Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2003-07-01• • PB MINUTES JULY 11 2003 APPROVED JULY 1512003 FILE (t/4,) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD DATE TUESDAY, JULY 19 2003 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, July 1, 2003, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Eva Hoffmann, Vice Chairperson; George Conneman, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Dan Walker, Director of Engineering EXCUSED: Fred Wilcox, Tracy Mitrano ALSO PRESENT: Tim Reynolds, 163 Game Farm Road; Paul Tavelli, 405 North Tioga Street; Katherine Wolf, Trowbridge and Wolf; Steve Beyers, 1328 Slaterville Road; Kyra Stephanoff, 8 Fox Hollow Road; Paul Steen, 8 Fox Hollow Road; Cathi Clori, 1105 Ellis Hollow Road; Josh Ganger, 1105 Ellis Hollow Road; Andy Noel, 1552 East Shore Drive; Stephen Erber, 522 Wyckoff Road; Hollis Erb, 118 Snyder Hill Road; Peter Paradise, Cornell University Planning and Design; Don McPherson, The LA Group; Joel Harlin, Newfield. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann declared the meeting duly opened at 7:08 p.m., and accepted for the record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on June 23, 2003 and June 25, 2003, together with the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of Danby, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on June 25, 2003. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Eire Prevention and Control. AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD, Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7:10 p.m. With no persons present to be heard, Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the meeting at 7:11 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination: Cornell University Precinct 8 Athletic Fields, Game Farm Road. PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7:12 p.m. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I assume that there is somebody here to give a presentation to us on this matter, which is something that we would like to start with. I think what we will do is what we have usually done lately and that is consider, pretty much, everything because it relates to both the site plan approval and the SEAR determination. So, you give us all the facts that you have, certainly everything that relates to Environmental Review. I will also do what our regular Chairman does and allow people in the audience to speak before we vote on the SEQR Review and we'll have a discussion among the Board Members and staff also before we vote on that. If you will introduce yourself please. Peter Paradise, Cornell University Department of Planning and Design — I'm the project manager. The project is a replacement of two fields that we lost on Cornell's Campus, Alumni Fields due to the construction of the Life Science Technology Building. In addition to these two fields, we are seeking approval for two additional fields with this project. In addition to the fields we will be constructing associated support infrastructure which will be lights, light poles, fencing, a changing facility and access drive. The project is located on Game Farm Road. Here's Ellis Hollow, Game Farm is on the west side. In February 2003, we presented this project and the sketch plan presentation to you. It is our hope that we will also approach the Zoning Board of Appeals on July 21St seeking a height variance and a special use request. We also hope to be back the first meeting in August for final site plan approval. Tonight we have Don McPherson from the LA Group and he will present the site design to the Board and the public. In addition to this, Kathryn Wolf will discuss the design features and relationship to the surrounding environment. At this point, I will turn it over to Don McPherson. Don McPherson, the LA Group , Saratoga Springs — I'm continuing to work with Cornell on the Precinct 8 athletic field project as their site designer. As Peter mentioned the site is located on the northeast corner. Road access is going to be on Game Farm Road at this location. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Excuse me for interrupting you for a second. I just realized that people in the audience who might want to see this are not able to see it from where they are. Please feel free to come back here so that you can see what he is taking about and pointing to. Mr. McPherson — This parking lot will be gravel. The project will consist of four athletic fields, built in two phases. The Phase 1 fields are inside the fence here. Around each of the fields, again they're showing soccer diagrams, but will also be used for lacrosse within that same footprint and we've allowed for a thirty foot 2 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 run out here or apron around each field. The proposal also includes the support building is here, which is here. It is centered within the four fields to allow for functional relationship to the fields and observation. The are no provisions for spectators, either for parking or for seating or anything like that. This will be just a practice facility Focusing in on the support building, again already in your packet are plan and elevation views of the support building. It will total some 3,600 square feet, a little bit smaller than what we had previously planned because of the plumbing. It included two changing rooms for both men and women as well as support rooms which will include first aide or training room, storage space, bathrooms. It is a one story metal structure. It doesn't reproduce here well, but the colors are tentative to be the same as those of the Reis Tennis Center or Oxley Polo Arena with a blue metal roofing and green siding. There will be a foundation to anchor the building properly to the ground, here's the color of the foundation. This shows the south, east and west elevations of the building. (inaudible speaking away from microphone) Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Can I ask you a question before you move away from those plans? When I looked at the drawings of those fagades, I saw that the height of the building on the southern fagade is ten feet, but I don't see any measurement on the northern fagade. Can you tell us how high that is? Mr. McPherson — It is 21 feet. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, I see. I must have missed that. Okay 21 feet. The reason I ask is because I thought I saw somewhere else in the papers a height of 15 feet. I wonder where I got that from. Mr. Mc Pherson — I don't know. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Alright. But it's 21 feet? Mr. McPherson — Yes (inaudible)The height was to give us a profile that would be more pleasing than a flat roof or something like that. There really is no occupiable space there. Voice from the audience Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We will let you speak later on. This is just for you to see what they are presenting. Thank you. Mr. McPherson — Getting into more detail on the site design, the parking areas, as well as the fields are terrace indents. (inaudible speaking away from microphone) 3 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 The stormwater management system will control runoff from the north area, which includes the building, parking, and field areas. Those will be dug to bypass the perimeter into two detention basins that will control the peak flow of the runoff and this will actually achieve a reduction in the post development runoff. This serves as a water quality treatment function by holding the water and allowing silt to settle out and so forth. Both basins meet the current storm water erosion control regulations that are being implemented by New York State DEC. As part of that, Cornell will also implement an integrated pest management or IPM program on the site, which helps them to reduce any need for chemicals, either fertilizers or pesticides on the turf by better horticultural practices, such as proper watering, mowing and so forth. The submission also includes the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, both the text report, that was appended to the Storm Drainage Report, as well as a drawing showing the erosion control measure that will be implemented during construction. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Can I interrupt again, before you turn that page, while you have both of those plans up. There's something that is a little confusing to me. On the plan on the left, the green and yellow one, the area that you have indicated in yellow looks like it might be the work area, but in the plan that's on the right, there is a dashed line, which indicates the work area, I believe, which is somewhat smaller than the yellow area. Mr. McPherson — That is correct. The plan on the left is the one that shows the area of actual work. The second plan with the yellow area shows the remaining meadow area between the fields and the woods that would remain open. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, when you put up the protective fences of different kinds, they will be put up according to that map, what is that one called? Mr. McPherson — The Overall Grading Plan. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It will be put up according to the Overall Grading Plan rather than that yellow area that you have on that other map? Mr. McPherson — Yes. The yellow is the meadow buffer remaining between the developed area of the field and the woods. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you, I needed that clarified. Mr. McPherson — The utility systems, in addition to the drainage for the project include the water system, which will culminate in a new pipe brought down from the Town water main along Ellis Hollow Road and a meter along the building that will branch out and provide the underground irrigation for the two Phase I fields. The primary use of the water will be for irrigation, there are showers, but the focus will be irrigation. The daily usage is only approximately 500 gallons a day. 4 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 So, even though it's 3,600 square feet, the water usage is comparable to a four bedroom home. There's not really a lot of domestic water use. That's of benefit to out contact septic system because our sewage disposal is in an on -site septic system, which will be designed in accordance with the Tompkins County Department of Health standards. For the electrical services, the primary services are located from Game Farm Road to a transformer on the west side of the building and that will serve both the site lighting for the driveway, the parking areas and the athletic fields. This will be heated seasonally by electric heat. Looking here at the site light (inaudible speaking away from microphone) Vice Chairperson Hoffmann - While you're setting things up, I would like to compliment you on having provided us with a lot of very complete materials. It makes a big difference for us when we try to review things and I appreciate that. I'm sure we all do. Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge and Wolf Landscape Architects — I would like to address five aspects of the project. That would be the visual impact, sound, Unique Natural Area, the traffic study and archeology. I'm going to be quite brief in summarizing the analysis that was done and the conclusion. I'm sure you will let me know if you would like more detail. First of all, I'll address the visual assessment. A comprehensive visual assessment was prepared by the LA Group and that was included in your packets. The first step in that was to try to understand where the new development might be visible from a distance and so that entailed a lot of driving around and great frustration on the part of the driver because no sites were found. We looked very hard. The places we really tried to see if it might be visible were Ithaca College, Coddington Road. We looked also at 96B, Route 79. A pretty extensive analysis and we were unable to find any sites, from a distance, where the site was actually visible. I think that's largely due to the fact that the site is actually very low in the landscape and, for that reason, we do not believe that it will be visible from a distance. The views will be primarily localized and nearby the site. I will talk about those views now. If we go back to the context map, from the north, the site will be heavily buffered and screened by the vegetation along Cascadilla Creek and so, it should be pretty much invisible from the north. There is also a great deal of vegetation from the east, which will block the views from the east. So the views of the site are going to be primarily from the south, along Ellis Hollow Road, immediately to the east, along Game Farm Road and then, of course on the west from the Summerhill Apartments and the senior center. This is actually something that is not included, we have something additional here that was not in your packets. I believe the photographs with the existing conditions was included in your packet, what we have added to that now, is the view on the bottom, we have added the proposed development to that view so that you can compare the existing condition to the proposed development. In the existing condition, of course, we see the manure pile in the foreground and a small farm outbuilding, both of which will remain regardless of the changes. The I PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 vegetation of Cascadilla Creek is really quite dominant at the background and because that's quite dark, particularly this view, it begins to make the NYSEG utility poles less visible where there is the darkening of the photograph. Here, up closer, they are quite apparent. So, the NYSEG overhead wires and utility poles that are marching across the site here are really the dominant feature on that site, backed up by this woodland. And then there's, I guess, apparently a water tower that is quite visible in the background. So this view is taken from approximately the corner of Game Farm Road and Ellis Hollow, looking northwest towards the site. Then, in the developed condition, you can see here the entrance drive coming in. It's hidden by the manure pile and emerges north of there on the other side of the outbuilding. At the turnaround with the parking lot right here, a new support structure is visible right here and a new light pole is, as well. In general, I think the addition of the six light poles behind the NYSEG poles will not feel like a strong contrast. They'll not feel all that different from the NYSEG poles. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Excuse me. It's very hard to see the light poles from here. Could you indicate, by pointing to the top of them. Ms. Wolf — I can bring this over to you. The NYSEG poles are actually seventy feet high and the light poles would be eighty feet high, but the grade is dropping as you move towards Cascadilla Creek, so they will, in fact, be lower from the uphill side. