known as "Raponi" and we will end up with what we expect to be less significant environmental impact. The elements that were outlined in the final scoping document started with land and what were we going to do to mitigate impacts from phased construction and the actual footprint of the project. And what you have in the document under land is a presentation on phasing. We show you 4 different phases. Phase I through III and they help you to understand what's going to be taking place; what are the components of the building, what are the aspects of the site that are going to be completed with each of the phases and what is the duration of time anticipated for those. And I guess as we progress here if there are questions from the Board that you think are relevant to each of these sections that we are going through, feel free to stop and we will be happy to answer any of those questions or comments. So other aspects of land disturbance dealt with construction impacts for questions about how we were going to handle construction traffic and we have provided for you illustrations of haul routes that we will expect the contractors to adhere by and we look to use 96B the principle entrance to the college for ingress and egress of construction traffic. We do expect that there will be some influence on Coddington Road. There are some businesses that would probably use Coddington Road for delivering of materials, but again we look to emphasize using 96B for most of our ingress and egress. Construction noise. There certainly will be a significant noise generated from earthmoving activities in the first expect to mitigate is the duration of that noise and Jim they are consistent with the Town's expectations and some of those activities such rock disintegration that loudest of construction related noise. amount of site disturbance and phase of the project. What we iting hours of operation so that requirements and further limit is going to be generating the Stormwater Management. There certainly is going to be a significant change in hydrology on the eastern side of campus. We have been out to the site with the Town, PB 12.18.07 Pg. 62 with the County. We have looked at infrastructure that would be impacted by the changes from the additional impervious surfaces. We are providing both water quality and water quantity mitigation so that we can minimize both the pollutants, pollutant loadings, and the impacts to the peak runoffs from the new project. Natural Resources. As I mentioned earlier we found that there was a fair number of new wetlands that were added to the delineation from what had previously been done in the study that the college undertook in 2000 with Ethological Associates. It was interesting to note how those wetland boundaries had changed given some of the previous activities constructing the parking lots within some of the shrub -land area. But what we found is that the wetlands have changed and we had more area that was going to be affected by the footprint for the building and we have listed how we will mitigate that disturbance to the existing wetlands. There is a description of how compensatory mitigation wetlands will be constructed by the College to replace what has been disturbed. US Army Corps of Engineers will be involved in this process. They generally like at least a one to one ratio for wetland replacement and again we look to provide those replacement wetlands on lands owned by the College. There is also an update on rare and endangered species that have been identified on the property, where those are, and what the impacts would be from the footprint of our site improvements and buildings. Historical and Archeological Resources. We covered the entire site with a 50 -foot grid and conducted shoveled test pits to look for artifacts. This was all done through the public archeological facility out of SUNY Binghamton. And we did find that there is one site on Coddington Road on land owned by the College that does have some historic significance and that small portion of this larger site is going to be flagged, fenced, so that our construction activities won't disturb it. It does have some impact on the future alignment of the pedestrian trail that was considered in the last phase of this project, but in terms of other archeological or historical significance there is none that has been identified by PAF. There was a concerned expressed by George Frantz about the incline plane. There certainly are grading remnants of the old incline plane and there is a specific addendum completed by PAF to address that and that is included in our appendix. [whispering] Mr. Herrick - Do you want to discuss some of that, Howard? Howard Blaisdell from Columbus, Ohio Howard Blaisdell from Columbus, Ohio with Moody Null the architecture firm for the project. A couple of things we wanted to add from this is, um, as part of the response we looked at the consistency with the Sosaki original master plan and evaluated the building and understanding that the master plan is a flexible document. It is a blue print for what might be done for the college. We wanted to make sure that the project was consistent with the intent of the master plan and we identified a number of areas such as trying to put the building close to the campus so that it is within a 10- minute walking distance of most of the campus. In emphasizing the pedestrian access or the nature of the college campus by moving roads to the perimeter and to extend up distributed PB 12.18.07 Pg. 63 parking and utilizing indigenous native species and plantings that we have been showing in the landscape plans and really the multidisciplinary use of the building. We also took a look at the visual impacts of the project. We did a series of photographs, which were enlarged from what you might see at various spots on the hillsides east and north of the college. And on a couple of those we actually took the computerized rendering and inserted that into the photo, utilizing the data points as to where were around the college or adjoining hills, tying in key points from adjacent buildings to identify where the building would be, the scale of the building within the photograph, and approximately how much trees or site might be displaced as part of the actual building. So the studies show what that visual impact might be and noting that even the roof that might be visible is not any higher than the existing roofs that you see on the Ithaca south hill campus. We also included some lighting plans for the outdoor turf field and since the time that we submitted the plan we have reviewed the requirements for broadcasting for broadcasting events and in order to do the NCAA recommended guidelines for broadcasting local and regional events, they have requested use of a 75 candle...foot candles for the lighted field for those events. At Ithaca College I think we have a revised photometric plan, but the intent of the college is that the only time that the 75 foot candles would be used would be for a televised event. Otherwise, the 50 foot candles that is proposed for the field would be adequate for both practice and for competition. It is also noted that the technology that the College is pursuing for the ... what has been illustrated as the Musco Light - Structure Green is trying to keep with the cutting edge, the highest level of technology in terms of cutoff or controls for the lighting fixtures to be as responsible as possible. Mr. Herrick — Within the technical exhibits that are in the appendix we do provide the illumination plans and will present to the board what would be an addendum to figure 6, which is showing you how the normal customary practice illumination would be measured within the field and within the proposed tennis courts. So we will submit that to you this evening. And I expect that there will be a need to provide an addendum to this document and this will be one piece of that addendum and will also clarify for the Town what the frequency of use is expected to be for lighting at higher levels when broadcasting is expected. Again, as Howard mentioned we would normally be using lower light levels for intramural activities and practice sessions, which are already represented in figure 6 of the technical documents. Ms. Brock — Dave, wouldn't they also be using the lower light levels for actual games? It's only televised games that would need the higher levels? Mr. Blaisdell — That is correct. Chairperson Wilcox — When you say games, we mean activities, right? Ms. Brock — Well, I meant actual athletic competitions between Ithaca College and other schools. