Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2011-03-22FILE DATE S(p TOWN I OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, March 22, 2011 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Chair: Fred Wilcox; Members: Linda Collins, George Conneman, John Beach, Ellen Baer, Jon Bosak, Hollis Erb, David Slottje (Alternate Member) Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Creig Hebdon, Engineer; Christine Balestra, Planner; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM Discussion of the Findings Statement for 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 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4- 38, and 26 -4 -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 INYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density 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 most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M.! Parks, Esq., Agent. Members of the applicant team present were: David Parks, attorney, Fred Wells and Jim Garofalo from Tim Miller Associates, and Mark Parker from Keystone Associates. Mr. Parks made a general'comment from his perspective. He hopes they as a group can continue the productive discussion started last time. He's thought hard about the difficulties the Board is having in conjunction with the difficulties the applicants are having. His interpretation lis that the regulations require that those impacts that are significant (important) need to be mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, to me anyway. That does not necessarily mean that we can bring the project back to status quo — there will always be impacts in any type of project. Whatever measure we implement will not completely mitigate those impacts. It means that to whatever extent practicable, we have done so. He stated that whatever reasonably can be done, Board should require them to do. Whatever that is, they are willing to do it. Whatever creative solutions they PB 03 -22 -2011 Page 2 of 5 come up with, th y ose mitigations should have a real impact. What he doesn't believe is true is that they can solve the problem that already exists and, to a certain extent, we will exacerbate. We can be part of a solution down the road, but these things take a lot of time and planning, such as the Route 96 Corridor Study. It will take awhile to implement the study. But it 'will take a long time for the Town, County, and City to implement that plan. Mr. Wilcox suggested going through the red -lined version of the Findings Statement. Grammatical changes are not noted. The subsequent red -lined version of the Findings Statement is attached as the main reference for the following summaries. Please refer to the Attachment for clarification. Page 13 Mr. Slottje requested that all parenthetical statements referring to the levels of service as acceptable, desirable, etc, be deleted throughout this document, explaining that the notion about what NYS considers to be desirable or acceptable, is unintentionally misleading. It implies that DOT set standards for what is desirable or acceptable. The adjectives give a sense of approval to the levels, and he interprets them, instead, as a measure of frustration on the part of people sitting in traffic. For example, "acceptable" is not saying that the LOS is acceptable, but the level of frustration of people in the vehicles is acceptable. The Board discussed this and agreed that the first occurrence in the Findings of level of service reference to a letter grade be footnoted as "See Appendix S, page 2, for definitions of these levels of service." Mr. Wilcox stated that it appears that the National Academy responsible for the Highway Capacity Manual, simply defined d'id not place any subjective qualifications on them. DOT later judgments in another publication. Page 15 Slottje also took issue with wording of the bullet to reduce the number of parking spaces. He limiting number of parking spaces, they did impact" on the applicant. of Sciences, the agency the levels of service and applied some subjective regarding changes to the subdivision plat stated that while the Board discussed iot specify unless it had a "substantial Ms. Brock explained that she wrote the language because at the time it was brought up as a possible mitigation, it wasn't clear whether it could legally be included. This was Ms. Brock's attemptl to include this condition in a way that is legally acceptable. The Board agreed to remove the last part of the sentence "and this measure ... implement." I Ms. Erb suggested modifying the first full paragraph on page 15 by deleting "the minimum level deemed acceptable to the NYS DOT" and inserting LOS D. This change should be made wherever it appears in the document. PB 03 -22 -2011 Page 3of5 Mr. Bosak read portions of Tim Logue's letter that show the impact of the project as significant. The Iletter characterizes the difference in delay between No Build and Build 80 as "not insignificant." It states that the "Holochuck project does increase the utilization of the intersections, pushing already near - capacity intersections closer to the 100 percent mark or pushing over - capacity intersections further into congestion." It also makes reference to service along Buffalo Street, saying it will be degraded if signal modification is implemented in an effort to improve traffic flow on Route 13. In light of all this, Mr. Bosak does not think this is insignificant. Ms. Erb disagreed, saying that the. NYS experts don't think it's significant. She cited numbers from Table 1 -5: 50 out of 53 are a change of 2. seconds or less; a maximum change of 8 seconds; half the changes in the afternoon are .2 seconds or less, in the morning, .1 seconds or less; and 20 out of the 53 changes are 0. She cannot see how this rises to a significant adverse environmental impact.. I Mr. Wilcox stated that the beauty of the SEAR law is that it's up to each community to decide what is significant — each community can use their own standards. Ms. Collins disagrees that seconds don't count. While she does not discount NYS DOT expertise, she thinks a local transportation engineer expert is not insignificant, and she gives extra weight to that. She pointed to the second point in Mr. Logue's letter, which gives a different! perspective of those seconds: 5 seconds of additional delay per vehicle multiplied by the! 1000 vehicles represents an additional 83 minutes of delay. Delays don't impact only drivers, but also other environmental factors: they also waste gas, waste time, and increase emissions. Mr. Logue also points out how "fragile the West End traffic is." Ms. Collins said the Board was very careful about protecting animals, birds, and water quality, and that this is another fragility. Ms. Erb said she is going to push for the mitigations, and that this cluster subdivision provides the Board with an opportunity to impose better mitigations than if there were 80 or 90 curb cuts. If there is any background growth, the seconds keep piling up anyway. Page 17: Discussion and Findings I • Mr. Slottje suggested deleting the sentence "The additional delays... scenario" because it diminishes the impact of the delay. • Add this sentence after "EIS process ": 'The Planning Board has special concerns about congestion at the northern site access intersection and the two City intersections (,Cliff Street / Fulton Street and Cliff Street / Taughannock Blvd)." Mr. Wilcox reminded the Board that it's important to create mitigation measures that are effective as opposed to ones that feel good. Mr. Slottje initiated a discussion about bus passes. He had a concern regarding motivation: if someone else is paying for it, they won't be motivated to use it, whereas if they are paying for it, it might force them to use it. Mr. Slottje thinks that to the extent that Board members think this will be meaningful, it will be important that there be a provision in the bylaws of the Homeowner's Association that residents can't waive them, sell them, PB 03 -22 -2011 Page 4 of 5 or transfer them to someone else and it has to be stated that this can not be amended or removed from the Ibvlaws in the future. Mr. Bates was concerned about enforcement, and asked how the Town will know in ten years that the program is still in place. 'Mr. Parks responded that it will be in the Homeowners' Association bylaws. You can't prevent people from breaking the rules, but he can set up the l system to show people why this provision is there and to encourage them to use it. The reason for the bylaws is that when people are buying the units, they know what they're getting into. • First bullet at the bottom of the page: change "subsidize" to "provide" and add "beginning with the Homeowners' Association's first collection of fees from the residents and continuing for a period of at least ten years from the completion of the last unit built." I Page 18: • First bullet: change "subsidize" to "provide" and "expenses" to "services" and append the sentence with "beginning with the completion of the first 50 units and continuing for a period of at least ten years from the completion of the last unit built." • Fourth bullet: end the sentence after "mitigation measures." • Third black bullet, last sentence: change to read "This link will be specified..." The Board began discussion about some of the units being affordable. Ms. Erb stated that 21% of the unmet need for housing is for median income housing and the provision of median income housing takes pressure off of lower income housing. Page 19 and 20: Recreational Resources The Board discussed the park land acquisition and how to ensure that that happens as well as restrictions on it. See attachment for redline changes. i Page 19 & 20: Alternatives Option 1. Discussed Option 2. The BoardI Idiscussed the "traditional layout ". Options 3 A & B The applicant noted that the economics make these options less viable with the affordable housing included. Discussion followed. There was also a lot of discussion regarding the conveyance of the park land again. i The Board then discussed the affordable housing component. There are 3 -6 units in each building and the proposal is to make 10% affordable to the median income. The stated benefits and mitigations were discussed. The Board did not necessarily agree with the stated benefits of this option such as reduced rooftops