Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2013-07-16^ TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. July 16. 2013 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than fwe minutes). 7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Rancich Grayel Mine, Mecklenburg Road. 7;05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approyal and Special Permit from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board regarding the continued use of the existing grayel mine located on the north side of Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-14.2, Agriculture Zone. The project inyolyes a request to continue the mining operation on a portion of this property for an additional 10 years. This project was preyious approyed in 2002, 2005, and 2008, with the 2008 approyal haying an expiration date of August 31, 2013. No changes in the operation are proposed. John Rancich, Owner/Applicant. 7:20 P.M. SEQR Determination: EcoVillage T.R.E.E. - Building Permit Waiyer, Rachel Carson Way. 7:20 P.M, PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a waiyer as outlined in Planned Deyelopment Zone No. 8 (Limited Mixed Use, EcoVillage), Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W, regarding the issuance of additional building permits for the Third Residential EcoVillage Experience (T.R.E.E.), where not all water focilities haye been completed. T.R.E.E. is located on Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28-1-26.85,28-1-26.22, 28-1-26.82, and 28-1-26.84, Planned Deyelopment Zone No. 8. T.R.E.E. LLC, Owner/Applicant; Mike Carpenter, Agent. 7:45 P.M. New York Planning Federation yideo regarding new State Enyironmental Quality Reyiew (SEQR) forms (effectiye October 7,2013). 7. Approyal of Minutes: June 18, 2013 and July 2, 2013. 8. Other Business: 9. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273-1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday,July 16, 2013 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox(Chair), Linda Collins,John Beach, Paula Wedemeyer,Jon Bosak,Yvonne Fogarty, Hollis Erb,Joseph Haefeli Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Chris Balestra, Planner; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Creig Hebdon, Town Engineer; Susan Brock,Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and accepted the secretary's posting of the public hearing notices. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination: Rancich Gravel Mine, Mecklenburg Road Mr.Wilcox explained that this item was originally supposed to be a SEQR determination, preliminary site plan approval, and special permit on the Rancich gravel mine extension.The Planning Board previously acted only in an advisory capacity by giving a recommendation to the Zoning Board, which issued a special approval. Under the current zoning, both boards must grant approval of the mining permit. Given that the ZBA did the environmental review of the mining operation in 2002, 2005, and 2008, it makes sense for them to be the lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed project. The Planning Board needs to either concur or object. If the Planning Board concurs, the ZBA will take up the environmental review. If the ZBA makes a determination of no significant environmental impact, they will address the special approval, and the Planning Board will then address the special permit and preliminary approval. Mr. Bosak asked why the 2012 amendment to the law that brought this project before the Board isn't an ex post facto action when applied to the Rancich project.All the Board is doing is renewing something that has already been approved several times. He asked if it was common that a change in zoning catches the applicant the next time through, even though they were okay before zoning was changed. For example, suppose the Town Board had been historically violently opposed to this project, so they passed a law to make the applicant jump through hoops he can't pass next time. Ms. Brock responded that Mr. Ranchich's permit is expiring, so there's a new action that has to be taken.Any property to be developed is subject to the zoning in place at the time the development is undertaken, not the zoning in place when the property was acquired. This is slightly different because it's an ongoing action. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 2 of 18 Mr. Bosak said an analogy would be that the Town didn't used to require that a building have sprinklers when it was built, but when an applicant wants to add something on, they have to follow the new requirement. Ms. Brock agreed that a building expansion would trigger the need for sprinklers even though the original building predated the law. She explained that the special permit criteria the Board has to apply is the identical criteria as the special approval criteria the ZBA is applying. Both boards are going to apply the exact same criteria from Section 270-200. Those criteria have been in the code for a long time, but the Town Board amended its fill permit requirements so that the Planning Board is now getting fill permits whenever the amount of fill to be excavated exceeds a certain amount. In the agricultural zone where mining is allowed, that provision for mining states that the applicant has to get a fill permit. So the mining provisions did not change, but the fill permit changed. So the ZBA no longer gives special approvals; the Planning Board gives special permits. Ms. Balestra said that staff included more information in the packet than they normally would because many of the current Board members were not on the Planning Board when the project originally came before it.Also, staff generally include the EAF as a courtesy. Ms. Fogarty noted that there are two closing times given in the EAF. Ms. Brock responded that the State limits the conditions the Town can put on the mine because it gets a DEC permit.The Town can enforce the hours of operation that are in the DEC permit and they can make that a condition of approval, but they can't change the hours of operation in the DEC permit.As far as the discrepancy, she doesn't know how that happened. PB Resolution No. 2013-025:Designation of the Zoning Board of Appeals as Lead Agency, Rancich Gravel Excavation Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Linda Collins RESOLVED: That this Board, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, hereby concurs that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals should be the Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed request to extend the Rancich gravel mining operation on Mecklenburg Road for another 10 years. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Beach, Fogarty, Wedemeyer, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board regarding the continued use of the existing gravel mine located on the north side of Mecklenburg Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-14.2, Agriculture Zone. The project involves a request to continue the mining operation on a portion of this property for an additional 10 years. This project was previous approved in 2002, 2005, and 2008,with the 2008 approval having an expiration date of August 31, 2013. No changes in the oper- ation are proposed. John Rancich, Owner/Applicant. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 3 of 18 Mr.Wilcox explained that the Planning Board can't legally hold the public hearing, but they can give the public the opportunity to speak. John Rancich gave a brief overview of what he is proposing. A number of years ago, he proposed a development across from Rachel Carson Way called Carrowmoor. It was 400 units and 30,000 square feet of commercial space. He applied for and received the mining permit to mine the materials that were there and stockpile them on the site for use on the site. He's used maybe eight or ten truckloads of the material for his own personal use over the last ten years; the rest of the material is all piled up. He got a special permit from the DEC, because his mine area is so small - only five acres out of the 250 acres - to store the materials off the mine site. He wants to extend the permit because he thinks it will cost less to extend the permit than to get a new one. Part of the reason he hasn't been on the Carrowmoor project is because he's invested his time and energy on the wind project. Last week they had a spectacular public hearing, with almost everyone speaking in favor. They're expecting a permit from the Town of Enfield to put the towers up toward the end of the summer.After that goes through, he'll come back before the Planning Board to revisit the Carrowmoor community project. In the meantime, he wants to be able to mine and stockpile material. Mr. Rancich noted that his DEC permit expires August 20th, his permit with the Town expires August 31st, the next meeting of the ZBA is the 19th, and Planning Board meeting is the 20th. He doesn't know if the DEC will renew his permit without the Town's approval. He's nervous about the tight timing. Ms. Erb said it makes sense that he has gravel there for a large project; however, if nothing ever hap- pens with Carrowmoor, there are 9000 truckloads of gravel that could possibly start being conveyed through the Octopus. Mr. Rancich responded that his permit restricts the number of truckloads per hour that can leave the mine to eight. If nothing ever happens with Carrowmoor, he's spent hundreds of thousands of dol- lars stockpiling the material and he will sell it. Part of his LEED certification is to use the gravel that's on site to build roads. He's trying to not haul material and is not prepared to throw the towel in on that project. It's his intention that something is going to happen. But that material has the right to leave now. There is no restriction in the DEC permit on how many trucks can come in or out; only in the Town's permit. Ms. Erb wondered if the Town will ever have the opportunity to revisit issues like truck routes, num- ber of trucks per hour, etc, if nothing ever gets built on the site. Ms. Brock explained that the Mined Land Reclamation Law allows the Town to regulate the ingress and egress of public thoroughfares patrolled by the local government and routing of mineral transport vehicles on roads patrolled by the local government; i.e., the Town cannot regulate anything that is not on a Town road. The special permit and special approval criteria have things about impact on the neighbors, community character, etc. So if the Board feels that part of the operation will be so injuri- ous that it can't meet the criteria, then they can deal with it by not granting the special permit, but they cannot, as a condition, state that Mr. Ranchich is limited to a certain number of truckloads on roads that aren't Town roads. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 4 of 18 Mr. Bosak asked where in the timeline between 2000 and present did Carrowmoor become anyone's idea as part of the context. In the series of approvals that began in 2000, which of those approvals were loosely conditioned on using the gravel for Carrowmoor? Mr. Rancich said he purchased the land with the idea of putting a development on it - that it had a permitted mine was an extra bonus. The two were never - by any sort of proclamation or agreement with the Town or the DEC - going to work together. They are separate entities and are not intercon- nected.They are just connected in his mind as the best use of the gravel. Mr. Bosak said the reason he asked that question was that he interpreted Ms. Erb statements to mean that this is okay as long as Mr. Ranchich uses it for what he's telling the Board he's going to use it for, which is on site. Mr. Bosak said if that is not the circumstance, he might feel differently about it. He's coming at it from the opposite angle: he is seeing a bunch of approvals, none of which have men- tioned the development. He's extremely reluctant to monkey around with prior approvals, unless something new has come up to make him think those approvals should not have been granted. Ms. Erb explained that she was reading in the current approvals that there was some limitation to the number of truckloads that could leave the property in any given hour and was inquiring as to whether that limitation ends with the permit or whether the Board could make a recommendation if other members felt the same way. She's wary for the sake of the neighborhood and the Town roads in the neighborhood and is leery of suddenly having some convoys. Ms. Brock suggested that it would be helpful if the Planning Board and the ZBA could get all the plans that are referenced in the DEC permit, because that permit will state that all the activities au- thorized by the DEC permit must be in strict conformance with the approved plans, and it will actual- ly list them: the 2013 mining permit application, the letter Mr. Rancich submitted regarding where he would stockpile materials, the organizational report form. Because the DEC permit is based on that, it may be that Ms. Erb's issues are addressed. The most recent information on the noise study, dust, traffic routing, etc, would be useful. Mr. Rancich said he thought all that information had been delivered to the Town, and if it had not, he will deliver it. Mr.Wilcox suggested that Board members give their comments on the EAF to staff for the ZBA.This is simply an extension of the previous permits. Mr. Rancich stated that nothing has changed - he just wants to stretch it out. AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination: EcoVillage T.R.E.E. - Building Permit Waiver, Rachel Carson Way Mr. Wilcox reported that yesterday six of eight Planning Board members had a site visit to TREE. He did not observe any members discussing the project among themselves. Mr. Carpenter described