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 64 Mr. Blaisdell — That is correct. NCAA competitions. Ms. Brock — So it's only for televised competitions. Chairperson Wilcox — The reason I said that is that I thought it was stated that there would be no football games played on this field. Mr. Blaisdell — Correct. Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Other competitions. All right. Good. Alternate Member Erb — Does televising include public access TV locally? Chairperson Wilcox — Meaning the Ithaca College broadcast facilities themselves or...? Alternate Member Erb — Yes. Mr. Blaisdell — Yes, it does. Alternate Member Erb — I thought they had a loophole. Board Member Hoffmann — How often is it likely to happen that there'll be televised events? Mr. Herrick — Well, that is, as I was saying, we're going to clarify for the Town just what the frequency would be, what the athletic directors are expecting for televising. I'm sure that there are different standards for local access than there are for national broadcast. Mr. Blaisdell — Yes. National broadcast would be asking for 125 to 150 foot candles and Ithaca College is not asking for that. Board Member Conneman — While we are on this, what about the use of public- address systems? I mean it is unclear to me, I'm not an engineer. I can't read some of this stuff, but it's unclear to me how much you will really use public address systems and how loud they would be and how late they would be. I mean that is probably what the neighbors would.. the community would care about, I think. Mr. Herrick - Correct. And it's a good segue into noise, which is the next the of those community... [not audible — many talking at once] Mr. Herrick — Yes. Noise from typical field events is something that we looked at and we did have a consultant; Environmental Safety Associates provide an analysis of how the sound would dissipate from a public address system that is being proposed for use within the bleachers. And part of the answer to the question from Mike in his comment letter was where would there be utilization of sound walls or earth berms that dissipate noise? And what we found in the analysis was that those kinds of facilities aren't PB 12.18.07 Pg. 65 necessary, so that's why they are not included in the document. We found that the dissipation of noise through the vegetation that will be remaining together with the noise shadow and together with the control of the public address system at the source, would minimize those annoyance impacts at the neighboring residents. Alternate Member Erb — Well, I'm not going to get into the ... you are actually are talking about vegetation that is quite a deep buffer. Is that correct? Mr. Herrick — That is correct. Alternate Member Erb — Okay. Are you actually committing... there was something in the specifications for the PA system that sounded to me like it was a distributed sound system through the bleachers rather than two big horns up there trying to accomplish it all. Do I have it right, first of all. And are you actually committing to that? Mr. Blaisdell — The sound system has gone through the initial planning to determine what that sound radio would be needed for the bleachers. It is intended that it would be a distributed system to keep that noise level down. It has not gone through the final design yet. As it goes through the final design it will be kept with that interest in mind of what is the impact of the distance and we keep below that threshold. Board Member Hoffmann — I remember that early on that you were saying there wouldn't be any sound system and I remember we were talking about what if there were concerts in this center and would the sound of the concerts be so loud that it would be heard outside the building and we were assured no. Somehow I didn't think there would be any outdoor sound systems. Am I wrong or was there a change? Mr. Herrick — No. It was not a change. No. We have always suggested that there was going to be some exterior sound system for sporting events. Board Member Hoffmann — Is it only going to be for sporting events? Mr. Herrick —Well. I I Board Member Hoffmann — Or would there be outdoor concerts, for instance? Mr. Herrick — You can answer that. Mr. Couture — The intent is not to have outdoor concerts. I mean, the facilities on the exterior of the building are for athletics, intramural and club sports events, and if we are going to have concerts, the intent is to have those inside the facility. Concerts or speakers. So the services that are proposed serve primarily as a public- address system to announce a score or to announce something occurring at the game. Chairperson Wilcox — How many, potentially... roughly how many bleacher seats are proposed? Four hundred? Mr. Couture — We had about a thousand. PB 12.18.07 P& 66 Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Mr. Herrick — I guess at this point we are up to the section on traffic and Amy Dake is here to share with the Board how we went about with the analysis and will present some preliminary findings of that analysis. Chairperson Wilcox — Oh boy, I hope she wasn't here when we were smearing traffic consultants earlier on. I Jaughter ... were you here? Mr. Herrick — She was outside... Ms. Dake — No... Amy Dake, SRF and Associates, 3495 Winton Place, Rochester Chairperson Wilcox — We've seen SRF here before, many times I think. Ms. Dake — Yes. We prepared the traffic study for the Athletics & Events Center. We began by collecting traffic date at 10 intersections in the study area that were identified through the scoping process. All of the data was collected in April of this year at all the intersections but one because the bridge was out on Aurora. So we collected data at the Aurora Street/Hudson Street intersection in August of this year, after the bridge was reopened, and then those data were merged with the April data. So that was the existing conditions. The next step was to take a look at background conditions and the background conditions included four developments that were identified as approved or under construction at the time that the study was begun. And those included; The Country Inn & Suites, Holly Creek subdivision, West View subdivision and the Monastery. In addition to the four developments that were either under construction that were added into the background conditions, we also added a growth rate based on historical data that we obtained from New York State DOT and also from Tompkins County and what we determined was that the growth rate in the area is about 2% per year and we looked at a ten year build out time frame for this study, so we added 2% per year for ten years. We then generated traffic for an event at the facility assuming that it would be a one- time event that occurs infrequently but would be about 3,500 spectators, and normally we use ITE data when we generate traffic for a new development like this and that's a national