Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2008-12-02FILE DATE PLANNING BOARD TOWN OF ITHACA Regular Meeting December 2, 2008 215 North Tioga Street 7 :00 p.m. Present: Rod Howe, Chairman Members: George Conneman, Larry Thayer, Susan Riha, Kevin Talty, Hollis Erb and Fred Wilcox. Alternate Member; Jon Bosak Staff: Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Dan Walker, Town Engineer; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Lorraine Moynihan Schmitt, Acting Attorney for the Town; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Darby Kiley, Planner, Chris Balestra, Planner; Paulette Terwilliger, Deputy Town Clerk Others: Steve Beyers and Don Bilderbach, Cornell ERL; Kathryn Wolf and Bill Wendt, T -GEIS; Bruce and Doug Brittain, Residents commenting on T -GETS; Peter Cherubini and Dan Kathan, Student Agencies, Inc. Chairperson Howe opened the meeting at 7:01 p.m. and announced where the fire exits were located. Chairperson Howe also asked that any cell phones be turned off unless used for emergency response personnel. Persons to be heard There was no one wishing to address the Board at this time. Chairperson Howe introduced Lorraine Moynihan Schmitt as the acting Attorney for the Town for the first item from which Susan Brock had recused herself. Significance for the proposed Cornell University Energy Recovery Linac (ERL) project located north of the Pine Tree Road and Drvden Road (NYS Route 3RR1 intersection, I own of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63 -1 -8.2 63 -1 -2 2, 63 -1 -12 63=1=3 *1 and 63 =1 -3.3, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves construction of an underground accelerator tunnel (14 -foot diameter and 2 km long) a cryogenic facility and associated electric substation ( +1- 15,000 square foot footprint), and an extension to the existina Wilson Laboratory ( +/_ 185,000 -gross square feet of building space). The project will also involve new stormwater facilities, parking, outdoor lighting, and landscaping The Planning Board may also discuss the draft scoping document for the Environmental Impact Statement Cornell University, Owner; Steve Beyers, P E Engineering Services Leader, Agent. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 2 Steve Beyers and Don Bilderbach, Cornell University Steve Beyers stated he felt this was the formality of designating the lead agency and making the positive declaration of environmental significance which they had agreed to previously. Alternate Member Bosak asked about the long form and boxes not being checked off and there was some discussion about the boilerplate form and its inadequacies and challenges. Ms. Schmidt thought the Board could move ahead with the SEQR and then discuss the process. ADOPTED RESOLUTION PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 103 Lead Agency Designation & Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance Cornell University Energy Recovery Linac Tax Parcel No.'s 63- 1 -8.2, 63- 1 -219 634-12, 63- 1 -11, and 63m1 -3.3 Dryden Road (NYS Route 366) at Wilson Lab Entrance Town of Ithaca Planning Board December 2, 2008 Motion made by Susan Riha, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is considering serving as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed Cornell University Energy Recovery Linac (ERL) project located north of the Pine Tree Road and Dryden Road (NYS Route 366) intersection (at Wilson Lab Entrance), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63- 1 -8.2, 63- 1 -2.2, 63 -1 -12, 63 -1 -3.1 and 63- 1 -3.3, Low Density Residential Zone (LDR). The proposal involves construction of an underground accelerator tunnel (14- foot diameter and 2 km long), a cryogenic facility and associated electric substation 15,000 square foot footprint), and an extension to the existing Wilson Laboratory 185,000 gross square feet of building space). The project will also involve new stormwater facilities, parking, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. Cornell University, Owner; Steve Beyers, P.E. (Engineering Services Manager), Agent, and 2. The proposed project, which requires Site Plan and Special Permit 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 the construction of a nonresidential facility with more than 25,000 square feet of gross floor area, and 3. A letter from Steve Beyers, dated October 3, 2008, has been received, in which the agent states that "...the Town, Cornell, and the community may be best served through a SEQR process utilizing a formal Draft Environmental Impact Statement PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 3 (DEIS) and review procedure, rather than through review of the Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF) alone." 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 September 19, 2008, 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 Cornell University, and Parts II and III 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 Cornell University Energy Recovery Linac, 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 Department duly file and publish a Notic e provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617.12, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: hereby requests that the Town Planning of Positive Declaration pursuant to the That Cornell University 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 Cornell University 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. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Talty, Erb and Wilcox Nays: None PB 12.2.2008 Pg, 4 The motion passed unanimously. Chairperson Howe asked if the Board had some issues to highlight at this point. Highlighted issues: Alternate Member Bosak asked about the figures of megawatt usage and he came up with an added energy use in the Town of 47,000 — 105,000 megawatt hours per year. The impact, therefore, would be equivalent to adding 4,000- 11,000 households of electrical use and he asked what benefit the Town of Ithaca would be getting for expanding its energy use and its carbon footprint. He would want green house gas emissions to be addressed in the Scope. Don Bilderbach replied that the projects they work on will benefit society. Better catalysts and many energy saving and medical discoveries. Alternate Member Bosak also asked what the benefit is to Ithaca itself not the universe at large. In other words, why have it here instead of Princeton. Board Member Riha asked if Cornell would consider this as part of their carbon footprint and their climate neutrality plan. Mr. Bilderbach was not sure if that had been fully asked and answered yet. Board Member Erb wondered what the carbon footprint would be for different LEED certifications as kind of a trade -off for the expanded energy use. Chairperson Howe pointed out the public health and safety that he would be particularly interested in and Board Member Wilcox mentioned sprinklers. Board Member Erb brought up traffic mitigations and in particular, Dryden Road and Judd Falls Road. There was some discussion about traffic signals. Chairperson Howe reviewed the timing stating that the applicants would be returning in mid - January with a draft Scoping Document and he asked about the time line with the National Science Foundation, Mr. Bilderbach brought the Board up to date on that and explained that they had given a 3 -hour presentation a week earlier to the National Science Foundation and they were pleased with their progress. Chairperson Howe thanked the applicants and Ms. Lorraine Moynihan Schmidt left and Susan Brock came in as Attorney for the Town. Ffl to the Town of Appeals regarding the proposed construction of a 10,000 square foot warehouse at 1482 Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79). Town of Ithaca Tax Parr_al Nn 97.1= al i of a 250' 14' steel warehouse structure on a concrete pad for the storage of Cornell student belonainas to be added to the exictinn a nnn cniiaro fnnt fnnimis Ta%., tora and extended and modified in 2004. Warehouse and storage facilities are not Permitted_ uses in the Aaricultural Zone_ The nrnnncal alaf% in# %hmae� m^%as PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 5 driveway connection to Sheffield Road. Student Agencies Properties, Owner /Applicant; Dan H. Kathan, Chief Executive Officer, Agent. Dan Kathan and Peter Cherubini Mr. Kathan gave an overview of the business, stating that the business principally serves Cornell, and the business has grown to the point where they rent additional space at another location which presents difficulties. Also, the business principally operates only during the summer months, and this makes other locations, either building or renting, economically unfeasible. Board Comments There was quite a bit of discussion about the original granting of the use variance and how that applies to the Board's recommendation. Jon Kanter gave a brief background on the inspection requirement and the continuance of the variance. The Board had a lot of questions about the use variance process and whether the use variance would be in perpetuity. The Board was concerned about the location of the new addition as shown and felt that at the very least, the applicants should have to come in for site plan review. Many Board members were not in favor of more agricultural land not being used as agricultural, but the use variance is there, so what is the issue of making the building larger. In effect, the size doesn't make an environmental difference, it is the underlying use variance that is debatable. The actual use of the buildings and how items were stored was discussed in detail, with the Board making some suggestions on how this could be done. The need for a second driveway was debated and would be addressed during site plan review. The configuration and setbacks were discussed, and again, this would be addressed during site plan review if the Zoning Board approved the use variance. There was some discussion on the need for the additional space. The Applicants assured the Board that they were close to 100% capacity and foresee that for the future. They do not see a need for even more buildings in the far future. They have a niche market and they have 95% of that business and they have built in a small amount of excess space. The applicants noted that having the storage in one location would decrease truck trips to another location and the accompanying pollution. The need for sprinkler systems and the water to supply them was touched on briefly. Sprinklers were not required previously, but there are new laws that would require them now. The way the use variance stands now, the use is attached to the building so any sale of the building would not carry the use variance with it. Mr. Kanter noted that the agricultural zone was designated in 2004, it was not an agricultural zone when the use variance was granted. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 6 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION No. 2008 - 104 Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Student Agencies Warehouse 1482 Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79) Planning Board, December 2, 2008 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Larry Thayer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the use variance request by Student Agencies, provided the request meets the use variance criteria, for the construction of a 10,000 square foot warehouse, located on the same parcel as an existing 9,000 square foot structure, for the purposes of storing Cornell University student belongings at 1482 Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1- 24.32, Agricultural Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. Zoning Board of Appeals imposes similar conditions on the expansion as are attached to the current variance, 2. The Zoning Board of Appeals requires the proposal to receive site plan review from the Planning Board. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Talty, Erb and Wilcox Nays: None The motion passed unanimously. Consideration of Acceptance of the Cornell draft Final Transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Final t- GEIS). The t -GETS includes an identification, examination and evaluation of transportation - related impacts of hypothetical Cornell University population growth scenarios over the next decade on transportation systems and neighborhoods. The t -GEIS addresses these impacts by evaluating and proposing mitigation measures to encourage alternatives to single - occupancy vehicle use by those traveling to and from Cornell. The draft Final t -GEIS includes copies of all of the public comments submitted regarding the t -GEIS and draft responses to these comments that were considered substantive. Kathryn Wolf and Bill Wendt, Agents Ms. Wolf noted that there are new errata sheets which were changed because as people arrive at Cornell, the way they arrive is completely dependent on their destination, and the first sheet stated that they would all come to Hoy Road. This had to PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 7 do with signage, and suggestions made for various locations. There was some discussion on signage and Mr. Wendt noted that a lot of the roads are State roads, and they have their own regulations. This is not insurmountable, but it is time consuming, and they have to agree. Ms. Wolf reiterated that the point was to avoid Forest Home. Ms. Wolf reminded the Board that after the FEIS is adopted, the next step would be to adopt the Findings, and she suggested the Board not forget about the TIMS as the process comes to a close. The TIMS is almost verbatim from the FEIS but put in a different format, and she would like to see support for the TIMS formally as the outcome of the TGEIS. The TIMS will be updated in 5 -year cycles and really spells out a lot of the mitigations. Chairperson Howe invited the Brittains to address the Board, as indicated at the last meeting. Bruce and Doug Brittain The Brittains had a handout which they gave to the Board. Doug Brittain thought some of the responses to the public's comments did not stay on topic. He noted that the calculation of the background traffic was incorrect. The Brother's tag- teamed and attempted to explain the handout and their findings. Basically, they thought the background traffic growth did not include Cornell non - commuting traffic. Ms. Brock noted that the background trips are included according to the Scoping Document and the Brittains disagreed. This went on for quite some time with the Brittains using their graphs and the Board commenting on them. and disagreeing with some of their conclusions. Ms. Brock noted that the consultants had already changed the numbers according to what the Board agreed to. The Brittains thought that compounded the error instead of correcting it. They thought the slope of the line was wrong. After much discussion, Ms. Brock noted that the timing of the mitigations might occur sooner but the actual mitigation would not. The Brittains agreed, but the numbers are incorrect, the effect is underestimated by a factor of three. Ms. Brock noted that the TGEIS does not say that mitigations are not required in this situation because the mess is there from background, not Cornell. The TGEIS says that even without Cornell, there are issues that require mitigations and they do not pin the mitigations to whoever is causing the growth. Traffic is traffic is traffic. Also, the non= commuter trips may not be loaded in these corridors, they could be in outlying towns. Ms. Brock felt the mitigations may not change with a change in the slope of the line. The Brittain's felt it was important that if the Board was going to use this document to measure the impact of Cornell growth, then it would be underestimating it by a factor of three. They want an accurate assessment of Cornell growth. Board Member Erb asked them directly whether they felt that Cornell commuting traffic had been incorrectly estimated and they stated that it was not, it was ballpark. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 8 The Brittains went over some of the other comments that they felt were not responded to by the consultants. They also had an issue with the simulation the consultants used at certain intersections. Board Member Wilcox clarified that they were accepted simulations and it was the Brittains opinion that they were misleading. Ms. Brock asked if any of the mitigations would have changed and Doug Brittain stated no. In conclusion, the Brittains stated that overall, they are not trying to raise the bar or get something done that was not supposed to be done. They felt they were just pointing out that they have not done what they said they would do or not quite correctly. They think Cornell could do it correctly if they wanted to. The possibilities they suggested were to 1) Hire an independent consultant to respond to the substantive comments. They noted that this had been done in the past. The other alternative is to just drop it, if they didn't want to do it correctly. They felt that if the document was accepted the way it is, it would be the beginning of problems. Ms. Wolf was invited back up respond to the Brittains comments. Ms. Wolf pointed out that the there were no new disagreements stated tonight. She felt it was a "regurgitation" of the comments made the first time around, except for their theory on how it should be done. The 