the challenges they've faced in bringing the water system for TREE into compliance with Ithaca Town Code Section 271-9.W, which spells out the provision of adequate wa- Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 5 of 18 ter facilities of the Special Land Use District(SLUD). He explained that they've nearly complied with the three provisions in Item (1): there is a water system in place from Westhaven Road that feeds the two developments and has been shown to be capable of feeding the third; a meter has been installed for metering by Bolton Point; and all the uses requiring water have been approved and are in place, with the exception of fire protection. He stated that they've been working on this since April, and it's been very confusing. Many people from many agencies have been at the pump house trying to figure out how to satisfy all the requirements in the SLUD. They had a meeting with Bruce Bates and Steve Williams last Friday and got clarification on what they're looking for. Since then, Bolton Point has again chimed in and said they need something else done before they can approve the system. He de- scribed what is working. There is a pipeline that goes up to three hydrants in the TREE neighbor- hood. They did a test on the fire line a few weeks ago with the fire department, and Chief Parsons found the level of water going through to charge the hydrants acceptable. The Highway Superintend, ant, however, did not accept it because there's a possibility that if the fire company used the wrong type of hose on the hydrant by the pump house, they could create a negative pressure in the water tank, which would create a negative situation for other residents in the Town. He agreed that it's not something they could call a functional system.The fire pump itself had a test a week ago and passed. The letter from Mr. Herrick that was provided to the Board members at the beginning of the meeting states that they got 750 gallons per minute (gpm) flow from the pump house. They're working on getting what Mr. Bates and Bolton Point want completed so the full system can be commissioned. Mr. Carpenter then discussed Item (2) of the SLUD, which allows the Planning Board to grant a waiver from one or more of the requirements in Item (1), so the developer can obtain more than ten building permits. (c) Hardship: He stated that the future TREE residents, many of whom were in attendance, were experiencing hardship. Some are living in temporary housing with relatives and friends. They started applying for building permits last July and it took until December to start build- ing. It is costing the residents a lot of money to wait to move in. Mr. Carpenter is also con- cerned because there are contractors he's been trying to keep on the site since winter. He's getting low on work for them, and if they don't get some new permits, he'll start losing the contractors to other jobs.Also, winter is coming and it's much more difficult and expensive to build in winter. (d)Adequate financial support: The water system is in place and approved by the Town. The fire system is also in place and approved. The pump house is the only thing remaining. He'd be happy to provide proof that they have the $10,000 to $20,000 needed to finish. (e)The Town Engineer recommends granting the waiver: Mr. Carpenter is asking for two items to be waived: (1)The last ten houses are ready to be started; they would like to get ap- proval to submit and be granted foundation permits, which is half the cost of the building permit and will allow them to finish through the foundation work. The foundations are all concrete, so there's no additional risk of fire. (2)They have two foundation permits in place for two duplexes: one is already poured and the other should be poured by the end of the week.Those duplexes are next in line for the framing contractors, who've done all they can to this point. The sidings are basically fireproof: the roof is metal and the siding of the houses is half metal and half fiber cement,which is a class-A fire-rated material. They would like to tell Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 6 of 18 the framing contractors to put the materials on the slabs; this will keep them busy for another three to four weeks, during which they can finish the pump house approvals. Mr. Hebdon said he had extensive discussions with Mr. Sincebaugh concerning this. Mr. Carpenter told him that the reduced pressure zones between the Town's system and their system are still not corrected. TREE's plumbing rep said that Peter from Bolton Point tested and approved the one-inch reduced pressure zone (RPZ) from the jockey pump.The four-inch main cannot be tested until the pump is running. He and a Bolton Point staff person planned to visit the site the next morning to fire up the pump and test the RPZ while the pump is pressurizing it. It's a brand new RPZ. He has also set up the equipment to do a flow test at the highest hydrant in the system. Mr. Hebdon said there's a line from the Town's main water line up to the pump station. He explained that the RPZ allows the water to go in only one direction and makes sure that if something happens in their line that creates a negative pressure, it's not sucking something out of someone's sink into the Town's line. Mr. Hebdon pointed out that there is a maintenance hydrant hooked directly into our main line that was not meant to fight fires. The Town usually puts up 10-foot high fences around tanks. EcoVillage asked the Town not to put the fence up. If they had put the fence up, that hydrant would be inside the fenced area. The Town prefers not to have that hydrant used. David Warden, the applicant's plumbing contractor, stated that the maintenance hydrant is west of Rachel Carson Way, a few hundred feet from the pump house.The one next to the pump house is designed for fire and is the one pumper trucks would hook up to.As he understands it, the pumper truck pulls up to the pump house, latches onto the first hydrant, and ties into a Storz connection, which is a fire connection at the pump house. The water gets drawn from that hydrant, through the pumper truck, right into the Storz, bypassing the pump, and feeding water through the whole system. Mr. Hebdon said the design is set up so that that isn't necessary.When you're done and you have your fire pump in place, there's no reason for the truck to pull up and hook up to the hydrant. Mr. Warden maintained that pumper trucks do that to push even more water, if necessary. David Herrick stated that the hydrant right next to the pump station does double duty, and is intend- ed to help flush the line (the eight-inch main) that's connected to the Town's ten-inch main. It also has the potential for a fire truck to hook up and draw from it if they want to bypass the flow that would go through the pump station. So if there's a problem with the pump station, the fire depart- ment would have the ability to move that same amount of water into the TREE water main system. Mr. Wilcox stated that instead of using the pump in the pump house, they would use the pump in the fire truck. Mr. Herrick explained that the fire department went up to the site and developed that scenario. They use a collapsible hose that helps the operator understand when they're starting to exceed the ability of the water system pressure to maintain a solid, positive pressure on the inlet side of their pump. If they see a hose start to shrink or collapse, they know to adjust the flow rate or stop the flow rate.The sys- tem is designed for 500 gpm of flow, and the fire pump has to be capable of 150% of that. It was test- ed and successfully met both the 500 gpm and 750 gpm called for and maintained positive pressure on the Town's system. If there's a limitation on the use of the Town's fire hydrants anywhere on the Town main, it needs to be made clear that they are off limits and are for maintenance purposes only. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 7of18 Mr. Wilcox stated that one of the conditions for the Board to consider is whether the Town Engineer recommends granting the waiver. Mr. Bosak said he was trying to avoid the entire complex of technical issues and that he thought it was irrelevant to what the Board was trying to decide. He's totally confident they will not get a certifi- cate of occupancy until this is done correctly. It's also clear to him that there's real hardship. The question is: if a fire broke out during the period of this waiver, could the fire department put it out? There's sufficient flow from the pumper truck to put out anything that might occur during the period of the waiver and, moreover, the pump is perfectly operational anyway.To him, they have redundant systems to address any problems that come up during the period of the waiver. Ms.Wedemeyer asked what the maintenance hydrants are designed for if they are not designed for fire suppression, and asked what the issues are if the fire trucks hook up to them. Mr. Hebdon responded that the maintenance hydrants are there, particularly by the tank, in case there's a break in one of the water mains; it's flushed through the hydrant to get all the air out of it. It's also to help drain the tank. His concern is that they can get 750 gallons of pressure out of the hydrant per minute, but the pumpers can push around 1500 gallons per minute. If a firefighter hooks up and slams that pumper at full bore and puts a hard hose on instead of a soft hose, they're putting negative pressure into the Town's system. If that facilitates a line break somewhere, rather than the water spurting out, everything is going to be sucked into that system and a whole length of line will be cross-contaminated. That's why the fire pump that's hooked up to that line is set at 750 gpm, and it won't have the possibility of going over that. Ms. Erb asked Mr. Hebdon if he was concerned that we can't manage a sign by the hydrant that sig- nals to the professional firefighters not to use a hard hose, and that after all these discussions, they will still throw a hard line on it rather than collapsible hoses. Mr. Hebdon responded that at 2:30 in the morning,you're going to grab what you have. The top of the maintenance hydrant will be painted black to prevent usage. Ms. Erb asked what the solution would be to preventing the firefighter from attaching a hard line rather than a collapsible hose. Mr. Haefeli noted that this will be a forever issue since this hydrant will always be there. Normally they'd fence them off. Mr. Hebdon said he didn't think there were other fire pumps in the Town. This is the only place we have to pressurize the system. They could put a sign up there. IPD tries to color-code the tops of their bonnets. Mr. Bates wanted to explain what happens within the fire service and what happens with fires and what happens within the pump.The Building Department has to clarify issues per the code.The fire chief, once the fire has been declared an emergency, has the ultimate authority, under New York State law, to mandate anything he wants. Once the incident is over, he loses that authority.The fire fighters can use that hydrant if the chief so deems they can. When the fire department checked the two hy- Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 8 of 18 drants, one belonging to EcoVillage and the other belonging to the Town, they got two residual pres- sures. They checked how much static pressure was there to use on the hydrant before pumping water. The Town hydrant gave a bigger pressure, which allowed him to get more water up at the other end of the system. When figuring out how much water needs to be pushed per minute to put out a single, residence fire, Mr. Bates came up with 583 gallons per minute. That's the most the fire service is go- ing to get with a collapsible hose because that's what they carry. The fire department currently can't adequately protect anything at EcoVillage because they refuse to use the pond,which is set up for the current system. The current system for FROG and SONG is to hook up to the pond, pump into the hydrants, and create the water. The fire chief has now said he will hook up to the hydrants and push it up to the other hydrant system to feed for FROG and SONG. Once the whole system is done, it will have been designed to feed SONG and TREE. FROG is still on its own, and always has been, because it was built before the current codes were in place. So there are 750 gallons per minute from the pump at the building, but we don't know what it can produce at the other end. The code says this system has to be automatic: once they open the hydrant, the system has to function. It does not mean that it works only when someone turns it on. Like Mr.Warden said, the Storz creates a redundancy. The question Mr. Bates can't answer is whether there is adequate fire protection if something hap- pens. In his opinion, there is not. The system that is currently there is not the system that was de- signed.The pump is, but the pump that is currently holding the pressure on that system is a residen- tial well pump, whereas a jockey pump would provide a bigger horse power and be less apt to fail be- cause that's what it's designed to do. Mr. Wilcox asked Mr. Bates if he feels that there is sufficient pressure and/or water to fight a fire on unoccupied buildings under construction. Mr. Bates responded that there is not because nothing has been officially approved. Under the code, the pump has not been approved for fire fighting. If a fire were to occur, any structure in EcoVillage would be at risk. Mr. Haefeli asked if it was okay to hook a pumper to the hydrant next to the pump house. Mr. Heb- don said yes and no; it's there as a backup. Mr. Haefeli asked if the rest of the system was satisfactorily functional, leaving the pump out of the