standard. However, there aren't really a lot of data for this type of a use through ITE and what ITE says is that when you can't find data that we have, you should either go out and collect your own data or find data on a local level for a similar type use. So that's what we did. We did some research and we've done some studies for other similar facilities in New York State and so we found some similar data. So what we found was that about 60% of the spectators that attend these types of events at colleges are actually students that are already on campus and then the remainder of the spectators are coming to campus in cars. So that's how we began with our traffic generation. And then we analyzed the impacts of the traffic at all of the ten intersections for this type of an event, and what happens with this type of an event is it's PB 12.18.07 Pg. 67 kind of during a short window, so, you're not really affecting the morning peak hour which is one of our peak hours studied, but you could be affecting the evening peak hour. What we did was analyze the worst case scenario which is probably unlikely to happen because if you have an event at this type of a facility it is probably going to be an evening event where people are coming in either late afternoon, maybe during the PM commuter peak, probably after the commuter peak. We actually analyzed it such that all the traffic was exiting during the PM commuter peak just to show that the intersections could handle that, which means if traffic exits later, 8, 91 10 o'clock at night, then there really won't be any problem with the intersections handling the traffic. And what the analysis showed is that there really aren't any significant levels of service that get degraded as a result of the traffic from the event. And one of the things that the college is planning to put in place is that they close the exit to Coddington Road so that all the traffic would have to exit to Route 96B, that way we would minimize the impact on Coddington Road. A few of the other things that the traffic study looked at were the potential for a round- about on Coddington Road at the rear entrance. That was something that was discussed with the County. Some trip reduction strategies. Construction traffic. Environmental livability on some of the residential streets and pedestrian, bicycle and transit considerations. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Chairperson Wilcox — Go head. Board Member Hoffmann — When you did the traffic study in August, were Ithaca College and Cornell University in session? Ms. Dake — It was.I Jet me just look at the date ... I think it was ... it was at the very end of August... Chairperson Wilcox — While you're looking it up, it's an interesting thing, because first the bridge at the base of the hill was closed for, I hate to say repairs, actually they completely re- decked it, and then even after it opened up, then you had the construction up the hill on Aurora Street were they were replacing the sewer pipes, which had a significant impact on normal traffic patterns as well, for people who live on South Hill, but, go ahead... Ms. Dake — We collected the data on August 301h and 31st. We specifically waited until a week after school started. I think school started the 25th or the 22nd this year, somewhere in that timeframe. Chairperson Wilcox — Or at least the students returned those days, I'm not sure if classes started but... Numerous Board Members — They did start at Cornell... Chairperson Wilcox — That's right, they started early. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 68 Board Member Conneman — Students came back. Jiving units were open the 18th of August, I know that for sure. Amy, thank you because the last, the reason Fred referred to traffic engineers is the last one had not done any study of anything, as far as I could tell, would know what traffic was, in my opinion.... laughter... Alternate Member Erb — We also, I think, would congratulate you for including some of the under - construction projects, but I'm not clear on whether those fit into your 2% increase or whether you made some additional specific adjustments for those? Ms. Dake — They are in addition to the 2 %. Alternate Member Erb — They are in addition to the 2 %. Board Member Talty — I'd just like to congratulate, it's a very thorough traffic study, didn't see any major gaps, or even minor gaps. If you've got a business card, I think the guys that just exited... laughter... Board Member Conneman — They need you. Ms. Dake — Thank you. Alternate Member Erb — Do we have a concern about Hudson Street, because Hudson Street degrades, according to page 67, table f -1? Chairperson Wilcox — We very well may, but, that's... Alternate Member Erb — Later? Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, that's later. Though we certainly are clear about all the traffic calming measures on Hudson Street right now, like potholes, and ... laughter...l'm sorry.. Are we all done with traffic right now? Okay. I will remind everybody that it's 10:17. Mr. Herrick — okay. I get the message,.. Board Member Conneman — David, who does Amy work for? Mr. Herrick — SRF Associates, Rochester. One comment that Mike made relative to traffic was the lack of team bus parking. That's something that we can easily provide with an illustration, 81/2 by 11 illustration as part of our addendum, so you'll see where those spaces are proposed, and Howard, you can point them out if you'd like. (he does) I guess the last potential impact was on community services and that, those primarily deal with traffic control, which, as Amy already mentioned, the College has stated how they will manage exiting traffic from larger events, in essence closing off Coddington Road and relying upon the western edge of campus to put traffic back into the network. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 69 Water, sewer, very basic ... there are no significant issues there. The College will be making some upgrades to its water system to provide the necessary fire -flow to the building. That's all internal as the College maintains all of its water infrastructure. So those wrap up the A through G potential significant impacts. Again, there is a wealth of information that was produced by many consultants and as incorporated within the appendices. Mike noted that while there is a general summary in the first 100 pages, a lot of supporting information can be found in the appendices. That then brings us to consideration of alternatives. What did the College look at specifically with site selection and I think it would be appropriate to have Cart Sgrecci share with you what the College's vision and efforts were in selecting the site. Carl Sgrecci, Vice President for Finance and Administration, 200 Job Hall One of the governing principles that we have used in this whole planning process goes back to the master plan exercise that the college went through in 2001. Some of you who have been on the Board for a long time actually had the opportunity to participate and be involved in that process, and we wanted to go through that so we could plan in an orderly way for how the campus would develop in the future. We've had the benefit of building a campus from scratch and we've more or less have a fairly compact campus that people can navigate fairly easily and coming out of the master planning exercise, one of the overriding principles was that whatever we do in the future, we want to recognize that these buildings are there to support the academic and student life programs at the college and therefore we want the buildings and where they're located to support what we call a sense of campus community. So that we basically recognize that we have a village within the campus if you will and