HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2012-01-09r
Organizational Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850
AGENDA
1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
2. Oath of Office administered to Herb Engman, Supervisor; Biil Goodman, Eric
Levine and Nahmin Horwitz as Town Board Members
3. Acknowledge Appointment of Deputy Town Supervisor - Biii Goodman
4. Consider Appointments of Officiais
a. Town Cierk - Paulette Terwiiliger
b. Highway Superintendent - James Weber
c. Receiver of Taxes - Deborah Keiiy
d. Deputy Receiver of Taxes - Pauiette Terwiiiiger
e. Town Historian - Laura Johnson-Keily
f. Marriage Officers - Wiiiiam Goodman and Paulette Tenwilliger
5. Persons to be Heard
6. Supervisor's Report of 2011 and Outlook for 2012
7. Report of Tompkins County Legisiature and Ithaca Common Council
8. 5:45 p.m. Public Hearing regarding a Local Law Amending Chapter 271 of
the Town of Ithaca Code Titled Zoning: Special Land Use Districts, to add
Additional Parcel to ithacare's Planned Development Zone No. 7, Authorize
Use of Parcel for Adult independent Living Duplexes, and revise Restrictions
on Occupancy (Longview)
a. Consider Concept of Infrastructure Service
b. Consider SEQR
c. Consider Adoption
9. 5:45 p.m. Public Hearing regarding the Penny Lane Water Main
Replacement Project
a. Consider Approval of Public interest Order
10. Consider Approval of Additional Lieutenant Position at the Ithaca Fire
Department
11. Discuss and Consider Approval of Town Board Meeting Schedule for 2012
12. Consider Membership and/or Chair Appointment(s) to the
a. Planning Board
b. Zoning Board of Appeals
c. Conservation Board
13. Acknowledge Supervisor's Town Board Committee Appointments and
Consider Town Board Appointments for Citizen Advisory Committees and
Intermunicipal Organizations
14. (Combined above)
15. Discuss and Consider Agreements for Legal Services and Authorize the
Town Supervisor to Sign the Contracts
16. Consider authorization for the Town Supervisor to sign contracts for the
following services:
a. Tompkins County Area Transit (TCAT)
b. Tompkins County Public Library
c. Town Residents' use of City Park Facilities (Cass Park) MOD
d. Coddington Road Community Center - Summer School Program
e. Coddington Road Community Center Grounds and Maintenance
f. Cooperative Extension
g. Learning Web
1 h. Gadabout
i. Lifelong
j. Human Services Coalition
k. Community Science Institute (CSI) - Water Quality Monitoring
I. Ithaca Babe Ruth League MOU
17. Discuss 2012 Association of Towns' Resolutions and Consider Designation of
2012 Official Delegate and Alternate Delegate for the New York State
Association of Towns 2012 Annual Meeting
18. Consider Agreement for the Expenditure of Highway Monies
19. Discuss and Consider Adoption of Revised Emergency Preparedness Plan
20. Discuss and Consider Approval of Town Board Protocol and Procedures
21. Discuss Proposed Tompkins County Legislature Redistricting Options
22. Consider Consent Agenda Items
a. Approval of Town Board Minutes of December 30, 2011
b. Town of Ithaca Abstract
c. Bolton Point Abstract
d. Voucher Deadline Schedule for 2012
\ e. Designation of Official Newspaper
f. Designation of Official Depositories of Town Funds
g. Official Bonds of Town Officers and Employees
h. Increase the Open Space Plan Reserve
23. Report of Town Officials
24. Report of Town Committees
25. Intermunicipal Organizations
26. Review of Correspondence
Organizational Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board
Monday, January 9, 2012 at 5:30 p.m.
215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850
MINUTES
Board Members Present:
Herb Engman, Supervisor; Bill Goodman, Deputy Town Supervisor;
Pat Leary, Tee-Ann Hunter, Eric Levine, Rich DePaolo and Nahmin Horwitz
Staff Present: Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town;
Judy Drake, Director of Human Resources; Susan Ritter, Director of Planning, Mike Solvig,
Director of Finance, Paulette Terwilliger, Town Clerk and Jim Weber, Highway Superintendent
Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
Mr. Engman called the meeting to order at 5:33 p.m.
Oath of Office
administeredto Herb Engman as Town Supervisor; Bill Goodman as Deputy
Town Supervisor and Town Board Member; Eric Levine and Nahmin Horwitz as Town Board
Members
Acknowledge Appointment of Deputy Town Supervisor – Bill Goodman
TB Resolution No. 2012 – 001: Acknowledge Appointment of Deputy Town Supervisor.
The Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby acknowledges the Town Supervisor’s
appointment of Bill Goodman as Deputy Town Supervisor to serve at the pleasure of the Town
Supervisor. As Deputy Town Supervisor, Councilperson Goodman is hereby afforded all duties
and responsibilities of said position as prescribed by Section 42 of Town Law, General
Municipal Law, and the Public Officer’s Law of the State of New York.
Moved: Nahmin Horwitz Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
Consider Appointments of Officials
TB RESOLUTION NO 2012- 002: Reappointment of Paulette Terwilliger as Town Clerk of
the Town of Ithaca
BE IT RESOLVED that Paulette Terwilliger is hereby re-appointed as Town Clerk of the
st
Town of Ithaca for a term continuing until the 1 day of January next succeeding the next
biennial Town election to wit, January 1, 2014.
Moved: Tee-Ann Hunter Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 2 of 26
Motion passed unanimously.
TB RESOLUTION NO 2012- 003: Reappointment of James Weber as Highway
Superintendent for the Town of Ithaca
,
BE IT RESOLVEDJames Weber is hereby re-appointed as Highway Superintendent for
st
the Town of Ithaca, for a term continuing until the 1 day of January next succeeding the next
biennial Town election to wit, January 1, 2014, and be it further
RESOLVED, the Highway Superintendent also serves at the Director of Public Works.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Rich DePaolo
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
TB RESOLUTION NO 2012- 004: Appointment of Deborah Kelly as Receiver of Taxes for
the Town of Ithaca
BE IT RESOLVED that Deborah Kelley is hereby re-appointed as Receiver of Taxes, for
st
a term continuing until the 1 day of January next succeeding the next biennial Town election to
wit, January 1, 2014.
Moved: Tee-Ann Hunter Seconded: Eric Levine
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
TB RESOLUTION NO 2012- 005: Appointment of Paulette Terwilliger as Deputy Receiver
of Taxes for the Town of Ithaca
BE IT RESOLVED that Paulette Terwilliger is hereby appointed as Deputy Receiver of
st
Taxes, for a term continuing until the 1 day of January next succeeding the next biennial Town
election to wit, January 1, 2014.
Moved: Nahmin Horwitz Seconded: Bill Goodman
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 006: Reappointment of Town Historian
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby reappoint
Ms. Laura Johnson-Kelly, 48 Comfort Road, Ithaca, New York as Town Historian for the
term of January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2012.
Moved: Pat Leary Seconded: Rich DePaolo
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 3 of 26
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -007: Appoint William D. Goodman and Paulette Terwilliger
as Marriage Officers for the Town of Ithaca
WHEREAS New York State Domestic Relations Law Article 3, Section 11-C authorizes
the governing body of a town to appoint one or more Marriage Officers to solemnize marriages
within the territory of the town, provided they are at least 18 years old and reside in the town
and
WHEREAS William D. Goodman and Paulette Terwilliger, who meet all the
qualifications required by the Domestic Relations Law, have requested that the Town Board
appoint them as Marriage Officers, therefore, be it
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints William D.
Goodman and Paulette Terwilliger as Marriage Officers for the Town of Ithaca, for which there
will be no salary or wage, from the date hereof until January 1, 2014.
Moved: Nahmin Horwitz Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes – Horwitz, Leary, Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Levine and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously.
Persons to be Heard
Leon Zaharis addressed the Board regarding highway dump trucks and snow plows stating that
the vehicles the town uses are not as good as a 6-wheel grader. He has experience as a mechanic
and driver and the graders are smaller and use less gas. He also felt strongly that a commercial
grader is more reliable and less costly to run. Graders can last 30-40 years and the parts and tires
are much cheaper. He described the grader and what he thought it could do for snow removal.
Town Board Comments
– Mr. Engman noted that TCCOG has an excellent report on
hydrofracking with a lot of information and very well done. It is available on the TCCOG
website.
Supervisor’s Report of 2011 and Outlook for 2012
Moved to February
Report of Tompkins County Legislature and Ithaca Common Council
Peter Stein was present and reported on the Legislative Chair voting which resulted in 7 ties.
Frank Proto is the Acting Chair until the next meeting and there is nothing happening until the
Chair is determined.
5:45 p.m. Public Hearing regarding a Local Law Amending Chapter 271 of the Town of
Ithaca Code Titled Zoning: Special Land Use Districts, to add Additional Parcel to
Ithacare’s Planned Development Zone No. 7, Authorize Use of Parcel for Adult
Independent Living Duplexes, and revise Restrictions on Occupancy (Longview)
Mr. Engman opened the public hearing at 6:03 p.m. There was no one wishing to address the
Board and the hearing was closed.
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 4 of 26
Consider SEQR
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012 - 008: SEQR: Proposed Local Law Amending Chapter 271 of
the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled Zoning: Special Land Use Districts, To Add Additional
Parcel To Ithacare’s Planned Development Zone No. 7, Authorize Use of Parcel For Adult
Independent Living Duplexes, And Revise Restrictions On Occupancy, As Well As
Dedication of Utilities to the Town
WHEREAS, this action is the adoption of a local law amending Zoning Chapter 271 of
the Town of Ithaca Code to add an additional parcel to Ithacare’s Planned Development Zone
No. 7, authorize use of the parcel for adult independent living duplexes, and revise restrictions on
occupancy; and
WHEREAS, this action also includes the dedication of utilities (water service) to the
Town upon construction of the water pipe line; and
WHEREAS, this is an unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board is acting
in an uncoordinated environmental review with respect to the enactment of the proposed local
law; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board, at a public hearing held on January 9, 2012, has reviewed
and accepted as adequate the Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF), Parts I and II for
this action, along with other application materials;
RESOLVED: that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby makes a negative
determination of environmental significance, in this uncoordinated environmental review, in
accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed based on the information in the LEAF Part I and for the reasons
set forth in the LEAF Part II, and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be
required.