equation, and if the Town should accept this system in pieces and parts or the whole configuration or none of it. Mr. Bates responded that it's been accepted when it meets the testing. It's a National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) test, which basically says that the whole system, not just the pump, is functioning at a certain level and that that level is tested and maintained. Once it meets the test, everyone signs off and certifies it. Mr. Bates believes that the fire department could hook up to the hydrant, pump into the Storz fitting, and get water out the other end. The question is how much water they're going to get out the other end. Their hose will start collapsing when they start sucking too much water. Mr. Beach said he will have to rely on staff to ascertain what is acceptable. Clearly, some of the issues have been resolved and there is a potential hardship for some people. He asked whether a fire could be fought if one were to break out in one of the buildings under construction. Mr. Hebdon said it could, with some risk. They're asking for ten building permits,which theoretically wouldn't have any burnable materials. He asked what risk the Town wants to run by allowing them to frame two more buildings. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 9 of 18 Ms. Fogarty wanted to revisit the idea of signage. She said to paint the top of the hydrant next to the water tank black so it won't be used. She suggested putting a sign by the hydrant next to the pump house indicating only collapsible hose should be used. Mr. Hebdon agreed that that could be part of the resolution. Ms. Fogarty said she was hearing that the capability is there for the fire department to put a hard line on it and that it could create enough negative pressure to cause damage to the system. If that's the problem, she suggested figuring out a solution to that problem, which would be a sign. Mr. Hebdon responded that the problem is taking human error out of it. At what point is the risk manageable; at what point is it mitigated? Mr. Beach asked if there was a risk from an insurance point of view. Mr. Hebdon didn't think so. Mr. Warden said he had a conversation with chief Parsons during the test and asked specifically why the chief wasn't using hard pipes. Mr. Parsons said if he put too much negative pressure on it, it would ruin the pumper truck. Mr.Warden also pointed out that the fire system was designed to be completely separate from the domestic system. Ms.Wedemeyer asked Mr. Bates for clarification on his comment that if there was a fire at EcoVillage that evening, the fire department wouldn't be able to contain it. She asked if that meant that occu- pancy permits were given when there wasn't adequate fire suppression. Mr. Bates said he has a choice to make. He can issue a violation to TREE because they don't have fire protection under their agreement for their plan of SONG because the pond is not clean and they don't have the system tested to say it's functional. He was prepared to write the letter to do that, but he thought that, instead of using the money to get the pond cleaned out and an engineer to certify the dry hydrant and that everything is working correctly, they should put it into the hydrant system, because the hydrant system will back feed the other system, and once it's done, the pond is going to be gone. Technically, they are in violation now. Mr. Herrick added that some of the common houses have sprinkler systems connected to the domes- tic supply, but the individual residences don't. Mr. Carpenter stated that the FROG neighborhood has a dry hydrant that went into the pond that was, when it was installed, state of the art and acceptable under the SLUD. When they put in the SONG neighborhood, it required more than that. The source of the water was still the dry hydrant at the other end of the pond, but they put in a complete piped system throughout the neighborhood with three hydrants in the neighborhood itself that is fed by the dry hydrant. The fire truck drafts water out of the pond and pushes it into the dry hydrant, then pushes it through the neighborhood. He said Mr. Bates is correct in saying they don't know the state of that system right now. He has heard that the Ithaca Fire Department is supposed to check that system once per year and that they stopped doing that because Chief Parsons didn't want to take the chance that they would pull con- taminants from the pond into their fire trucks. It was built from specs by TG Miller and was assumed to be a functional system; if it isn't now, he didn't think it would take too much to resolve the issues. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 10 of 18 But whether or not Chief Parsons wants to continue testing it is the question. He agreed with Mr. Hebdon that the hydrant next to the pump house is for emergencies. Ms.Wedemeyer stated that the Board knows there isn't a situation with the foundations,which leaves in play the two townhouses. It appears that the townhouses are rather isolated from the build- ings that are occupied. She asked if it would be feasible that they take the risk that if the townhouses catch on fire, they will burn, and that the fire suppression that exists stays the way it is until it can be completed according to the specification. Mr. Bosak wanted to recap for his own understanding. He said he endorsed Mr. Bates' decision not to push the violations because they're on the brink of having the whole thing solved. He also heard some serious issues with FROG and SONG, but that they're not relevant to what's in front of the Board tonight. The issue really is. can a fire at the construction site be suppressed using a pumper truck if the manual start of the pump that's already there fails?What he was hearing is that there is probably sufficient water and pressure with a pumper truck to suppress a fire at the construction site, but there are circumstances under which we can conceive of the fire department doing the wrong thing and damaging the Town system. He was feeling comfortable with that level of risk if a fence is put up around the maintenance hydrant, if signage is put on the hydrant next to the pump house, if the Board makes those conditions, and if Chief Parsons is told that there is a special issue with this particular location. If all those things happen, he'd be comfortable with that level of risk. He said he was okay with it as long as Mr. Hebdon was. Ms. Erb wanted go back to the beginning. First, she said believes that the Town Board already accept- ed a certain level of the risk of a negative pressure issue because they consented to have the first ten buildings go in before the new pump was anywhere near online. She clarified her comment by saying that the Town Board passed a resolution for the planned development zone, and in doing so when they explicitly permitted ten dwelling units to go forward