making less of a visual impact. Discussion followed. Changes were made to the Findings Statement. PB 03 -22 -2011 Page 5 of 5 The Board summarized the discussion by saying it seems that this is a trade off between affordable housing and fewer trips generated. With the affordable housing included, which leaves the number at 106, there will be 13 additional trips generated and given the choice between that amount of trips generated and affordable housing the Board would choose affordable housing. Changes were 'made to the Findings Statement. Option 4 The Board does not approve of this option at all. Option 5 Discussion of the Homeowners Association particulars were discussed. Minor change made to the Finding Statement. Option 6 This is'Ithe preferable option. The Board discussed changes to the final paragraph summarizing their preferred option. Option #6 with thIP mitigations the Planning Board proposes was discussed and changes made. Mr. Bosak discussed the fact that these options are supposed to be alternatives, not the proposal.) There are changes to the proposal in #6 but it resembles the original proposal substantially. The Board then discussed the definition of median income and who would be able to buy them. The concern was having someone who could afford a more expensive house, buying one of the Iset aside affordable houses. What would the restrictions be? Without restrictions, the siupply of housing at a "affordable" price is meaningless. Ms. Erb discussed the current Comprehensive Plan and the discussions happening now during the revision process regarding affordable housing. By simply having affordable housing available does not equate to people who can only afford that price range will be the buyers. People with above median income could choose to spend less of their income on housing and purchase one of these "affordable" units. Discussion followed. Chairman Wilcox discussed the need for a special meeting. Staff will revise the Findings for discussion and Ito finalize the Findings Statement for a vote on April 5t". Discussion followed. It was decided that the Planning Board would hold a special meeting March 29th at 6 p.m. to finish discussing the Findings Statement. Adjournment Upon motion by John Beach, the meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submittl d, I ebra DeAuq tine,Deputy ow Clerk Fifth draft, March 29, 2011 redlined 'ATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW FINDINGS STATEMENT TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Holochuck Homes Subdivision March 2011 Pursuant to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act — SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6� NYCRR Part 617, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as the Lead Agency, makes the following findings. Name of Action: I Holochuck Homes Subdivision Project Number: 07 -05 -612 Description of Action: The project is 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 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4 -38, and 26 -4- 39, Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The project involves the construction of 106 +/- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from INYS 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 will acquire most of the eastern portion of the property, in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Agency Jurisdiction: Town of Ithaca Planning Board is Lead Agency for the environmental review. Town Planning Board actions include Subdivision Approval. Date FEIS Accepted: February 1, 2011 A-Ar,�� - Date FEIS Filed: February 2011 Y , 'V,, 3�aa� P f3 Date Revised FEIS Accepted: March 15, 2011 ry� KI-ICA Date Revised FEIS Filed: March 22, 2011 - - - -- Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I I I I. INTRODUCTION A. Compliance with) State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) This document is a Findings Statement prepared pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617.11. It pertains to they proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision project. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is the Lead Agency and is responsible for Subdivision Approval, which also includes approval of site (plan elements. This Findings Statement is based upon the facts and conclusions in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) (first draft received on September 1, 2009), accepted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as amended on September 15, 2009, October 6, 2009, and November 3, 2009; the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) (dated July 27, 2010), accepted by the Planning Board on September 7, 2010; the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) (dated November 4, 2010), accepted by the Planning Board as amended on December 7, 2010, December 21, 2010, January 4, 2011, and February 1, 2011; and the revised Final Environmental Impact Statement ( RFEIS) (dated March 11, 2011), accepted by the Planning Board as amended on March 15, 2011. The RFEIS corrected and revised somelof the traffic data and related text only. The applicant and Planning Board agreed the RFEIS was necessary because after the FEIS was accepted and filed, they received new information that was considered material to the traffic analysis conducted for the project. The applicant performed revised traffic analyses utilizing the new information, and the revised traffic tables and text comprise the RFEIS. All references to the RFEIS in this Findings Statement refer to the revised traffic table and text, as well as to the portions of the FEIS that were not changed. This Findings Statement demonstrates that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as Lead Agency, has complied with all of the applicable procedural requirements of Part 617 in reviewing this matter. This Findings Statement also demonstrates that the Planning Board has given due consideration to the above - referenced documents prepared in conjunction with this action. Further, this Findings Statement contains the facts and conclusions in the DEIS, SEIS FEIS, and RFEIS relied upon by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board to support future decisions related to these documents. I B. Potential Environmentdll Impacts Leading to Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Potential impacts were identified in the Final Scoping Document, accepted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on March 18, 2008, relating to the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision project. The identified impacts include the following: • Land: Construction I p phases facilities and site disturbance in multiple over several years; disturbance ofd more than 10 acres; disturbance of erodible soils; impacts to slopes exceeding 15 %; source, frequency and duration of the noise impact associated with construction activity and vehicular traffic; source, magnitude and duration of dust and impacts generated by construction. 2 Findings Statement — Hol6chuck Homes Subdivision. March 29, 20] 1 • Stormwater Management: Impacts to numerous streams located on the property; increased downstream sediment deposition during and following construction; potential for changing floodwater flow; degradation of surface water from roads and parking facilities; increased rates of runoff and erosion velocities in downstream channels; exceeding capacity or altering the function of existing natural stormwater management facilities; watershed shifting resulting from landform changes. • Natural Resources: Conversion and /or removal of wildlife habitat and impacts to endangered for threatened plant and wildlife species; impacts to the existing shrub and mature forest and other identified unique or sensitive areas in the vicinity. • Community I Character and Aesthetic Resources: Compatibility with the Town's Comprehensive Plan, compatibility with and relationship to existing development adjacent to and in the vicinity of the proposal (Paleontological Research Institute, Cayuga Medical Center, Finger Lakes School of Massage, Cayuga Ridge Nursing Home); visual impact of the proposed development on the surrounding neighborhood, across Cayuga Lake, on East Hill and the community at large. • Historic and Archaeological Resources: Location of proposed development in areas that may contain historic or sensitive archeological artifacts. Irretrievable loss of any areas designated as sensitive for archaeological sites. Impacts to structures located adjacent to proposed development that were once and may still be eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. • Traffic and Transportation: Impacts to the existing transportation systems (i.e. highway, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities, intersection level -of- service, safety, pedestrian access); alteration of existing traffic patterns resulting from new roads; demands on public transportation facilities and services; impacts to the transportation (system into the City of Ithaca. • Community and Emergency Services: Greater demand on emergency services; capacity of municipal water and sewer systems; adequacy of school systems to accommodate anticipated school -age children. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A Land and Construction Phasing 1. Impacts and Proposed Mi Construction of this project will take place in two phases over a period of several years. Depending on the phase, large areas of land will be disturbed, with a total of 29 +/- acres planned for development. Phase I will include the development of the roads and all infrastructure, 67 dwelling units and appurtenant utilities, and stormwater management facilities for the entire development. Phase II willlinclude developing the remaining 39.dwelling units. 