MOVED: Tee-Ann Hunter SECONDED: Bill Goodman
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
Consider Concept of Infrastructure Service
Mr. Goodman explained by reporting what had been discussed at the Public Works Committee.
The applicant has proposed two different locations for water service to the patio homes and one
of those options would include a water line along a portion of the road that the Town is planning
on doing in 2013. The applicants propose that the Town share in the cost of that portion of
roadway that they would be installing instead of the Town. It is approximately 500 feet and
would save the Town approximately $25K.
The Applicant is asking for approval in concept of either location of the water service so they
can proceed through the Planning Board and Building permit processes.
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 5 of 26
Discussion followed on the two plans, savings and actual action in front of the board at the
moment. Mr. Engman noted for the record that the action is approval of the concept of location
NOT the possible participation in financing. If the applicant wants the Board to consider
participating in financing that would have to be a separate request and this resolution tonight in
no way commits the Town to any financial aid to the project. Mr. Weber added that the only
portion the Town would be sharing costs on would be 500 feet, regardless of which option the
applicant decided to go with. Discussion followed.
The Board had no objections to the Public Works Committee and staff continuing to work with
the applicants on details of the plan and details of any cost sharing that may be requested. Mr.
DePaolo asked if there would be any difference in cost to the Town between the two options the
applicants are looking at. Mr. Weber responded that there would not be, because we are always
just talking about the 500 foot length; the cost is the same. Either option meets the needs and
specifications required by the Town.
Mr. Goodman explained what has been discussed at Public Works Committee and the savings
the Town may realize. He asked whether the Board would like the Committee to continue
discussions with the applicant regarding possible financial commitments by the Town. Mr.
DePaolo wanted to make sure that there would be no implied funding or financial arrangements
and Mr. Engman made it very clear that the Town is not agreeing to any financial partnership
with the applicant.
TB Resolution No. 2012 - 009: Acceptance of the Concept and Locations of Public Utilities
to be Dedicated to the Town in Conjunction with the Longview Patio Homes proposal.
WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has granted Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed Longview Patio Homes located off Bella Vista Drive and Danby
Road (State Route 96B) immediately south of the existing Longview facility, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No.’s 39-1-3.2 and 39-1-1.31, High Density Residential Zone and Planned
Development Zone No. 7. The proposal involves the development of 11 duplexes (22 total rental
units) on a new access drive from Bella Vista Drive for independent senior living, and includes
new walkways, stormwater facilities, outdoor lighting, utilities, and landscaping. The proposal
also requires the rezoning of tax parcel no. 39-1-3.2 from High Density Residential to Planned
Development Zone No. 7 by the Town Board. Ithacare Center Service Company, Inc.,
Owner/Applicant; Mark A. Macera, Agent, and
WHEREAS, the applicant for the above-referenced site plan has proposed to dedicate to
the Town of Ithaca a public utility (water line extension) and an easement for a future water line
extension to serve the Longview Patio Homes, and
WHEREAS, the water line extension and easement is indicated on the drawing
“Proposed Overall Site Plan” (L1.1) date stamped 12/20/11 and prepared by Schopfer Architects,
LLP, which shows an easement for a future water line extension (indicated as 681’ on the
drawing) extending from Danby Road to the Patio Homes development at the southern end of the
site and two optional northern end water line connections, identified as 981’ and 1089’ on the
drawing, the final location to be determined by agreement between Longview and the Town, and
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 6 of 26
WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Public Works Committee has reviewed the plans for the
above improvements that are proposed to be dedicated to the Town, and have found them
generally acceptable, and voted to move the request to the Town Board for further discussion and
consideration; now
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca
determines that either proposed location for the northern end water line connections, or an
alternate location in their general vicinities, is acceptable to the Town Board, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby
accepts the concept and locations of the above-described improvements, subject to the following
conditions:
1.That the surveyed locations, deeds, and abstracts showing good and marketable title
for the proposed improvements and easement be submitted in a form acceptable to the
Attorney for the Town of Ithaca and Director of Public Works prior to dedication and
acceptance of the improvements by the Town Board; and
2.That Final Site Plan Approval be granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, prior
to the Town Board accepting the conveyance of said improvements; and
3.Completion of the utility lines, to the satisfaction of the Town of Ithaca Director of
Public Works, prior to the acceptance of said improvements by the Town, and
4.Acceptance by the Town Board of the proposed easement and public utilities to be
dedicated to the Town.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes – Goodman, Leary, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Consider Adoption of the Local Law
Mr. Horwitz asked about the whereas addressing affordability and why it was in the resolution
when it was not requiring any affordability. Ms. Brock responded that the Town does not have
any affordability requirements and this whereas refers to Longview’s current policy of
subsidizing housing. Ms. Brock and Ms. Ritter explained that the whereas(s) give a history of
the process and discussions regarding the project and they are not a part of the local law itself.
Mr. Horwitz thought that they seem to infer that there is an affordability clause requiring
affordability as a factor in approving this local law but there is not.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-010 : Proposed Adoption of a Local Law Amending Chapter
271 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled Zoning: Special Land Use Districts, To Add
Additional Parcel To Ithacare’s Planned Development Zone No. 7, Authorize Use of Parcel
For Adult Independent Living Duplexes, And Revise Restrictions On Occupancy
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 7 of 26
WHEREAS, on June 13, 2011, the Town of Ithaca Town Board referred consideration of
the proposed modifications to Planned Development Zone No. 7 (Limited Mixed Use, Ithacare;
now commonly referred to as Longview) to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for a
recommendation; and
WHEREAS, in addition, at the June 27, 2011 Study Session, the Town Board referred
consideration of the Longview zoning modifications to the Planning Committee and
recommended that the Committee invite Longview’s Executive Director to the meeting to get
clarification on affordability aspects of the proposal and to discuss trail and pedestrian
connection opportunities; and
WHEREAS, at the July 14, 2011 Planning Committee meeting, the Committee heard
from Mark Macera and determined that Longview’s policy of subsidizing the housing costs for
20%-30% of its residents (using no public funds) was adequate and did not warrant the Town
imposing additional affordability requirements for the patio homes rezoning proposal, and
further, the Committee asked staff to work with Mr. Macera on reserving potential future
pedestrian/trail connections on the Longview property and to incorporate these through the
Planning Board site plan process, and
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2011, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board did recommend
that the Town of Ithaca Town Board enact the proposed local law with suggested edits; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board resolution, dated November 1, 2011, granting
Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the Longview Patio Homes project included a condition
requiring submission of a 150-foot wide floating easement on the western portion of tax parcel
No. 39.-1-1.31 for a potential future Town trail, to address the request of the Planning
Committee, and
WHEREAS, resolutions were duly adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca for
public hearings to be held by said Town Board on December 12, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. and on
A
January 9, 2012 at 5:45 p.m. to hear all interested parties on a proposed local law entitled “
Local Law Amending Chapter 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled Zoning: Special
Land Use Districts, To Add Additional Parcel To Ithacare’s Planned Development Zone
No. 7, Authorize Use of Parcel For Adult Independent Living Duplexes, And Revise
Restrictions On Occupancy“;
and
WHEREAS, notices of said public hearings were duly advertised in the Ithaca Journal;
and
WHEREAS, said public hearings were duly held on said dates and times at the Town
Hall of the Town of Ithaca and all parties in attendance were permitted an opportunity to speak
on behalf of or in opposition to said proposed local law, or any part thereof; and
WHEREAS, the adoption of this local law is, pursuant to Part 617 of the Implementing
Regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law and
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 8 of 26
Chapter 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code (which laws and regulations thereunder, including the
Town’s local law, are collectively referred to as “SEQR”), an unlisted action; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Town Board, acting in an uncoordinated environmental
review with respect to the enactment of the local law, has, on January 9, 2012 made a negative
determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a
Long Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board finds it is in the best interests of the Town and its citizens
to adopt the local law;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts said local law
“A Local Law Amending Chapter 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Titled Zoning:
entitled
Special Land Use Districts, To Add Additional Parcel To Ithacare’s Planned Development
Zone No. 7, Authorize Use of Parcel For Adult Independent Living Duplexes, And Revise
Restrictions On Occupancy”
, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this
resolution, and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file said local law with
the Secretary of State as required by law.
MOVED: Tee-Ann Hunter SECONDED: Bill Goodman
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
5:45 p.m. Public Hearing regarding the Penny Lane Water Main Replacement Project
Mr. Engman opened the public hearing at 6:32 p.m.
Mr. Chamandy, a resident of Penny Lane, asked about staging, easement borders, timing, noise
and water disruption relating to the project.
Mr. Weber responded that he does not know about the staging yet but that the contractors would
be told they have to stay within the Town easement or work with the property owner on their
own easement. All work would have to abide by the Town’s noise ordinance which has specific
work hours and noise limits. Water disruption will only occur at the very beginning and end of
the project; Penny Lane water tank users will be switched to another tank and switched back;
those would be the only two disruptions.
Consider Approval of Public Interest Order
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012 – 011: ADOPT PUBLIC INTEREST ORDER
REGARDING THE PENNY LANE WATER MAIN REPLACEMENT WATER
IMPROVEMENT
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 9 of 26
At a regular meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York, held at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, in Ithaca, New York, in said
Town, on the 9th day of January, 2012, at 5:45 o'clock P.M., Prevailing Time.
In the Matter of A Proposed Water Improvement in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York, pursuant to Article 12-C of the Town Law, to be known as the Town of Ithaca
Penny Lane Water Main Replacement Water Improvement.