we want it to be very, fairly easy for people to navigate. As part of that process, as was previously mentioned here, we developed what we call the 10- minute oval, recognizing that our campus is on a hill and that we are governed, in our business, by basically a 10- minute interval that students are allowed to get between classes, as they take their courses, and the oval concept recognizes that you can walk across the east -west plain of our campus and get further within 10 minutes than you can if you go north and south and have to climb up or down the hills. And so that has become a fairly overriding principle in everything that we've done since the campus Master Plan was approved by the Board in 2002. So coming out of .that master -plan exercise is support of the principles of maintaining a sense of campus community were some guidelines where we were trying to keep the future development of the campus, as much as possible, on that east -west plain, that, where it easily can be navigated and I think you'll recognize that the two buildings that are currently under construction, the new Business Building and the Gateway Building, are purposely on a new Main Street concept that keeps most of the traffic on that east -west plain. And so that has been the governing principle, along with the fact that we are trying to keep our buildings fairly close together so that they can be easily navigated and in some cases, even connected, as is the case with the Gateway Building and the Business Building. So when we began to look at alternative sites for this major addition to the campus, those principles, once again, governed our thinking. We looked at the Axiom facility across the street, at one point, as a possibility for this facility. it didn't meet any of those criteria. The main highway, 96B the campus, it was downhill substantially from the rest of the within the 10- minute oval by any measure and certainly would a development of campus community, particularly given the divide the main campus from that facility. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 70 But at the end of the day Nould obviously bifurcate campus, it would not be not support the sense of way the highway would We then moved on to looking at what we call the terraced playing fields area which is up above the Butterfield Football Stadium. It's a fairly large expanse of land. That kind of went to the opposite extreme. It went uphill and considerably to the south of the campus and would not be within the 10- minute oval. Also, as mentioned in the report, created some major athletic field relocations that we would have to do and it also would not provide for the, very conveniently for the magnitude of the parking that we would have to accommodate in the event, for some of these major events. And then, lastly, we looked at the area, what we call the Allen and Yabitz Field area which is between Route 96B and the Parks School of Communication. Those field areas out right directly in front of the campus. This once again went downhill, was off the main plain of the campus and would been, created another situation where the campus would remain to be bifurcated if you will because the main campus Loop Road, which we've relocated on purpose in the 1990's to bring the Park School of Communications and other buildings within the new growth to maintain the sense of campus community, we would now immediately be going across and putting a major pedestrian interference, if you will, to get to and from that facility from main campus, you would be going across the roadway. So, at the end of the day we looked at the Raponi parcel, which the College had acquired a number of years ago thinking perhaps our development would go in that area and the master plan had specifically marked that for future development of the College and I think if you look at the site, you will see that it meets the criteria that we're talking about in terms of it's on the main plain, the east -west plain of the campus, when all is said and done, it basically will be on the perimeter of the 10- minute oval, with Dillingham Center, if you will, on one end of the campus and the, as a major anchor building on our campus and this will be a counter- balancing main facility on the eastern- most edge of our campus and be well within the 10- minute oval, and also all on virtually the same plain, you could walk all the way across campus and have very little change in elevation. So ultimately we thought that this site was the best fit because it really fit the criteria and I think when it is completed, it will foster a sense of campus community and will keep our campus fairly compact and get all the major facilities that we need for our campus, once again, within the 10- minute oval and meet the needs of maintaining the sense of a campus community. Questions? Chairperson Wilcox — At 10:25 we don't have a lot of questions... laughter... Board Member Hoffmann — I have a lot of questions, but I feel it's too late to start. Chairperson Wilcox -- Thank you. David. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 71 Mr. Herrick — Very quickly, there were some other alternatives that we were asked to consider and they deal with structured parking and alternative layouts for the loop road. With respect to structured parking, we have provided a fiscal analysis of what it would mean to the College to provide a conventional structure, multi -level parking garage, something with some aesthetic value, similar to the Cayuga Street garage that the City recently built, and what we found is that the costs associated with meeting the College's parking needs, for this project, are equal to the value of the project. So it's not fiscally prudent to consider that style of parking at this time when there are surface parking alternatives. So that is the sum of our review and discussion of structured parking at this point. There is however a consideration of a single level, below tennis building opportunity in Phase 3 of the project which could potentially hold as many as 100 vehicle. And with the loop road, we were asked to consider alignments that would be not so intrusive to the neighbors, both on the east -west portion of Coddington Road and the north - southwest portion and in fact, as part of our more contemporary design, we made those loop road adjustments out of response to those concerns. So coming up with alternatives to our new design was a little difficult in that we had already embraced those concepts of moving the road and they're inherent now in what we are presenting to the Town. And then last would be consideration of scale of development, and Howard can address why the building needs to look and mass as it does. Mr. Blaisdell — The main function of the primary portion of the building is an indoor, 6M lane, 200 -meter track. That footprint is unavoidable, that's the size of the building that it needs to be. What we have done and as we were studying alternatives and studying options for the building, is we reduced the scale of the building in the north and south where we had offices, mechanical areas, and we started putting more of them below ground and below plaza areas to reduce the mass of the building. A couple other items we looked at as we evaluated the extent of the wetlands that have been developed, we started pulling back the perimeter road and, as you can see from the original development, we were anticipating the future development of the building to go in a more...add on to the south of the building, but to extend in an east -west direction. What we've done is re- evaluated that and actually taken the alternative and proposed that the future additions be run north - south, which keeps the buildings further away from the neighbors, allows the perimeter road to be further to the west than it had been shown in the previous schemes, and actually separated the tennis building to allow that so that we could keep that perimeter road out of a wetlands area that is just to the south, south and west of the tennis courts. And lastly, in terms of the scale of the building, the main fieldhouse design has been redesigned in terms of its structure and the eave of the building, which is the top corner on either long side of the building was reduced from about 60 feet to 40 feet. So we've reduced the visual effect of the building as well. We've lowered the ceiling height within the space as much as possible. We meet the minimum requirements for NCAA i 7 s y ,. �W', _ Y x 1 Ci_s .a ? 