3 Findings Statement — Hot Site preparation will inclu staging areas, stockpiling stormwater basins. The to would include the placem entrances, soil cover and t crossing proposed betwei upstream and downstream Control Plan will be incorl the requirements of the N' State Pollutant Discharge stormwater management. Public Works Departme development areas within to five acres at any given t • Cnil Frnrlihili Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 clearing vegetation, establishing access roadways and construction 1, and installing temporary erosion control measures and permanent )orary erosion control measures would be part of each phase and t of silt fence, curb inlet protections, stabilized stone construction tporary seeding, check dams, and dust control measures. A stream buildings 7 and 8 will have permanent rip -rap aprons located prevent erosion and scour. All details of the Erosion and Sediment ated in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP) that meets Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC) under the mination System (SPDES) and the Town of Ithaca requirements for he SWPPP will be reviewed and approved by the Town of Ithaca prior to final subdivision approval. Per DEC requirements, ch of the phases would generally be delineated to limit disturbance erodible, with moder property are to reman lands having 10% slc places. In particular, HuD), Hudson soils (] and building foundati Plan for the project, suitability for roads, 1 will be utilized for em accomplished by usi hydroseeding to be al vegetation, and rip -ray ation: The proposed site contains soils that are considered highly to steep slopes. As proposed, the steepest portions of the undeveloped; however, much of the development will occur on -s or more including areas with slopes up to 15% or more in adson and Dunkirk soils (HzE), Hudson - Cayuga soils (HuC3 and >C3), and Ovid soils (OcC3) have low bearing capacity for roads is. Therefore, as part of the Erosion and Sedimentation Control 1 excavated soils will be inspected and separated according to ilding foundations, and fill. Those that are suitable for building tnkments or other structural applications. Soil stabilization will be soil covers and temporary seeding, with mulching and/or lied to areas with low slopes that have been stripped of natural ing, matting and /or sodding for permanent soil stabilization. • Construction Noise/Hours: Construction- related traffic to and from the project site will be generated by workers, material and equipment delivery, and hauled -away debris materials related to the dump site that was identified in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS). The number and type of vehicles would vary depending on the phase of construction. Construction of the project will generate noise and vibration from construction equipment, construction vehicles, worker traffic, and delivery vehicles. Noise levels caused by construction activities will vary depending on the phase of construction (clearing of vegetation, felling of trees, grading the site, excavation, erection of the structures, etc.). To mitigate noise and construction impacts to adjacent and nearby institutions and residences, noise - producing construction - related activities on the site will be limited to lam to 7pm Monday through Friday. Work will not be routinely scheduled for Saturdays, but will be permitted if required by extenuating circumstances, such as severe weather, subject tol approval by the Director of Code Enforcement. Construction will be prohibited between 7pm and lam, and all day on Sundays and federal holidays, except emergency repairs (such as to stormwater facilities) will be allowed on any day. Because all parking and staging can be accommodated on site and all earth -work is expected to remain on site (with the exception of the dump site debris), there is no anticipated queuing of construction related traffic on area roadways, no long -term street 4 Findings Statement — Ho closures, no construction • Dust: Various ri moving, such as implemented. Th mulching and see crushed stone or ; 15 miles per hour significant advers( 2. Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 to parking, and therefore no significant adverse impacts related to Recreation, and Hi century dump sites cleanup without tl ( "Locus 1" and " downgradient eros vegetative stabilize abandoned landfill Refuse Site." TI development area, the NYS OPRHP. Remediation Plan 1 amount of site dig ;thods of control to minimize excessive dust associated with earth ;ite grading, back filling, and excavation for foundations will be ;e methods include the use of vegetative covers or spray -on tackifier, ling, soil compaction, water sprinkling, wind screens, the use of •avel along construction roads, and limiting on -site vehicle speeds to in unpaved construction roads. By controlling the sources of dust, no impacts are expected to occur. construction equipm for permanent stabili Site Cleanup: Per NYS DEC and New York State Office of Parks, )ric Preservation (OPRHP) requirements, two of the three early 20`h at were identified during the review of the DEIS will require manual use of heavy equipment, in order to minimize site disturbance )cus 2 "). As these sites are located on slopes of about 13 %, n controls will be implemented during operations, followed by Dn. The third dump site, listed in the County's 1995 database of is larger than the other two, and is referred to as the "Odd Fellows site is located a few hundred feet away from the proposed t the portion of the property that will -is proposed to be conveyed to The Odd Fellows Refuse Site will be mitigated according to a it has been approved by the DEC and that will result in a minimal trbance. Up to one acre of existing woods will be disturbed by -Int and material handling, and disturbed areas will be re- vegetated r.ation upon completion of the remediation. The Odd Fellows sitel mitigation will take place prior to or concurrently with construction of Phase I of the Holochuck Homes development project. An estimated six to seven truckloads of debris will be removed from the property over a course of four days and transported to offsite disposal sites. Due to the slope and area of disturbance, the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department will require the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWOP) for the clean up of the dump site, including temporary erosion and sedimentation control practices that have been approved by the DEC. No significant adverse impacts to soils, vegetation, and water resources are expected from performing the landfill reclamation in accordance with DEC regulations, with DEC approval and oversight, and with approved erosion and sedimentation control practices. The Lead Agency finds that: • The impacts related tol construction traffic, dust, noise, and the dump site clean ups (including the Odd Fellows Refuse Site) will be temporary in nature and entail several mitigation measures. The Planning Board will require a phasing /sequencing plan for the individual development phases as part of subdivision approval. With the above mentioned mitigation measures incorporated as conditions of approval, no significant adverse environmental impacts are expected. E II Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I B. Stormwater Management I 1. Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The proposed development will result in the conversion of 8.7 +/- acres of forest, brush, and meadow to buildings, parking areas, and roads. There is the potential for flooding, channel erosion in the many downstream waterways, and increased pollutant export if not mitigated. Changes to the �Iexisting drainage patterns of the site will also occur as the land is re- graded to construct buildings, parking areas, and roads. Both runoff volume and peak discharge rate will increase as a result of the proposed project in the absence of stormwater controls. In addition, the site will bey a potential sediment source during construction, at which point land will be cleared and graded, exposing bare soil. • Water Quantity: The design of the development incorporates three stormwater management ponds to control and convey stormwater runoff to the existing watercourses on site and ultimately to Cayuga Lake. The three proposed detention ponds will be located along the Conservation Zone boundary of the site and will discharge via outlet control structures near the boundary onto the 65 +/- acre portion of the property that will is proposed to be conveyed to the NYS OPRHP. Stormwater detention practices will be designedlto maintain the peak discharge for the 1 -, 10 -, and 100 -year storm events at pre - development levels. A single stream crossing is proposed between buildings 7 and 8, with the construction of the internal subdivision road. The crossing will consist of a corrugated metal pipe; sized appropriately to handle the potential storm flow in the channel. • Water Quality: The project will result in a net loss of around 21 acres of vegetation, which will be converted to impervious cover (including 8.7 acres of buildings, driveways and parking areas), stormwater facilities, grass and landscaping. This increase in impervious cover increases the runoff volume for all storm events, and in particular, the small and frequent storm events that, taken together, account for a significant percentage of the pollutant load in a typical year. In addition, concentrations and types of pollutants introduced from sediment, automobiles, pet waste, herbicide and pesticide application and atmospheric deposition are elevated in residential land uses when compared to a site's undeveloped condition or forested land. Therefore, water quality treatment for this project will be achieved by utilizing construction related erosion control measures and post - construction related permanent stormwater management practices that meet NYS DEC design and implementation guidelines. The details, including the size and location of the proposed practices, will be incorporated into the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan, the SWPPP and subdivision drawings for the project that will be reviewed and approved by the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department. • During Construction: During the construction phase, the site has the potential to export significanti sediment as a result of land clearing. In addition, chemical handling and construction vehicle maintenance can result in spills or other pollutant discharges. Several key measures that are proposed to improve the quality of stormwater discharged from the site and reduce the impact on downstream waters or other offsite areas will be incorporated into the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan and SWPPP for the project 6 i I i Findings Statement — Holocbuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, '4011 • Wildlife: The project