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you. Are these the NYSEG poles over here for comparison. Ms. Wolf — These would be the light poles, the NYSEG pole, light pole, NYSEG pole, light pole, NYSEG pole and then there's another light pole. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay. Maybe you could show it to the rest of the members. Ms. Wolf — Sure. This second view then, is a view of — do you want me to wait then. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes, please. I think it's better if you wait. You should all look at what you're talking about. Ms. Wolf — The second view is a view from just outside of the nearest of Summerhill Apartments looking due east. So, this is the view of the existing conditions standing outside the Summerhill Apartments looking east. The NYSEG utility poles are quite apparent as you can see in the foreground. The vegetation of Cascadilla Creek and then, across the road, Game Farm Road, there's a small barn there that's associated with, I believe it's a pheasant farm. On the bottom, again, we see the developed condition. Again, the NYSEG poles 6 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 are predominant in the view. We see the new light poles, in this view. Again, the barn across the road, and then here is the new support building, on the right, as well as the light poles that are associated with the new parking lot, which are quite a bit lower. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Are those pictures taken standing at ground level with a camera, at eye level? Ms. Wolf — Right. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So they are not from the apartment? Ms. Wolf — That is correct, from standing outside the apartment. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, they would not be as visible once you were in the apartment, probably? At least on the second floor. Ms. Wolf — Right. I'd like to move on now and talk about the sound assessment that was done. Fortunately, there will be no amplification at the site. As you know, there are no spectators and so no need for amplification. Whistles will be used and that will probably be the loudest noise. We did engage the services of Fisher Associates Engineers to take measurements of existing sound levels at the existing Alumni Fields. So, those, during a typical practice, during the school season last October and November, they actually took measurements at those fields during practice. The maximum average sound that they measured was 60 decibels and that was 50 feet from the edge of the field. So, in analyzing how sound might impact nearby residences, both at the Summerhill Apartments and the residences on Game Farm Road, again we're always looking at those residences that are closest to the fields. We then took that sound level of the practice fields on Alumni Field and, to assume the worst case, we assumed that each field was in play so that four times that sound level that was occurring here. That was then propagated out towards the Summerhill Apartments and toward the closest residence on Game Farm Road and what we found was that the sound level standing outside of the Summerhill Apartments would increase by one decibel. If you were inside, it would be less than that. What that means is that residents would, on occasion, hear a faint whistle or faint voices. So, an increase of one decibel outside of the Summerhill Apartments. No increase in noise is projected for the residences on Game Farm Road because of the background noise of the road is higher than the background noise that would be in the intervening fields, so this is considered to remain the same. Briefly, I want to point out that the Unique Natural Area to the north, Cascadilla Creek, has been identified as such by the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council. In recognition of that, we have attempted to hold the field as far south as we can without moving under the wires. So, this is a very irregular edge of course, so I can't give you a consistent dimension, but in the worst case, the closest the disturbance will come to the Unique Natural Area is 70 feet. So 7 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 that's the worst case. In all other cases it's more than that. The gorges on Cornell are managed by Cornell Plantations. We have met with the Plantations on several occasions and most recently, last week and they have no objections to the project. I'd like to summarize for you the traffic analysis that was conducted by FRA Engineers of Rochester, New York. Traffic counts were taken at the Game Farm Road/ Ellis Hollow intersection and also at the Games Farm Road/ Route 366 intersection in order to understand existing levels of traffic and levels of service at these intersections. Two separate analyses were then conducted, one for the summer day camp and one for the collegiate practice session. This is to really summarize it, in the existing condition, all of the turning movements on those intersections operate at either level of service A , except north bound on Game Farm Road in the am peak hour. If you want to make a left hand turn, it's a level of service D, it's hard to get out on Route 366. So that's the existing condition. After development, all levels of service remain the same, there is no change in level of service as a result of this project. Neither the day campers, nor the collegiate practices will generate traffic during regular peal hours. However, we did look at the very worst case, we did overlap the collegiate practice pm with the pm peak to see what that might do and there was no change to the level of service. For collegiate practices, most of the athletes will be bused to the site so that helps with the traffic impacts, but there was an assumption that approximately 15 people would drive. Practice is between 4 pm and 3 pm, so most people have to be there before 4 o'clock. So, because of the buses busing people — Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Could you go back and speak near the microphone when you don't need to point? It helps us pick up what you are saying. Thank you. Ms. Wolf — Because, for the collegiate practices the athletes will be bused to the site, there is a lower traffic impact resulting from the collegiate practices. The greatest traffic generator is anticipated to be the summer day camps and that's because many of the children will be dropped off. We know, from historical experience of the day camps, we know that a certain number of the day campers are dropped off and we know what percentage car pool with neighbors or friends. So, in conducting the traffic analyses, we used those same percentages of assumptions of how many would car pool and how many would ride with friends or how many would be dropped off individually. Also, for the day camp analyses, we assumed a worst case, we assumed that the fields would be 100 percent occupied, 30 children per field, times four fields is 120 participants. Background growth was also added, assuming that traffic in the area, even without the project, would increase slightly. So, with those assumptions, and conducting the analyses, 162 trips are generated in the morning for dropping off. There's 162 trips, that's because everybody enters, drops their kids off and leavess, so each car is coming twice in that traffic analysis. In that situation, at that time of day, after the peak hour, that level of service in the vicinity is level of service B and, K, PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 with the development, it will continue to be level of service B and so that's that worst case condition. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Can I ask you a question before we move on? I was a little confused actually about the traffic count having to do with the day campers because it said that some of the children would be local children, but I understood from that statement that maybe most of them would be from out of town. If the assumption is that they live like the typical local population all over, that is maybe not quite right, because I would assume that the out of town day campers would live all together maybe on campus. Ms. Wolf — I think, Eva, part of it depends on the particular day camp. There are different kinds of camps and some of them attract more out of towners than others, but we were assuming a worst case scenario, where most of the people were coming from in town. You're absolutely correct, but we were trying to demonstrate a worst case scenario. So, we looked at how traffic patterns occurred on a typical day. What direction are people traveling from on the road system during the peak hour? It's 60 percent traveling east to west. Those assumptions were applied to this traffic study. So, I think it's very much a worst case because, you're correct that probably many more would be out of towners. Board Member Conneman — The camps are July and August? Ms. Wolf — Correct. I think sometimes they start in late June. Board Member Conneman — Okay, I understand that. They probably quit before late August school starts. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann - Do you know, in fact, where the out of town campers live when they are here? Ms. Wolf — I don't know where they live. In dormitories? Residence halls. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I would also be interested to know the proportions between local children and out of town children, but you may not be the right person to ask that question, so I'm happy to wait for an answer for later on. Ms. Wolf — Okay, we'll get that for you. Finally, on the traffic analysis then, there will also be a temporary traffic impact during Phase 2 of the construction for trucking and importation of fill to the site. I believe Don already explained this, but during Phase 1, when fields 1 and 2 are constructed, the cut and fill on those two fields in balances, so fill doesn't need to be imported. During Phase 2, construction of fields 3 and 4, those fields will require 25,000 to 30,000 cubic yards of fill be brought to the site. At this point in time, it's anticipated that that fill will come from excavation from the Life Sciences Building and that this would be the fill site for that. So, to understand what that 9 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 traffic impact would be, at 25,000 to 30,000 cubic yards, a dump truck takes about 10 cubic yards, which means you need about 3,000 truck trips or 75 loads a day or nine loads and hour, if you were to do this all in a short period of time. The good news is, assuming the fill were to come from the Life Sciences Building, the most direct route would most likely be through Tower Road on campus, up to Route 366 and down Game Farm Road. The only residential area is really the northeast corner of Game Farm and Route 366 and there really are no other residences along that route, so any impact to residences would be minimal. Also, just operationally, I think certainly the road system can handle nine additional trucks per hour. The capacity is there for that. The only, slightly unfortunate thing might be if, in the am peak, they want to take a left hand turn off of Game Farm Road, but hopefully they could schedule their trips so that they could avoid that. Finally, I wanted to let you know about the archeological studies. An archeological survey, both Phase 1 and Phase 2 has been completed for the site by the Binghamton Archeological Facility. The findings have been reviewed and agreed to by the State Historic Preservation Office, known as SHIPO. SHIPO has jurisdiction where a site is determined eligible for the Nation Register of Historic Places. This site has now been determined to be not eligible for the National Register and SHIPO has concurred with that finding by the Binghamton Archeological Facility. We have a letter and you maybe have that, dated June 19th from SHIPO stating that this project will have no impact upon cultural of historic resources. They have requested that a temporary fence be installed during the construction phase along the northern edge of the service so that construction vehicles don't wander further into areas that aren't unnecessarily used. So, they just want to keep Cascadilla Creek undisturbed beyond the area that we have already proposed. So, that would be a temporary fence during construction. So that completes the summary of the various studies that have been done and I would be happy to take any questions, but I guess at this time, I'll turn it over to Peter Paradise. I think he's just going to do a little wrap -up. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Are there any questions? Board Member Conneman — I have a question and this may not be your area. The fields, obviously in the summer will be used from morning to late afternoon, is that right? Ms. Wolf — Nine to four is the time frame for the summer camps. Board Member Conneman — Okay. What about the practices in the Fall? Ms. Wolf — The practices are four to seven - thirty. Occasionally, there are practices that go a little later, but that's the predominant time frame. Board Member Conneman — And the lights would be on? 10 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Ms. Wolf — Well, the lights will depend on the time of year, of course. Board Member Conneman — Of course, in the summer you're not going to use the lights. Ms. Wolf — We wouldn't think so. I guess I wouldn't want to say never. Maybe at the end of a summer camp, you have some special event one night. Board Member Conneman — What about the practices in the Fall? Ms. Wolf — The practices in the Fall? Again, it would depend on the time of year. Early in the Fall, well, what time does it start to get dark? That's really what it's going to be based on. At this time of year, obviously, eight- thirty, nine o'clock it's starting to get dark now. I think as you get later into the Fall, there's more usage of the lights and that's really what it's based on. Board Member Conneman — The lights would be on maybe from four until nine o'clock, something like that? Ms. Wolf — I don't think they'd be on that early because I don't think we're getting dark that early. The practices end in November. Board Member Conneman — So, they'd be from August to November? Ms. Wolf — So, I think really you're talking about lights going on more like around five or six o'clock. They'll start going on more like seven, early in the Fall and then as the Fall gets later, they'll be coming on slightly earlier as it gets darker, but I don't think they'll ever be on a four o'clock. Board Member Conneman — It takes time to get those lights up and down, is that the deal? Ms. Wolf — I don't know the answer to that. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We need to have whoever comes up and speaks, come up to the microphone because otherwise — Ms. Wolf — It takes 15 minutes from the time you switch them on to get the full effect of light. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think I have a question related to that too, because I saw that in the proposed resolution it says, it suggests that we say that lights must be off by eleven pm, but it doesn't sound as if any practice would ever go on that long. PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Ms. Wolf — I guess our preference would be to not say never. Again, overwhelmingly practices would be done at seven - thirty. There may be special events on unusual occasions and it would be nice to have some flexibility to have that. It's certainly the case that overwhelmingly the practices would be over at seven - thirty. You see, the kids have to get back to the residence halls to eat dinner before the cafeteria closes so there's pressure and they have to get those kids fed. There's a real pressure there to make that happen and not just — Board Member Conneman — So, if the resolution said, say, four to nine and it wouldn't disturb anyone. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, maybe what it could say is that the lights should be off no later than 15 minutes after the practice ends, but in any event no later than 11 pm. Ms. Wolf — I think that's reasonable. Mr. Kanter — Who actually would be responsible for turning lights on and off? The reason I'm asking is because I drove by the fields off of Triphammer Road the other day in mid - morning and the lights were on and I couldn't understand why those lights were still on at that point. Board Member Conneman — I did too Jonathan. That's why I asked the question. Mr. McPherson — Which lights were these? Mr. Kanter — The Jessup field, Jessup Road, something like that. Mr. McPherson — There's two ways the lights can be turned off. There being someone controlling the lights, there can be times, in addition to that I assume that there's be a manual shut off. Board Member Thayer — So the timer will be set for eleven? Mr. McPherson - It's our interest to turn the lights off because we're paying for the power while they're on. I would anticipate a timer that would shut them off at eleven and if we're out of there before then, a manual shutdown. Board Member Thayer — Or hopefully a quarter of eleven if it takes 15 minutes. I have just a curious question about the building itself and why does it have to go from ten feet to 21 feet? Is there something inside that takes the configuration of the building? Mr. McPherson — It was the building architect. We didn't want to have a flat roof there. 12 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Board Member Thayer — It looks kind of ugly, actually, I think. We will certainly ask you to buffer it somewhat, even though it's way in the distance and it doesn't stand out. It isn't very handsome. The colors are fine. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, I'm not sure that I agree with you on that because I see the colors of the Tennis Center all the time, on a daily basis. Board Member Thayer — Well, the blue is supposed to be the sky, I assume and the gray is the fields or whatever. Well, that was my question about the slope of the roof, it really makes the roof outstanding because it's such a steep slope. Mr. McPherson — It's a four on 12 slope so it's a moderate slope and it was a building architecture issue. We just really did want to get away from the looks of a flat roof. Board Member Thayer — I just wondered if there was something inside that caused it. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — My preference for the colors, it's not that I mind the color blue or grayish beige, but it's the lightness of them. I think if they were a few shades darker they would stand out less. Mr. McPherson — We were trying to keep the theme of the athletic facilities over on Pine Tree Road and carry that over theme over to this complex, that was the thought process behind the color selection. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think the Tennis Facility would stand out less too if it were somewhat darker and that would be a good thing in my opinion. They are not going to be seen together. I doubt that they would be seen at the same time by people passing by. If you choose the same colors, but change the darkness of them , I don't think that that would be a problem really. I would definitely prefer that so that it wouldn't stand out so much by being light. All right, are there any other questions from the Board at the moment or shall we invite the public to ask questions of they want. If there's anybody who would like to ask any question, we will ask you to step up to the microphone and give us your name and address. Cynthia Calori, 1105 Ellis Hollow Road - Directly across from Game Farm and Ellis Hollow. The question that I want to ask right away, it sounds like you did your sound analysis using collegiate athletes and not using 120 children and I would anticipate that there would be a very different sound analysis if you went to Cass Park. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Would you like to answer that question right away? 13 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Andy Noel, 1552 East Shore Drive — Director of athletics. Those students will be listening to their instructor, they will not be screaming. They are going to be listening. This is not sort of a free for all where they will be competing. They really will be listening to instructions. I'm not being facetious, that's the case. Ms. Calori — (Inaudible). Mr. Noel — I've been dealing with these camps for about 40 years and have been teaching at them and I can tell you that the kids are listening to instruction, quite honestly. Kyra Stephanoff, 8 Fox Hollow Road — Just parallel to Game Farm Road. I have great concern about the traffic study. The bridge over Cascadilla Creek is so narrow that two cars can't pass each other on that bridge. It is a very old bridge and it will not hold up to the increased traffic, I am sure that if these fields are put in that bridge is going to have to be replaced and that's a Town of Dryden bridge and I don't know if you've notified them of this increase of traffic. As it is right now, the current traffic on that road, which I've experienced for decades, is very dangerous. Even in summer months, we have cars going into the ditch off the side of that road because of speed of the traffic. People going back and forth on that road disregard my family when we walk along the road. It is horrible traffic, believe it or not, on Game Farm Road. More than anything else is the bridge and I really don't understand why this location was chosen. Did you ever consider the corner of Game Farm and 366, which is a flat parcel of land contiguous with the campus. People could park in the existing parking lots at the Vet School or students could even run up through campus and go right to that location, which, to me, seems a much more logical location to have these fields. I just am really upset that you don't understand how bad this traffic is going to be especially that very narrow bottleneck of a bridge. Right now I've seen many almost fatal accidents. People do go in the ditches, but I've also seen cars sideswipe each other quite a bit. I mean it's not something that they've presented at all in their traffic analysis. I've witnessed it. I've seen the evidence of the vehicles in the ditches. My kids have gone to the day camps at Cornell, they are noisy. I'm sorry, but I've done it for several years. The parents there, the bottleneck for these day camps is horrendous when they drop off the kids and pick up the kids. The other thing that I'd like to know is litter that's left behind. I've seen lots of litter there after these day camps. In the future, when the two extra fields are put in are there going to be fences around them because I'm sure when people see a fence there, they are going to come and play on it even though they are not associated with the Cornell community. Who's going to monitor that? Those are my primary things. I would really like you to consider deeply this traffic situation, it is not as light as has been presented to you, especially with that ridge. Also, as I said, I've experienced the day camps. Some of the soccer camps are totally day camps, nobody is residential. One soccer camp is some residential, but one week of total day camp and it's chaos when they drop of the kids. My two girls that were here have done that, so I know about that fact. I really, as I've said, cannot stress 14 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 more with traffic. It's not going to be good and I don't know why you chose that location because of that bridge. Board Member Conneman — Kathryn, did the engineers take that bridge into account? I was going to ask a question later about trucking over that bridge, but since it's come up now. Ms. Wolf — The traffic engineers looked at that entire road and looked at possible problems and mitigating measures, they did not identify the bridge as a problem. Board Member Conneman — I just asked the question because I had made a note of that earlier. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann —And I had too because I go on that road quite often and I do understand what you were saying. By the way, it wasn't our proposal, it came to us. Excuse me, if you want to speak, you need to come up to the microphone. But, I also have a concern about the fact that the bridge is very narrow and not only that, but it sits in a dip in the road so that, especially when you come from the north, you come down the hill, into the dip and you don't have very much of a view over the hill that goes up to the south. Because it's narrow there, and because a lot of cars that go on that road go very fast, I am also concerned about the truck traffic especially. Ms. Stephanoff — There is no speed limit on that road. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes, I realize that from the text of the papers that we got. Ms. Stephanoff — But, that bridge is old, it's a matter of time if traffic increases, that bridge will have to be replaced and who will pay for that if they put in these fields? Because the bridge is old and it is very narrow. Secondly, if people come running up, a lot of people use that East Recreational Way and a lot of runners come up Game Farm Road as it is right now, it's a bit scary with that traffic as it currently is, it's going to be even worse, especially if athletes want to run through the field and back, there's no access to the fields from that Recreational Way. As say, I just don't understand why they put the fields where they did because of this bottleneck and it's adding sprawl to the area. I can understand the corner of Game Farm and 366, it's flat, it's next to the Cornell campus, you don't have to put in fill. It's, to me, a much more logical location for fields, not where they currently are being proposed. Speaking of lights, I can see the lights from my house of Schoellkopf Field, so I don't know about this light business. Maybe they are going to make them better, but we're more than three miles away from Schoellkopf Field and I can still see the lights. 15 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Can you tell us where you live, to help us understand? Ms. Stephanoff — Fox Hollow Road is just off Ellis Hollow. It's 50 feet beyond Game Farm, on the left, going down the hill. So, I'm just behind the residences right on Game Farm Road. I'm sure the noise at my house will go up, the noise level, I'm sure. The traffic certainly is going to be going up and I just don't think it's- I just don't think it's a logical place to put these fields. Thank you. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is there anybody else who wants to talk about this. You have to tell us your name again. Ms. Clori — I just want to make a few comments because before I thought we were just allowed to ask a question. My main objection , I have lots of objections to this plan, the main one has to do with the lights. One of the luxuries of this area is our environment and the beauty of Ithaca and as I drive to my home on Ellis Hollow, there's this beautiful open space and darkness. I just wonder why we couldn't have this same thing without artificial light, relying on the sun. I'm very concerned when we're hearing, on the one hand that the practices will be over at 7:30, but light until eleven. I'm not comfortable just leaving that for someone else to try to get them off in time. This is going to make a major, major impact on my home and my life. The other thing that I just wanted to mention is that there's a bird sanctuary that's contiguous to this and I wonder if anybody has looked at what will happen to the wildlife that lives along that natural area, which is Game Farm Recreation Way and what that impact is. I couldn't agree more with the traffic issues. If you took two rather wide cars and tried to pass them on that bridge at the bottom of Game Farm, someone had already mentioned that you can't see because it's a dip. If you had a truck coming on one of those and you came over that hill with a car, they couldn't pass on that bridge. And now you're talking about lots and lots of big trucks, carrying dirt and I don't see how this can possibly happen safely. Those are the main things, mostly having to do with the light pollution. I'm wondering, it seems like there has been a little bit of shotty research gone on here. At the begining of the presentation, it talks about the traffic impact, it was nil or minor and to happen at Game Farm and 366 and then we hear about 162 cars a day coming for the day camp. SO, I'm wondering if there really was an adequate investigation as to the impact of doing this. I'm hoping that something will happen to stop these from being built. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you. Is there anybody else. Would you please come up to the microphone and give your name and address? Joel Harlin, Newfield — I've been at these Planning Board meetings and all kinds of meetings throughout the City, Lansing and here and all's I hear is a lot of whining. They don't want it in their backyard. Put it somewhere else in someone else's backyard, but not in mine. They don't want growth in their neighborhoods. The way I tell Alan Cohen, the Common Council and the Planning Board in the 16 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 City, there's just going to be build and built and they don't want it. Build it bigger. If they don't want height, built it higher, just to make them irritated and upset them. The more they complain, the more bigger I get. That's what I would do. The more you complain, we're going to build it bigger and higher. They just don't want growth and they'll hen -peck everything. What really upsets me is the way they treated Burger King, up there at East Hill Plaza and they're still hen - pecking them. They don't like lights up there and they just don't want Burger King and they complain about the traffic. Well, why don't you move into College Town, where these neighbors have to put up with the noise and the lights and the traffic and the parking and on and on and fireworks and the partying. You guys complain too much about little things. Mr. Barney — Harlin, I think we're more concerned about comments on this project. Mr. Harlin - That's what I'm trying to do, I'm trying to refer it to one thing and the other thing. Mr. Barney — You're taking some personal shots and I don't think that's really appropriate. Please comment on the project. Mr. Harlin — I know it, but what I'm doing is comparing it. These neighbors have to put up with what's going on up there around the colleges where the parties are at and South Hill. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Let's stick to this project. Mr. Harlin — I think it's a peaceful plan, go on with it, but watch the plan because it's going to be hen - pecked no matter what you do. I've been waiting for this meeting. If the lights are on, make it lighter, just to upset them. They're going to complain no matter where you put these fields, no matter what you're going to do with growth. Take a look at Southwest Park and all that other crap that is going on around here. Target, they're complaining that everything around here is in their back yard. Go on and get it done with, that's what I say. Do it, don't complain about it. Do it, regardless of what these people have to say. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Alright, anybody else? Hollis Erb, 118 Snyder Hill Road — I apologize that I missed the presentation, I had another appointment. I also made a mistake because I sent an e-mail, but I sent it to Fred Wilcox. Well, in the four points that I made in the e-mail that I sent Fred were, first of all, I was concerned that the building height be kept below the tree line and if that's the building there, it looks fairly small. The second concern I had was about the length of time at night that the lights would stay on. The over- sized lights, I understood from the original meeting, to be explicitly for the practice of the varsity players and as soon as the varsity practice is over, it 17 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 seems to me that those lights ought to be off, period. Other lights, that might be needed for security around the building entrance or the parking lot could be much smaller, it would seem to me. My third concern was that I would very much like ague that there be no amplified sound. I live at the bottom of Snyder Hill Road and I assure you that I can hear the public address system in Schoellkopf Field. Amplified sound just really is not going to be a very nice thing to do to the neighborhood. The fourth concern that I have is that I was going to ask that that, what looks like a driveway, be as far away from dip, the tree line as possible because, to reiterate what several other people have said here tonight, the traffic goes very fast, that dip is absolutely blind when you come up over the hill. I park in that area right now to walk my dogs, along the tree line, there are now two sort of defacto driveways into that big flat gravelly area and I assure you that it is scary even coming back out from the one farther away from the tree line. The traffic comes very fast and it is absolutely blind until you get up to the crest of the hill and the crest of the hill you can see is literally where the tree line is. In addition, there is absolutely no shoulder on the road. It begins as a smooth rock wall on the tree field side on that road. Two cars can pass if they're being civilized on the bridge, but is one is not interested in being civilized or if something has gotten loose or a bicycle has swung out of the Recreation Way, it can be very difficult. Those are my four thoughts that I came prepared to ask you to consider and I thank you very much. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, I don't remember seeing anywhere else in the papers about amplified sound, so I have assumed there wouldn't be any. Is that correct. Yes. Okay. Anybody else? Tim Reynolds, 163 Game Farm Road - I live on the end of Game Farm Road I Ellis Hollow. I just wanted to tell you that I got a letter over two years ago that said that bridge was due for replacement and they were going to do it in the summer of 2000, that it had come of age. So, as long as you're aware of that. I share the same concerns as other people about the light pollution and to say that the light pollution won't effect me, sitting on my front step, won't make any change in my quality of life, I don't think is realistic. Thanks. Board Member Conneman — Who told you about the bridge? Mr. Reynolds — A letter from the Town of Dryden. Board Member Hoffmann — So that bridge does belong to Dryden, it seems. Mr. Barney — It doesn't belong to us. Mr. Walker — Well, it's a multi - jurisdiction road, half of it's in the Town of Ithaca, half of it's in the Town of Dryden and the County's involved with it also. So, the Town of Ithaca maintains the southerly portion of it, Dryden maintains the mid- PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 section of it, I believe, and the County maintains the Route 366 end. I'm not sure who's plowing it now, if it's us or Dryden or the County. Board Member Hoffmann — And has the Town of Dryden been notified of this project? Mr. Barney —Absolutely. Board Member Hoffmann — And the County, too? Mr. Walker — They're aware. Board Member Thayer — Are you aware, Dan, of the replacement of the bridge? Mr. Walker — I'm not aware of any plans. They did some drainage work three years ago, I believe. The Town of Ithaca worked with Dryden to do drainage on the east side of the road because there was a pretty bad road bank, they put some underground drainage to stabilize that and then, I believe, they re -paved part of the road. Board Member Thayer — What's your opinion of the bridge? Do you think it will hold the truck traffic? Mr. Walker — I think it's a pretty solid bridge, it's a bid pipe barge, I believe. There has been heavy traffic on it. It is narrow, there is a steep grade going down to it and coming up. We do have the parking lot for the East Recreation Way there, it holds a half dozen cars if they park right. It is sight distance problem. If there's additional usage of that road, we might be able to petition for a speed limit change on that road. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, there is no speed limit, apparently. Mr. Walker — It has a 55 mile an hour speed limit. Inaudible voice from the audience. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I can not have you speak while we're talking and I would also like to say to all of you that this is not a Public Hearing for the SEQR review and I am just allowing you to speak anyway. So I cannot have you come up time after time. Ms. Stephanoff — I did try to ask for a speed limit change. It's the Town of Dryden who has control of the speed limit, but they said that they can't do it unless the State gives them the okay. So, it has nothing to do with the Town of Ithaca. Mr. Walker — Yes it does. Half the road is the Town of Ithaca's Road. 19 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Ms. Stephanoff — I called the Town of Ithaca and they told me to call the Town of Dryden. Mr. Walker — That's why I say it's an interesting situation, with multi - jurisdictions. The Town line goes down the middle of the road. So, the west half of the road is the Town of Ithaca's, the east half is the Town of Dryden's. Now, we have worked out an arrangement where the Town of Dryden has agreed to take care of the center section of that road, which includes that bridge, which I believe is not quite wide enough to make it a County bridge. If they replace it, it might become wide enough to make it a County bridge, but the County has no money either, at this point. So, I don't believe there are any plans to replace the bridge, at least I'm not aware of any. We could petition the State. The Town Board could petition the State to consider a speed limit change, especially if there is a new facility being added that will increase traffic. Right now, I believe, there is not enough residences and there is not enough traffic, basically, for the State to grant that. They're very strange about that. But, we could petition through County to the State to drop the speed limit. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I just need you to state your name again because it's very hard for the secretary to distinguish between different voices. Ms. Stephanoff — It, with trucks or buses going over that bridge is going to be a very dangerous situation because they can't pass a car. A car and a truck can not get even near that bridge as it currently is set up. Secondly, even if a wider bridge is there, it's a very dangerous situation there, the way the ground dips down like it does. Mr. Walker — It is not a good situation for the amount of traffic that exists there now and the relative small increase that this project might generate. 61 cars — Ms. Stephanoff — I think it's going to be a lot more than they project for the traffic. Mr. Walker — We don't know which direction they're coming from either. Half the cars will probably be coming from the Eastern Heights, come into the site, turn around and go back out again because most of the population for these day camps, which is the higher traffic generator, are coming from the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca, and Pine Tree Road. Ms. Stephanoff — Well, I don't know if you can say that absolutely. Mr. Walker — No, we haven't done a traffic study. Mr. Barney — Actually, the traffic report does indicate. 20 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Kanter — There is a very complete traffic analysis and as Kathryn Wolf mentioned, the 162 trips for the weekday morning peak period counts both directions in and out. So, it's, basically, an overstatement of the anticipated traffic. Board Member Talty — Four fields simultaneously. Ms. Stephanoff — I've been to the soccer camps and all I can say is it's really a mess in the morning and when they pick them up. I've been one of them so I know. Mr. Kanter — I would just ask the Board to consider actual data and reports carefully because comments are one thing, but a traffic analysis by a certified engineer is another. Board Member Hoffmann — Right. I would like to say that, at this point, if there are any more comments that have to do with the environmental review, I will take them, but otherwise we will put off any other comments to the Public Hearing for the site plan approval. So, is there anybody else who wants to say anything that has to do with environmental review? And I would prefer not to have the same person come time after time. Inaudible voice from the audience Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay, then you can do it. State your name. Ms. Calori — I'm still Cathi Calori and I still own the property at 1105 Ellis Hollow Road. I just want to mention two things. By saying there are no bleachers does not mean there won't be spectators. Look at the other fields around, if there aren't spectators people come and they bring chairs and parents come. There are likely to be spectators. The other things is, if you're going to put these two fields here, outside of those camps, children are going to want to come and use those fields to play ball or baseball or whatever and there are no sidewalks anywhere to get children safely and you know they're going to walk there once you build this. That's all. Thank you for indulging me. Board Member Conneman — Kathryn, I have a question. Did you say that the fields are going to be fenced? I assume locked and therefore not available to the public. Ms. Wolf — The two fields in Phase 1 will be fenced because these are very specifically for high level collegiate practice and so they want to control the fields so they aren't destroyed. They have to be a high quality field and that's the reason for the fences. The other two will not be fenced. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That's for certain, that they will not be fenced? 21 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Ms. Wolf — That's the proposal at this point in time. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, we're looking at a plan to approve what you are presenting to us tonight and what you're saying, is what goes. Thank you. Alright, well, I guess we need to discuss this ourselves moving on to considering the SEQR determination for this project. If there's anyone on the Board that has more questions related to what we have heard tonight or what we have read in preparation for the meeting, if you want to amplify on anything that was said. Board Member Howe — I'm all set with the SEQR. When we get to thinking about final resolution, I do want to talk about the lighting and whether we should be more specific about what time the lights need to be shut off. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I also do. Board Member Howe — And maybe after the resolution, looking into the idea of petitioning the State for a speed limit on the road. I don't know if that would be appropriate. But, for SEQR, I don't have any questions. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You notice that the SEQR resolution also includes a part that establishes us as lead agency of this project. Board Member Thayer — I'm ready to move the SEQR. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay, on page three of appendix A, the one we got from the applicant, under site description at the top of the page, they have checked off physical setting of the overall project, present land use, they checked off "agriculture" and other, saying "institutional ", but it seems to me that the UNA, under "recreational use" in the Cascadilla Creek area should also be added there. Do you agree? Okay. So, I think we need to add that and you too, since it's your form. I think that was the only question I had on that part. Mr. Barney — Eva, do you want to go over that again, I had disrupted Jon here. Mr. Kanter — Lori has the original Environmental Assessment Form. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I just want to check that I didn't have any questions on Part 2. There were some suggestions in Part 2 of what to add to the proposed resolution and one of the things I noticed that I didn't see added, I may have overlooked it, is Page 3 of Part 2, the description, at the bottom of page 3, the second paragraph on the bottom, it says details of these control measures, which is the sedimentation and erosion control measures should be required as part of the final storm water plan submission. It's true, it's in the site plan presentation, but still I thought we should maybe talk about this as part of the Environmental Review because it has to do with the environment. 22 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Kanter — Well, unfortunately, our engineer just stepped out of the room. Mr. Barney — The trouble with putting it in the SEAR resolution, is you convert from a negative declaration to, perhaps a conditional, which has impacts on your ability to proceed. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — No, I didn't mean to put it in the SEAR resolution, but I wanted to discuss it before we do it as something that Sue had suggested that we include in the site plan resolution, but I didn't see it there. And so, if anybody else has noticed it, let me know. Otherwise, maybe we should add it. Mr. Kanter — Well, I think the sedimentation and erosion control plan that was in the preliminary plan package was pretty good with describing what types of solutions there would be. It's just a matter of seeing exactly where and details of exactly what would be appropriate for that construction area. I think we were confident that, based on the description given in the preliminary plan, that there should be no significant impact associated with the construction. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You feel that we have essentially gotten a sufficient plan already. Yes, basically. Certainly for the environmental determination, yes and it's really a question of final construction details. Mr. Barney — With this new permit process would the DEC require an erosion control plan. Mr. Kanter — It does. Mr. Barney — So, I think you've covered it because you're talking about it in subparagraph "d" the Notice of Intent for Pollution Prevention Plan. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Alright, then maybe that takes care of it. Mr. Barney — I think so, but maybe we can check with Dan. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I'm worried about all the truck traffic and the effect that will have too and what it will do to the road and the bridge. But, since Dan indicated that he didn't think that it would be a problem, I trust his judgment as an engineer. Anybody else have any concerns that we need to deal with now, as far as that goes. Board Member Conneman — Not as far as the SEQR. Board Member Thayer — I'm ready to move the SEQR, as I have done. Board Member Howe — I'll second. 23 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — There's no more discussion about that then? All in favor, say "aye ", anyone opposed? No one abstains. And I'm voting for it, too. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -045 :SEAR: Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Special Approval, Cornell University — Precinct 8 Athletic Fields, Game Farm Road Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, 62 -2 -6 Motion by Larry Thayer, seconded by Rod Howe. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed construction of two lighted athletic practice fields in the first phase and two unlighted athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater facilities, and parking to accommodate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, Residence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Peter D. Paradise, P. E., Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has indicated its intent to act as Lead Agency in a coordinated environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, Special Approval, and a height variance, and 3. The Planning Board, on July 1, 2003, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning Staff, drawings and details included in the site plan submission titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Fields Project," dated May 28, 2003, prepared by the LA Group, Landscape Architecture and Engineering, P.C., and plans titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Facility," sheets SK -7 rev and SK -8 rev, dated 5130103, prepared by Barradas and Partners Architects, and other application material, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval, Special Approval and a height variance; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 24 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, having received no objections from other Involved Agencies, hereby establishes itself as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the above - described actions, AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required, and that a notice of this determination will be duly filed and published pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617.12. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Hoffman, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty NAYS: None ABSENT. Wilcox, Mitrano The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM : PUBLIC HEARING - Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed construction of two lighted athletic practice fields in the first phase and two unlighted athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater facilities, and parking to accommodate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, Residence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Peter D. Paradise, P.E., Agent. Vice Chair Hoffman — Well, you have done most of you presentation, is there anything else you would like to add? Mr. Paradise — No, not at this point. We did give our full presentation to you already so, we're prepared to answer any questions that you may have. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened the Public Hearing at 8:39 p.m. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, if there's anybody here who wants to speak on the issue of the consideration of preliminary site plan approval and the recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, I invite you to come up to the lecture and give us your name and address and let us know what you would like to say — 25 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Board Member Howe — And, Eva, could we say that it be something new, that people don't need to just repeat. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes, it would be good if it was something that we haven't heard already. Thank you. Ms. Erb — I would just like to raise a different issue that I have raised in front of you on a previous evening regarding that and that is whether or not some consideration could be given to connecting a pedestrian path between the Recreation Way and the Palm Drive area of Cornell. I am trying to think in terms of encouraging pedestrian and bicycle traffic and at least avoiding some of the longer loop from Cornell all the way down 366 and down Game Farm Road and at least taking people through, I think it's Palm, back into where the new storage buildings are and trying to find a way down the hill. I pointed out that there was a foot path, a wild, un -kept path that was pointed out to me as really a utility road, but it exists and it comes down on the Recreation Way and if something like that could be considered, it might encourage some of the non - vehicular traffic for people willing to jog to and from. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — They still would have to come out at the Recreation Way and Game Farm Road. Ms. Erb — They wouldn't necessarily have to come out at the Recreation Way because that utility way goes across a very shallow portion of the creek. It's flat rock, there's a grade down right now without brush on the northern side of the creek and there is a foot trail that actually gets brush whacked, presumably by the utility company, that comes up on the south side of the creek and it is almost immediately behind the Summerhill Apartments and directly in line with the one lone oak tree that is there. Behind the Summerhill Apartments and the Best Western Motel. So, in theory, if a way could be found to just enable people to feel comfortable crossing that creek, you could bring people from Palm Drive, down across Recreation Way, across the creek, up a not difficult at all path on the far side and then come on, again the back little foot path that is there along the tree line and come in the back way through the fields. Board Member Conneman — Hollis, a question, this would be sort of from the "A" Lot. Ms. Erb — Yes, you could literally come up Campus Road, cross with the stop light to go in Palm Drive and find that utility way. The big oak tree that I'm talking about is right about here and the foot path doesn't look very promising until you get to the crest of the hill and then it's been bush whacked quite wide and then it goes down to a very passable, the most accessible part of the whole creek. And it has a very smooth climb up the other side and across the Recreation Way. I understand that it isn't part of this, but in the long run, if you're building 26 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Recreation Way paths and trying to discourage vehicular traffic and encourage people who might wish to bike or walk from Cornell, it would get some of the traffic, perhaps completely off of Game Farm Road. If I can do it quite comfortably, going up and down the hill on the south side then it's really not in bad shape. This is something to consider. Thank you. Mr. Kanter - I just wanted to comment that we have talked about that pedestrian bicycle connection here and the Transportation Committee, George, you probably remember, this was in the last couple of months talked about that. That's definitely in the Town's long range plans. We've talked about it with Cornell a couple of times and the main problem with the creek crossing is a bridge of some kind and it's not a cheap bridge. It's got to be something that stays out of the flood plain and it's got to be a fairly significant bridge, so there's a definite cost involved in it. It's definitely something the Town and Cornell are interested in doing, but it's going to take some planning and working together to figure out how to best do it. I think you're right, in the long term, you know five years, ten years, it's going to be there, but it's not going to be immediate. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you. Is there anybody else? Has everybody already told us what they wanted to know? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed the Public Hearing at 8:46 p.m. Board Member Conneman — Well, there was one question that the young lady raised who lives down the road there. She talked about litter. What's the plan for litter? It seems to me that it's a legitimate questions. In fact, the Conservation Board raised that aspect of it. What's the plan. Mr. Paradise — There will be some kind of receptacles for the trash collection at the facility and then there will be trash pick up provided by the University and the University's solid waste management practices. There will be garbage collection of some type. This facility will be served by the University collection system. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, you would provide receptacles, but there will be no follow -up necessarily of cleaning up of things that don't end up in the receptacles? Mr. Paradise — I think, in general, the University is very good about keeping the campus clean and you don't see a lot of debris on campus and if it shows up there, it quickly is taken care of and I have no reason to believe that this will be managed in a different way. Board Member Conneman — The other point that the young woman raised was about the time the lights would go off. I don't see why,if the fields are going to be used from four to seven or 7:30, the lights couldn't go out at nine o'clock. understand that kind of pollution and I think that we've heard enough people, 27 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 over the years that I've been on the Board, talk about Schoellkopf. I don't see any reason to leave those lights on after nine o'clock in any circumstances. It seems to me that eleven o'clock in the standard resolution is a little unreasonable. Mr. Kanter — That was just the staff starting point. We knew you would want to talk about it. Board Member Conneman — Now there was mention about noise that kids make. Let me say that I live on the corner of Blackstone and, whatever it is, it is across the way from the Northeast School and kids play at recess all day. In the summer, they play at night. But, you know what happens? When it gets dark they go home. That's it, it's over. I really can't object to the noise of kids playing. These kids, I think, are going to make most of the noise between eight in the morning and four in the afternoon. I think that's not a fair thing. I want to say while I raised the light question, I want to say the other question. Kids don't disturb me as long as they quit and don't play all night. Now, if you open up these other fields, that would be another issue that I would raise because that's a different thing, but kids are okay. I like kids. Mr. Barney — We were all kids. Board Member Conneman — We raised the litter question. We raised the question about the lights. Board Member Thayer — Let's talk about the lights and when they're going to go off. How about nine o'clock? I think that sound reasonable. Mr. Barney — Is that a problem for you? Mr. Paradise — Can I just confer with my team? Board Member Thayer — Sure. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — In the meantime, I will discuss a little bit what I was thinking about that. If you have an overcast day, I can see that, maybe, lights are needed longer. But, if they typically go back to their dorms to have dinner at 7:30 anyway, I don't see why. If it's really badly overcast because it's raining, I assume they're not playing anyway. I'm a little bit worried about the idea of the automatic lights being there and going off at eleven, so, that if they forget to turn it off earlier — Board Member Thayer — So, they'll set the times unit nine. Board Member Conneman — They go on at the beginning of practice and they go off at nine, if it's daylight, who cares. You don't see light in the day light. 28 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Were there any other questions that the public raised that we should discuss. Board Member Talty — I have some of my own when we get down this way. Board Member Conneman — Okay, it's yours, Kevin. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You can go ahead, they'll come back. Board Member Talty — Well, the team has to be here. I don't want to break up the huddle. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Somebody made a comment that, even thought there aren't bleachers, there may still be spectators. Board Member Talty — But, for the most part, it's going to be practicing and there's not many spectators in practicing. Board Member Conneman — I see these kids everyday, they don't really make much noise. They are paying attention. Mr. Barney — It's not competition. Board Member Conneman — It's not competition. Are some parents going to come and see them? Sure a few parents. Board Member Talty — The difference of ages at these camps. We haven't really talked about ages. Because ages of 16, 17, 20 or eight, it's quite a difference on how much listening time there is, how much screeching time there is. It all depends on the maturity level. Board Member Conneman — Maybe they should tell us what the ages are. The other thing is, Kathryn, when we did the other fields by the Tennis Center, I thought those were going to be where they would have the kids playing, the soccer fields. I know that's not your question, but I'm just thinking in my mind about that. But I think we should say something about the age of the kids. Board Member Talty — What are the ages of these camps? Mr. Paradise — That's a great question because we just discussed it in the hall. Board Member Talty — We have a listening device out there. Mr. Paradise — These aren't necessarily sports camps or the day camps for younger kids. In general, the usage out there would be more for the high school age athletes, which is a different audience than the day camps, where there is a much younger audience. 29 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 In regard to the light time, the University would find nine o'clock acceptable for the athletic fields lights. We would ask that the street lights serving the parking lot and the driveway not be included in that so if there's a need for someone to be there later, there's still adequate lighting to leave the facility. Board Member Conneman — Those lights would have as little glare as they could possibly have? Mr. Paradise — Yes, they would be a sharp cut off light and they'd be fairly similar to the other ones around campus. It's a localized light. Board Member Thayer — They would be dusk to dawn? Mr. Paradise — I'm not prepared to say they'd stay on all night, but we'd want to keep them on for a period after the athletes are off the field. Whether they'd stay on all night, I don't know. Board Member Thayer — How about exterior lights on the building? Mr. Paradise — We anticipate some exterior lights on the building and, again, don't know if they're going to be on all night or not. Board Member Conneman — Kevin, did you want to raise the question about the building, because I don't? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Just more second on the lights. Are the street lights and building lights indicated on these drawings? Mr. Paradise — There are. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Could you tell us which drawings they are on? Or do we know that already? Mr. Kanter — Well, the locations are shown on the electrical plan. Do you remember what the drawing numbers are? Mr. McPherson — E1. Mr. Kanter — It's very small. If you want to see the larger sized plan, we have this set over here. Board Member Thayer — So we can change the time on the resolution to nine o'clock? Mr. Barney — Right. 30 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Board Member Thayer — And it specifically says the athletic fields, so we're okay there, right? Board Member Conneman — I have a question about the building. Usually when come to these hearings we always come back again and by that time I can call my son -in -law who's an architect and he always tells me. Tell me why the building has to be ten and 21, why it can't be ten and 15 or some other height. Is there something magic about that? Or why it couldn't be a building that looks like a building, instead of a shed. Is there are reason? Mr. Paradise — As, I said, it's not really an occupiable space. We hired architect John Barradas came in and we gave him direction that we were going to put up a metal -sided structure on this site and asked him for recommendations on building profiles and, based on his professional judgment, this is what he suggested for this site. I was also reviewed by the University's architect and it was found acceptable. So, it was a matter again, of preference and professional design. Board Member Conneman — There's no magic about 21 feet? Mr. Paradise — There is not. Ms. Wolf — If I could add one small comment. I think an influence on that profile, that slanted roof, may have been agricultural buildings. There are many agricultural buildings that have that profile. I grew up on a farm and we had all kinds of builds on the farm that looked like that. I suspect that that was an influence, to try to create something that kind of felt like — Board Member Conneman — They also build Butler buildings that don't have the slope. Ms. Wolf — Sure. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Agricultural buildings don't have those colors, however. You do see that roof more from Ellis Hollow Road, for instance because it's further down, so you see more of that area. That's one of my objections to the coloring of it. That's why I would strongly urge you to- Board Member Howe — The shed doesn't bother me, but the blue roof — Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I could be a darker gray than the siding, but something that is more earthy and fits in with the natural look of the soil and the trees and whatever that's around there. That's darker. Board Member Conneman — We don't expect you to build a building like on Jessup Road there. That's too much. 31 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, do we want to put that into the resolution? Board Member Talty — What exactly. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The coloring of the building because if we don't, may not happen. Board Member Thayer — I really don't have any problem with it at the distance that it is. Not a major problem. Are we going to ask for some buffering? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We're not going to buffer that roof. Mr. Kanter — Well, you were suggesting a darker shade or something like that, we might be able to do that. Board Member Hoffmann — I'd like to see a darker shade on both the walls and the roof, especially if the roof stays blue, but I guess, my preference would be a different color on the roof altogether. Something that is a more natural color than that roof. I don't see the reasoning behind tying the colors into the existing Tennis Building because it's too far away from this. Mr. Kanter — How about Cornell Red? Mr. Barney — I get a little concerned when we start treading into aesthetic areas where architects have reviewed it and come up with a design. What may not be attractive to us may very well be attractive to other people. I think you could probably do it. I'm looking in here and our site plan does give us the right to look at adequacy, arrangement, size, design and general site compatibility, but it's an area I would tread very carefully on because beauty is in the eye of the beholder and we may behold things differently that others do. Board Member Conneman — I would too John, accept that they haven't justified to us why it has to be 21 feet either. Mr. Barney — 21 feet is well below the maximum height permitted in that zone, it is up to 36 feet. So, in the grand scheme of things, at a distance of a half a mile — Board Member Conneman — The building on Jessup Road is not 36 feet tall. Board Member Howe — When they gave us the view of the colors, it was approximate colors. It's not going to be exactly what we saw. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — On those photographs, for instance, what we see there is kind of a grayish thing that blends in quite well with the background. If that had been colored the colors of Reis Tennis Center, you would have seen that, it would have stood out. 32 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Board Member Conneman — The other thing that I would like to see in the resolution is something about litter. Even Burger King agreed to pick up litter that went around. It seems to me that the University can make a little effort to do that. They should and they probably will, but if you go up to North Campus when they occasionally have a game up there, they leave a lot of junk on the ground and sometimes it isn't picked up for days because I drive past there all the time. That's my only concern. I think Cornell owes that to the community and to themselves. If you don't put it in, it's okay. I want it on the record. Board Member Talty — I'm fine with the shed, it's alright and the colors, as is. Board Member Thayer — I'll buy into the explanation that Kathryn has given us. I have no problem at that distance. Board Member Howe — I would like to see different colors that blended more with an agricultural landscape, but I understand that we may be treading where we shouldn't tread. Mr. Barney — I was just saying tread carefully. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — What about not changing the colors from blue and gray to something else, but making them darker? Mr. Paradise — We can explore that. I cannot commit to that at this point in time because the University would have to approve the color selection for any exterior changes. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, if you would explore it for the next meeting, I think that would be very helpful. Board Member Talty — Use your best sales pitch. Mr. Paradise — Could you clarify your request to me then? What you're asking so I have a clear direction. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — My reason for asking for it is that the ball fields and the buildings and the road and everything are being located in an area which is very rural and natural looking right now. The rolling ground, the woods in the background and you're changing it by adding these flat fields, which will give a different look. It will look much more developed, even though it's green and the building colors, if they're going to be like the Reis Tennis Center, will make the building stand out rather than blend in with the background. That's why I would like to propose that the colors be darkened a few shades. 33 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Paradise — Okay, so the color scheme may be acceptable, but maybe explore darkening the tones? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Right, exactly. Board Member Conneman — You were not here when we did Burger King. Burger King is very generic, it is very light, it has a small sign and it doesn't have a red light around the top because this Board asked the developer to not do that, go to the national Burger King and say "we don't need a red light on the top ". think that's Eva's point. Mr. Paradise — I understand your direction, I just wanted to make sure that I was very clear, so when I came back, I could respond to you request. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Let's see. There was also some concern about that the plans didn't show any plantings around the parking area and the building. I think it would be a good idea to have some plantings there. Board Member Thayer — Item C does request that. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, it does request that. But do we want to be more specific about what sort of planting we would like to see? Board Member Thayer — They were going to show us a landscaping plan. Mr. Kanter — That will be submitted with the final site plan. If you still don't like it, you can request further changes. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, when you come back you will have some proposal for plantings? Mr. Paradise — We will modify sheet L -5 the landscape plan on your request. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Let's see, what else here? I was interested in having some numbers of about how many local children, versus out of town children will be using these fields as part of the sport's camps program. So maybe you could provide that. Mr. Paradise — We could provide actual numbers from last year. We have actual numbers of commuters versus resident campers. We have those percentages. We can't guarantee that it's 100 percent representative, but we can give you actual numbers from last year. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It's an indication anyway and that's all I want. We did get a letter here. I think it was from the County about the septic field. 34 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Kanter — The County Health Department? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, it was the County Health Department. Did you get that letter, too? Mr. Paradise — I have a copy of that letter. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I guess that is something that we need to have you look into. Mr. Paradise — We're working through the permit process with the County at this point in time to determine the appropriate septic system design for this site. Mr. Kanter — We, basically, asked for evidence of County Health Department approval prior to building or construction permits because sometimes there is a timing issue in terms of getting final Health Department approval. So, we didn't necessarily want to tie it in with prior to final site plan approval. But, the Health Department was obviously concerned about seeing the details and approving the final plan, so they will do that. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Right. We were talking about the practice times in spring and fall. If you could have some more details about that next time. Unless you have them tonight. Mr. Paradise — We have provided you fairly extensive documentation on the practice times. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We have the hours, but I don't know that I saw when the practices start in the spring, end in the spring, start in the fall, end in the fall. Mr. Kanter — It's in there. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It is in there? I apologize then. Yes, I was also very impressed with the thoroughness of the materials. Board Member Talty — Absolutely. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Now, this is something else that I didn't see anything about and most of you may not have seen this either. This winter or at the end of the winter there appeared big, white piles of stuff near the tree border close to Cascadilla Creek there, just north of this project site. They disappeared slowly, over time as it got warmer, so it was snow that was piled out there. I suspected, when I saw them because I had seen trucks carrying away snow from East Hill Plaza, that this snow came from East Hill Plaza and was dumped there. I was concerned about it because it's very close to the Cascadilla Creek natural 35 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 area and who knows what's in that snow that was in the parking lot at the P &C. I was wondering if you know if that is something that will continue? Right adjacent to this site or maybe on this site? Mr. Paradise — I don't have personal knowledge of the snow and who makes the decisions, but I can tell you that they will not be able to dump snow on out athletic fields or on our maintained areas. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, there is a strip of land that will be there, between the northern end of the athletic fields and the tree line and that's exactly where the snow had been dumped. My concern about it is that I don't know if this gets filtered before it gets into Cascadilla Creek and if it doesn't, that's a problem. would like to find out, through you, if that could be stopped in that location. This may not be the right way of doing it, but since you're doing something so adjacent to it, if it would be possible to find out, that would be very good. What do you think? Mr. Barney — There's no hard, I think, in asking what's going on. I think we got on East Hill Plaza's case, I can't recall who's quest, but it was back a couple of years ago, because they were piling the snow up right in the parking lot and losing parking spaces. I suspect that what they're doing may be in reaction to that concern that the Town expressed where would be an appropriate place to dump the snow. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I specifically remember when we talked about the snow removal from East Hill Plaza that we said that we did not want it dumped in such a way that when it melted it would create a problem in our waterways. Mr. Barney — It's very likely that we did say that, but I just don't know. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It may not have gotten into a resolution, but remember that it was talked about. So, that's why I'm concerned about it. Mr. Walker — I think that you're going to find that access to that area is going to be kind of limited when they do the excavation for the forth field or third field there. That area has been used for stockpiling by the Town and by the County and Dryden for gravel and materials, like when they did the drainage projects. I think most of that area is going to be underneath the athletic fields, that open space. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Did anyone else see these snow piles? Board Member Howe — I think I did. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — A couple of house cleaning things, we got two handouts. One is called LEAF Supporting Study Summary and the other one is 36 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Cascadilla Woods and Fish Pond's Unique Natural Area. Neither of them have any title, date, any name of the person who prepared them. This has happened before. You can tell me who prepared them now, but I think the Town should have a copy of each which has that information, eventually. (Katherine Wolf indicated from the floor that she had prepared those reports) Could you prepare at least a copy for the Town records, which gives that information? Actually, there is also the Project Narrative for preliminary and final site plan review, which also doesn't have any of that information. Was that prepared by you, too? Could you also add the information to a copy to give to the Town on that? Board Member Talty — Eva, I have a couple other things. I have some specific questions and I may have misheard with regards to the amount of water that was going to be in the facility. We keep using worst case scenarios, so I was wondering, either a, I misinterpreted it or I didn't understand. But, worst case scenario, with regards to how much water is going to be used is really 17,000 gallons a day, at this site. That's a little bit more that a four bedroom house would use in one day. I just wanted to make that correction in case I misinterpreted it there. Mr. McPherson — There are two different numbers. The 17,000 is correct as the aggregate between irrigation and domestic. The 500 1 was mentioning was just the domestic usage. Board Member Talty — Number 2 is, unless I passed through it in the information, are any of the personnel that are going to be utilizing the fields that is going to be bussed in and have you talked to TCAT? I thought somewhere back awhile ago we had talked about that. Mr. McPherson — The bussing will be coordinated by our department of transportation. It will more likely be van, large vans for our residents. Board Member Talty — So, minus the TCAT, are the going to be any traditional type of school busses being utilized to shuttle the students? Mr. McPherson — Not to our knowledge. Board Member Talty — Because, if there were and then looking at the parking, it didn't look as though there had been any type of thought process with regards to where the busses would stay, if they decided to stay. Mr. McPherson — At this point, we don't anticipate that. I would have to say that we're using an entirely drop -off scenario. Board Member Talty — Is this going to be plowed in the winter? 37 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Paradise — We don't anticipate maintaining this in the winter. It is a seasonal use facility. Board Member Talty — With regards to trucking the fill, how many trucks per hour did we break it down to? Mr. McPherson — I think the staff made an assessment of over a two month duration and that was nine trucks per hour. Mr. Kanter — Right, 75 trucks per day. Board Member Talty — Okay, that's what I had was 9 trucks per hour. Traditionally, this Board Member has got issues with trucking fill very early in the morning or very late at night. So, I would think that, given the left hand turn on to 366, that that is going to cause some type of difficulty because I don't want them trucking at the crack of dawn. I just don't think that that's fair to the residents or even the people trying to furrow back and forth from work to mitigate that issue. So I don't know what they are going to do, but I think it you're trying to negate the 8am to 9am rush by starting at 6:30, I'm not going to vote for that. So, with that being said, either you're going to have to mitigate the traffic between eight and nine or start later. Do you know what I mean? Nine trucks an hour, that's a lot of trucking going on when you start dividing it down into quarter hours. So, just something to take under advisement because I don't want any trucking, myself, before 8 am and not after dark. Weekends, that something that's up to discussion. I don't want to put too much crimp on the trucking issue because I know you've got to get the project done, but, at the same time, dust, noise pollution, traffic volume, that's all something that has to be studied as well, unless I missed it. Board Member Howe — I think that could be added to the resolution. It says submission of a truck routing plan, but that could say- Mr. Barney — I was going to say " a truck routing plan for, and timing of, the importation of fill ". Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — About that fill, I also wanted to ask whether it would be possible to bring in less fill and adjust those to later fields accordingly. Maybe the western most field, for instance, could be slightly lower, just like the eastern most one is slightly higher than the two middle ones if that would result in less fill being needed and fewer truck loads. Mr. Paradise - Well, I can say, it would result in less fill to the site of this project. It's not going to reduce the trucks because the fill is going to be generated from the University project. PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Walker — Is it true then that the quantity of fill is based on the estimated excavation for the construction of projects on the Cornell Campus? Because you could balance the cut and fill on this site a lot closer the 25,000 yards. Mr. Paradise — We could balance it and that fill is going to be generated and we've asked our designers to see if there was a way that we could beneficially grate this site that would use that fill. It actually would be a reduction of trucking by having a place that close to a project site to use that fill, rather than running it father out into the Town of into the County, into the City or wherever it may go. So, actually, we think the truck traffic is going to be reduced outside the boundaries of campus. Mr. Walker — I agree. The impact on Game Farm Road- it isn't the strongest road in the world. I'm sure all three highway departments, the Town of Ithaca, the Town of Dryden and Tompkins County will be watching Cornell and if the road breaks up, they will be coming to ask you to fix it. I can guarantee that. Put that on the record. Board Member Conneman — Dan, it is not part of the resolution, but it seems to me that it would be helpful if you would look at the bridge and tell us what you think. Mr. Walker — I'll check with Fred Noteboom our Highway superintendent because he's been working closely with the County and I'll get his assessment of it. Board Member Conneman — If we could have you look at it personally. Mr. Walker — Yes, we'll look at it and get you an assessment. Board Member Thayer — With that much increase in fill does it increase the run- off? Mr. Walker — No, because basically the fill that is going to come out is going to be subsoil and rock. What they'll do is strip off the topsoil, then put the topsoil back on and the finished grade will be flat and they're already collecting it in a detention pond. Board Member Howe — I'll move the resolution. Board Member Conneman — I'll second it. With the additions we made. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Now, do we need to work on that a little more? Board Member Talty - Do you have all that Mr. Barney? 39 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Barney — There are a couple of things actually. I think I'd like to add an omnibus statement that wherever we say that something is to be submitted prior to final site plan approval, it's implied that it is also to be approved by this Board as part of the final site plan approval process. So we'll add that at the end. But then, I would suggest adding, as we discussed in subparagraph "b" that phrase "and timing of" before the words "the importation of fill ". Changing "f' from eleven to nine. I thought I heard a new "k" would be "there should be no amplified sounc used on the playing fields or anywhere else on the site, outside of the building." Then I think we had, what I would suggest for this is that, and I don't know if the catches the jest of the discussion, "submission, if the applicant is so advised, of a possibly darker color scheme for the building." I'll leave it in their hands, but it does make note of the fact that we are concerned with it. That is the sum of my changes. Board Member Howe — John, is this the appropriate time to talk about, down the road, asking the State to think about posting speed limits or that's not really it. Mr. Barney — I don't know if we really want to make it part of this resolution, but the application for, this is a County road or is it a Town road? Mr. Kanter — Yes, yes and yes. Mr. Walker — Two towns and a county. Mr. Barney — But who owns it? Is it a County road? Mr. Walker — I'm not sure who owns it. Mr. Barney — If the County owns it, it's totally out of our control. If it's a Town road and the Town of Dryden, it would probably take joint action both from the town boards. I don't think there's any problem getting action at the Town level, the problem is getting the action at the State level and they have very strange criteria for reducing speed limits. Just eyeballing it, we've seen much worse situation that this and they've turned us down. I think this Board would have to make a separate resolution to the Town Board requesting that an application be made for the reduction of speed. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think that would be a good thing to do actually because I do drive quite a bit on that road and there's a lot of speeding going on there. It is scary when you go into that dip and across the bridge. Mr. Barney — That actually, in that sense acts as, what's the magic term? Traffic calming device. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, it doesn't for everybody though. 40 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Board Member Conneman — The traffic has increased on that road a lot recently. People cut across there and use it as a short cut. Mr. Walker — Well, the bridge construction in that intersection at 366 and Pine Tree Road. Mr. Kanter — Do you want to add anything about trash receptacles and a plan for clean up? Board Member Conneman — I would Jon. Mr. Kanter — I think we should see the details anyway for the final site plan and, at the same time, we might as well ask for a submission of some kind of a program or plan for handling the trash. Board Member Talty — I that a trash and a recycling receptacle? I always wondered about that because kids are traditionally environmentally conscientious and if they have the plastic water bottles, are they going to dispose those or are you going to have two different containers? Mr. Paradise — I don't know. Board Member Talty — I've got a lot of good questions. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That's a very good idea. Board Member Conneman — When they come to the games, when they come down past the campus, they do have water bottles in their hands. Mr. Kanter — And one more question, where is the ice cream truck going to be stationed? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I must say that, now that we have heard that the fill, at least some of the fill is put here for the convenience of construction efforts on campus, I feel a little bit disillusioned about that because I was hoping that this in such a way that was graded because it has to be graded this way, not to accommodate fill. Board Member Talty — Well, I think, Eva, you've got to look at this like a business because they're not going to truck it 20 miles away, it's just no going to happen. Board Member Thayer — This is the lesser of two evils in getting rid of it. Board Member Talty — Exactly. 