2.2% background growth, which was agreed to by a whole group of planners and NYS DOT, is derived by actual on- the - ground traffic counts that were taken over a 15 -year period. Traffic counts within the County that were taken at the same intersections over 15 years, that is the information that was used, not some form or estimate, but actual on- the - ground counts. Daily counts that included background traffic going to malls, or P &C or whatever. Ms. Wolf reiterated that the focus of the project is on the commuter trips. The charge was to look at the peak hours, not to study and identify ways of mitigating non - commuter trips. That was not part of the Scope. She also stated that she was very confident in their transportation engineers, and the methodologies that were used are standard practice, and they went the "extra mile" to analyze the background traffic rates to show what the real impact is. Ms. Wolf went on to state that it neighborhood traffic was to be in tho some improvement of existing traffic as park- and -ride and van pools, etc. to reducing the existing condition; it growth. Board Comments was always understood that the reduction of growth not in the existing conditions. Although could improve with the mitigation strategies such But the intention was never that Cornell was held was reducing the amount of traffic of the future Board Member Talty commented that this has been.before the Board for more than a year and it is possible that both the Brittains and Cornell are right. Why not have two plans and fall back on the second. This is a plan; it's a floating, moving target. If there are issues with it the way it is, change it. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 9 Board Member Riha commented that the increase in the background was taken to maximize the increase. By not knowing how the non - Cornell traffic was going to grow, this was a high -end estimate that was agreed on. She was comfortable that it was not being underestimated. Board Member Erb commented that this is a tool and that the Board is not locked into it. When there are concerns with a particular project, the Board can ask for details. This is not something the Board is tied to, but gives ideas for mitigations and a lot of guidelines. Alternate Member Bosak commented that although he came in the process very late, he understood what the Brittains were saying and agreed with some. He also stated that in general, the responses to the comments were not responsive. He noted that the comment that he submitted was not responded to very well and he would have felt more comfortable with the other responses if his had been responded to more fully. He would like to see a better response to the Brittains comments than "we're confident that our engineer's must have gotten it right." He did not think that was responsive to the kind of detail submitted. Board Member Conneman commented that he agreed with Kevin in that, if it doesn't work, you have to be prepared to change. The future is unknown. Keep flexible. Board Member Thayer agreed that it is a guide, not a bible and the Board can use it as a guide as they review particular cases. Board Member Wilcox commented that he is struggling with it. He is not comfortable because there has been no time to digest the Brittains comments. He could not pinpoint a particular question, it was more just overload. Chairperson Howe asked about the process and Mr. Kanter replied that it is fluid and the mitigation strategies will be available to use along with common sense. The Finding Statement is envisioned as a palette of choices of how and when to use mitigation strategies while maintaining the process of planning with all involved agencies. This is a background document. Discussion amongst the Board focused on whether the calculations caused a big enough difference in the outcomes. The resolution was moved and seconded with changes to add the second errata sheet. ADOPTED RESOLUTION PB RESOLUTION No. 2008 = 105 SEQR = Acceptance of Final Cornell University Transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Final t -GETS) as Complete Town of Ithaca Planning Board, December 2, 2008 MOTION made by Hollis Erb, seconded by Susan Riha. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 10 WHEREAS: 1. Cornell University has submitted a report outlining a proposal for a "transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t -GEIS) and Ten -year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS)11 , dated August 26, 2005, being undertaken by Cornell University in cooperation with the Town of Ithaca. The t -GEIS will address transportation impacts on the community surrounding the campus related to an increasing population traveling to Cornell. The TIMS will evolve in response to the information obtained from the t -GEIS, and may include recommendations for transportation demand management, multi -modal transportation strategies, access and circulation modifications, and zoning changes. Cornell University, Applicant; Kathryn Wolf, RLA, Principal -in- Charge (Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP); Martin, Alexiou, Bryson (Transportation Consultants), and 2. The proposed transportation- focused GEIS would be a generic environmental impact statement that will identify, examine and evaluate Cornell's transportation - related impacts and potential mitigations for several hypothetical population growth scenarios over the next decade. The GEIS is a tool available under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, commonly referred to as SEQR. Unlike an Environmental Impact Statement, a GEIS is flexible enough to explore hypothetical or alternative scenarios, and 3. 