WHEREAS, a plan, report and map, including an estimate of cost, have been duly
prepared in such manner and in such detail as has heretofore been determined by the Town
Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, relating to the creation and
construction, pursuant to Article 12-C of the Town Law, of water system improvements to be
known and identified as the Town of Ithaca Penny Lane Water Main Replacement Water
Improvement, and hereinafter also referred to as the “Improvement,” to provide such water
Improvement including extensions, to the present Town water improvement, such water system
Improvement to be constructed and owned by the Town of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, after said plan, report and map, including estimate of cost, were prepared by
a competent engineer, duly licensed by the state of New York, and filed in the office of the Town
Clerk, the said Town Board did, on December 12, 2011, duly adopt an Order reciting the
proposed Improvement, a description of the boundaries of the proposed benefited area, the
maximum amount proposed to be expended for the Improvement, the proposed method of
apportioning the costs of such Improvement, the proposed method of financing to be employed,
the fact that a plan, map and report describing the same are on file in the Town Clerk's office for
public inspection, and specifying that said Town Board shall meet at the Town Hall, 215 North
Tioga Street, in Ithaca, New York, in said Town, on the 9th day of January, 2012 at 5:45 PM
Prevailing Time, for the purposes of conducting a public hearing on such proposal to provide
said Improvement, and to hear all persons interested in the subject thereof concerning the same,
and
WHEREAS, copies of said Order were duly published and posted according to law, and
said Town Board did, at the time and place specified in said Order, duly meet and consider such
proposal and held a public hearing in which it heard all persons interested in the subject thereof,
who appeared at such time and place, concerning the same, and
WHEREAS, the Town Board now desires to authorize the Improvement based on the
evidence offered at such time and place, and
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on January 9, 2012, the Town Board has determined
approval, construction and implementation of the Improvement are a Type II Action pursuant to
the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated
pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, because the Action constitutes
"replacement, rehabilitation or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on the same site,"
and thus approval, construction and implementation of the Improvement are not subject to
review under SEQRA;
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 10 of 26
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board that it be and hereby is
determined as follows:
(1) The notice of hearing was published and posted as required by law and is otherwise
sufficient.
(2) That all of the property within the proposed benefited area is benefited by the
proposed Improvement.
(3) That all of the property benefited is included within the proposed benefited area.
(4) That the proposed method of apportioning the costs of the Improvement should not be
changed.
(5) It is in the public interest to authorize, establish, and make the Town of Ithaca Penny
Lane Water Main Replacement Water Improvement as hereinafter described, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board does hereby approve, authorize and
establish the Town of Ithaca Penny Lane Water Main Replacement Water Improvement in the
area of the Town described as follows and as more particularly shown and described in said plan,
report and map presently on file in the office of the Town Clerk: Replace 700 feet of existing
ductile iron main with new 8” water main made of Polywrapped Ductile Iron pipe. New valves,
hydrant connections and related ancillary facilities will be placed as necessary, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the area hereby determined to be benefited by said Town
of Ithaca Penny Lane Water Main Replacement Water Improvement is all of that portion of the
Town outside of the Village of Cayuga Heights, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that all of the allocable costs of said Improvement shall be
borne wholly by property within the Town of Ithaca water improvement benefited area, being the
entire area of the Town outside of the Village of Cayuga Heights, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the maximum proposed to be expended by the Town of
Ithaca for the Improvement, including costs of rights of way, construction costs, legal fees and
other expenses, is $ 150,000, which shall be financed as follows: expenditure of current revenues
and surplus funds from water rates from the Town of Ithaca water system benefited area, and be
it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Order is subject to a permissive referendum in the
manner provided in Town Law Article 7 and Town Law Section 209-q, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the estimated expense of the aforesaid Improvement does
not exceed one-tenth of one per cent of the full valuation of the taxable real property in the area
of said Town outside of villages and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of subdivision
13(a) of Section 209-q of the Town Law, the permission of the State Comptroller is not required
for such improvement, and be it
FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to subdivision 6(d) of Section 209-q of the Town
Law, the Town Clerk is hereby directed and ordered to cause a certified copy of this Order to be
duly recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Tompkins within ten days of the date
this Order becomes effective pursuant to Town Law Section 91, which when so recorded, shall
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 11 of 26
be presumptive evidence of the regularity of the proceedings and action taken by the Town
Board in relation to the aforesaid improvement
The question of the adoption of the foregoing Order was duly put to a vote on roll call,
which resulted as follows: Herb Engman, Aye; Bill Goodman, Aye; Pat Leary, Aye; Eric
Levine, Aye; Tee-Ann Hunter, Aye; Rich DePaolo, Aye and Nahmin Horwitz, Aye.
The Order was thereupon declared duly adopted.
* * * * *
Consider Approval of Additional Lieutenant Position at the Ithaca Fire Department
Mr. Engman proposed a change to the draft resolution he prepared prior to moving for
discussion. Changes were made.
TB Resolution No. 2012- 012: Approval of the City of IthacaFire DepartmentRequest for
a Roster Change
WHEREAS the Ithaca Fire Department has had a reduction in staffing creating an adjustment of
assignments and responsibilities in the fire department and
WHEREAS the elimination of a Deputy Fire Chief position has reduced management capacity
within the Fire Department and
WHEREAS the areas of responsibility and the workloads of the Fire Chief and remaining
Deputy Fire Chief will need to be adjusted as needed to maintain the function of the fire
department and
WHEREAS the position of Fire Alarm Superintendent is not funded in 2012, and there is a need
for some of those responsibilities relating to fire protection system inspections to be transferred
to persons in the fire department and
WHEREAS the nature of code enforcement, the need for day-to-day guidance, and quality
assurance is very time intensive and
WHEREAS there has been a resignation of a person working in a half time position as financial
clerk for the fire department and
WHEREAS the Fire Department has proposed an adjustment to facilitate staffing change
Now, therefore be it
RESOLVED the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby authorizes the creation of an
additional Fire Lieutenant position to serve as a supervisor in the Fire Prevention Bureau, thus
allowing the Fire Chief to delegate certain responsibilities to that Fire Lieutenant and
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 12 of 26
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the approval of the Fire Lieutenant position will become
effective on the date of, and is contingent upon, the signing of an agreement by the Town
Supervisor and the responsible City signatory describing how and in what manner the effort of
the Fire Prevention Bureau will be devoted to fire code inspections within the Town of Ithaca in
the same proportion as agreed upon in the fire contract (currently 33%) and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the vacancy created by the promotion of a Fire Fighter to
Lieutenant will be not be filled and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED one firefighter position will be eliminated from the fire
department roster and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the position of half-time financial clerk will be eliminated from
the roster and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the position of Fire Alarm Superintendent will be eliminated
from the fire department roster and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the funding for the new position of Fire Lieutenant will be
derived from the existing authorized Fire Department budget and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this action is contingent on the approval of the City of
Ithaca Common Council.
MOVED: Bill Goodman SECONDED : Eric Levine
VOTE: Ayes – Goodman, Levine, Engman, Hunter, DePaolo, Leary and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Discuss and Consider Approval of Town Board Meeting Schedule for 2012
The Board discussed the second meeting in November which used to be used as a Budget
meeting but the last two years has not been needed. By advertising it as a Budget meeting,
residents may think they can comment on the budget when in fact, the budget may have already
been adopted. With an active Budget Committee, it appears we may not need it, but would like
to “reserve” the day in case. It was decided that the Thursday meeting in November would be
called a Special meeting to use if needed.
TB Resolution No. 2012-013: Set Dates for 2012 Meetings of the Town Board
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the
following schedule:
Monday, January 23, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, February 13, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 13 of 26
Monday, February 27, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, March 12, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, March 26, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, April 9, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, April 23, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, May 7, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, May 21, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, June 11, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, June 25, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, July 9, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, July 23, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, August 13, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, August 27, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, September 10, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, September 24, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Thursday, October 4, 2012 Budget Meeting 5:30 p.m.
th
Monday, October 15, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m. (Oct. 8 is Columbus Day)
Monday, October 29, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Thursday, November 8, 2012 Special Meeting 5:30 p.m. (if needed)
Monday, November 19, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, November 26, 2012 Study Session 4:30 p.m.
Monday, December 10, 2012 Regular Meeting 5:30 p.m.
Monday, December 31, 2012 Year-End Meeting 10:00 a.m.
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Eric Levine
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 14 of 26
Consider Membership and/or Chair Appointment(s)
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-014: Appointment of Planning Board Chair for the Year
2012
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints Fred
Wilcox to serve as Chair of the Planning Board for the term January 1, 2012 to December 31,
2012.
MOVED: Pat Leary SECONDED: Tee-Ann Hunter
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 015: Appointment of Zoning Board of Appeals Chair for the
Year 2012
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints Kirk
Sigel to serve as Chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the term January 1, 2012 to December
31, 2012.
MOVED: Eric Levine SECONDED: Pat Leary
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-016: Appointments to the Conservation Board
Two-Year Appointments
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints the
following individuals to the Conservation Board for the term of January 1, 2012 to December 31,
2013:
Kristine Shaw Susan Peri
Anthony Ingraham Andrew Goodell
Vladimir Micic
One-Year Appointments
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints the
following individuals to the Conservation Board for the term of January 1, 2012 to December 31,
2012:
Diane Conneman Jonathan Meigs
Aaron Donato
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 15 of 26
Appointment of Conservation Board Chair
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints Kristine
Shaw as Chair of the Conservation Board for the term of January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012.
MOVED: Rich DePaolo SECONDED: Tee-Ann Hunter
VOTE: Ayes: Hunter, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Leary, Horwitz and DePaolo
Motion passed unanimously
Ms. Hunter asked if Staff could prepare a Resolution of Appreciation for Mrs. Conneman
Acknowledge Supervisor’s Town Board Committee Appointments and Consider Town
Board Appointments for Citizen Advisory Committees and Intermunicipal Organizations
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 017: Acknowledge Supervisor’s Town Board Committee
Appointments and Confirm Citizen and Intermunicipal Committee Membership
Appointments and Recommendations
BE IT RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca ratifies the following Town
Supervisor’s Town Board Committee appointments for a term beginning January 1, 2012
through December 31, 2012 and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca makes the following
Citizen Committee and Intermunicipal Organization appointments for a term beginning January
1, 2012 through December 31, 2012 unless otherwise noted.
