Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2001-04-19 Special Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Thursday, April 19 , 2001 at 5 : 30 p . m . Town Hall , 215 North Tioga St. , Ithaca , NY AGENDA 1 . Call to Order 2 . Pledge of Allegiance 3 , ECO Village - Discussion of Adequacy of Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement 4 , Consider Approval of Job Classification Listing 5 . Discussion of Tompkins County Communication Towers Project 6 . Consider Adjournment l Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD THURSDAY, APRIL 19, 2001 AT 5 : 30 P . M . ITHACA TOWN HALL, 215 NORTH TIOGA ST. , ITHACA, NY At a special meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York held at the Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street , there were present : PRESENT : Supervisor Cathy Valentino ; Councilwoman Carolyn Grigorov ; Councilman William Lesser; Councilman Tom Niederkorn ; Town Clerk Tee-Ann Hunter; Attorney John Barney ; Director of Planning Jonathan Kanter; Director of Engineering Daniel Walker; Human Resources Specialist Judy Drake OTHERS : Martha Armstrong , 766 Elm Street Extension ; Rod Lambert , Eco Village ; Kathy Wolfe , Trowbridge & Wolfe Landscape Architects Call to Order : The Supervisor called the meeting to order at 5 : 30 p . m . , and led the assemblage in The Pledge of Allegiance Agenda Item No . 3 — Adequacy of the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Eco Village Martha Armstrong appeared before the Board to comment upon the adequacy of the Eco- Village Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement. Her comments appear in Attachment # 1 . Councilwoman Grigorov — Are there alternatives in here that are not developed sufficiently? Or are there not enough alternatives ? Martha Armstrong — I did have a chance to looks this over. The alternatives are not detailed at all in picture . They are simply stated . They are only stated as a short paragraph and all four alternatives , I believe , fit on one page . It is my feeling that we need to have a graphic idea of what they are talking about so that we can look at it and compare . Cost and benefit information simply saying , "This is too expensive for us" period is not adequate . Supervisor Valentino asked for other questions for Ms. Armstrong. There were none. Rod Lambert , Eco Village Resident — My cohort , David Eric , could not be here tonight and I am expecting Katherine Wolfe for questions . I will give an overview of what we are trying to do . On page 9 ( of what . . . . ) is a master plan for future developments , hence the need for a generic . Eco needs some room to breath on this and is intending to build , at least in the special land use district wording , up to 150 units . The first neighborhood is in just above the pond . To its immediate west is the site plan made out for the second neighborhood . And then , to the north , 3 egg-shaped cells made thus because we are looking at the development from a response to need process . We want to plan ahead but we also want to be able to respond to the sensibilities of the residents in terms of how many . Current sensibilities are that somewhere between 3 , or 4 , or its equivalent would be built . That 's really what I think is the most likely scenario , but we have 1 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved gone ahead to ask for 150 units and shown in the DGEIS the impact of 150 units , as well as specific impacts of a second neighborhood . The outline of the property , 176 acres , is in the dashed , dark line . It is quite articulated . It has contact at West Haven Road for a piece of the property , and contact for a very small piece of the highway Mecklenburg Road . Essentially it creates a u -shape around the City Lights Antiques buildings in the middle . There are currently 2 ponds . One is an agricultural pond that handles irrigation and runoff. Irrigation for the West Haven Farm , which is a community , support agriculture organic farm currently at 10 acres . It ' s a type of farming that invites the greater Ithaca area people to participate in a share system , taking shares of the actual produce . You can , of course , see the main artery , Rachel Carson Way to feed that neighborhood . The area that was chosen for residential was chosen for a number of reasons . Partly to save the best farmland , because there is a very significant agricultural component to Eco Village ' s intentions , save the better quality farmlands for farming . That ' s why West Haven Farm is there . To remain distant from the high tension power lines . We did not want to be building under them or very close to them . There is a 55-acre easement that is given to Finger Lakes Land Trust , which is adjacent to the farm . We are , on the very most western projection of the property , planning to set aside 30 odd acres as a natural area . This land , Eco Village land , is actually not contiguous with the Unique Natural Area , but is close to it and it seemed appropriate to set it aside in that area ; and in some deference to Long House which has a 10 acre buffer zone between it , which it has planted in pine trees that are 10 to 15 foot height now . They bought that a while ago as a screen from development . We were thinking that we would add this land to that area for those various reasons . The remaining land will have agricultural designation . While there ' s 176 acres the intention is to put up these 150 units on as little as 30 acres of the property and retain the remainder for green space . There is some sense of hoping to model a better way to develop lands that are adjacent to urban areas . If we can show that it is a tenable model of development that ' s an aerial view of Ithaca a couple of decades hence could show a tremendous amount of green space around it without sacrificing the density . We picked 150 for various reasons , but one of the significances of that number is that it is the number of units that was planned for by a previous developer who owned the land who was going to basically use up the entire parcel of land to put that many houses on . It became a bit of a target of Eco Village to see how much land could we put that same number of units on . We have it down to probably even less than 30 acres when we are finished . At that there will be green spaces and gardens amongst those existing houses . A great deal of thought has gone into how best to use the land . This isn 't , as you know , a developer that will just walk away from the final product . The developers are the people who are going to live there and who care very much about what happens to the land and hope to develop it in as ecologically sensitive a way as possible . It is important to us to do so . Some 100 people participated in a visioning plan that is a little different than this now in about 1993 / 1994 to generate ideas and planning for the future , including future gardens , and aquatics , and perma-culture , and so on . It certainly represents a great deal of work and thought and it continues to be thought about how best to develop this . 