without this system, they accepted a certain level of risk. Ms. Erb therefore was not looking at risk for the whole situation, but was looking for additional risk. She agreed with Mr. Bosak that what's wrong potentially with FROG and SONG should be of interest to members of the audience, but that it had nothing to do with the resolution she had to consider.Also, she heard the Town doesn't have the easement to put up a fence, but they can slap black paint on the hydrant so firefighters understand, and she would make that a condition of any approval.Then she was faced with how much to worry about fire suppression on ten addition- al slabs. She said she worried not at all. There's also a request for two additional duplexes.The PDZ language specifically talks about ten dwelling units, and what hasn't been addressed is that there are already 11 dwelling units, with one dwelling unit being in limbo,which she did not think the Board should ignore. Under the ten homes already granted, there were building permits for seven single- family homes plus two duplexes: that's 11 dwelling units. Mr. Bates said that part of the condition allowing them to go to 11 is that they're duplexes, so it didn't make sense to build one without the other. Also, back in April, when it was decided to give them the two foundations they currently have, that was a good gesture on the Town's part to help them out and keep them moving, which is the same thing they're asking for here. But under that condition, the Town was given to understand that the pump house would be up and running in two weeks.That was three months ago. That's the reason there are 11 units instead of ten.That that was a courtesy on his part: he overstepped because the code says ten. He took it on his own authority, as the Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 11 of 18 code officer, to try and keep the project moving. His job is the health, safety, and welfare of people and property. He wanted the Board to understand the facts of how we got here. Ms. Erb accepted that. Her point was that there's a dwelling unit in limbo that was not addressed. She did not have a problem with it and just wanted it on the record that the Board recognized that it ex- ists. Mr. Carpenter pointed out that the SLUD language in some places mentions ten dwelling units and in others ten building permits.There have only been nine building permits issued. Ms. Erb said that she was looking at the page in the document she was given from which to work. It says ten dwelling units. She started considering how big the risk is of damage to the Town and she came back to the concept that the Town Board already accepted a substantial portion of that risk when they allowed the first ten dwelling units to go forward. Town staff have already sensibly in- creased that risk by letting the 11th go through.All that's being proposed are the pads for the two duplexes, which are way out beyond. If they were to collapse to the ground without fire suppression, she would have a hard time believing that fire would catch to anything else. Although she worried a little bit about the Town's loss if there was a problem with negative pressure in the fire lines, the big- ger loss would be to TREE and EcoVillage. They're going to have to scramble to figure out how to take care of this.With no certificate of occupancy, there's no risk to the residents of TREE.All that's being considered is ten pads that have no fire risk whatsoever plus four more dwelling unit framings, whereas 11 dwelling units have been allowed to be completed. She was sure that staff wouldn't let any personal residential property or lives be at risk. She said she was in favor of the waiver. She would like the hydrant near the Town's tank painted black. She would like a sign visible at night on the pump house and the adjacent fire hydrant to reduce the risk that the Town has substantially accepted in the first place. Mr. Bates wanted to clarify that the buildings Ms. Erb noted that are already there should include the garages that have been built. PB Resolution No. 2013-026: SEQR, Waiver from Town Code Section 271-9.W., EcoVillage TREE Neighborhood, Tax Parcel No.'s 28.-1-26.85, 28.-1-26.22, 28.-l-26.82, 28.-1-26.84, Rachel Carson Way Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by Jon Bosak WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of a waiver as outlined in Planned Development Zone No. 8 (Limited Mixed Use, EcoVillage), Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W., regarding the issuance of build- ing permits for the Third Residential EcoVillage Experience (TREE), where not all water facilities have been completed. TREE is located on Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28-1-26.85, 28-1-26.22, 28-1-26.82, and 28-1-26.84, Planned Development Zone No. 8. TREE LLC, Owner/Applicant; Mike Carpenter,Agent; and Planning Board Minutes 07.16-2013 Page 12 of 18 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as lead agency in an environmental review with respect to the request for a waiver as outlined in Planned Devel- opment Zone No. 8, Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W.; and 3. The Planning Board, on July 16, 2013, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environ- mental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and other application materials; and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental signifi- cance with respect to the issuance of the waiver; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Beach, Fogarty, Wedemeyer, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of a waiver as outlined in Planned Development Zone No. 8 (Lim- ited Mixed Use, EcoVillage), Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W, regarding the issuance of addi- tional building permits for the Third Residential EcoVillage Experience (T.R.E.E.), where not all wa- ter facilities have been completed. T.R.E.E. is located on Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28-1-26.85, 28-1-26.22, 28-1-26.82, and 28-1-26.84, Planned Development Zone No. 8. T.R.E.E. LLC, Owner/Applicant; Mike Carpenter,Agent Mr.Wilcox opened the public hearing at 9:09 p.m. Ms.Wedemeyer noted that it was mentioned that$10,000 to $20,000 was set aside to finish this part of the project. Mr. Carpenter responded that the rest of the budget for this project, several millions of dollars, is available to finish this, since it is top priority. Mr.Wilcox asked if they are getting money from FROG and SONG to finance the pump house and infrastructire. Mr. Carpenter responded that they are not. A member of TREE thanked the Board for the opportunity to work through a major issue in terms of moving forward with the neighborhood. He stated that this project will represent a huge break- through in terms of sustainable living for the County and Town. Mr. Bates said the Board should vote not do this because