site exhibits a relatively diverse assemblage of open field, forested and successional habitats for resident and migratory wildlife. However, none of the habitats or populations are unique to the area or are specific to the project site. The loss of habitat associated with the proposed development will result in reduced regional wildlife populations. This loss, however, is expected to be minimal due to the relatively small area of disturbance of the project site (29 acres out of 109). There are no State or Federally listed threatened or endangered wildlife, mammal, amphibian, reptilian or mammal species of special concern that have been identified within the project area. While the existing woodland and successional field vegetation would be replaced by ornamental plants, lawns, and landscaped plots within the developed areas, the introduced foliage could still be used by wildlife for food and nesting sites. There are potential impacts to the ecology and wildlife of the area within the UNA, from the large population of new human residents and their associated pets that will inhabit the townhouses. New residents and their roaming dogs or cats will easily be able to access the UNA from their units, potentially killing or harassing wildlife and trampling sensitive plants. The Planning Board will therefore require that the Homeowners' Association enact restrictions on free roaming animals owned by residents to ire- ensure that pets in the Holochuck Subdivision do not roam, and also educate and communicate to residents the need for controlling jpets in the UNA and in natural areas. 2. The Lead Agency finds • While they will be mitigated as much as possible, the loss of wildlife and woodlands, and the potential change in isolated wetland functions, remain negative environmental impacts. The Planning Board will require a final plan that specifically identifies any large, mature or old growth trees to be impacted by the development, and that incorporates avoidance or protection of trees greater than 6 inches in diameter to the greatest extent practicable. Additionally, the Planning Board will require that the Holochuck Homeowners' Association enact restrictions on free roaming animals owned by residents to insure that pets in the Holochuck Subdivision do not roam, and also educate and communicate to residents the need for controlling pets in the UNA and in natural areas. D. Community Character and Aesthetic Resources 1: Impacts and Proposed Miti The existing character of the project vicinity is a disconnected mix of residential, institutional, and educational uses, with varying styles, facades, and building materials, scattered along the NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) corridor. The Cayuga Medical Center and Professional Buildings are immediately adjacent to the Holochuck property on the north side, while the Candlewyck Apartment complex borders the property on the south side. The proposed Holochuck development will be located behind the Paleontological Research Institute, the Finger Lakes School of Massage, the Cayuga Ridge Nursing Home, the Seventh Day Adventist Church, and a few single family homes. The West Hill Fire Station, more single family homes, and the Sterling House Adult Care ,Facility are located across the road from the proposed development. 0 Findings Statement— Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 n Unless the project is properly mitigated, the Holochuck development will have some significant visual impacts, 1particularly from NYS Route 13, from the Cayuga Heights Road exit and southbound as on' e nears the City of Ithaca, and areas on the east side along Cayuga Lake. I • Community Character: The Holochuck Homes Development is consistent with many of the goals 1 1 stated in the Town's 1993 Comprehensive Plan, particularly as the townhouse style relates to the provisions of having a variety of housing patterns to meet the diverse needs of the community, and clustering the development to preserve significant areas of open space. However —, t he Comprehensive Plan also notes the importance of providing opportunities for affordable housing. The pr-opesed develepment does not Affordable Housing Needs Assessment definition of medianl income The proposed developmentR-a6e does not enhance the existing character of the Route 96 corridor area, but given the wide variety of structures and uses in the area, the proposed development does not detract from the character of the area, either. The proposed building styles are largely monotonous, but can be mitigated with varying architectural details that break up the monotony of the proposed building designs. The linear arrangement of townhouses, along a very long stretch of road is not conducive to a connected,1 vibrant neighborhood. The development does, however, promote some limited connectivity between the new and existing uses, with the proposed sidewalks from the development to Route 96 and trail connections to PRI. • Visual Impacts: The proposed development will be very visible from NYS Route 13, from the Cayuga Heights Road exit and southbound as one nears the City of Ithaca, and from NYS Route 34. Both of these highways are part of the Cayuga Lake Scenic Byway, designated by the NYS DEC in accordance with the NYS Scenic Byway Program. In addition, two of the views noted in the EIS are listed in the Town's Scenic Resources Inventory I the view of the lake from NYS Route 96 /School of Massage and the view of West Hill from East Shore Park. To mitigate visual impacts, the proposed landscape plan will include additional evergreen and deciduous landscape trees in clusters along the east side of buildings 1 and 14 -20 and additional evergreen buffer plantings along the easterly side of the project, thereby softening the visibility of the project as a whole from points east of Cayuga Lake. Additionally, the buildings in the development will be a variety of neutral, natural colors, to make the structures blend in more with the hillside and to further mitigate visual impacts. Finally, the landscaping plan will include additional buffer plantings at the edge of the property adjoining the neighboring houses and church at the south�end of the project, particularly behind buildings 3, 4, and 5 to mitigate visual impacts on those properties. The proposed building palette of colors and all landscaping plan details for the development will be submitted for Planning Board review and approval during subdivision review. • Building Design and Layout: The proposed colonial and craftsman character of the proposed townhouses will be loosely compatible with the character of the surrounding area, as there is no unifying architectural style amongst the mix of uses in the overall vicinity of the proposal. However, the Odd Fellows Complex, described in the "Historic and Archeological Resources" section below, is located immediately west of the 10 Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29. 2011 Holochuck Subdivision. The Complex, which fronts on NYS Route 96, contains three historic structures that provide significant character to at least a portion of Route 96. To mitigate impacts on the historic Odd Fellows Complex from the Holochuck development, NYS OPRHP requests that additional landscaping in the form of a tree line be added on the west side of buildings 8, 9, 10, and 11. Also, as noted above, the buildings in the Holochuck development will consist of various neutral, natural colors, to make the structures blend in more with the hillside and further mitigate visual impacts. The proposed palette of building colors will be submitted for Planning Board review and approval during subdivision review. The Planning Board will also consider during subdivision review whether to require architectural details and additional landscaping to break up the monotony of the proposed building designs. 2. The Lead Agency finds that: I While the project) s impact on views will be partially mitigated by "vegetative buffering and the neutral color palette for the structures, the project nonetheless will have a negative impact on views. To enhance the development's impact on community character, the Planning Board will evaluate during the subdivision process whether to require architectural details and additional landscaping to add visual interest and variety to the largely monotonous building styles and linear neighborhood. E. Historic and Archaeological Resources I 1. Impacts and Proposed Mitigation I I The Phase 1 B Archeological Field Investigation, conducted due to the presence of nearby historic sites /prehistoric sites, per NYS OPRHP requirements, adequately documents the historic and archeological resources identified on the lands proposed for development. The archeological investigation discovered various 201h century artifacts in two locations, the largest of which was labeled as "Locus 1" on all of the EIS maps. Locus 1 contains a historic stone pump house and various refuse and debris such as bottles, drinking glasses, tin cans, pipes, washtubs, etc. Locus 2 is much smaller and 'contains some debris that, along with the Locus 1 debris, will be manually cleaned out, per NYS DEC and OPRHP requirements (please refer to the "Odd Fellows Refuse Cleanup Site" under Section A: Land and Construction Phasing, located at the beginning of this Findings Statement). The Archeological Field Investigation determined that the Locus 1 and Locus 2 trash sites were likely associated with jthe Grand Lodge of the Odd Fellows property (the structure that now houses the Finger Lakes School of Massage). The Grand Lodge was built in 1922 as an administrative building and part of a complex of structures that housed the philanthropic International Order of Odd Fellows, including an orphanage (the existing, original PRI building) and infirmary (the structure immediately south of the School of Massage, currently used as an apartment building). The three structures that make up the Odd Fellows Complex are potentially eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. To mitigate impacts on the historic Odd Fellows Complex from the Holochuck development, NYS OPRHP requires that Findings Statement — Holochuck .Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 Locus 1 and the historic pump house be completely avoided by the construction of the development (with the exception of the manual clean up of the debris). Also, additional landscaping in the I form of a tree line will be added on the west side of buildings 8, 9, 10, and 11, to reduce the visibility of the Holochuck development from the Complex. 2. Discussion!and Findiniis The Lead Agency finds that: • No significant adverse impacts in relation to historic or archaeological resources are anticipated .1 Per NYS OPRHP requirements, the "Locus 1" site will be protected and avoided during construction, and a tree line will be added and maintained along the west side of the 1, development. The Planning Board will ensure these items are executed by requiring them as conditions of subdivision approval. F. Traffic and 1. Mi The traffic evaluation in the EIS studied traffic volumes projected from the full build -out of the Holochuck Homes project and the resulting impact on Route 96 and nearby intersections. The study included an analysis of existing conditions, along with no -build and build scenarios. The proposed Carrowmoor development and the Linderman Creek Senior Housing development (both located on Mecklenburg Road) were taken into account in the no -build and build calculations, as both projects had either been recently approved or were under review by the Town Planning Board at the time of the Holochuck Homes EIS Scoping process. In addition, a background growth factor of 1.5 percent per year for four years was applied to the no -build and build scenarios. The traffic study also evaluated the signalized intersections at Taughannock Boulevard/Cliff Street and Cliff Street/Fulton Street, as there was significant concern regarding impacts of the Holochuck project on the existing Route 96 transportation. network into the City of Ithaca. The traffic s t udy in I the DEI S used Highway Capacity Manual procedures and Highway Capacity y Software (HCS) to model levels, of service during peak hours at intersections. For the build scenario, the study assumed all of the site traffic was distributed out of the main (northern) entrance. This assessed the maximum impact of the site - generated traffic. Based upon an analysis of directional distribution of existing traffic volumes on NYS Route 96, the study distributed 60% of the site - generated trips southbound on Route 96 (toward the City of Ithaca), and 40% northbound. In response to Town of Ithaca Planning Department comments on the DEIS., the RFEIS includes an additional Sensitivity Analysis 1! HCS to route 80% of the site - generated traffic southbound. The RFEIS includes this Sensitivity Analysis for all study intersections -. I In response to a request by the NYS Department of Transportation (NYS DOT), the RFEIS also includes a SYNCHRO Analysis and Sensitivity Analysis (distributing 80% of the site - generated traffic southbound) for the study intersections located in the City of Ithaca. The NYS DOT has made preliminary comments on the original SYNCHRO analysis that is in the FEIS, and the Town has provided NYS-DOT the revised SYNCHRO analysis that is in the RFEIS. As of the 12 Ridin!s Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 date of this Findings Statement, the Town has not received NYS_DOT comments on the revised SYNCHRO analysis. `I • Transportation Network Levels of Use: The traffic study results in Table 1 -5 of the RFEIS show that all study intersections currently operate and will continue to operate under the No -Build and Build conditions at a level of service (LOS) C or better,' (whie NYSPOT dee ; ii�ble4",-except for the following: • Trumansburg Road/Harris B. Dates Road/West Hill Drive: Trumansburg Road in the northbound left and through movements currently operates at a LOS D during the p.m. peak hour and will remain at that level in the No -Build and Build conditions; ." • The project intersection at Trumansburg Road ( "Site Access ") is projected to operate at LOS D (it currently is only a "driveway" with no noted existing LOS). • Cliff Street [Route 961/North Fulton Street currently operates at a LOS F for the southbound left and through traffic. It is projected to remain at LOS F for this direction in all scenarios, with increased waiting times on the order of one -half minute in the No -Build scenario a.m. and p.m. peaks relative to the existing condition. I The Build scenarios do not further increase the times for the southbound direction. The overall LOS for this intersection in the existing condition is E, and it is projected to decline to F in the p.m. No -Build and Build scenarios. Table 1 -5 — indicates six changes in LOS between the existing and No -Build conditions, for the following in (each involving Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96)): • Bundy Road EB -L,R changes from B to C in the a.m. peak; • Taughannock Boulevard /Cliff Street overall changes from B to C in the a.m. peak; • North Fulton Street/Cliff Street EB -T changes from C to D in the a.m. peak; • North Fulton Street/Cliff Street WB -L de facto left -turn lane) changes from B to D in the a.mi. peak; • North Fulton Street/Cliff Street WB -L,T changes from C to D in the p.m. peak; • North Fulton Street/Cliff Street overall changes from E to F in the p.m. peak. Table 1 -5 indicates no further changes in LOS category for any other current and studied intersection between the No -Build and Build scenarios (at either 60 %- distribution or 80 %- distribution scenarios). The maximum average delay increase noted between the No -Build and Buildlscenarios is an increase of 8.0 seconds for Cliff Street/North Fulton St. WB -L,T in the li p.m. peak 80% scenario. The increase in average waiting time (between the No -Build and either Build scenario) for all other directions of traffic and overall for all studied intersections is typically (51/54 instances) less than or equal to 2 seconds. I Tables 3.6 -1 and 3.6L2 in Appendix "S" of the RFEIS illustrate the comparison between the 60% and 80% distributions of site - originating trips towards (and back from) the City of Ithaca. The data I in Table 3.6 -1 are also in Table 1 -5, are only for the studied unsignalized intersections. 13 I Findings Statement— Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I intersectionsi within the Town of Ithaca, and are based on HCS. These data indicate no differences in LOS between the 60% and 80% distributions. The data in Table 3.6 -2 instead used the SYNCHRO software, are for the studied intersections within the City of Ithaca, and used data supplied by NYS_DOT signal timing reports, with the timing held constant for fall conditions (Existing, No -Build and Build). Again, there are no LOS changes between the 60% and 80% distributions for any intersection. The Cliff Street/Fultoni� St. intersection under both Build scenarios has overall levels of service E and F in the a.m. and p.m. peaks, respectively, as modeled in both SYNCHRO and HCS; the SB -L,T direction for Fulton St. is LOS F at both times of day as modeled in both SYNCHRO and HCS. The Taughannock Boulevard/Cliff Street intersection has LOS D in the a.m. peak hour for SB -L, and LOS D in the p.m. peak for NB -L, under both Build scenarios in I the SYNCHRO analysis; the HCS analysis shows LOS B and C, respectively. 1 There are also some other differences between the levels of service shown in the HCS analysis and SYNCHRO analysis. The Planning Board has been advised that, due to the differences inithe parameters between the Highway Capacity Software (HCS) model and the SYNCHRO model, it is typical for results of the HCS and SYNCHRO analyses to be slightly different. Except for the Cliff Street/North Fulton Street intersection, the levels of service for the study intersections; do not fall below LOS D. the minimum level deemed aeeeptable to the 104 40t However, at many intersections additional seconds of delay will occur as a result of the project. This will add to the existing traffic issues and frustrations noted by many residents who have commented orally and in writing through the EIS process. The Planning Board will require measures to help mitigate the additional delays. These measures inclu i de: • Requiring the Holochuck Homes Homeowners' Association to subsidize public transit ibus passes for residents of the subdivision • Requiring the Homeowners' Association to subsidize vanpool expenses for residents of the subdivision • Fair share contribution by the applicant or Homeowners' Association to any signal, roundabout, or similar traffic device at or near the northern entrance required by NYS DOT as a result of this project or future projects • Financial contribution by the applicant to a future park and ride on the Route 96 corridor or to other transit - related improvements • Changes to the subdivision plat that would reduce the number of parking spaces, unless the Planning Board determines during preliminary subdivision review that this measure is not necessary in light of the other required mitigation measures; At the requirement of NYS DOT, the applicant prepared additional traffic study materials, including a Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis and Sight Distance measurements. Based on the submitted materials, the DOT determined that a traffic signal and /or a left turn lane was not warranted at the Holochuck main (northern) entrance, but that a right -in only drive at the secondary access road would be required under the NYS DOT highway 14 Findings Statement— Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 work permit fol the project. As a mitigation measure, the applicant must comply with any final DOT requirements. Table 3.6 -13 oflthe DEIS shows the results of a Driveway Livability Analysis, conducted to measure the real -life traffic delays experienced by residents who live along NYS Route 96 near the Holochuck project site. The Driveway Livability measurements were taken at five driveways ilocated on Trumansburg Road between Bundy Road and Dates Drive. Delays recorded ranged from 2.2 seconds in the a.m. to 75.1 seconds in the p.m., with the average driveway delay of 29.3 seconds (equates to LOS D). The analysis surmises that the average delays for vehicles entering the traffic stream would increase less than two seconds as a result of the Holochuck Subdivision, thereby remaining at a LOS D after the project is built.1I Mitigation measures that this Board will require to help mitigate additional delays at intersections