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 September 12, 2005, and received no objections to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board serving as Lead Agency on this matter, and 4. The Planning Board after having reviewed the report referenced above, which includes a Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, prepared by Cornell University, a description of the proposed action, a cover letter (August 26, 2005) indicating that the applicant proposes to prepare a transportation- focused Generic EIS and is requesting a positive declaration of environmental significance for the Planning Board's consideration, and Part 2 of the Full EAF, prepared by the Planning staff, established itself as lead agency on November 1, 2005 to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed transportation - focused GEIS and Ten -year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy, as described above, and made a positive determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, confirming that a transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t -GEIS) will be prepared, and 5. Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca Planning Board agreed that a public scoping process would be initiated to determine the scope and content of the t- GEIS, and that Cornell University would prepare a draft written scope of issues to be addressed in the t -GEIS, and PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 11 6, The Planning Board, at a meeting held on November 15, 2005, has reviewed a Preliminary Draft Scope, dated November 15, 2005, for the t -GETS and TIMS, submitted by Cornell University, and determined that said Preliminary Draft Scope was adequate to proceed with a public scoping process, and 7. The Planning Board held two public scoping sessions, one on December 6, 2005, and a second on January 3, 2006, to hear comments from the public and interested and involved agencies regarding the scope and content of the t -GEIS, and accepted written comments on the Preliminary Draft Scope through December 16, 2005, after distributing the Preliminary Draft Scope to potentially involved and interested agencies and numerous stakeholders that had been identified, and 8. The Planning Board, at a meeting held on January 17, 2006, has reviewed a revised Draft Scope document (dated November 15, 2005, revised January 11, 2006) for the t -GEIS and TIMS, along with a "Responsiveness Summary for All Comments Received on t -GEIS Draft Scope, dated January 11, 2006," and copies of all written comments and records of all oral comments made at the public scoping sessions, and Cornell University and the Planning Board agreed to additional revisions, and 9. The Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca determined at its meeting held on February 7, 2006 that the revised Draft Scope document (dated November 15, 2005, revised January 11, 2006, with a final date of February 7, 2006) for the t- GEIS and TIMS adequately incorporates the relevant comments and concerns of the Planning Board, the public, and involved and interested agencies, and accepted the above - referenced revised Draft Scope document (dated November 151 2005, revised January 11, 2006, with a final date of February 7, 2006) as the Final Scope document and as being adequate to define the scope and content of the t -GEIS, and 10. Cornell University prepared and submitted a (t- DGEIS) transportation- focused Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Appendices, dated May 20, 2008, along with a Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies Draft Report (TIMS), dated June 3, 2008, to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for adequacy review, and 11. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed and discussed said t -DGEIS at its meetings on May 20th, June 3rd, June 17th, July 1st, and July 15th, 2008, along with amendments /revisions to the t- DGEIS, dated July 2008, and submitted to the Planning Board for the July 15, 2008 meeting, and the Board accepted the t- DGEIS, dated May 20, 2008, with amended pages dated July 2008, as satisfactory with respect to its scope, content, and adequacy for the purpose of commencing public review, and accepted said t -DGEIS as complete, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.9, and PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 12 12, The Town of Ithaca Planning Board held a public hearing regarding the t -GEIS on September 16, 2008 to obtain comments from the public on the t -GEIS, and accepted written comments through September 26, 2008, and 13. Cornell University has in consultation with Town of Ithaca staff prepared a Draft for Review of the Final transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (Final t- GEIS), dated November 2008, and submitted said Final t- GEIS to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for consideration of acceptance as complete, and 14. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed and revised said Final t -GEIS at its meeting on November 18, 2008, and 15. Cornell University has prepared "Errata Sheets" for the Final transportation - focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement, dated November 25, 2008, and December 2, 2008 containing revisions discussed at the November 18, 2008 meeting, and submitted said "Errata Sheet' to the Planning Board for consideration, and 16. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the Draft for Review of the Final t -GEIS, dated November 2008 and the Errata Sheets, dated November 25, 2008 and December 2, 2008 at its meeting on December 2, 20081 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby accepts the Draft for Review of the Final t -GEIS, dated November 2008, and the Errata Sheets, dated November 25, 2008, and December 2, 2008 together to be considered as the Final t -GEIS, as complete, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.9; and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby directs the Town of Ithaca Planning Staff to take those steps as may be necessary or appropriate, including filing a Notice of Completion of the Final t -GEIS and distributing the Final t -GEIS to involved and interested agencies, as required under 6 NYCRR Parts 617.9 and 617.12. