The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPC Minutes 2019-05-161 Town of Ithaca Planning Committee Thursday, May 16, 2019 Committee Members: Rich DePaolo, Chair; Rod Howe; Pat Leary Board/Staff Members Present: Bill Goodman; Susan Ritter; Chris Balestra; Bruce Bates Others: None 1. Persons to be heard: None 2. Committee announcements and concerns: None 3. Consider April meeting minutes: Rich approved, Rod seconded; (Pat had not yet arrived). Approved with several grammatical edits. 4. Continue review and consideration of findings statement for the Chain Works District Generic Environmental Impact Statement: Chris explained how the current revised version of the findings statement differed from the version provided for the April meeting. This version contained the original edits, shown in blue, with new proposed edits from the May 7th Planning Board meeting, shown in red. The document also contains yellow highlighted areas identifying outstanding questions/issues. Staff felt that it was important for the committee to see these new proposed edits, as it is hoped that both the Planning and Town Boards will ultimately finalize findings statements containing similar mitigation measures. The committee continued review of the document, starting at the beginning with the new edits that came out of the recent Planning Board meeting. The following reflects edits requested by the committee as well as noteworthy discussion/comments on various areas of concern: Pg. 7, Discussion of Alternatives/A./No-Action: 1st para, last sentence concerning Gateway Trail, replace last word “unlikely” with “less likely”. Pg. 10, A./Land Use and Zoning/Mitigation/1a: The committee agreed not to incorporate buffers along the periphery of the proposed development in the new zoning. The few town residences adjacent to the Chain Works PDZ include a 4-unit apartment and 2 two-unit eight bedroom houses. These rentals properties are not dissimilar to the rental properties proposed by developer. Pg. 10, A./Land Use and Zoning/Mitigation/3c: Replace “ensure” with “promote” or “encourage”; regarding zoning standards and guidelines will help “encourage/promote” construction of new buildings that are pedestrian scaled… Pg. 14, C./Water Resources/Potential Impacts/Surface Water-1c: Rich questioned whether the location of erosive velocities from peak runoff rates and volumes have been, or will be, identified. Sue responded that this would be anticipated through a yet to be developed SWPPP. Pg. 14, C./Water Resources/Mitigation/Stormwater: Mitigation measures for stormwater include statements concerning what the ROD (Record of Decision related to the contamination issue) will include. Rich noted that this is just conjecture at this point, given that the NYS DEC has not yet issued the revised ROD. He questioned the ability to make findings on these elements, given the unknowns. 2 Pg. 17, D./Vegetation and Fauna/Table – Vegetation coverage: In CW2 over 50% (3.4 acres) of the Appalachian oak hickory vegetation is reported as needing to be removed, yet this is also reported as being of high value. Chris suggested adding language in the mitigation section to indicate efforts will be made to minimize loss during the site plan review process, such as tree surveys, preservation and protection plans. Pg. 21, E./Public Health and Environment/Mitigation/1: The committee discussed the timing of town approvals, given that the ROD must still be approved by NYSDEC. The committee thought it would be sensible to wait until the ROD was approved by NYSDEC before adopting the PDZ. Pg. 24, G./Transportation and Circulation/Intro: The 2nd paragraph states that TCAT provides service “for over 100,000” residents. Remove the figure and just leave statement that TCAT serves county residents. Pg. 25, G./Transportation and Circulation/Potential Impacts/2: Add reference for LOS “D” that this is considered acceptable by the Highway Capacity Manual and AASHTO and that D is defined as approaching an unstable flow (35-55 second delay at signalized intersection and 25-35 seconds at unsignalized). Pg. 25, G./Transportation and Circulation/Potential Impacts/4. Table: The “Trip Reductions” listed in the table was discussed and assumed to mean a reduction in vehicle trips due to programs such as carpools, transit, etc. as well as due to on-site services associated with the mixed use development. Staff will look into this to make sure. Pg. 26, G./Transportation and Circulation/Potential Impacts/6: The sentence states that most of the approaches and overall LOS at the studied intersections will operate within “acceptable” parameters. Committee had no specific change, but suggested a definition or reference for “acceptable” be identified. Pg. 28, G./Transportation and Circulation/Mitigation/a: The committee expressed surprise with the NYSDOT requirement for Phase I development that the two southbound lanes of Route 96B would be reconfigured to one lane to allow for a turning lane from the city/town line to past Bella Vista Drive. Pg. 30, G./Transportation and Circulation/Mitigation/h: Telecommuting and compressed work schedules were listed as a Phase I mitigation measure and the committee questioned how the developer would get employers to do this. Staff will look into this. Pg. 30, G./Transportation and Circulation/Mitigation/i: Remove word “demographic”. Pg. 34, G./Transportation and Circulation/Mitigation/c: The committee questioned the necessity of having the Pine Tree Rd/ Slaterville Rd. intersection included in the list of intersections that must be analyzed after each phase of development. Pg. 35, H. Utilities/Potential Impacts/1: Chris explained that the water usage figures were incorrect and she read proposed revisions, including that water usage under the full development buildout is estimated at approximately 271,500 GPD. Pg. 36, H. Utilities/Potential Impacts/4: The sentence states that “natural gas usage is estimated at 32% of the total usage”. It is not clear what “total usage” means. Staff will look into this. Pg. 37, H. Utilities/Mitigation/1.c: Correct this statement by better delineating the water from the sewer utilities. Currently it states that water and sewer lines would both be 8 inches, but sewer is usually larger, and also states that both would be looped, which is not typical for sewer lines. Pg. 37, H. Utilities/Mitigation/1.g: For “meter and audit individual buildings”, add “water usage” to clarify. 3 Pg. 37, H. Utilities/Mitigation/1.h: The committee raised concerns about the “reuse of stormwater…” given the on-site contamination issues. Pg. 39, I. Air Quality/Mitigation/3: The committee raised concerns with “prior testing for soil vapor intrusion…” and questioned why testing would not be on-going, or at least prior to occupancy, for the residential areas. Pg. 39, J. Visual and Aesthetic Resources: The committee discussed potential light pollution due to the topography, even with dark sky lighting requirements. Pg. 41, K./Community Services/Potential Impacts/5. - Religious Facilities: Change wording in the first sentence from “will result” to “might“ (regarding the project’s demand on religious facilities). Remove last sentence regarding expected outcome. Pg. 44, M./Construction Activities/Mitigation/Soil Erosion-Dust/3b: The committee raised issues about fugitive dust from excavation, given potential contamination. Pg. 45, M./Construction Activities/Mitigation/Mitigation/ 5. – Noise Emissions: The committee recommended the hours of outside construction to be 7AM – 6PM, Monday thru Saturday, and to not use the Town’s Noise Law, which allows construction until 9pm. 5. Staff Updates: Sue reported on new information concerning the inadequacy of the town’s water infrastructure to serve new development on South Hill. The new information came about from the town’s recent water studies. 6. Discuss next meeting date and upcoming agenda items: Next meeting is Thursday, June 20th at 4:00 pm.