it's a public safety issue. Staff have tried to work with them on this. There have been many meetings. Promises have been made that things would be done and it still isn't done. His concern, as the person in charge of public safety and public Planning Board Minutes 07.16-2013 Page 13 of 18 welfare, is that SONG and FROG are at risk.The fire chief has told him that if there's an issue, the IPD will hook into the system and do what they need to do to fight a fire in an existing neighbor- hood. The Town was told in April that the system would be finished in two weeks. They were told it would be done a week ago. The system still is not functional. Is there enough water to fight a fire? It depends on the size of the fire. If there's a fire up there, even with the system up and running, they will still have a problem because they will have just enough to fight a single structure. Ms. Erb asked if the same issues would exist for SONG and FROG if the waiver were denied tonight. Mr. Bates said they would. Ms. Erb asked if Mr. Bates was requesting that the Board deny the waiver to put pressure on the applicant. Mr. Bates responded that denying the waiver would keep their feet to the fire to get this system up and functioning. Ms. Erb asked Ms. Brock if the Board could proceed with a waiver with a kill date. Mr. Bates responded that the kill date is already there. Once they finish the foundations and the ad- ditional structures, they're stopped again because that's what they came here for.That's the kill date. His recommendation, for the safety of people and property, is to make them get the pump working before they can go on. To him, he feels like it's at that point again,where they're saying again:Just give us this and we'll have it done in a couple days. In his opinion, they should be made to get the pump system working. Is there additional risk with foundation permits? Probably not. He is required to look at the big picture. The Board is looking at the risks of what's in front of them. Ms. Erb asked how fire suppression to FROG and SONG fit into the scope of what, as a Planning Board member, she is capable of using in her decision to grant a waiver for ten foundation slabs and framing of two duplexes. She was trying to figure out whether FROG and SONG can be used to deny a waiver request for what she though was fairly circumspect. Ms. Brock responded that it would be relevant if the Town Engineer doesn't recommend granting the waiver for that reason. The Town code gives the findings the Board has to make to grant the waiver. She didn't know whether that would preclude them from looking at other issues if they decide not to grant it. If Board members want to grant the waiver, they have to make the findings affirmatively. If the Board felt there were other issues that make the waiver not desirable, such as that there was in- creased risk in cross contamination of the Town system, that could be a reason to deny it. The Board can look at the course of conduct of the parties over the last few months and whether they've made sufficient progress to date and whether it's likely that things will be wrapped up soon or not. Ms. Erb said she was still stuck with the idea that, in financial terms, until they get the certificate of occupancy, there is still a huge financial hardship for the parties involved. She also considered the possibility of striking a compromise: allow ten foundation pads and leave off the two additional build- ings. It lets some work proceed. That would strike a balance.The ten pads are not a fire risk. Ms. Collins said she was struggling and had become convinced by what Mr. Bates said. She does not think FROG and SONG are irrelevant issues. She did not think the pads carry no risk. She has great respect for EcoVillage, and pointed out that they see themselves as a community. She's concerned about the whole community. This community doesn't have appropriate fire suppression now. She doesn't think that is irrelevant.And because there are already people living there, in the unlikely cir- cumstance of a fire, there could be loss of life and property. She said that is a bigger risk than the Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 14 of 18 Town having problems with the water system. Her moral compass would not allow her to vote for the waivers. Mr. Bosak said that he was under the impression that when this pump is operational, it still won't solve the problem of FROG and SONG. Mr. Bates responded that once this system is up and functioning, it will be hooked into the SONG hydrant system. The dry hydrant will be capped and shut off. The system will give them some fire protection that they don't have now. Mr. Bosak said whether it's the Board's function to use this procedure as a tool to get a behavior they want is a critical point. Ms. Brock responded that that's not the only way to think about the issue. It's also: do you want to increase risk where it's already existing? Mr. Bosak said he sympathized with Mr. Bates' frustration, but was reticent to use a punitive measure. Also the business about the Town Board already having set a risk higher than what the Planning Board is contemplating makes him wonder whether, in going against that, the Planning Board would be contradicting the intention of the Town Board. Ms. Erb responded that that's not the case because they explicitly put in the waiver possibilities for the Board to consider. Mr. Bosak said that, to him, it's all or nothing and that he sees no real benefit in separating the pads from the other structures.The new frames are clad in fire-rated materials. He didn't see how denying the waiver would increase the level of fire protection for anybody. Ms. Erb agreed, especially with the future TREE residents in the audience saying, Where the heck is my home? She pointed out that Mr. Bates is not giving a single C of O until this problem is solved. She was having trouble seeing what additional risk was faced by granting this waiver. Mr. Bates responded by saying that the foundations and the buildings probably do not create a greater risk than what currently exists.What he's looking at is how he can get more people protected. Part of the risk he sees is that it will cause a risk to more people if they break the system. Ms. Erb responded that there already is the risk of breaking the system, and that numerous other Town hydrants pose the same risk. Mr. Hebdon stated that he has no problem with the foundation permits. He was ambivalent about the two buildings and did not feel he could recommend the waiver for the duplexes. Ms. Brock asked if there was proof that delaying construction would cause a substantial hardship to people other than those who plan to occupy the first 11 units. Mr.Wilcox asked people from the audience to explain their hardship: Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 15 of 18 • A woman explained that she doesn't have a lease