will also help mitigate the additional driveway delays. • Traffic Circulation Within the Development: The proposed development includes a cul- de -sac at the northern end of the subdivision, attached to a loop road with two access points to NYS Route 96. Per NYS DOT requirements, the southern access point will be restricted to a right -in only drive. The development also includes sidewalks along the internal project roadways to facilitate internal pedestrian movement. The cul -de -sac and loop road will bed built to Town of Ithaca specifications and offered for dedication to the Town upon completion. Circulation within the development is not expected to be a problem, given `the largely linear internal road network. The Holochuck northern entrance road will replace the existing entrance to the Finger Lakes School of Massage and the existing drives for the Finger Lakes School of Massage building and adjacent apartment building will connect with the new subdivision road. The construction of the main entrance road will incorporate gentle grade changes to mitigate the slope that currently exists at the School of Massage entrance. • Pedestrian and Bicycle Network: The EIS notes that the only existing sidewalks in the study area are located in the City of Ithaca, adjacent to NYS Route 96. The Town of Ithaca 2007 Transportation Plan and the Route 96 Corridor Management Plan call for sidewalks along both sides of Route 96, bike lanes along Route 96, multi -use trail connections to internally connect sidewalks and bike lanes, and the incorporation of sidewalks into all new developments in the area. The Holochuck project includes sidewalks along the development's internal road system to the two access points to Route 96. The project also includes an easement for a future trail connection along the northwest propertyl line to the back parking lot of PRI, to encourage connectivity between the developments and to facilitate access to the bus shelter located at the Cayuga Medical Center (which is accessed by an existing pedestrian path from PRI). The proposed easement for a trail connection will be specified and required during subdivision review. The NYS DOT, in�a letter dated, January 6, 2011, acknowledged the use of transit and introduction of pedestrian/bicyclist features into the Holochuck project and suggested that site sidewalks and'ipaths should link with the public highway where appropriate. The DOT additionally requested that the Holochuck applicants consider reserving a strip of land along the NYS Route 96 frontage for a future sidewalk or other improvements envisioned for the iiCayuga Medical Center node described in the Route 96 Corridor Management Study; To provide additional opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle 15 i Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 connections, 'I the applicant will provide easements along the project frontage on NYS Route 96 as needed for future transportation improvements. • Transit Service: There are currently two scheduled bus routes serviced by Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT). Bus Route 14 passes the site every half hour during the morning 'land evening rush and hourly in the off -peak times on weekdays, hourly between 7:30AM and 7:30PM on Saturdays, and between 10:30AM to 6:30PM on Sundays. Buis Route 21 also passes the site daily, roughly every half hour from 6:30AM to 9:30AM and then again from around 1:40PM to around 7:OOPM on weekdays and fewer times on weekends. TCAT has explicitly indicated that they have no plans to change the current bus routes or schedule as a result of the proposed project. However, the applicant will set aside an area on the project plans as a future bus stop near the center of the project, in case TCAT changes its route in the future to include a stop inside the Holochuck development. To encourage the use of the public transit system and mitigate traffic impacts, the Holochuck Homes Homeowners' Association will be required to subsidize pub lic transit bus passes for residents of the subdivision. There are two existing covered bus shelters located near the Holochuck project. The first is located near the northern end of the site, on the Cayuga Medical Center (CMC) property. Asl described in the pedestrian and bicycle network section above, this shelter is accessed by an existing pedestrian path located at PRI. The proposed Holochuck project will include a trail easement/connection along the Holochuck northwest property line to PRI, to facilitate pedestrian access to the existing TCAT bus shelter at CMC. The second bus shelter is located further south along Route 96, in front of the Cayuga Ridge Nursing Facility. The Holochuck proposal does not include a formal easement or access to this bus shelter. In addition to the covered shelters, there is a TCAT bus stop located at the Finger Lakes School of Massage, which can be accessed by residents of the Holochuck development via the proposed sidewalks that will be constructed alongside the Holochuck subdivision road. i 2. Discussion an'd Findings The Lead Agency finds that: i Except for the Cliff Street/North Fulton Street intersection, the levels of service for the study intersections do not Mall below LOS D. the ,,.,;,,"m,,.,., level deemed aeeeptable --te the D4DT-,However, at many intersections, additional seconds of delay will occur as a result of the project. for- the WB 1=,T- in tho p.m. peak hour- 80% Build seenar-ie. The additional delays caused by the project are in addition to the delays that are already projected to increase considerably between the Existing and No -Build scenarios.. The project's additional delays will add to the existing traffic issues and frustrations noted by many residents who have commented orally and in writing through the EIS process. The Planning Board has special concerns about congestion at the northern site access intersection and the two city intersections (Cliff Street/North Fulton Street and Taughannock Boulevard/Cliff Street). The Planning Board will require measures to help mitigate the additional delays. These measures include: 16 I f I Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 i I • Requiring the Holochuck Homes Homeowners' Association to �e-- provide public transit bus passes for residents of the subdivision, beginning with the Homeowners' Associations' first collection of fees from residents and continuing for a period of at least 10 years after a Certificate of Occupancy has been received for the last unit built. • Requiring the Homeowners' Association to sic- provide vanpool- expenses services for residents of the subdivision, beginning with the completion of the first 50 units and continuing for al period of at least 10 vears after a Certificate of Occupancv has been received for the last unit built. • Fair share contribution by the applicant or Homeowners' Association to any signal, roundabout, or similar traffic device at or near the northern entrance required by NYS DOT as a result of this project or future projects. • Financial contribution by the applicant to a future park and ride on the Route 96 - corridor or to other transit related improvements. • Changes to the subdivision plat that would reduce the number of parking spaces, unless the Planning Board determines during preliminary subdivision review that this measure is not necessary in light of the other required mitigation measures„ and this measure would likely have a Q14 s4afitial impaet on the appheant's ability to mar-ket the townhouses or- is .t etieal to plo „* I Other mitigation measures that the applicant has incorporated into the project and that the Planning Board will require include: i • The applicant's compliance with NYS DOT requirements, including (but not limited to) the right -in only drive at the secondary access road, and the reservation of a strip of land along the NYS Route 96 frontage for a future sidewalk or other improvements envisioned for the Cayuga Medical Center node described in the Route 96 Corridor Management Study. • To provide additional opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle connections, the applicant will provide easements along the project frontage on NYS Route 96 as needed for future transportation improvements. • The applicant's provision of an easement for a pedestrian connection located along the northwest property line, connecting the Holochuck development to PRI (and on to the CMC bus shelter). This is link t1tt = will be specified during subdivision review. I • The applicant's set aside of an area near the center of the project for a future bus stop. • The applicant's provision of sidewalks along the development's internal road system to the two access poin ts to Route 96. This will facilitate pedestrian access by the project's residents to the existing TCAT bus stop located at the Finger Lakes School of Massage on Route 96. II G. Community Services' I 1. Impacts and Proposed Mitigation • Water: The Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission supplies water for domestic use and firefighting purposes, and would supply the water for the Holochuck Homes Subdivision. The Trumansburg Road water tank, located near the project site, has 'I 17 Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 a 500,000 gallon capacity. This tank is fed from a 1,000,000 gallon tank in the system. The EIS states that the Holochuck development will demand a total water usage of approximately 32,670 gallons of water per day. The increased water demands from the development will be easily met by the reserve capacity of the municipal system. Therefore, no significant impacts to the water supply are anticipated. Sewer: The proposed development will require a new sanitary sewer connection to the existing town main that runs through the subject property. During the review of the EIS for this project, ;the Town Public Works Department received anecdotal information that the sewer interceptor connection at the City/Town sewer pipe located at the base of Cliff Street periodically overflowed directly into the Cayuga Inlet at a rate anywhere from once a year to two times a month. To determine if and just how much of a problem actually existed; the Town installed sewer flow monitors at that pipe connection, monitored the flows for a period of seven months, and determined that the sewer line only operated