Town Board Committees
Budget
Eric Levine – Chair
Nahmin Horwitz
Pat Leary
Personnel and Organization (new, combined with Operations)
Bill Goodman – Chair
Pat Leary
Tee-Ann Hunter
(same TB members for Employee Relations)
Planning
Rich DePaolo – Chair
Bill Goodman
Pat Leary
Public Works
Bill Goodman – Chair
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 16 of 26
Rich DePaolo
Nahmin Horwitz
Town Board Ad Hoc Committees
Fire and Emergency Response
Eric Levine – Chair
Nahmin Horwitz
Herb Engman
Youth and Recreation
Tee-Ann Hunter – Chair
Rich DePaolo
Herb Engman
Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD)
Herb Engman
Bill Goodman
Tee-Ann Hunter
Staff Committees
Employee Relations
Bill Goodman – Chair
Pat Leary
Tee-Ann Hunter
*Staff representatives are appointed by fellow staff
Records Management
Tee-Ann Hunter Paulette Terwilliger – Chair
Nahmin Horwitz Lisa Carrier-Titti
Laura Johnson-Kelly
Citizen Committees
Agriculture
Bill Goodman (Liaison) Alan and Debbie Teeter – Co Chairs
Herb Engman – Alternate James Baker
John and Jennifer Bokaer-Smith
Nelson Eddy
George Sheldrake
Jan and Sue Suwinski
Codes and Ordinances
Bill Goodman – Chair Fred Wilcox – Planning Board
Pat Leary Eva Hoffmann – Conservation Board
Eric Levine Bill King – Zoning Board
of Appeals
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 17 of 26
Comprehensive Plan Committee
Herb Engman – Chair Hollis Erb
Pat Leary Dianne Conneman
Tee-Ann Hunter Joe Wetmore
Stephen Wagner
Bill Sonnenstuhl
Non-Voting Members
Peter Stein
Diana Riesman – VCH Representative
David Kay – City of Ithaca Representative
Intermunicipal
Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization
Rich DePaolo
Herb Engman (Alternate)
Cayuga Medical Center
Rich DePaolo
Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC) Policy
Herb Engman
Bill Goodman (Alternate)
Ithaca College Community Work Group
Rich DePaolo
Joint Youth Commission 2-Year Terms
Rich DePaolo Lorraine Moran
Eric Levine Christianne White
Sandie Grooms
Robin Tessell
Cable Access Oversight Committee
Rich DePaolo
Recreation Partnership
Eric Levine Levine
Nahmin Horwitz
Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission (Bolton Point)
Herb Engman
Bill Goodman
Sewer Joint Committee of the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility
Herb Engman
Bill Goodman
Rich DePaolo
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 18 of 26
Tompkins County Council of Governments
Herb Engman
Bill Goodman (alternate)
Tompkins County Municipal Health Consortium
Judy Drake
Herb Engman (alternate)
Subcommittee -- Joint Committee on Plan Design
Judy Drake
Herb Engman (alternate)
Moved: Bill Goodman Seconded: Pat Leary
Vote: Ayes—Engman, Goodman, Leary, Levine, Hunter, DePaolo and Horwitz.
Motion passed unanimously.
Discuss and Consider Agreements for Legal Services and Authorize the Town Supervisor
to Sign the Contracts
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 018: Appointment of Attorneys for the Town and
Authorization for the Town Supervisor to Sign Agreements for Legal Services with Guy
Krogh, Lorraine Moynihan-Schmitt and Susan H. Brock for 2012
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Town Board hereby agrees to terms outlined in
Agreement Letters submitted by Susan H. Brock, Guy Krogh, and Lorraine Moynihan-Schmitt
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Ithaca Town Board hereby appoints Susan H.
Brock, Guy Krogh, and Lorraine Moynihan-Schmitt as Attorneys for the Town for the year 2012
and authorizes the Town Supervisor to sign said agreements.
MOVED: Pat Leary SECONDED: Bill Goodman
VOTE: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Consider authorization for the Town Supervisor to sign contracts for the annual services
There was some discussion regarding the Ithaca Babe Ruth MOU and the availability of the field
for other groups. Mr. Weber noted that we can change the MOU closer to spring and we do
work with the group to ensure the field is available for others. There has never been an inquiry
from another group to use the field. This pre-approval is because the League has a tendency to
need a signature at the last minute and this allows for signing without waiting for a meeting.
Both Public Works and the Town Clerk’s Office are aware of the Board’s concerns and work
towards saving some field times for other users.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012 - 019: Authorizing Supervisor to Execute Annual Contracts
RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby authorizes the Town
Supervisor to execute annual contracts with the following service(s) providers:
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 19 of 26
a.Tompkins County Area Transit (TCAT)
b.Tompkins County Public Library
c.Town Residents’ Use of City Park Facilities (Cass Park)
d.Coddington Road Community Center – Summer School Program
e.Coddington Road Community Center – Grounds and Maintenance
f.Cooperative Extension
g.Learning Web
h.Gadabout
i.Lifelong
j.Human Services Coalition
k.Community Science Institute (CSI) Water Quality Monitoring
l.Ithaca Babe Ruth League MOU
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the foregoing annual contract expenditures were approved
as part of the Town of Ithaca 2012 Budget
MOVED: Pat Leary SECONDED: Bill Goodman
VOTE: Engman, Leary, Hunter, Levine, DePaolo, Horwitz, and Goodman
Motion passed unanimously
Discuss 2012 Association of Towns’ Resolutions and Consider Designation of 2012 Official
Delegate and Alternate Delegate for the New York State Association of Towns 2012 Annual
Meeting
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-020: Official Delegate and Alternate for Year 2012 New York
State Association of Towns Annual Meeting
WHEREAS, the NYS Association of Towns Annual Meeting will be held in New York
City and
WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca is a member in good standing with the NYS Association
of Towns and is eligible to have voting rights at the said meeting; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the governing Town Board to appoint an Official
Delegate who will have voting rights on behalf of the Town of Ithaca at the said meeting; now
therefore be it
RESOLVED, the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints Bill
Goodman as the Official Delegate on behalf of the Town of Ithaca at the 2012 NYS Association
of Towns Annual Meeting,
And be it further
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 20 of 26
RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints
Herb Engman as the Alternate Official Delegate on behalf of the Town of Ithaca at the 2012
NYS Association of Towns Annual Meeting.
MOVED: Eric Levine SECONDED: Pat Leary
VOTE: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Leary discussed adding a resolution regarding repealing the tax cap.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 021: Request Additional Resolution for the 2012 New York
State Association of Towns Annual Meeting
RESOLVED
the Town Board wishes to request the submission of an additional resolution at the
2012 Association of Town’s Annual Meeting urging the repeal of the 2% Property Tax Cap for
towns
MOVEDSECONDED
: Pat Leary : Bill Goodman
VOTE
: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Engman, Levine, Horwitz, DePaolo and Hunter
Motion passed unanimously.
The Board also voted unanimously for its support for all of the stated resolutions being presented
at the Meeting.
Consider Agreement for the Expenditure of Highway Monies
Attachment #2
Discuss and Consider Adoption of Revised Emergency Preparedness Plan
Mr. DePaolo was concerned about the vagueness of the policy. He could not determine from the
policy who was in command, or how it was directing anyone in any situation. The chain of
command was not clear, the command center was not clear etc. He felt that if the intent was to
streamline the chain of command in the event that it is needed, this does not serve the purpose.
Ms. Drake responded that the Committee worked with the County’s Emergency Response and
their suggestion was a huge book, and our suggestion was this outline. Mr. Weber added that it
is a state mandate that we have to have and there are courses that Town Board members need to
take and just be aware of the general outline. Mr. DePaolo felt that he could envision Town Staff
working very well together and this document muddies the water. We either have to spell it out
or concede that we are not filing an Emergency Plan. The Board discussed options including
adopting it now and reviewing it in more depth and making changes if needed. Mrs. Terwilliger
will research the training the Board is required to take and report at the Study Session. (NIMS
National Incident Management System.)
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 023: Approve Revised Emergency Preparedness Plan
WHEREAS
the Emergency Preparedness Plan was adopted on December 30, 1993; and
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 21 of 26
WHEREAS
the Safety Committee and management staff have reviewed and revised the
plan to bring it up to date after meeting with the Tompkins County Department of Emergency
Response; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED,
the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the revised
Emergency Preparedness Plan.
MOVEDSECONDED
: Herb Engman : Bill Goodman
VOTE
: Ayes – Engman, Goodman, Hunter, Leary, Levine and Horwitz
Nays – DePaolo Motion passed 6 to 1.
Ms. Hunter noted that the Town is also supposed to review the Procurement Policy and Mr.
Solvig responded that we are working on it. She also asked if there would be a “green”
component and Mr. Solvig said it would.
Discuss and Consider Approval of Town Board Protocol and Procedures
TB RESOLUTION NO. TB 2012 – 024: Approve use of Board Protocol and Procedures
Manual
WHEREAS the Town Board has adopted and approved the use of the Board Protocol and
Procedures Manual and
WHEREAS the Manual is to be reviewed and reaffirmed bi-annually
Now therefore be it
RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby reaffirm and approve
the use of the Board Protocol and Procedures Manual as the rules of its procedures for the Town
Board as authorized by Town Law Section 63.
MOVED: Pat Leary SECONDED: Rich DePaolo
VOTE: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Discuss Proposed Tompkins County Legislature Redistricting Options
The County had sent out a memo regarding the options they are now considering. All options
are for the 14 member Legislature. There are no changes to the Town boundaries in the
scenarios under discussion. The change would be no City district would extend into the Town.
We would share a representative with some of the other bordering municipalities. It reduces by
2 the number of slivered districts the Town had. There was quite a bit of discussion on the
legislators and the new boundaries.
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 22 of 26
Consider Consent Agenda Items
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012- 025: Consent Agenda
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or
adopts the resolutions for the following Consent Agenda items:
Pulled
a. Approval of Town Board Minutes of December 30, 2011
b.Town of Ithaca Abstract
c.Bolton Point Abstract
d.Voucher Deadline Schedule
e.Designation of Official Newspaper
f.Designation of Official Depositories of Town Funds
g.Official Bonds of Town Officers and Employees
Pulled
h. Increase the Open Space Plan Reserve
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012 -025b: Town of Ithaca Abstract
WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town
Board for approval of payment; and
WHEREAS, the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board;
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said
vouchers in total for the amounts indicated.
VOUCHER NOS. 1564 - 1589
General Fund Town wide 40,017.34
General Fund Part Town 74.50
Highway Fund Part Town 670.87
Water Fund 2,229.85
Sewer Fund 178.60
Fire Protection Fund 131.10
TOTAL 43,302.26
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025c: Bolton Point Abstract #013 & #001
WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers for the Southern Cayuga Lake
Intermunicipal Water Commission have been presented to the governing Town Board for
approval of payment; and
WHEREAS, the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board;
now, therefore, be it
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 23 of 26
RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said
vouchers.