where she is living; she is renting on a month-to-month basis. Sue Ritter stated that she been in contact with Liz Walker and knows that they have occupants for all but one of those buildings. Mr.Wilcox pointed out that the fact that they have occupants doesn't mean they have a hardship. • Another woman explained that she is the mother of two small boys. They moved to Ithaca to be closer to their families two years ago.When they had to re-sign their lease, they had only been living in their apartment for four months and, at that point, they had a hardship because they anticipated moving into TREE. Subsequently, they signed a second year's lease; now that lease is up. She can't move into TREE without a certificate of occupancy, and the unit she owns shares on is one of the duplexes under consideration tonight. They will be homeless when their lease is up July 31st. • A man stated that he and his wife moved to Ithaca on June 11th and have been staying in the basement bedroom of the home of friends.They thought they would be with friends for two weeks and don't know what they will do in the coming months. They're willing to take the ac- ceptable level of risk. Wilcox asked for a show of hands from those who are waiting to move in; people from eight distinct households raised their hands. The condition calls for a hardship of one or more individuals. Mr. Wilcox noted that the developer needs proof of adequate financial support available to complete the line and associated facilities. Ms. Brock asked Mr. Carpenter to verify that the amount needed to complete the system is between $10,000 and $20,000. Mr. Carpenter responded that it was difficult to answer because it's complicated. They started the process in April.They thought it would take two weeks to complete, but having never installed a fire pump, they found that it was much more complicated than they thought. There were a number of Town and Bolton point employees who kept changing what needed to be done. It got more expensive and much more complicated. They have been working on the system since April and have spent tens of thousands of dollars with Warden Plumbing. To say it will cost up to $20,000 to finish it may or may not be correct because it's possible for Bolton Point or the Town to come on Monday and say they need to do it entirely differently. Ms. Brock asked Dave Herrick, based on his experience and since he designed the system, to provide a reasonable estimate as to the range of additional expenditures that will be needed to get the system up and running. Mr. Herrick stated that the cost to get the system automated would be on the lower end of the range: $10,000-$12,500. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 16 of 18 Ms. Brock stated that, given the small expenditure this would require, she didn't think any financial security would be needed. She said that she was comfortable with that, as long as the Planning Board and Town Engineer were also. Mr.Wilcox closed the public hearing at 9:49 p.m. PB Resolution No. 2013-027: Waiver from Town Code Section 271.9.W., EcoVillage TREE Neighborhood, Tax Parcel No.'s 28.1.26.85, 28.-1-26.22, 28.4-26.82, 28.-1-26.84, Rachel Carson Way Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by Fred Wilcox WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of a waiver as outlined in Planned Development Zone No. 8 (Limited Mixed Use, EcoVillage), Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W, regarding the issuance of build- ing permits for the Third Residential EcoVillage Experience (TREE), where not all water facilities have been completed. TREE is located on Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28-1-26.85, 28-1-26.22, 28-1-26.82, and 28-1-26.84, Planned Development Zone No. 8. TREE LLC, Owner/Applicant; Mike Carpenter,Agent; and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in the environmental review with respect to the request for a waiver, has, on July 16, 2013, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as ade- quate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff; and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on July 16, 2013, has reviewed and accepted appli- cation materials; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 271 "Zoning: Special Land Use Dis- tricts", Section 271-9.W of the Town of Ithaca Code, hereby finds that: a. The plans for the water line have been approved by all applicable agencies; b. Work has commenced on the construction of the line and station and is progressing with suf- ficient rapidity that it is reasonable to expect that it will be completed before any certificates of occupancy for any dwelling units are issued; c. It would be a substantial hardship to one or more individuals to delay construction of more than 10 of dwelling units; d. There is proof that there is adequate financial support available to the developer to complete the line and associated facilities, satisfactory and acceptable to the Town Engineer,Attorney for the Town and the Planning Board; and Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 17 of 18 e. The Town Engineer recommends granting the waiver for 10 foundation permits; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby authorizes a waiver as outlined in Planned Develop- ment Zone No. 8, Town of Ithaca Code Section 271-9.W. to authorize the Director of Code En- forcement to issue permits for the construction of 10 building foundations, subject to the following conditions: a. Erection of a sign on the hydrant that is located next to the pump house directing the Ithaca Fire Department to use collapsible suction hoses only; and b. Painting the top of the maintenance hydrant located across the road from the pump house in a color recognized by the Ithaca Fire Department as designating that the hydrant is not usable to fight a fire. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Beach, Fogarty, Wedemeyer, Bosak, Erb Nays: Collins AGENDA ITEM Approval of Minutes from June 18, 2013 and July 2, 2013 PB Resolution No. 2013-028: Minutes of June 18, 2013 Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on June 18; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, as amended, to be the final minutes of the meeting on June 18. Vote: Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Beach, Wedemeyer, Fogarty, Bosak, Erb PB Resolution No. 2013-029: Minutes of July 7, 2013 Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on July 7; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, as amended, to be the final minutes of the meeting on July 7. Planning Board Minutes 07-16-2013 Page 18 of 18 Vote: Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Beach, Wedcmeyer, Fogarty, Bosak, Erb AGENDAITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Hollis Erb, the meeting adjourned at 10:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted, 5ehra DcAugistiner-Deputy Tow^Cle^