1 _ i C �4 -' -✓;, ` 1. _ r I II I I I _I II I P I O� II 4 I JI I I } I tI 1 I 1I I I OI I . L I I O I . T .` '�; !y . :y 4 r n, rO t r `t E a F -t r^ w ' I I ; f I L I '+' ^ f .s,c e g _i. :fir -.k r Y v :: z o- t A^ +v ih - °t IN b -C D 1 2n1 0 Q�77 $ * '* µ.>• a -,4 t K 01 - 3 an t �)a }�` X V I - ` & 72 `{ o r s. t x 3a k �'' r k P. _ -; competition but._we'ye ":decreased the effective scale of .the building along the,_two main 4:. , f r _ `,facades:by:a good-2&' feet r F it ,,- l I I I I c r r :.I f t J q t if I ma The current- IanI that ou :care Chairperson Wilcox = General , question, y t p fl . Y "_ ` shovAng which: is the „one. on top; to my left, is there* any substantial difference - between . y�' that and the update you gave us the last time you were here 1 - f f - ( _ i_ Y- -41 i i. •G C i 1 ✓' Mr Hernck This is the up this isthe} - ,, S - J,. a Y 1 I . . .. I, - k. 171 r erson- Wilcox So there"& no substantial change_ from that update that you gave us while you were preparing the environmental _impact statement and what; you .are showing :us. tonight? f c ry - ' r I I . R ?� "_, { I I Mr Hernck Correct ' - A t * �1 ! } K` Y F S 2 f' 1 1 iC 1 L - ._G 1 i L2 �`� °? i ,. _ _ 'x! - C it! "S -C F - tr °Chairperson Wilcox Good. Thank you O' z y a c I s °, i6 2 N� y ; 1 - T _ t b �•- t i. -.'�ft 9 ' ` ,. �F 1 s` •t' . -A=; Mr ..Herrick And..then the last `element. of_ the EIS is._ the summation , . impacts. and; we're.- all fully aware that, a f project of;;this scale - is going It . have ;certain unavoidable 7 ,. impacts :,' We've identified. what those are and we've. made ..attempts .to mitigate •each and every one:: Some certainly will; be unavoidable and .those are presented to :you' t. The very -last component of our presentation would be to understand our schedule and f w. what we are looking uforward to here. -in the'_ coming,: months: Herman :Sieverdmg �nnth `= Intergraded Acquisition and Development.is going to address that for us A L , >,I - '` G o- p i ' Y Her - man,Sieverding,' Intergraded Acquisition and`Development, 15Thornwood Dnve t . 4R think, Jon, you had. sent out to th_'e Planning Board the schedules 44 ' - = ' t � 3 { l I . ` - ; ter d Chairperson Wilcox :_Yes A. Y _ 6 r `� . h t _ •” y k , 1 # C S a { t ' a ` ' f._. e ,...T c 4 ,c to B �� _ _ - `' Mr.. Sieverdmg - :So this is a fairly complicated, review process.and itW involves ., full � _ environmental impactstatement, we have site -plan review,'and there is also "a variance t „in-=there. because - of`the height of the tower, and so,-David, . Howard and h have:put _ a together'an, initial schedule thaf `;we've - reviewed with "Jon, made ajew adtustments:antl then; .pUt' this'} together for -your, consideration 'Where we ,are right Clow IS Were We =,h originally thought_ we- Would be talking to' you .about a decision• .for adequacy butsJon F 3 L `.`:suggested it,would -be. better. to-first have.a presentation, at least talk about ahe content -- i. ± of--the-DEIS and -see whether:or not you`h'ave any questions and then post' ne_the decision to aadequacy.to January- 8th which is 45; days, which is the - outer` limit `of the:fime. - allowed in the whole SEQRI process,. t ' make that determination;' and;assurriing that on ' I - I January 8th -that decision is, made, then we are suggesting that perhaps February Stn f. , : , could be` the date for, the public °.hearing to take comment ,on the. Draft` Environmentai - >, e Impact - Statement .That the public comment period would ,then also be closed on =that ,_: _ same - date, I-'think there's - 10- Where where you`.can take ;written comment, so I _.; . -_:. . to t think February ,16 would really "be :the end: period for; public`comment'.on the.'DEIS = PB 12.18.07 Pg. 73 document and we were hoping that that could be completed by March 18th. Then, when you publish your notice of completion of the FEIS, we would be looking ...and then the 10 -day review period for that document, we would hopefully be looking at April 15th as the time when you could adopt a finding statement and at the same time, consider preliminary site -plan approval. There would be a stop at the Zoning Board of Appeals before coming back for final site -plan approval, for the height variance and assuming that that could be done on April 21, we would be looking at around May 6th as a date for final site -plan approval. So this is a pretty packed -full 5- month, but I think very doable, schedule, given the volume of information that's been put together in the form of the DEIS. Chairperson Wilcox — Looks aggressive, doesn't it. Mr. Kanter — You'll notice there's also ... we put in ranges of dates on some of them because, obviously there could be some changes in the way things work out. MR. Sieverding — Right, and also, tried to sort of set this schedule up using your normal meeting dates, no special meetings. Mr. Kanter — Also, you'll notice the site-plan package itself needs to be submitted in there. Herman has it January 14th and that would assume there would be a joint public hearing on the preliminary site plans and the EIS, which is normally the way Boards like to do it. Mr. Herrick — Yeah. They are so closely linked... Chairperson Wilcox — Some of these dates are ... some of these action dates, action dates, are mandated by New York State timelines, that you've dictated within the SEQR process. Mr. Sieverding — yes. All of the dates that have to do with dealing with the Environmental Impact Statement itself are mandated dates. If you take a look at the footnote, I think I've... Chairperson Wilcox —Yeah. After that it's... Mr. Sieverding — There are some discretionary dates after that relative to when you deal with site - planand all that. Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, and I don't think you're, Herman, you're not looking to walk away with anything other than here are the dates that you, as representing the applicant, would like to operate within. Yeah. I mean, that's all you can expect. Mr. Sieverding — Yeah, that and the general concurrence that it's not unrealistic to really achieve this end result of May 6th, May 20 for final approval. And in fact, it's very important to Ithaca College that that happen because, as you've just heard, a key component of this project is building some replacement parking for the amount of PB 12.18.07 Pg. 74 parking that gets dislodged when the Event and Athletic Center is going to be constructed. The only feasible time for the College to really achieve that would be when the students are away, so frankly, the goal here is to be able to commence construction on the building and the remote parking lots in June so that when students come back in mid - August those lots are complete and ready for use. Chairperson Wilcox — On the other hand, if we have a lot of people here for a public hearing and you know, we may run out of time and have to take the next meeting to continue the public hearing. - -Mr.