Voucher Numbers: 675-731
Check Numbers: 13550-13606
#013 #001
Bolton Point Rd Project $ 0 0
Operating Fund $ 68,760.17 $3,644.45
TOTAL $ 68,760.17 $3,644.45
Less Prepaid $ 20,525.92 $ 0
TOTAL $ 48,234.25 $3,644.45
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025d: YEAR 2012 PROCESSING VOUCHERS/INVOICES
DEADLINE DATES
WHEREAS, to facilitate an efficient and timely method for processing vouchers/invoices for the
monthly abstracts it is necessary to establish a deadline for submission of vouchers/invoices by
vendors, staff, and other service people; and
WHEREAS, the Accounting Department has determined the following dates to properly prepare
the vouchers/invoices for approval; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, the Town Board does hereby adopt the following schedule for the year 2012 as the
last date by all vendors, staff, and other service people to submit vouchers/invoices to the
Accounting Department for presentation to the Town Board on the Abstract Date:
Deadline Dates Abstract Dates
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 Monday, January 23, 2012
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 Monday, February 13, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012 Monday, February 27, 2012
Wednesday, February 29, 2012 Monday, March 12, 2012
Wednesday, March 21, 2012 Monday, March 26, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012 Monday, April 9, 2012
Wednesday, April 18, 2012 Monday, April 23, 2012
Monday, April 30, 2012 Monday, May 7, 2012
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 Monday, May 21, 2012
Thursday, May 31, 2012 Monday, June 11, 2012
Wednesday, June 20, 2012 Monday, June 25, 2012
Friday, June 29, 2012 Monday, July 9, 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012 Monday, July 23, 2012
Monday, July 30, 2012 Monday, August 13, 2012
Wednesday, August 22, 2012 Monday, August 22, 2012
Friday, August 31, 2012 Monday, September 10, 2012
Wednesday, September 19, 2012 Monday, September 24, 2012
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 24 of 26
Monday, October 1, 2012 Monday, October 15, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012 Monday, October 29, 2012
Monday, October 29, 2012 THURSDAY, November 1, 2012
Wednesday, November 14, 2012 Monday, November 19, 2012
Tuesday, November 20, 2012 Monday, November 26, 2012
Friday, November 30, 2012 Monday, December 10, 2012
Wednesday, December 26, 2012 MONDAY, December 31, 2012
**Abstract dates in blue are Regular Town Board meetings.
***Abstract dates in red are Study Session Town Board meetings.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, vouchers/invoices must be submitted no later that 12:00 p.m. on
the Deadline Date.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025e: DESIGNATION OF OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby designates the Ithaca
Journal as the official newspaper for the Town of Ithaca for the year 2012.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025f: Designation of Official Depository of Town Funds
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby designates Tompkins
Trust Company as the official depository for monies coming into the hands of the Town
Supervisor, Budget Officer, Town Clerk, and Receiver of Taxes for the year 2012; and, be it
further
RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of
this resolution to the Tompkins Trust Company.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025f: Designation of Official Depository of Town Funds
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby designates Tompkins
Trust Company as the official depository for monies coming into the hands of the Town
Supervisor, Budget Officer, Town Clerk, and Receiver of Taxes for the year 2012; and, be it
further
RESOLVED, the Town Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of
this resolution to the Tompkins Trust Company.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012-025g: Official Bonds for Town Officers & Employees
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, that the Faithful Performance
Bonds for the Town Officials and Employees for the year 2012 are approved as followed:
Town Supervisor/Fiscal Officer $3,000,000.00
Deputy Town Supervisor $3,000,000.00
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 25 of 26
Finance Officer $3,000,000.00
Receiver of Taxes $3,000,000.00
Town Clerk $ 25,000.00
Town Justice, James Salk $ 25,000.00
Town Justice, David Klein $ 25,000.00
Highway Superintendent $ 25,000.00
All Other Employees (Per Person) $ 25,000.00
Forgery & Alteration $ 5,000.00
MOVED: Pat Leary SECONDED: Rich DePaolo
VOTE: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Ms. Hunter pulled the item from consent and asked Mr. Solvig if there was not another reserve
account we are supposed to be funding annually. Ms. Drake responded that there was and Ms.
Hunter asked that it be put on the February agenda.
TB RESOLUTION NO. 2012–026: INCREASING THE OPEN SPACE PLAN RESERVE
WHEREAS, the Open Space Plan Reserve was created at the Ithaca Town Board on October 2,
1997 for the acquisition of development rights and the future development of parks and
preservation of open space, and
WHEREAS, as of the year ended December 31, 2011 the balance of the Open Space Plan
Reserve totaled $652,256 in reserved Fund Balance within the General Townwide Fund, and
WHEREAS, this Town Board indicated its intention to increase the Open Space Plan Reserve by
the amount of $75,000 in the 2012 Town of Ithaca Budget, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that this governing Town Board hereby designates an additional $75,000 of
unreserved Fund Balance of the General Townwide Fund as reserved for the Open Space Plan,
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town Board approves, authorizes and directs the Town Finance Officer to
transfer $75,000 from the General Townwide Fund account to the Open Space Plan Reserve
account.
MOVED: Tee-Ann Hunter SECONDED: Bill Goodman
VOTE: Ayes – Leary, Goodman, Hunter, Engman, Levine, DePaolo and Horwitz
Motion passed unanimously.
Report of Town Officials
Mrs. Terwilliger discussed the Shared Services Grant being proposed by the County. The
County has the infrastructure and is willing to allow all municipalities to use the system for their
records management. She read a letter of support drafted by the County. There was some
concern that the letter binds the Town without having any specifics or a contract. Discussion
Adopted 2-13-2012
TB Minutes 01-09-2012
Page 26 of 26
followed. Ms. Terwilliger stated that she would make changes to the letter, talk with the County
and discuss the topic again at the study session.
Ms. Ritter noted that we have been offered the opportunity to have a consultant come to the
Town to talk about the Energy Code and Green Building Code through NYSERDA and she
wanted to gauge the interest of the Board for scheduling. Mr. Bates added that as the Town
goes further into enforcing the new energy code, Board members will be the ones getting the
calls and letters asking why we are making them do this. Ms. Ritter will set up the meeting and
let Board members know when and where.
Mr. Engman reminded the Chairs of committees to canvass and set meeting dates.
Review of Correspondence
Ms. Hunter asked about the PILOT agreement for Ithaca Beer and she asked Ms. Brock to
explain the agency that they have to turn something over to. Mr. Engman responded that it was
his understanding that TCAD will be a holder of the mortgage so they have to have something
transferred to them. Ms. Hunter was hoping that we could learn how to read these PILOTs and
understand them and Mr. Engman agreed, adding that he hoped that would be the outcome of our
increased involvement with TCAD.
Meeting wa^adjourned upon motion and a second at 8:05p.m.
Respectl
n
Paulette Terwilliger, Town Clerk
n
Adopted 2-13-2012
■^1 V K. C C\, f
617.20^ Appendix A
State Environmental Quality Reviewj FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, In an orderly manner, whether a project or action may
be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of
a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal
knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge
in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concems affecting the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process
has been orderly, comprehensive In nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists
a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance
as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The
form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is
actually important.
THIS AREA FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE - Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identity the Portions of EAF completed for this project: El Part 1 Part 2 □ Part 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and
considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that:
El A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore. Is one which wili not have asignihcant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration wili be prepared.
□ 8. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effectfor this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore
a CONDITiONED negative declaration will be prepared.*
I 10. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the
environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared.
* A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Longview Patio Homes
Name of Action
Town of Ithaca Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Herb Engman Town Supervisor
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
I Signature of Resp^ible OW\cfm\x\ Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer)
//^//^
Date
Page 1 of 21
PART 1-PROJECT INFORMATION
Prepared Iqr Project Spcnaor- -
isl MSEP 22 2011
TOWNOFIfHACA
PLAMWIWQ / PMraiitfpppiiuA
NOTICE: This document Is designed to assist In determining whether the action proposed may have a significant ef/eci on il id '
environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the
application for approval and may be subject to further verification and publlo review. Provide any additional Information you believe
wUI be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It Is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on Information currently available and will Involve new studies,
research or Investigation. If Information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each Instance.
NameofActlnn Loagview Patio Homes
Location of Action (Include Street Address, Munidpallty and County)
1(X)6 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompldns County, NY 148S0
Name of AppUcant/Opeweer Schopfier Architccta LLP
Address 1111 James Street
Cfty/PO Syracuse StateNY Zip Code 13203
Business Telephone 313'474'6S01
Name of Owner (If different) ^BOTiOT)_jfoacaieCCTtar3CTylwCgafa
Address 1 Bells Vista Drive i
o»y/POlfi«a gtai.wY zipcwte J«50
Business Telephone 607-375-6300
On a 6.1 acre undeveloped paiccl adjoining
dweUing units) for lease to independent older adults. Eachdwelllns unitwillbeappioxiinatelyQ^^Faiidconstiactedassonestoiy,
two bedroom, two bath unit wifo single car garage. A request to the Town Board is underieview to «tniwMi the pnqjierty mnfag fiom
H J).R. (High Density Residentul) to PJ3.Z. (Planned Develcqinient Zone) to the 'djofning Longview paiceL
7 ^ CC-'iWi CM -11^ ^..,4,^
tM oJf , 'SVoM^w.fcj^
S(a.<Lai;4(« «.xA
tAoduLi -VWji. c>l.
ajt%
n
Page 2 of 21
>».PIeasa Complata Each Quastion~lndicata N.A. if not appdcaUa
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
Physical setting of overaO project both developed and undeveloped areas.
1.Present Und Use: Qurban Qlndustrfal Qcommerdal Q^fdontlai (suburban) QRural (non-farm)
LdForest QAgrteuttura |71Other UtHtovelonect formeragricutture. /nyh jpI. .
2. Total acreage of prq|ect area: 7.37 acma.
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION
Meadow or Brushtand (Non-agricultieaO 5.56 acres 1.10 acras
Forested 1.58 acres , areas
Agricultural (includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.)Oacies _JL acres
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24.25 of ECL)Oacras 0 nniM
Water Surface Ares Oacres areas
Unvagetated (Rock, earth or fill)Oaoes Oacras
Roads. buUdngs and othar paved surfaces
, .
other rindksta typBl Lawn/planting areas
0.13 acres
O^ip, acres
1.82 areas
z.'i-) ijp
3. Whst Is predominant soil type($) on project site? Lacustrine rilt and clay «g sand {
a. Soil drainage: LjWeO drained % of site Q Moderately wei^^ined k iOQ9i of^te.
CUpQoriy drained of site
b. If ariy agrlciilttiral land Is Involved, how many acres of soft are classified within soH group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land
Classification System? acres (see 1 NVCRR 370).