at,, a 30% capacity when at peak flows. The Public Works Department therefore concluded that there was not a problem with the sewer interceptor connection. Based on the Town Public Works Department findings, no significant impacts to the sewer supply or connections are anticipated. Police Services:liThe Tompkins County Sheriff Department and the New York State Police will provide police protection for the proposed development. The EIS adequately documents that full development of all proposed phases will not have a significant impact on police protection and services. • Emergency Medical and Fire Services: The Ithaca Fire Department is responsible for fire and emergency medical service calls to West Hill in the Town of Ithaca (Bangs ambulance also responds to emergency medical calls). The EIS adequately documents that full development of the Holochuck Homes Subdivision will not have a significant impact on emergency medical or fire services. This is confirmed by statements made by Ithaca Fire Department Chief Tom Dorman and Deputy Chief Tom Parsons at a West Hill meeting at Town Hall on June 22, 2010. The West Hill Fire Department (Station 6) is located across the road from the Holochuck development and the two development access points will be easily accessed by the Ithaca Fire Department (IFD) apparatus. Final road and cul -de -sac designs will be assessed by the IFD during the subdivision review. • Schools: The EIS! estimates that, as a result of the project, a maximum number of 58 additional school -age children are anticipated to attend Ithaca City School District (ICSD) schools during any four year period. This increase is anticipated to require at least one more scliool bus for the West Hill, area of the Town. However, existing bus routes are expected to service the project until such time as the school -age population increase necessitates adding a bus. The impacts will occur over time and over a number of different ICSD schools. Therefore, the increase in school -age children will not have a significant impact on the ICSD capacity or operations. i • Recreational Resources: In conjunction with the proposed development, the applicant proposes to sell the' portion of the property, zoned Conservation (65 acres), to the New v E QtUtc- O vrzt P �y , n ccr- ccry . Histe, -ie Preser.ac OPRHP ). This portion of the property overlooks Cayuga Lake and consists of steeply sloping and forested 1 18 Findings Statement - Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 terrain. OPRHP would own and maintain the conveyed portion as undeveloped park land, possibly with pedestrian and hiking trails. Conveyance of this parcel to OPRHP would perfacilitate continuation of the Black Diamond Trail along the site's eastern frontage near the shore of Cayuga Lake. Residents living within the Holochuck Homes Subdivision will have direct access to the Black Diamond Trail and the 65 -acre adjacent parcel. The Holochuck development will also include areas for "passive and active recreation "I. These areas are loosely defined in the DEIS and generally located on Sheet C 100, titled "Master Plan ". i 2. Discussion'and Findings The Lead Agency finds that: • No adverse impacts on community services are anticipated. In particular, adequate water, sewer, and emergency services can be provided for the Holochuck project. Plans for the internal Holochuck development road and cul -de -sac should be reviewed by the Ithaca Fire Department as part of subdivision review. Any final approvals for the Holochuck Homes Subdivision will be conditioned upon conveyance of the 65 -acre portion of the property, zoned Uonservation, to the New York State UYKHY. It the conveyance is not feasible in a timely manner, then applicant will be required to convey the parcel to an established non - profit corporation that engages in land trust activities. Any conveyance to a non - profit corporation must contain adequate legal mechanisms to assure that the )ublic access to it access is detrimental to the lands or any natural resources associated with them) and allow continuation of the Black Diamond Trail along the site's eastern frontage near the shore of Cayuga Lake via a permanent easement or other permanent measure. The conveyance 'must occur prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancv for the first III. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES i Several alternative development plans were presented and evaluated in the EIS, including (1) a No Action Alternative in which the project site remains undeveloped; (2) an As -of- Right/Conventional I Layout Alternative; (3) a Reduced- Scale/Hospital Access Alternative (Alternatives "A" and "B "); (4) A NYS Route 89 Site Access Alternative; (5) A Common Ownership Alternative; (6) An Alternative Building Configuration. 1) No- Action Alternative: An evaluation of the No- Action Alternative is required under 6 NYCRR 6171.9(b)(5) and involves the scenario where the Holochuck property remains undeveloped.; Under this scenario, none of the impacts identified in the EIS would occur. There would The no impacts to soils and topography, surface water resources, vegetation and wetlands; traffic, historical and archaeological resources, community facilities and utilities, or visual resources. However, the Town's Comprehensive Plan indicates the portion of the property closest to NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) is appropriate for residential development, and it is zoned as such. Public water and sewer are available, and adequate 'capacity exists in both municipal utility systems to serve the property. The 19 i Findings Statement— Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 back portion of the property, closest to NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), is zoned Conservation. In conjunction with the proposed development, the applicant proposes to Isell the portion zoned Conservation (65 acres) to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation. This portion of the property overlooks Cayuga Lake and consists of steeply sloping and forested terrain. OPRHP would own and maintain the conveyed portion as undeveloped park land, possibly with pedestrian and hiking trails. Conveyance of this parcel to OPRHP would also-pem+4 facilitate continuation of the Black Diamond Trail along the site's eastern frontage near the shore of Cayuga Lake. Under the No- Action Alternative discussion in the EIS, the applicant states the sale to OPRHP would not go forward.; so this 65 acre parcel would-might not become State park land (or be otherwise preserved), and the Black Diamond Trail would might not bed, continued through that parcel. In addition, given the viability of a portion of the Holochuck site for development, and the current zoning and availability of public utilities that support it, the No- Action Alternative would not be a reasonable alternative. 2) As- Of- Righkonventional Layout Alternative: The Conventional Layout Alternative includes developing the entire Holochuck property to full build out, in accordance with the current Zoning densities for each district and not considering the topographic constraints or other environmental conditions of the site. In this scenario, 53 lots would be scattered !across the property, containing a -two- family homes (total of 106 units), connected by a looping internal road system, two access points to NYS Route 96, and two cul -de -sacs. The Conservation -Zoned portion of the property would be subdivided into 9 large Pots. There would be no provision for preservation of the slopes, streams, mature forest, or other environmentally sensitive characteristics of the Conservation - Zoned portion of the property. There would also be no poteatW r ision for future access to the Black Diamond Trail at the edge of the property near NYS Route 89. This Alternative would be the most environmentally damaging and most visually impacting of all the Alternatives. Therefore, this Alternative is not preferred. 3 -A) Reduced Scale with Hospital Access Alternative: The Reduced Scale with Hospital Access Alternative (Alternative "A "), in particular, was explored in the DEIS, FEIS, and through several meetings between the applicant, Town Planning and Public Works staff, Cayuga Medical Center officials, Planning Board members, and representatives of the NYS DOT. Meeting attendees discussed the issues surrounding utilizing and sharing the existing hospital entrance for the main Holochuck entrance. After investigating all the potential ways that this shared entrance could occur, the Cayuga Medical Center's Executive Management Team determined that they would not support any connection that would interfere with, or change, the hospital traffic routing as it exists. The Medical Center has concerns regarding emergency traffic flow, outpatient and visitor volumes, and impacts to existing structures on the hospital property as a result of modifying the existing entrance to accommodate the Holochuck Subdivision internal road system. Therefore, the Hospital Access Alternative (Alternative "A ") is not feasible. I 3 -B) Reduced - Scale! without Hospital Access Alternative: The EIS explored a reduced -scale option without; access through Cayuga Medical Center property (Alternative `B "), by discussing a reduced number of dwelling units (80 units) and eliminating 26 units at the west side of the project (for example, buildings 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, and two units in building 1). The road layout and building sizes would be the same as those in the proposed action Off i �I i Findings Statement — Hoi chuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I while providing for a denser building arrangement. Many of the impacts identified in the EIS would be! lessened with a reduced -scale project, such as the reductions suggested in Alternative 3 -'B. Reducing the size and scale of the Holochuck development to 80 units could: I a) decrease susceptibility of soil erosion and decrease surface water impacts by a small amount, as there would be less vegetation removal, less overall site disturblance, and less impervious surfaces (26.4 acres 'of total construction disturbance versus 29.0 acres under the proposed action; 7.0 acres of impervious surfaces versus 8.0 acres under the proposed action), b) decrease the number of residents living