- -Sieverding — Understood. Chairperson Wilcox — You've been here long enough, you know what can happen. Okay. It's getting late isn't it... Board Member Thayer — It is. Chairperson Wilcox — It's getting late. Board Member Talty — It is late. Chairperson Wilcox — It is late. Board Member Hoffmann — But, I would like to be sure that when we get to this item at the next meeting, that there's enough time first to ask all the questions. Chairperson Wilcox — Well, they're not going to be here next meeting. Are you gonna ... I'm not sure ... were you planning on being here on the 8th just in case? Mr. Herrick — Yes, we were looking forward to the 8th Chairperson Wilcox — Oh, I'm sure ... I'm sure you were... Mr. Sieverding — There will be a full compliment of consultants here. Mr. Herrick — That's right, we would bring everyone who participated in our process, but I think tonight, if you, and I do understand the time and appreciate your commitment here, but if there are key aspects of the EIS that you were looking to have answered, or thought should be in here, that jumped out as being missing, we would like to know that now, if it's possible. Chairperson Wilcox — I actually thought the analysis of the alternate sites was missing because I expected it in the front 100 pages and not ... I found it buried in the appendix. So, I guess that's not a complaint about the organization, the organization is different from what I expected, but it made it difficult to find some things. I expected to just be ... the discussion to be in -line and in order with the scoping document so, Michael, you mentioned a few minor things in your cover memo. I didn't see anything..] mean granted, I haven't gone through ... none of us have gone through this whole thing yet and PB 12.18.07 Pg. 75 probably none of us will go through the entire document, certainly not all the appendices... Ms. Brock—You shouldn't say that.... Alternate Member Erb —Yeah, you shouldn't say that.... Chairperson Wilcox — I'll speak for myself, I am not going to ready every word or every page of this... Mr. Herrick — There's a lot of Latin in here that you may want to take a look at... laughter... Board Member Hoffmann — I have one comment that I would like to make... Chairperson Wilcox — Okay, and then I'll get to Hollis after you're done. Board Member Hoffmann — I found that the view pictures in the discussion about views too, I have some questions about, but the pictures, I didn't find as helpful as I would have hoped them to be. I don't understand why you didn't have all of the views represented by photographs that show what it looks like when you are there on the spot instead of close -ups for some of them. Close -ups you could have added in addition.... Mr. Herrick — Ahhh, yes.... Board Member Hoffmann — But, if you don't have a picture of what it looks like when you are on the ground and seeing it, it's not very helpful. Mr. Herrick — Okay. Board Member Thayer — Also, it was a very hazy day. Mr. Herrick — Well, there were many days that were that way and the distance added to it, so a lot of these perspectives are 9 mile plus weather Board Member Hoffmann — A lot of them are hazy, that's true, but the weather we've been having lately has provided us with many clear days too, it just takes a lot of effort to go out there and photograph on a clear day. But that would have been helpful to have. Mr. Herrick — Okay. Alternate Member Erb — When it comes to the visual impact, to me it isn't merely whether it stands up above the ridgeline, but I'm also very concerned about what coloring the roof is going to be and I didn't understand the description of the lighting within the tower. That's going to be a big question that I'm going to have. Mr. Herrick — Okay. So, roofing materials and tower lighting. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 76 Alternate Member Erb - Yeah, those sorts of things, I mean, I can look at this, this big sort of ugly beached whale sort of color and that's a blight. Mr. Herrick - That's the actual name for the color... laughter... Alternate Member Erb - Yes, beached whale underbelly. Board Member Talty - I would say normally, you've done business with us before, many swatches, lights, any type of materials that they are going to use to give the Board a better indication of what the coloring and the texture is going to be would be greatly - appreciated: - — - - -- - - - - Mr. Herrick - Well, certainly as part of our preliminary site -plan review presentation we would bring you that typical presentation board and you'll see exactly, or very close to, what will be going on the building. Chairperson Wilcox - We will applaud you as we have everybody else. Hollis. Alternate Member Erb - with the wetland mitigai look very favorably on than, oh...this summer in place, if you possibly - The one other thing that concerns is, I believe that what you do ion is going to involve the Army Corps of Engineers, but, I would those new wetlands being created as soon as possible rather sort of after everything is all occupied. In other words, get them could. Mr. Herrick - Absolutely and part of the process with the Corps when looking at those compensatory mitigation wetlands is planning in advance. So we have some aspects of future phases that will have a wetland disturbance. We can construct the new wetlands now at a much lower ratio in anticipation that those are going to be disturbed in the future. So there's an opportunity to do all of the wetlands mitigation work for Phase 1 through III in the earlier phases of this project. Board Member Hoffmann - I really have much more questions but I really feel it's too late. Chairperson Wilcox - It's too late. We'll see you back on January 8th, we'll try to get rid of you, politely, of course. Mr. Herrick - I understand. Is there a sense that on the 8th we will be able to answer these questions and look at a determination of whether it's suitable for public comment? Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah. Board Member Hoffmann - I don't know if you'll be able to answer the questions, and do something about them... Chairperson Wilcox - Well wait a minute, let's be careful here, what are we doing on the 8 th? The answer is, is this complete enough to give it to the public to look at. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 77 Board Member Hoffmann — Right, and that's what I have some questions about. Chairperson Wilcox — That's...it doesn't...is it complete enough to give the public. Is it perfect? No. Is it sufficiently complete to give it to the public to allow them to review it, that's the question. Mr. Kanter — And adequately contain the scope and content that was in the scoping outline. Chairperson Wilcox — Right. Yes. Yes. Board Member Thayer — I agree with Mike that it is. Chairperson Wilcox — Right. Right. Just remember what our purpose is at our next meeting. Mr. Kanter — And scheduling wise, the January 8th meeting could be for this item only. There's one other potential item that may be on it, but... Chairperson Wilcox — Don't say a 2 -lot subdivision... laughter... Mr. Kanter — No, I promise. Mr. Herrick — Thank you very much. Chairperson Wilcox — All right. We've got a couple of things to do here really quick. Let me move approval of the minutes of November 27th ... seconded by Kevin ... you have Eva's changes... Hollis, you may vote ... all those in favor please signal by saying aye. ..anybody opposed ... any abstentions... there are... Board Member Hoffmann — I just want to say, Paulette herself found the major problem that was in there ... I don't know if you... Board Member Talty — I'm sorry... Board Member Hoffmann — Paulette found the major problem in them herself, I found out tonight when I came here. Did any of you? Ms. Neilsen — This is a test... laughter... Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. One of the resolutions and the vote on it were missing and that's the kind of thing we're supposed to find. I usually find just little trivial typos and such... Chairperson Wilcox— To other business.... PB 12.18.07 Pg. 78 ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2007 = 139 Minutes of November 27, 2007 Town of Ithaca Planning Board December 18, 2007 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty. WHEREAS: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from November 27, 2007, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on November 27, 2007. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty and Erb NAYS: None ABSENT: Riha The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox — To other business. You report on the environmental assessment of the available. You can get it off the Town website. Town Board Iast...December 10th... so ... Town Larry, we should recognize Larry, his son is gi announced in the paper. may have heard about it, the interim lands adjacent to Sapsucker Woods is There was a presentation made to the Topics ... I'm going to skip that...oh... stting married. The engagement was Board Member Thayer — He's 40plus, he's got a chance to do it again. Chairperson Wilcox — It's a Romanowski... Board Member Thayer — Yeah, that's Bob Romanowski, yeah. Board Member Talty — That should make for interesting table conversation. Chairperson Wilcox — A reminder of our meeting dates next month are the second and fourth Tuesdays. Next meeting agenda, possibly one other item... Mr. Kanter — Possibly the Cornell Combined Heating Plant Project, Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else you want to talk about tonight? Mr. Kanter — Nope. Oh. One thing. Just Staffs immense appreciation for Mr. Wilcox's years of service as Chair of this Board. PB 12.18.07 Pg. 79 Chairperson Wilcox -= I got a note here from a member of staff who obviously couldn't stay around very long...all rightly... anything else? Board Member Thayer — We as Members of the Board appreciate your... applause... Board Member Talty — And where will you be sitting, exactly? Chairperson Wilcox — I'm sitting next to Hollis. Assuming Hollis is re- appointed as the alternate, I'm going to sit right down there next to her. Ms. Brock — And actually, I think it's up to the Chair to determine the seating... laughter... Alternate Member Erb — Hey Rod, Susan and I want... Chairperson Wilcox — Let's put it this way, if he doesn't put me down there... laughter... or whomever ... all right ... is there anything else.... Board Member Talty — Yes. Chairperson Wilcox — she actually determine s honest... laughter... anything else? Can I have a at 10:47 p.m. Deputy Town Clerk the seating arrangement, let's be motion to adiourn. We are adjourned TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, December 18, 2007 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 330 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62- 1 -3.2, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 5.959 acre lot into two parcels consisting of a +/- 1.703 acre parcel, containing the existing Rite Aid Pharmacy, and a +/- 4.256 acre parcel located off Mitchell Street which would be available for future development. 1093 Group, LLC, Owner /Applicant. 7 :20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Equestrian Center located between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -1- 19.12, Agricultural Zone. The proposal involves the development of an equestrian center including pastures, outdoor hunter jumper and dressage arenas, paddocks, an interior arena and stalls ( +/- 33,000 square feet), and a hay storage and machinery barn. The project will also include a future residence for the owners, stormwater facilities, lighting and parking. Robert & Paula Wedemeyer, Owners /Applicants; Peter J. Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Agent. 7 :45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Continuation of consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding three proposed local laws associated with the enactment of the new Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Law, specifically: a, a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law deleting Chapter 228 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Storm Water Management," and adding a new chapter 228 titled, "Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control;" b. a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning," to add Storm Water Plan Submission Requirements; C, a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 234 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Subdivision of Land," to add Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submission Requirements. The three local laws are intended to implement the NYS mandated Phase 2 Stormwater Regulations for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System's (MS4). 8:00 P.M. Consideration of designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board to act as Lead Agency, and the determination of a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance for the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96) and Taughannock Boulevard (NYS Route 89), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 5 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4 -38, and 26 -4 -3, Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, and Conservation Zones. The proposal involves the construction of +/- 106 town home type units in a clustered development with two entrances proposed from Trumansburg Road. The development would be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to Trumansburg Road, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The eastern portion of the property will be conveyed to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation. Holochuck Homes, LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. 8:30 P.M. Preliminary presentation and discussion regarding the determination of adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Ithaca College Athletic and Events Center located on the eastern side of the Ithaca College campus near the Coddington Road campus entrance, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 41 -1 -30.2, 41 -1 -24, and 42- 1 -9.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of +/- 300,000 square feet of indoor athletic facilities including an indoor 200M track with practice /game field, Olympic size pool and diving well, tennis courts, rowing center, gymnasium, strength and conditioning center, and floor space for large indoor events. Outdoor facilities include a lighted artificial turf field, a 400M track with open space for field events, and lighted tennis courts. The project is proposed in several phases and will also include the construction of 1,002 parking spaces (687 displaced spaces and 315 new spaces), relocating overhead power lines, constructing a new loop road, walkways, access drives, stormwater management facilities, lighting and landscaping. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Agent. 7. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 8. Approval of Minutes: November 27, 2007 and December 4, 2007, 9, Other Business: 10, 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 December 18, 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, December 18, 2007, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 330 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62- 1 -3.2, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 5.959 acre lot into two parcels consisting of a +/- 1.703 acre parcel, containing the existing Rite Aid Pharmacy, and a +/- 4.256 acre parcel located off Mitchell Street which would be available for future development. 1093 Group, LLC, Owner /Applicant. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Equestrian Center located between 1456 and 1460 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -1- 19.12, Agricultural Zone. The proposal involves the development of an equestrian center including pastures, outdoor hunter jumper and dressage arenas, paddocks, an interior arena and stalls ( +/- 33,000 square feet), and a hay storage and machinery barn. The project will also include a future residence for the owners, stormwater facilities, lighting and parking. Robert & Paula Wedemeyer, Owners /Applicants; Peter J. Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Agent. 7:45 P.M. Continuation of consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding three proposed local laws associated with the enactment of the new Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sedimentation Control Law, specifically: a. a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law deleting Chapter 228 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Storm Water Management," and adding a new chapter 228 titled, "Storm Water Management and Erosion and Sediment Control;" b, a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, titled "Zoning," to add Storm Water Plan Submission Requirements; C, a recommendation regarding a proposed Local Law amending Chapter 234 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled "Subdivision of Land," to add Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Submission Requirements. The three local laws are intended to implement the NYS mandated Phase 2 Stormwater Regulations for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System's (MS4). 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, December 10, 2007 Publish: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 TOWN OF ITHACA I, PLANNING BOARD 'A NOTICE OF PUBLICiHEARING.: Tuesdayy, .r 1 December ,ecemb+1 B;, 2007: I. By - duecti6n`of the Chdiri rson " of the Planning, (Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY; GIVEN that Public Hearings] ;;will be held by the Planning] Board of the Town of Ithaca] on Tuesdayy, December -18,' 2007, at `215 North Tioga; tSheet, Ithaca, N.Y.., on at the' following times and the! ;followingg matters ' ;.t - ' 7:05 P.M.'Consideration "of Final Subdivision, . ro Ival for, the ,proposed; °2 -1ot', ,subdivisio'n- located +at ;3301 - Pine Tree • Rodd , Town of Ithaca .Tax.Parcef 9Vo: 62 -12 31 2, Community Commer - -` 'cial Zone. The 'Proposal Irv. valves subdividing; the; +/- 5.959 acre lot into,tWorpar- feels, consisting of. a- = +/J ;,9.703 acre parcel; contains ling the existing R +ia=Aid' :4:256 acre,parcel located 'off Mitchell • Street-�vvhich' would be available ;forV tore development - ,1093'; - Group, „ xe LLQ •'Owner /Applicant. 7:20-P.M I%Consideration 4of Final "Site. Pion. Approvali "for the proposed Equestrian ) :'Center located, ' between! 9456 and =1460' Trumansburg- ,Road, 4 Tovm ,of- Ithaca Tdx'Parc4'INo. i`-24 -1 19.12; . �:.'Agricultuial' :Zone. "The proposal . in -: j:volves .the development,ofi fan.equestrian center includ: ,000•square e. storage an rn. The ppro lode .a hitu Peter J. e, Trowbridge' &, " - -- :ration of a Rec -• ion to the `Town *Town' Board re-i� free' proposed'lo- ssociated vnth the: of;'the '•: new. r Management 3n -and; Sedim4a4 itrol taw, sped omn"ation re-; I ^proposed'. Local' and ',adding�a ." r recommendation re- i a - Proposed, Local'P wn of. u7An;n Sub- of the Town; of Ithaca; i; Tided-"Subdivision of `" to add Storm Water ion' Prevention Plan. ussion ;Requirements: a three.local laws are'. Jed,:,to-- implement' the imamdated'-Phase 2 iwater_Regulations for cipp'aaI _ Separate Storm; u System s (MS4(`., such'maIter, or;objeaions treto: Persons may ,ap- or- by agent or:in•person lividuals :with 'visual .iris'. irrhents,' hearing, impair -', mti -.ov 'other special% eds,` will'.be; °provided) th assistance as - necesso- ' upon" request.- Tersons' siring° assistance ,must,. the time bf' the - public, j.hearing -P othan Kanter; AICF; 1% Director- of- Planning' r x;-2731.747" Dated. Monday, December -10, -2007 - Publish: Wednesday December 12, 2007 Wednesday, December 12, 20071 THE ITHACA JOURNAL' x r -- . TOWN OF ITHACA I, PLANNING BOARD 'A NOTICE OF PUBLICiHEARING.: Tuesdayy, .r 1 December ,ecemb+1 B;, 2007: I. By - duecti6n`of the Chdiri rson " of the Planning, (Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY; GIVEN that Public Hearings] ;;will be held by the Planning] Board of the Town of Ithaca] on Tuesdayy, December -18,' 2007, at `215 North Tioga; tSheet, Ithaca, N.Y.., on at the' following times and the! ;followingg matters ' ;.t - ' 7:05 P.M.'Consideration "of Final Subdivision, . ro Ival for, the ,proposed; °2 -1ot', ,subdivisio'n- located +at ;3301 - Pine Tree • Rodd , Town of Ithaca .Tax.Parcef 9Vo: 62 -12 31 2, Community Commer - -` 'cial Zone. The 'Proposal Irv. valves subdividing; the; +/- 5.959 acre lot into,tWorpar- feels, consisting of. a- = +/J ;,9.703 acre parcel; contains ling the existing R +ia=Aid' :4:256 acre,parcel located 'off Mitchell • Street-�vvhich' would be available ;forV tore development - ,1093'; - Group, „ xe LLQ •'Owner /Applicant. 7:20-P.M I%Consideration 4of Final "Site. Pion. Approvali "for the proposed Equestrian ) :'Center located, ' between! 9456 and =1460' Trumansburg- ,Road, 4 Tovm ,of- Ithaca Tdx'Parc4'INo. i`-24 -1 19.12; . �:.'Agricultuial' :Zone. "The proposal . in -: j:volves .the development,ofi fan.equestrian center includ: ,000•square e. storage an rn. The ppro lode .a hitu Peter J. e, Trowbridge' &, " - -- :ration of a Rec -• ion to the `Town *Town' Board re-i� free' proposed'lo- ssociated vnth the: of;'the '•: new. r Management 3n -and; Sedim4a4 itrol taw, sped omn"ation re-; I ^proposed'. Local' and ',adding�a ." r recommendation re- i a - Proposed, Local'P wn of. u7An;n Sub- of the Town; of Ithaca; i; Tided-"Subdivision of `" to add Storm Water ion' Prevention Plan. ussion ;Requirements: a three.local laws are'. Jed,:,to-- implement' the imamdated'-Phase 2 iwater_Regulations for cipp'aaI _ Separate Storm; u System s (MS4(`., such'maIter, or;objeaions treto: Persons may ,ap- or- by agent or:in•person lividuals :with 'visual .iris'. irrhents,' hearing, impair -', mti -.ov 'other special% eds,` will'.be; °provided) th assistance as - necesso- ' upon" request.- Tersons' siring° assistance ,must,. the time bf' the - public, j.hearing -P othan Kanter; AICF; 1% Director- of- Planning' r x;-2731.747" Dated. Monday, December -10, -2007 - Publish: Wednesday December 12, 2007 Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street December 18, 2007 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name VOL -rc v, k Aa S y t ►. t.. LO U 1 Address z(c 1 Q U� T� r-vC.CIM�U5 4061 tc ivl j . \ - • 1 104 WU-+ .J -d'ocq 101 *OF(t/� It ?, 15z � h'10UI:�-( I(OLL"A'M C�3L) - ��o� ► , �,� FC) 0 tic �6-k �jy Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street December 18, 2007 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name /9?4 44 W MEN07'OL" Address 14 56 7PuM1A1SiBY2q Rry ir't�Zf}- eoo/ AwT /V/ MICA Z 7 r (6...'v J U4' 1''� � 41wa�7< T6 "►D I zA 0— 9-z�s . l D,z te, Z Address 14 56 7PuM1A1SiBY2q Rry ir't�Zf}- eoo/ AwT /V/ MICA Z 7 r (6...'v J U4' 1''� � 41wa�7< T6 "►D I zA 0— 9-z�s . l 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. Noti Ithaca in Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday December 18, 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: December 10, 2007 December 12, 2007 "M QQic� Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 12`h day of December 2007. Notary Public CONNIE F. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No.01CL6052878 Qualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 26,20 10 }