4. Are there bedrock outcropplfigs on project site? ^^Ves Qno
a. What Is depth to bedrock (In fiaet)
5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes:
ry|Q.10% 90% 010. 1S94 10% 1*^115%<ir<ieatar0 %
6. Is project substantiaU^onttguQus taor cont^ a buiiding, site, or district listed on the State or Natlofial Registers of
Historic Places? Yes No
7. Is project sufastantiaHy contiguous to a Site Hstad on the Register Of National Natural Landmarks? Oyss QiNo
What Is the depth of the water table? KyWflnfeaO
9. is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aqulfiar? Qves 0 No
10. Do hunting, fishing or sheH fishing opportunltlas presently exist In the project area? □ v«Q No
Paaa3of21
11. Does project slt8 contain any species of plant Of aftifrel life that is identtlted 8S threatened or eixIsngBred? [ZlYes [Uno
AccorcMnq to;
1NYS Department of Enviromnentai Conservatioii
12. Are there any urtque or unusual land forms on the project site? (I.e., cliffs, dimes, other geological form^ns?
□y« Qn.
Describe:
13. Is the project site presently used 1^ the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
Qves Qno
If yes, exotefei:
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be Important to the commimi^
I TVe •'OV
15. Streams whhln or contiguous to project area:
Neeo "Tute -arrta-XS oo-no-m*^ oim. u^^-VV^:rt a*a-su »
a. Nameof Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous t^yg^ area; j
An nbandoned quarry pit with wgt1and« chflracteriBtif^imSfwetlflnd/pond la situated due north of the project on the Longview |
parceL There will be no modification or impact U) this area.
b. Size (In acres)
0.7 acres
Page 4 of 21
7. ts the site served by existing public utilities? Yes Qno
a. if YES, does sufftelemcapadty exist to a^conriection? BYes Qno
b. If YES. wlil improvements be necessary to allow connection? igve. Qto
ia. is the site located In an agricuitwai district certified pursuant to Agrfcuitura and Markets Law. Article 25-AA. Section 303 and
3047 ONo
19. is the site locatad In or substantialjvcpntiguous to a Critical Envtronmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL.
and 6 NYCRR 617? □y« a No
20. Has the site ever been used for the cteposal of solid or hazardous wastes? felNo
B. Pipfict OescriptiQR
1. Physical dimensions and sc^ of prqfect (fill In dbnenslons as appropriate).
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by prefect sponsor: 34 aciaa.
b. Prqfect acreage to be developed: 4.79 acres NtitiaOy; 4.79 acres uitlmatBly.
c. Prqfect acreage to remain undeveloped: 2J8__acres.
d. Length of prqfect In miles: N/A (If c^ipropiiate)
e. if the prqfect Is an expansion. Indcate percent of expansion proposed. N/A%
!
f. Number of <rff-street oarklno spaces existing Q; proposed 34
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour: I'M ^(uoon completion of prqfect)?
h. if rasldentlat: Number and type of housing units:
One Family TWo Family Muttipie Family Condominium
0 11 0 0Initially
Ultimately 2 H 0 0
I. Dimensions On feet) of largest proposed structure: 2iydbhekdit: giy width: 55* length.
J. Linear feet of ftontage along a public thoroughfare prqfect witt occi^ Is? 73 ft
2. How much natural material 0-e. rock, earth, etc.) wfH bo removed from the she? .O___tonsfcuble yards.
3. will rfisturtmd areas be reclaimed QYes Qho
a. if yes, for what Intended purpose Is the site being ledabned?
b. WiH topsoH be stockpiled for reclamation? 0Yes Qno
c. WIN upper sufasoli be stockpiled for reclamation? Byos Q No
4. Howmanyacresofvegetatlon(trees.slvubs. ground covers) win be removed ftom Site?acres.
Pae»Sof 21
I I5. will aivm8tusfi]cest(ov<r 100 years oM) or othsriocally-lnipaitam vegetation be tonoved by thbprcilea?
□ Yes El No
6. If single phase project: Arrtlcfpated period Of construction: i2_ months, (Inchiding demolition)
7. if multl-phased:
a. Total number of phases anticipated (number)
b. Antiripat^ date of cnfnmgncgment Phase 1; month year, (induding demolitton)
c. Approximate completion data of fi nal phase: month
d. is phase 1 functlonaHy dependent on subsequent phases? □ Yes □ No
8. WHI blasting occur during construction? Elites [3 No
9. Number of lobs oenerated; during constmction ii? ; after project Is complete 4
10. Nuntiier of jobs eliminated by this project 0 .
11. WiS project require relocation of any prqiects or facilities? riYes [3 No
If yes. explain:
12. Is surface liquid waste (fisposa) involved? d Yes I3no ^
a. If yes, indctte type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc) and amount
b. Mama of water body Into which effluent wW be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal Involved? [3^^ ^0
14. wai surface area of an existbig water body Increase or decrease by proposal? nYeslRlNo
If yes. expiabi:
15. Is project or arty portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? (3^^ 13^(0
16. WiB the project generate solid waste? Yes Ono
a. tfyes. whatlsthearnourKperrTxmtii1^JiSjSl.tons
b. If yes. will an existing solid waste facility be used? [El Yes □ No
c. If yes. give name Tompkins County i i " ' location Tompkins County Ttansfer Station
d. Will any wastes not go Into a sewage disposal system orlnto a saititary landfill? LJYes IfLI No
Page 6 of 21
e. If yes, expiatn:
17. Wtll the project Involve the disposal of solid waste? □ Yes 13 No
a. Ifyes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month.
b. Ifyes. what is the anticipated site fife?.years.
18. WHI pntiect use herbicides or pesticides? No
19. Wil prqiect routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? n Yes No
20. Wffl project produce operating noise exceerfing the local ambient noise levels? CUves I^No
21. WBI project result In an Increase in energy use? Qyos O
If yes. indicate type(s)
Natural Oas, clectriciw» water
22. if w^ supply is from weSs. indicate pumping capacity gadons/mirntie.
23. Total antic^iated water usage per d«y gaiions/day.
24. Does project involve Local. State or Federal funding? Yes B No
Ifyes. explain:
Page 7 of 21
2S. Appravsto Requirod:
■en^ Town* VHtege Board Q Yes cn No
-mf. Town* Village Planning Board Qves O
City* Town Zoning Board
Other Local Agencies
State Agencies
Federal Agencies
No
Oves tSI No
City. County Health 0^)artinent □ves ^ No
□y« □No
Other Regional Agencies □ve. B NO
Qves B
□v« B
No
No
Type
Zoning Amendment
r-\
Submittal Date / •
7/14/U
(ConiiiMttt*
Site Plan Review
-Sketch plan
Preliminaiy
City Fire Dpt
1(yi9/10
08/2011
1/19/11 (email)
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1. Does proposed action Involve a planning or zoning decision? Bves □ NO
If Yes. indicate decision required:
B Zoidng amendntent □ Zoning variance □ New/revision of master plan
BsKsplx Q Special use perniit DuBsouroe management plan
□ Subdivl^on
□ other
Page 8 of 21
•/-N 2. What is the zoning ciass(fication(s) of the site?
HDR* High Deosity Residcntim
3. What Is tte maxinaim potential deveiopmem of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
28 dwelling units (i/9000 SF of lot) orlj^ oa tsh
oa:A^ OkAdk orAOkjcKftji tSwi-V -Vi vsjOsV* -VUi.
'"^Ar«3& t4<j Oax^S . (^^r)
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site?
FDZ-7, Planned Development Zone
5. What is the maximum potentiai development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
[22) dwelling units (per language m PDZ)
i. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted localland use plans? E|Yes Qno
7. Wh* are the predominant land use(s) and zonbig dassiflcattons within a V4 mile radhjs of proposed action?
Office park commercial (north).
High density residential (south and east),
Low density residential (west),
- PDZ (nmth)
— CxVV\o-«j»-
8. is the proposed action compatibie with adjoining/surrounding land uses with a V4 miie? Bj^es [I]'*'®
9. if the proposed action is the sutxlMsion of land, how many lots are proposed? N/A
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?
Paged of 21
10. win proposed action i«aireaiwauthorizatk3n(s) for the fonnatkjn of sevw or vwter districts? ClYes
11. Will the proposed action create a demand for ariy community provided services (recreation, education. poBce, fire protection?
Hves
a. If yes. Is existing capacity suffldenl to handle projected demand? Hves IUn®
12. WM the proposed action result In the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? QYesuNo
a. If yes. Is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic. CIyos Dno
I ——
Date 8/20/11
Signature
Title Partner, Schopfer Architects LLP
No significant increase beyond existing facility police and fire piotectiGn need(s)
O. Iiifuimaiional Detail
Attach any addltlonallnfbrmation as may be needed to clartfy your prqject.associated with your proposal, please (Sscuss such Impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avow them.
E. Verification
I certify that the Infonnatlon provided above Is true to the best of nty knowledge.
Appficant/Sponsor Name Datvid A. Schloaser, A.LA.
If the eetfon is in the Aree» end you ere e state agmcy, complite the Coestii Assessment Foim belora praceedhig wfth this
Page 10 of 21
PART 2 - PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE
Responsibility of Lead Agency
General Information (Read Carefully)
I In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been
reasonable? The reviewer Is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst.
I The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of
magnitude that would trigger a response In column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for
most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a
Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3.
I The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been
offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive iist of impacts and thresholds to answer each question.
I The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question.
I In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumulative effects.
Instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 20 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact.
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. if answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box(column 1 or 2)to indicate the potential size of the impact. If
Impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact wili occur but threshold is lower than
example, check column 1.
Identifying that an Impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that It is also necessarily significant. Any
large impact must be evaiuated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply asks that it
be looked at further.
If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3.
If a potentially large impact checked In column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a smail to moderate
impact, aiso check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be
explained in Part 3.
d.
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
2
Potential
Large
Impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
Impact on Land
1. Will the Proposed Action result in a physical change to the project
site?
NO □ YES 0
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot
rise per 100 foot of length), or where the general slopes
in the project area exceed 10%.
• Construction on land where the depth to the water table
is less than 3 feet.
• Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more
vehicles.
• Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or
generaily within 3 feet of existing ground surface.
• Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or
involve more than one phase or stage.
• Excavation for mining purposes that would remove
more than 1,000 tons of natural material (I.e., rock or
soil) per year.