41 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 Mr. Kanter — I think at the sketch plan discussion we heard Cornell describing the design aspect of it too. It's not just because there's fill there to truck away, but it's also, I think desirable to have playing fields at similar elevations. Cornell could talk about that again, but I think we did hear that discussion at the last meeting. Board Member Conneman — And I'd rather see them spend their money on trash receptacles and all kinds of things like that to make the site better. Board Member Talty — Well, there's no question taking dirt form point "a" to point "b" the shorter the distance is better for everyone as long as it doesn't change the water. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — But the other thing, though, is that even though it's not such a long distance, they are taking it on Game Farm Road, Game Farm Road is not maybe a road that can handle it. Maybe there would be other places, not much further away, where it could be trucked, where it wouldn't damage roads and where it would be alright to put it too. We haven't seen any alternatives to putting the fill somewhere else. Board Member Howe — No, but if they do damage it, Dan said they'll be requested to repair it. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — But that's an unnecessary expense, even if it happens to be Cornell's expense. It's not good planning, I think. Board Member Talty — Well, I think it's very good planning, I want you to know that. I think taking the dirt from where you got it to where it's going and what you're doing with it and the amount of effort that you put into the proposal is outstanding and that other people should merit exactly what you've done here. Board Member Thayer — Ditto. Board Member Howe — Absolutely. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I see that Hollis Erb would like to make a comment. Is that alright with everybody? Board Member Conneman — Since it's Hollis, it's okay. Ms. Erb — I wonder about the trucking of the dirt, whether something could be built in, and I heard you say that you were going to ask them for some truck routing, but maybe at the rush hour times of the day, the trucks should use the new bridges and come up Pine Tree Road and Ellis Hollow Road and not take the narrow bridge at the bottom of dip on Game Farm Road and not interfere with that intersection of Game Farm Road going out onto 366 because that it where the real traffic problem is at rush hours. Maybe part of the day, during the 42 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 heaviest time, they could use the stoplight coming up Pine Tree Road at the intersection of Pine Tree and Ellis Hollow. It would distribute the truck traffic. Mr. Kanter — The only problem with that though is during those peak hours, at rush hour time, those intersections are terrible and I don't think it would be a good idea to make them worse. Ms. Erb — I understand that they're all terrible. Mr. Kanter — No these are more terrible than Game Farm Road is, much more. Ms. Erb — Have you tried at, eight o'clock, in the morning to get from Game Farm, at 15 minutes to eight o'clock, to get from Game Farm Road onto 366? Mr. Kanter — I think the point was though, that the Board made it clear that that's not a time when the trucks will be there, not that they should go elsewhere and make it worse somewhere else. Ms. Erb — I was just trying to think whether there was another option available. Board Member Talty — There's also road crews, I would think, who could mitigate those particular circumstances. Board Member Thayer — Are we ready to vote? Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Do we want to listen to comments from Mr. Paradise? Mr. Paradise — No. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, are all those additions alright? We have covered everything, I think for the preliminary approval, okay. All those in favor, say "aye ". There is nobody opposed and nobody abstains. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 046 : Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Special Approval, Cornell University — Precinct 8 Athletic Fields, Game Farm Road Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, 62 -2 -6 Motion by Rod Howe, seconded by George Conneman. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed construction of two lighted athletic practice 43 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 fields in the first phase and two unlighted athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater facilities, and parking to accommodate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, Residence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Peter D. Paradise, P. E., Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, Special Approval and a height variance, has, on July 1, 2003, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on July 1, 2003, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, drawings and details included in the site plan submission titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Fields Project," dated May 28, 2003, prepared by the LA Group, Landscape Architecture and Engineering, P. C., and plans titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Facility, " sheets SK- 7 rev and SK -8 rev, dated 5130103, prepared by Barradas and Partners Architects, and other application material, and NOW THEREFORE BE I T RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Precinct 8 Athletic Fields located off Game Farm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62- 2-3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, as shown on drawings and details included in the site plan submission titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Fields Project, " dated May 28, 2003, prepared by the LA Group, Landscape Architecture and Engineering, P. C., and plans titled "Precinct 8 Athletic Facility, " sheets SK -7 rev and SK -8 rev, dated 5130103, prepared by Barradas and Partners Architects, subject to the following conditions: a. granting of Special Approval for the athletic fields project and a height variance for the light poles by the Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and b. revision of sheet L -4A, "Water Service Connection Plan & Details" to modify the location of the metering and PRV (pressure relief valve) building, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and 44 PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 C. revision of sheet L -5, "Landscaping Plan" to include plantings around the proposed building and parking area, for approval of the Board as part of the Final Site Plan Approval process, and d. submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and /or federal agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent and Pollution Prevention Plan for NYSDEC, and e. submission of a truck routing plan and timing of, for the importation of fill material for Phase 11 of the development plan prior to Final Site Plan Approval and approval of such plan, and f. that the outdoor lights used to illuminate the athletic fields be shut off by 9:00 PM every night, and g. submission of a maintenance plan for the stormwater detention basins, prior to Final Site Plan approval, and h. notification to the highway department's for the Tompkins County, Town of Dryden, Town of Ithaca, prior to importation and trucking of fill material to the project site, and i. submission of evidence of County Health Department approval for the proposed on site septic system prior to issuance of any building or construction permits, and j. submission of construction details of all proposed structure and improvements, including color of support building, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and k. There shall be no amplified sound used on the playing fields or anywhere else on the site outside of the building, and I. Submission, if the applicant is so advised, of a possibly darker color scheme for the building, and m. Submission of a program or plan for handling trash and recyclables prior to Final Site Plan Approval n. All items noted above are being submitted prior to Final Site Plan Approval and, except for item (a.) above, are to be approved by this Board as part of the Final Site Plan Approval. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: PB MINUTES JULY 1, 2003 APPROVED JULY 15, 2003 1. That the Planning Board, in making its recommendation regarding Special Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals, determines the following: a. there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location, as demonstrated by the applicant; b. the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected as a result of the proposed project; C. the specific proposed change in land use as a result of the proposed project is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development for the Town of Ithaca. 2. That the Planning Board reports to the Zoning Board of Appeals its recommendation that the aforementioned request for Special Approval be approved. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Hoffman, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty NAYS: None ABSENT: Wilcox, Mitrano The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Alright. Thank you. If there is anybody else who wishes to be heard, we can do that now. There is no body else who wishes to be heard. AGENDA ITEM : Approval of Minutes: June 17, 2003 Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We'll move on to the approval of the minutes June 17th, 2003. Board Member Conneman — I'll move then, except if somebody has some corrections in them. Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes, I have some. I wasn't able to get though all of it. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003- 047 : Approval of Minutes — June 17, 2003 MOTION by George Conneman, seconded by Rod Howe. 46 r � U • PB MINUTES JULY 13 2003 APPROVED JULY 155 2003 RESOL VED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the June 17, 2003 minutes as the of minutes of the Town of Ithacu Planning Board for the said meetings as presented with corrections. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Hoffinan, Connenian, Thayer, Howe, Talty NAYS: None ABSENT: Wilcox, Mitrano The motion was declared to be carried unanimouslv. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any other business? Anybody on the Board have any other business? Mr. Talty — What's the next meeting look like? Mr. Kanter — We've got some pretty busy meetings coming up, actually. We have a full agenda for August 5th is out next meeting, I think. Board Member Conneman — The next one is the 15th Mr. Kanter — I'm sorry, right, July 15th we have four items and August 5th we have three or four, possibly this back, if we get it in time. Actually, I'm going to be on vacation for the August 5th meeting, so my other staff will cover the meeting. Board Member Talty — I might not be here for August 5th Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay, so Kevin and Rod are perhaps away then. Board Member Howe — I'm definitely away. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT, Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the July 1, 2003 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:31 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lori Love 47 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, July 1, 2003 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell University Precinct 8 Athletic Fields, Game Farm Road. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed construction of two lighted athletic practice fields in the first phase and two unlighted athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater facilities, and parking to accommodate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, Residence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Peter D. Paradise, P.E., Agent. 4. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). ® 5. Approval of Minutes: June t7, 2003. 6. Other Business. 7. Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD 1S UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) • • 11 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, July 1, 2003 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the. following times and on the following matters: 7:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed construction of two lighted athletic practice fields in the first phase and two unlighted athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater facilities, and parking to accommodate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62 -2 -3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2 -6, Residence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Peter D. Paradise, P.E., Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings. Dated: Monday, June 23, 2003 Publish: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 • The Ithaca Journal Wednesday; June 25, 2003 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC , HEARINGS Tuesday, July 1, 2003 By direction of the Chair - person of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 215 North Tioga' Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the follow- ing times and on the follow - ing matters:. 7:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Ap- jproval and a recommendo- tion to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed • construction two lighted !athletic practice fields in,the ifirst phase and two unlight- ed athletic practice fields at a future date, a support building, stormwater tacilim ties, and parking to occom. modate 30 vehicles. The fields are proposed to be located off of Game Farm Road south of Cascadilla Creek, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 62.2.3, 62 -2 -4, 62 -2 -5, and 62 -2.6, Resi- dence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner/ Appli- cant; Peter D. Paradise, P.E., Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place :hear all.persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may ap- Pear by agent or in person. ndividuols with visual im- pairments, hearing impair- ments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desir- ing assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, June 23, 2003 Publish: Wednesday, June' 25, 2003 t TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNIN BOARD SIGN -IN SHEET DATE: Tuesday, July 1, 2003 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS /AFFILIATION L PI 171r� o� 1,63 6A meFww a ,�-e ey COY 5 l;s i4v l(ow P�'d �Y . / kJ A V\ L PI 171r� o� • • 11 TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Sandra Polce being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York, on Tuesday, July 1, 2003 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting Date of Publication: June 23, 2003 June 25, 2003 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 25th day of June 2003. A ci%% 1*� Notary Public Qani L. HoffW Nobly Public, State Of NW Yak No.01HO6052879 Seneca County '' ,(L �� A, II kly Commission Expires Dec. 26, 2 L. Ln