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, and Erb Nays: Talty and Wilcox The motion passed 5 to 2. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 13 P Board Member Wilcox suggested a change from March 17th which is St. Patrick's Day, to March 24th. The Board agreed. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008= 106 Town of Ithaca Planning Board Schedule of Meetings - -- 2009 Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting December 2, 2008 MOTION made by Kevin Talty, seconded by Hollis Erb. RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board adopt and hereby does adopt the following as its schedule of Regular Meetings for the Year 2009. Unless otherwise noted, all meetings will be held on the first and third Tuesday of each month, commencing at 7:00 a.m. and ending by 10:00 p.m. FIRST MEETING OF THE MONTH SECOND MEETING OF THE MONTH January 6, 2009 February 3, 2009 March 3, 2009 April 7, 2009 May 5, 2009 June 2, 2009 July 7, 2009 August 4, 2009 September 1, 2009 October 6, 2009 November 3, 2009 December 1, 2009 January 20, 2009 February 17, 2009 "March 24, 2009 April 21, 2009 May 19, 2009 June 16, 2009 July 21, 2009 August 18, 2009 September 15, 2009 October 20, 2009 November 17, 2009 December 15, 2009 A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Talty, Erb and Wilcox Nays: None The motion passed unanimously. Consideration of a Recommend of the Planninga Board for 2009. Postponed to the next meeting Approval of Minutes: November 18, 2008. ADOPTED RESOLUTION PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 —107 Adopt Planning Board Minutes of November 17, 2008 Planning Board December 2, 2008 Motion made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 14 Cha WHEREAS. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on November 17, 2008, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meetings on November 17, 2008. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Talty, Erb and Wilcox Nays: None Abstentions: Riha The motion passed. Other Business: Susan Riha and Rod Howe will be absent for the December 16th meeting. Committee reports were given and the next agenda previewed. PB 12.2.2008 Pg. 15 Adjournment. Meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Ily submitted, Paulette Terwilliger Deputy Town Clerk TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, December 2. 2008 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 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 Cornell University Energy Recovery Linac (ERL) project located north of the Pine Tree Road and Dryden Road (NYS Route 366) intersection, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63- 1 -8.2, 63- 1 -2.2, 63 -1 -12, 63 -1 -3.1 and 63- 1 -3.3, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves construction of an underground accelerator tunnel (14 -foot diameter and 2 km long), a cryogenic facility and associated electric substation ( +/- 15,000 square foot footprint), and an extension to the existing Wilson Laboratory ( +/- 185,000 gross square feet of building space). The project will also involve new stormwater facilities, parking, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. The Planning Board may also discuss the draft scoping document for the Environmental Impact Statement. Cornell University, Owner; Steve Beyers, P.E., Engineering Services Leader, Agent. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the proposed construction of a 10,000 square foot warehouse at 1482 Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1- 24.32, Agricultural Zone. The proposal includes the construction of a 250' x 40' x 14' steel warehouse structure on a concrete pad for the storage of Cornell student belongings to be added to the existing 9,000 square foot facility. The existing storage facility operates under a use variance, which was granted in 1987 and extended and modified in 2004. Warehouse and storage facilities are not permitted uses in the Agricultural Zone. The proposal also includes a new driveway connection to Sheffield Road. Student Agencies Properties, Owner /Applicant; Dan H. Kathan, Chief Executive Officer, Agent. 7:45 P.M. Consideration of Acceptance of the Cornell draft Final Transportation- focused Generic'Environmental Impact Statement (Final t- GEIS). The t -GEIS includes an identification, examination and evaluation of transportation - related impacts of hypothetical Cornell University population growth scenarios over the next decade on transportation systems and neighborhoods. The t -GEIS addresses these impacts by evaluating and proposing mitigation measures to encourage alternatives to single- occupancy vehicle use by those traveling to and from Cornell. The draft Final t -GEIS includes copies of all of the public comments submitted regarding the t -GEIS and draft responses to these comments that were considered substantive. 5. Consideration of Approval of 2009 Planning Board Meeting Schedule. 6. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town Board Regarding Chairperson of the Planning Board for 2009. 7. Approval of Minutes: November 18, 2008. 8. Other Business: 9, 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 -17470 (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street December 2, 2008 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name eon �farUOti- Vli.cv�So-r. Address ;2 vo/j q Le r v/ 6 f1�1��lcl�H � 914 G&ryv%O ._ C, 01S< i - )c5 vvAys2- I eP% � 11�43so �/IJY W L!k(I