□
□
n
□
□
□
□ □ Yes nNo
□ □ Yes nNo
□ O Yes Dno
□ □ Yes Dno
n n Yes
□ □ Yes nNo
Page 11 of 21
1 2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated by
Impact Impact Project Change
Construction or expansion of a santary landfill.□□C^Yes C3no
Construction in a designated floodway.□□nives CD No
Other impacts:□□CD Yes CD No
See attached supplement for description.
2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on
the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)INO [—[YES0
Specific land forms:
Impact on Water
Will Proposed Action affect any water body designated as protected?
(Under Articles 15,24,25 of the Environmental Conservation Law,
ECL)gjNO □YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
Developable area of site contains a protected water body.
Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of
a protected stream.
□
□
nves ^3 No
□ Dves nNo
□ □ves nNo
4. Will Proposed Action affect any non-protected existing or new body of
water?□no Qyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• A10% Increase or decrease In the surface area of any body of
water or more than a 10 acre Increase or decrease.
• Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface
area.
• Other impacts:
The proposal will require a road crossing over 2 existing streams. The installation of culverts to create the crossings will
result in only minor impacts.
□□r iyos
Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water □nVes
□
z O
body.
Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland.□□□ybs □ no
Other impacts:□Oyss □ no
oZ
□
□□□yos Qno
0 □1 lYea
c
oz
□
Page 12 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
impact
2
Potential
Large
Impact
3
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or
quantity?□no Qyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action wiii require a discharge permit.□□nYes riNo
• Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not
have approval to serve proposed (project) action.
□□CJves ^3 No
• Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater
than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity.
□□nVes Qno
• Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water
supply system.
□□□ ves nNo
• Proposed Action wiii adversely affect groundwater.o □Dves riNo
• Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which
presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
□
• Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons
per day.
□□Dves riNc
• Proposed Action will likely cause siitation or other discharge into
an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an
obvious visual contrast to natural conditions.
□□[jjYes CIno
• Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or
chemical products greater than 1,100 gallons.
□□Qyos riNo
• Proposed Action wiii allow residential uses in areas without
water and/or sewer services.
□□Dyos CIng
• Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses
which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment
and/or storage facilities.
• Other impacts:
□□
□
n^es nNo
riYes Dno
See attached supplement for description.
Page 13 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
2
Potential
Large
Impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change I I
6. Will Proposed Action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water
runoff?□no Qyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action would change flood water flows □□riyes Ono
• Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion.n □Dyss C3no
• Proposed Action Is Incompatible with existing drainage patterns.□□nves □no
• Proposed Action will allow development in a designated
floodway.
n □nVes □no
• Other Impacts:□C^Yes □no
See attached supplement for description.
IMPACT ON AIR
Will Proposed Action affect air quality?□ NO □YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips In any
given hour.□□C^Ves □no
Proposed Action will result In the incineration of more than 1 ton
of refuse per hour.
□□CUves □no
• Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour
or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per
hour.
□C3y0S □no
Proposed Action will allow an increase In the amount of land
committed to Industrial use.
□□L-Jyos □no
• Proposed Action will allow an Increase In the density of
industrial development within existing Industrial areas.
□nYes
oz
□
• Other impacts:□□^^Yes 1^3No
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species?Q]N0 ^YES
Examples that would apply to column 2
* Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or
Federal list, using the site, over or near □□nYes □no
the site, or found on the site.
Page 14 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
2
Potential
Large
Impact
3
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
• Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat.□□Dves FIno
• Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year,
other than for agricultural purposes.
□FJves ^^No
• Other Impacts:□□CUYes 0|no
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-
endangered species?□ NO QYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
Proposed Action would substantially Interfere with any resident
or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species.
• Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of
mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally Important
vegetation.
Other Impacts:
□
□
□
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES
10. Will Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources?[^NO riVES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The Proposed Action would sever, cross or limit access to
agricultural land (Includes cropland, hayflelds, pasture, vineyard,
orchard, etc.)
• Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of
agricultural land.
• The Proposed Action would Irreversibly convert more than 10
acres of agricultural land or. If located In an Agricultural District,
more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land.
□
□
□ Qves □ No
□ QYes QNo
^Ives [Uno
See attached supplement for descnption.
□ Dyes □No
n n^es
n nves Qno
Page 15 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
The Proposed Action would disrupt or prevent Installation of
agricultural land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain
lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such
measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to
increased runoff).
Other impacts:
□
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11. Will Proposed Action affect aesthetic resources? (If necessary, use
the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.20, Appendix B.)□no Qyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different
from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use
patterns, whether man-made or natural.
• Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce
their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
Project components that will result in the elimination or
significant screening of scenic views known to be important to
the area.
• Other impacts:
□
□
□
□
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic,
prehistoric or paieontological importance?[gNo □yes
Examples that wouid apply to column 2
• Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or
substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State
or National Register of historic places.
• Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within
the project site.
• Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive
for archaeologicai sites on the NYS Site Inventory.
□
□
□
2
Potential
Large
impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
D n\yes □No
01 Yes 101
□ DYes Dno
01 OlYes O No
□ DYes □No
O Dyos O No
O Qyos Qno
□ □ Yes □ No
Q Oves 0]no )
Page 16 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
Other impacts;
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13. Will proposed Action affect the quantity or quaiity of existing or future
open spaces or recreational opportunities?□ NO Qyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity.
• A major reduction of an open space important to the community.
• Other impacts:
IMPACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS
14. Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique
characteristics of a critical environmental area (CEA) established
pursuant to subdivision 6NYCRR 617.14(g)?[gNO □yes
List the environmental characteristics that caused the designation of
the CEA.
Examples that would apply to column 2
Proposed Action to locate within the CEA?
• Proposed Action will result In a reduction in the quantity of the
resource?
• Proposed Action will result In a reduction in the quality of the
resource?
• Proposed Action will impact the use, function or enjoyment of the
resource?
Other impacts:
2
Potential
Large
Impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
^^^Yes No
□□□Yes □no
□1 1 LjYes □no
□□riyes |_Jno
□□□ves I~Ino
□□Yes □no
□□^]Yes ^JNo
□□CIyss □ no
□□i^Yas □ no
Page 17 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION
15. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems?□ no Hyes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or
goods.
• Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems.
• Other impacts:
□
IMPACT ON ENERGY
16. Will Proposed Action affect the community's sources of fuel or
energy supply?
□no □yes
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% Increase in the
use of any form of energy in the municipality.
• Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an
energy transmission or supply system to serve more than 50
single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial
or industrial use.
Other Impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACT
17. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of
the Proposed Action?
0NO □yes
Examples that would apply to column 2
Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive
facility.
Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day).
Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the
local ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures.
Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a
noise screen.
Other impacts:
2
Potential
Large
Impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change ' 1
n ^^Yes □No
□ves Ono
Qves Qno
See attached supplement for descnption
[^Yes ^Dno
□ Dyos Qno
n DYes Dl
□□l_]Yes □ no
□□Oybs □ no
□□□Yes □ no
□□□yss □ no
□□□yss □ no
Page 18 of 21
1
Small to
Moderate
Impact
2
Potential
Large
Impact
Can Impact Be
Mitigated by
Project Change
IMPACT ON PUBUG HEALTH
18. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?
^NO nVESH'
Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of
hazardous substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation,
etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be
a chronic low level discharge or emission.
Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes"
in any form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive,
irritating, infectious, etc.)
Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquefied
natural gas or other flammable liquids.
Proposed Action may result in the excavation or other
disturbance within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of
solid or hazardous waste.
Other impacts:
□
□
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER
OF COMMUNfTY OR NBGHBORHOOD
19. Will Proposed Action affect the character of the existing community?□no QYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the
project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%.
The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating
services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of
this project.
□
□
services (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
□ Dves □No
□ nYes Qno
n ^^Yes C3no
O Dves [I]no
□ DYes □No
□ DYes Dno
□ Oyos Ono
Proposed Action will conflict with officially adopted plans or □n ^^Yes Qno
goals.
□Proposed Action will cause a change in the density of land use.^^Yes □no
Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities,□□□Yes □no
structures or areas of historic Importance to the community.
Development will create a demand for additional community 0 □riYes
oz
□
Page 19 of 21
• Proposed Action will set an Important precedent for future
projects.
• Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment.
Other Impacts:
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated by
Impact Impact Project Change
□□nNo
n □Dves Qno
□□Clves ^3 No
20. Is there, or Is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential
adverse environment impacts?□no □yes
See attached supplement for descnption
If Any Action In Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If you Cannot Determine the Magnitude of
Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Page 20 of 21
Longview Patio Homes
State Environmental Quality Review
Full Environmental Assessment
Fart n - Description of Project Impacts and Their Magnitude
Action: Longview Patio Homes
Modification of the Longview Planned Development Zone (PDZ) to add
additional parcel (rezone fi'om High Density Residential to a PDZ),
authorize use of parcel for adult independent living duplexes, and revise
restrictions on occupancy
Location: Danby Road, including 1 Bella Vista Drive and adjacent parcel to the
south
Tax Parcel Nos. 39-1-3.2 and 39-1-1.31
Lead Agency: Town of Ithaca Town Board
Description: The proposed action involves amending Chapter 271, Section 271-8, "Planned
Development Zone No. 7" to include allowing an additional parcel within the Planned
Development Zone (PDZ) (rezoning tax parcel no. 39-1-3.2 firom High Density Residential to
PDZ) for the proposed Longview Patio Homes development project located off Danby Road and
Bella Vista Drive, tax parcel nos. 39.-1-1.31 and 39.-1-3.2. The development proposal involves
constructing 11 duplexes (22 total rental units) on a new access drive created off of Bella Vista
Drive for an independent senior residential development. The proposal will also involve new
walkways, stormwater facilities, outdoor lighting, extension of utilities, and landscaping. Also
included is the dedication of a water utility line (following its construction) and water line
easement to the Town.
The proposed project is an Unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review
Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 148 - Environmental Quality
Review.
Impact on Land
1. Will the proposed Action result in a nhvsical change to the project site?
Other Impacts: The proposed action involves disturbance of +/- 4.8 acres of land for
development of 11 duplexes (22 residential units) which have a combined building
footprint of approximately 37,400 square feet (3,400 square feet/per duplex) along with a
loop access road, walkways, and stormwater facilities.
a. Briefly describe the impact:
The proposed project will result in a physical change to the project site with disturbance of
approximately +/- 4.8 acres of land for the construction of the 11 duplexes, access road,
walkways and stormwater facilities. The project boundary limits are identified on drawing LI.6
("Project Development Area"). As indicated on the drawing, +/- 3.5 acres of disturbance will
occur on tax parcel no. 39-1-3.2. The total acreage of this parcel is 6.1 acres. Additional
disturbance of 1.27 acres is proposed on the existing Longview parcel for development of the
road connection and extension of the existing nature trail.