in the new development (due to reduction of units), thereby decreasing the demand on community services, utilities, water and sewer systems, and impacts to the UNA (projected population of 232 people, including 44 school -age children, versus the proposed action's projected population of 307 people, including 58 school -age children), c) reduce the loss of vegetation and related alteration of existing topography by a small amount due to the reduced number of buildings, fewer driveways and fewer developed areas, d) reduce traffic impacts to the road system with fewer cars and trips; (trip generation for 80 dwellings is approximately 20% less than for the proposed action, with 50 total p.m. peak hour trips versus 63 for the proposed action under the DEIS's analysis), e) reduce visual impacts (depending on the final development layout); for example, the elimination of the buildings noted above, which are sited higher on the hillside than other buildings, would result in fewer visible roof tops as viewed from Trumansburg Road; and f) retain the benefits of the preservation of the eastern 65 acres as State park land or other preserved land, because the proposed conveyance to OPRHP is retained under the Reduced -Scale options. i The Redueed R ale without Hospital Aeeess option (Aftemative "B") is reasonable and- feasible. There r-e a number- of benefits to Fedueing the number- of townhouses to 80, as deser-ibed abeve;' with the signifieant benefit of r-edueing peak houf tr-affie and thereby The Reduced -Scale without Hospital Access option (Alternative `B ") is not - easeffaMe preferable. The EIS states the loss of 26 townhouses makes the project less economically feasible, and thei applicant has stated the inclusion of 11 units of median income affordable housing is not economically feasible if the moiect is reduced by 26 units. The 21 Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 Tomokins Countv Affordable Hous housing that is affordable for median income households. The traffic impacts from the oronosed action. and the reduction in traffic if 26 units were to be eliminated (for example, 131 fewer PM peak hour trips under Alternative B) are not great enough to make affordable units. The adverse traffic, visual and other impacts e€- caused by the proposed action will be mitigated to an acceptable level. Any adverse impacts of the proposed action remaining after mitigations are applied are not large enough to require a reduction to 80 townhouses. 4) The NYS loute 89 Site Access Alternative was also explored in the DEIS, which contemplates a site access road from NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard). This option was discussed at length by the Planning Board at many meetings. The Board ultimately finds this Alternative to be unfeasible because of the road's significant adverse environmental impacts caused by extensive cut and fill, the lengthy path for the road through three switchbacks, 20 or more stream crossings, extensive clearing of the eastern wooded slope, and the loss of the opportunity to preserve the eastern 65 acres. In addition, the i Planning Board takes note of a determination made by the NYS DOT in their 1992 FEIS for the "Octopus" redesign project (the proposal to mitigate congestion and traffic problems on the west end of Ithaca). One of the alternatives explored in that EIS included constructing a new road up West Hill that would connect to Rte. 96 somewhere near the hospital/PRI properties. In the EIS, the DOT determined that developing a 'road along the hillside between NYS Route 89 and NYS Route 96 would be undesirable from a geotechnical standpoint, i.e. very expensive foundation treatment costs, significant risk associated with construction difficulties, and the potential for long term maintenance problems would be encountered. The DOT also determined that there would be negative environmental impacts, such as substantial visual impacts, noise impacts and the loss of substantial amount of vegetation and woodland along the West Hill. 5) Common Ownership Alternative: This Alternative includes the proposed layout, but placing all land in common ownership instead of having individually -owned lots. Units would be soldi as condominiums and maintenance of all of the landscaping and buildings would require!,the establishment of regulations amongst the common owners. This could result in a more unified appearance for landscaping, as the regulations likely would control types 'and locations of plantings. The applicant asserts the lack of ability to personalize yard areas would result in lower market and assessed values and lower tax revenues as `compared to the proposed action. Aside from that potential impact, the impacts of this I, alternative are the same as for the proposed project, and the proposed sale of land to OPIRHP is a component of this Alternative. The Planning Board will not require the appllicant to implement this Alternative if4t_ the applicant does not pursue it. 6) Alternative Building Configuration: The Alternative Building Configuration option was intended to look at a building configuration that is different than the originally proposed action of 21 buildings. As a result of continued review of the plans during the DEIS preparation, the applicant and project engineer revised the original cluster plan so that it now consists of 20 buildings with more units in some structures. The revised plan became the proposed action that is evaluated in the DEIS and FEIS. The revised plan is 22 Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 preferable to the originally proposed action, because the design is more compact. The originally proposed plan also had an additional cul -de -sac for fire trucks and snow removal vehicles to try to negotiate, which has been eliminated in the revised plan. The visual impacts associated with the revised plan are slightly less than with the original plan. There would also be fewer impacts to neighboring residences located near the southern access with the revised plan, due to fewer buildings in that area. For these reasons, the proposed action Altemative— Building — Conf-igur-ation (whieh is new the pf:apased aetief ` =is preferable to the original plan. This Alternative also discussed the possible incorporation of energy efficient elements into the development, and the utilization of an Integrated Pest Management program and rooftop solar panels. These practices and items could be utilized under any of the Alternatives and are acceptable to the Planning Board_ if the appheant detefmifies they Based on an analysis of thelAlternatives, the Lead Aeencv Finds that: sistent with considerations from among the reasonable alternatives available, the action as proposed by the applicant_ including the affordable housing elements), combined with the mitigations described in this Findings Statement, minimizes or mitigates adverse environmental impacts to the greatest extent practicable. 4-The project is consistent with the Town's Comprehensive Plan and current zoning, and the proposed sa4econveyance of the eastern 65 acres to OPRHP or non - profit corporation will provide permanent protection to an important area in the Conservation Zone and allow for the continuation of the Black Diamond trail through that parcel. Additionally, tThe townhouses will add to the variety of housing styles available in the Town, -. and 10% of the units will be affordable to those I in the median income range (as defined in the Tompkins County Affordable Housing!Needs Assessment). The clustered subdivision will result in a denser development that uses and disturbs less land, creates a smaller amount of impermeable surfaces, and disturbs less vegetation than a conventional subdivision. The— prejeet. the Planning Bear -' it will help to fedu ° The mitigations will help to reduce the visual impact and the additional delays at intersections and driveways the project could otherwise cause. I analysis of each alternative, the Planning Board is not selecting one of the alternatives instead of the action! as proposed by the applicant. l The Planning I finds that the Redueed Seale v�,itheut Hospital Aeeess apt 23 ail I Findings Statement — Holochuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I i I trips, whieh will deer-ease the pFE�e 93Me:s7.1rrersrartrse��sere�sr s rsT S: ree�s ss�T S: e: z +��esrtersrtis�ru�:'�rssrr..errr ■:esf IV. CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO APPROVE Having considered the Draft, Supplemental a*d- ,Final and Revised Final Environmental Impact Statements, and having considered the preceding written facts and conclusions relied on to meet the requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617, this Statement of Findings certifies that: 1. The requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617 have been met; and i 2. Consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives available, the action is one that avoids or minimizes adverse, environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable, and that adverse; impacts will be avoided or minimized to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures that were identified as practicable. 24 .. I Findings Statement — Holo i chuck Homes Subdivision, March 29, 2011 I I I Town of Ithaca Planning Board I Signature of Responsible Official I I Chairman i Title of Responsiblle Official i I Town of Ithaca Planning Board Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 i i I Fred Wilcox Name of Responsible Official Date 25 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, March 22, 2011 (Special Meeting — Note Earlier Start Time) AGENDA 6:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 6:05 P.M. Discussion of the Findings Statement for 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 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26- 4- 38,�and 26 -4 -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 iRoute 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density 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 most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC,I Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. i 3. Approval of Minutes: March 1, 2010 and March 8, 2011. 4. Other Business: 5. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273 -1747 I i 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.)