The 6.1 acre parcel proposed for the patio home development is currently undeveloped and is
composed of large areas of open field and meadow along with a mix of deciduous and conifer
trees. Groups of conifers of similar age (relatively young) and desirable species (firs and
spruces), along with anecdotal information provided by the applicant, indicates these were likely
plantings for Christmas trees. Older species of conifers such as red pines and Norway spruces
are also common, especially along the perimeter of the property. With the exception of the
north end of the property most of the deciduous trees appear relatively young. Near the proposed
entrance to the new residential development (in the vicinity of the two parcel boundaries) there
are larger deciduous trees including two notable/impressive oaks and a hickory. These trees
appear to be within the proposed disturbance area, but if at all possible, preservation of one or
more of these trees should be attempted.
The project is not within a Unique Natural Area (UNA). The nearest UNA is the South Hill
Swamp UNA which is across the road on the east side of Danby Road/NYSR 96.
A stream and a smaller drainageway/swale are located on the existing Longview property,
running parallel to (east/west) and in close proximity to the new parcel containing the patio
homes. Construction of the access drive from the Longview property will require a crossing over
the watercourses and installation of culverts. There were no streams observed on the patio
homes parcel and none were reported in the CIS database for streams. Both of these
watercourses currently appear to be directed towards the existing wetland/stormwater detention
pond on the Longview property.
In terms of topography, the development area is moderately sloped, containing more gentle
slopes on the western portion of the site where the development is proposed. Slopes in this area
of the site range from around 4%-5%, and increase steadily toward Route 96 (east) where
grades of almost 10% can be foimd. Grading of the site will be necessary for construction,
however, no excavated materials are proposed to moved (trucked) off site. In addition, the
applicant intends to utilize and stockpile the mulch created from chipped trees and vegetation
that will be removed as part of the project.
According to the Soil Survey for Tompkins County (1965), much of the site contains soils with
moderate to poor drainage characteristics. This includes Ovid and Rhinebeck silt loams
(moderately well-drained to somewhat poor), Erie channery silt loam (somewhat poorly-
drained), along with small inclusions of Hudson silty clay loam (well-drained to moderately
well-drained) and Lordstown, Tuller, and Ovid soils (well drained to poorly drained). In
addition, according to the applicant, the depth to bedrock is relatively shallow at +/- 5 feet. A
site visit by staff on 10/18/11 confinned the presence of standing water throughout much of the
western portion of the vacant patio homes parcel. No wetland plant species were observed, and
it is possible that recent weather conditions, along with cooler fall temperatures, have created
unusually wet conditions that are not normally present on this site. According to the Northeast
Regional Climate Center (Ithaca Climate Page), rainfall totals for September were 10.46 inches
(normal is 3.84 inches) and on 10/15/11 (three days earlier than site visit) almost 1 inch of ,, \
rainfall was reported to have fallen. Nevertheless, development of the site will need to take into
consideration ^e poor drainage characteristics. Stormwater management is discussed in sections
#6 below.
Based on the above information, impacts identified in this section can be considered small to
moderate.
Impact on Water
5. Will proposed action affect surface or groundwater aualitv or auantitv?
6. Will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoff?
Other Impacts: This project will result in changes to the existing stormwater runoff
conditions, including a decrease in impervious surfaces, thus potentially affecting water
quality and drainage flow patterns/runoff.
a. Briefly describe the impact:
The project will result in the conversion of almost 2 acres of meadow/woods to impervious
surfaces and disturbance of an additional +/- 3 acres for lawn/landscaping. The removal of deep
rooted vegetation and the construction of hard surfaces will result in an increase in stormwater
runoff volumes and rates, subsequently affecting drainage pattems and water quality.
Existing drainage on the site is influenced by both soils and slope. As described above in
question #1 (Impacts on Land), soils on the site have moderate to poor drainage characteristics,
meaning infiltration is slow and this is further constrained by the depth to bedrock at only +/-5
feet. Under conditions of heavy precipitation, drainage would inevitably rely primarily on sheet
flow, and following topographic conditions sheet flow would be expect to move most rapidly
along the steeper grade (near Route 96B) and less so towards the western portion of the property
where the grade becomes gentle. Such conditions were observed by staff on 10/18/11, with
standing water observed throughout much of the western portion of the property following a 1.0
inch rainfall event that occurred several days earlier.
The addition of impervious surfaces for the patio homes development will further add to the poor
drainage conditions of the site. To address this situation the applicant is proposing to construct
diversion swales. As shown on drawing D-1 (Conceptual Stormwater Management Plan) a
diversion swale is proposed along the eastern edge of the development to collect sheet flow on
the up-hill side of the parcel before it enters the development. Drainage from this swale will be
directed to an open area and allowed to sheet flow above and toward an existing drainageway on
the Longview facility property. Dispersion techniques may be needed at the outlet of the swale
(to be determined by Town Engineers upon calculated flow volumes) in order to diffuse and
reduce flow velocities and minimize channelization and erosion of the land. Swales are also
proposed within the internal development which would allow runoff to be diverted to new
proposed stormwater facilities, including a bio-retention facility and an associated dry detention
facility, to provide water quality treatment and runoff attenuation.
The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Stormwater Management Report. This plan outlines
a basic concept for addressing stormwater management. Overall the proposed concept appears to
adequately address stormwater. A final Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan providing
additional details and flow calculations, including a plan for long-term operation and
maintenance of the stormwater infrastructure will be required prior to final approval. Also
required will be an erosion and sedimentation control plan to address construction related runoff.
Based on the above information, impacts identified in this section can be adequately addressed
and should be considered small to moderate.
Impact on Plants and Animals
9. Will Proposed Action substantiallv affect non-threaten or non-endaneered species?
Other impacts: Project will result in the conversion of approximately 4.5 acres of
undeveloped meadow and forest to residential development.
a. Briefly describe the impact:
The proposed project will result in the removal of approximately 4.5 acres of woods and meadow
plants which is anticipated to also result in die displacement of some wildlife species. The land
is not within a Unique Natural Area and the vegetation on the site appears to be fairly common,
consisting of a mostly early successional forest tree species, along with groupings of various
conifer trees (likely for Christmas tree harvesting) with somewhat more mature trees along the •
perimeter of the property (patio homes parcel). The loss of 4.5 acres of common habitat would
not be considered a significant impact. A large expanse of undeveloped land is contiguous to the
property (including the western half of the Longview facility parcel) which can likely absorb
wildlife that will be displaced by the project. As described in question #1, there are two
notable/impressive oaks and a hickory near the proposed entrance to the patio homes
development. These trees appear to be within the proposed disturbance area, but if at all
possible, preservation of one or more of these trees should be attempted.
Based on the above information, impacts identified in this section can be adequately addressed
and should be considered small to moderate.
Impact on Transportation
15. Will there be an effect to existing transportation svstems?
Other impacts: Project will generate additional vehicle trips per day.
a. Briefly describe the impact:
The amount of additional vehicle trips per day as a result of the project is anticipated to be
negligible. The project will add 22 new residential units for independently living retired senior
citizens. As shown on the site plan drawing each unit will be equipped with a driveway and
garage. While it is likely that residents of this development will own a car and utilize it , ^
periodically, it is unlikely that any of the residents will regularly contribute to the traffic
congestion of the Ithaca area during the morning and evening rush hours; during peak traffic
flow. As retirees, they are imlikely to drive as fi*equently as working residents/commuters do,
and when they do drive, they are likely to do so outside of the regular weekday commuting
period. In addition, residents of this community will be able to participate in &e many events,
activities and services that are provided in the Longview facility, necessitating even less vehicle
trips than retiree living in a typical single family housing neighborhood.
According to the Trip Generation (7^^ edition) book produced by the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE), the average estimated vehicle trips/day of an individual living in a "Continuing
Care Retirement Commimity" is approximately 2.8 on weekdays (compared to 9.57 for single
family residences). The ITE cautions that these figures are very preliminary and that the
Institute has only begun studying traffic generation for this relatively new land use category.
But in order to provide a very rough analysis for the patio home development proposal, using the
ITE figures, the total number of additional vehicle trips per day could be estimated at
approximately 62.
Based on the above information, impacts identified in this section can be adequately addressed
and should be considered small to moderate.
Impacts on Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood
19. Will proposed action affect the character of fee existing community?
Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use.
Development will create a demand for additional communitv services.
a. Briefly describe the impact:
The Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan (1993) designates the site and much of the surrounding
area as "Urban Residential" and "Suburban Residential" which anticipates additional growth that
can be served by public water and sewer. The site is currently zoned High Density Residential,
which would allow a mitiimnm lot size of 9000 square feet. The total development potential of
the site, if developed for single-family homes, is approximately 23 (if using an 80% buildable
factor) and with an allowance for each imit to have an additional attached secondary unit, the
total maximum number of residential units for this parcel is for 46. The proposal for 11
duplexes, totaling 22 residential units, appears consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and
existing zoning. The proposal to rezone the property to a Planned Development Zone is to more
easily incorporate the project into the existing Longview Planned Development Zone.
The proposed project would likely create some additional demand for commimity services, in
particular fire/emergency services. The Town of Ithaca contracts with the City of Ithaca Fire
Department to provide fire protection and emergency services in the town. The South Hill Fire
Station is located approximately 700 feet north of the Longview facility, off Danby Road/Route
96B. Demand for emergency services tends to be relatively higher for senior housing facilities,
t however, the 22 new residential units is not likely to create a significant demand.
Tom Parsons, Fire Chief for the Ithaca Fire Department, had expressed concerns to Town staff
about the patio homes development relying on the single entrance off Route 96B. These
concerns were alleviated by the proposal to install sprinklers within each of the patio homes. In
addition, the Fire Department has reviewed the application drawings and determined that the
proposed access road is acceptable for fire department apparatus access.
Based on the information above, impacts identified in this section can be considered to be small
to moderate.
Staff Recommendation. Determination of Significance
Based on review of the materials submitted for the proposed action, the proposed scale of it, and
the information above, a negative determination of environmental significance is recommended
for the action as proposed.
Lead Agency: Town of Ithaca Town Board
Reviewer: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning
Mike Smith, Environmental Planner
Review Date: December 20,2011
I >