2 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved That' s the general overview . We do have some maps . This shows primarily the SoNG site with the existing first neighborhood group partly shown on the right hand , or eastern , side of the neighborhood . You ' ll see what appear to be roads that run through the middle of the neighborhood . This is in deference to emergency access . They are actually not going to be appearing as roads because Eco Village is adopting a co- housing principle of development that essentially removes vehicular traffic from the internal areas of the neighborhood and is left primarily for pedestrian uses . So this will be a stabilized walkway capable of handling emergency vehicles . But generally speaking it is intended for pedestrian use and will be grassed back into more like a six-foot path . It will be marked out for emergency vehicles and maintained and plowed for emergency vehicles . In the very center is an area below that main emergency road which will be gardens and playground viewable from the homes so the parents have some visual contact with children in the playgrounds . And the difference in this particular neighborhood with the houses farther apart is that the common building , called the common house , will be central and in view of most homes . There are greater spaces between the homes desired by the residents for aesthetic purposes , but it also helps for view from the common house , it' s called a view gap . In fact , in the center, the south , this also represents extra thought to fire safety . The artery that drops to the south and gives an upside down Y shape to it near the pond is an access for fire trucks for a dry hydrant . A dry hydrant is also planned to be placed in the center of the neighborhood . Fire trucks , in our talks with the Fire Department , they would arrive at the lower pond site dry hydrant and actually pump and pressurize the one in the middle of the neighborhood for fire truck to use . There is also a loop kind of road , as you can see a spur comes off and then loops so that there are multiple access points . The parking , again , as is desired by the co- housing idea is to the north of the neighborhood . Eventually there is a desire to form a kind of area that would be common to all neighborhoods , or a village green , which is where the loop road , at the end of Rachel Carson . All of that area is hoped to be eventually moved towards a village green , a place for playing fields, perhaps a tennis court , something like that would be held and used in common by all the neighborhoods and form a kind of collection area , a way of connecting the neighborhoods together. Most of the drainage for the neighborhood has been thought through . The intention for drainage is to use surface swales as much as possible . Retention basins as much as possible . Mitigate torrential flows into the pond . But most of that site water is being moved in an easterly direction and retained and moved to the pond . There ' s virtually, in fact I don 't believe there will be any flow other than to the pond which will help to retain its level for fire fighting as well as for aesthetic use . It is a congregation area , a sort of poor man 's air conditioning in the hot summer months . Are there questions ? Councilman Lesser — On your earlier map , do those , including this one and this other elliptical areas , does that indicate the likely full development of houses on this land at some future time ? Rod Lambert - Yes . That is the maximum planned area for residential . There ' s an actual open field there that has been mowed and the intention would be that that' s where all future building would be . No intrusion into the woods , for example . 3 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Councilman Niederkorn — This is clearly the plan for the whole area as best you ' re able to divine it at the moment . Is it possible in the future that some of these elements might move around some ? Rod Lambert - Say a residential area versus agricultural area ? Councilman Niederkorn — Yes . Rod Lambert - It seems very unlikely at the moment . A berry farm , CSA Berry Farm , is now underway and is under lease immediately to the indicates on plan, and the land to its immediate east has been placed in a land trust with Finger Lakes Land Trust . If it were to do so it would have to move west into a natural area which there is currently no desire to do . Or south of the existing neighborhood which would impinge on view sheds of those neighborhoods and is undesirable . So , it's a very high probability that that is the best place to go . It seems very unlikely we would move anywhere else . There isn 't the space to do that kind of number anywhere else . Councilman Niederkorn — What is the nature of this agricultural area designation , and the natural area set aside ? What does that mean ? Do you actually farm in this agricultural area south of the first neighborhood ? Rod Lambert - Not currently other than it has been brushed out . There ' s no farming taking place at the moment . There currently is a kind of hobby farm to the immediate east of FroG where we have sheep , goats , chickens ; mostly they' re like 8 sheep . That is more of a hobby farm for the interest of Eco Village and it's also a community garden that has been deer fenced and is also open to greater Ithaca . Councilman Niederkorn — The actual farming takes place where ? Rod Lambert - The farming takes place to the immediate east of the Land Trust area . That ' s where the best land is . The easterly slopes are ideal for orchards . Currently 10 acres of that area are actively farmed organically . Councilman Niederkorn — The natural area set-aside , what does that mean ? Rod Lambert - The plan is not to consider it for agricultural purposes . Succession growth may be monitored ; some Cornell students are actually doing an inventory of what ' s growing in there now . Mostly poplar invasion at the moment , but white pine is coming and that sort of thing . There are no plans to do anything with it . Councilman Klein — Are there any external lights that are placed higher up that would cover a larger area than around the homes , what you call a light pollution ? Rod Lambert - That was considered quite carefully and the neighborhood chose to use exterior lights that are 12 volt , low voltage lights that are low to the ground and don 't have any up light to them at all . They' re all directed down . Many people are wondering whether there are enough lights . Very serious thought was given to light pollution and not wanting to block 4 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved out the sky with lights . If you ' re up to visit sometime , you ' ll see that it is very , very low lighting . Councilman Niederkorn — I felt that you were a little light here on the mitigating measures for the visual impacts . The words were there , but also the photos were there , mentioning these red roofs and that they are really quite visible and in contrast to the natural surroundings . Whereas the buildings themselves , the facades , they blend in better. And I notice on that photograph where you superimpose the new development that all the roofs are black . Would that be a mitigating factor in terms of the visibility from nearby , because it says in here that you can see those red roofs from everyplace ? Why red and why not some other color? Rod Lambert - Trowbridge and Wolfe were hired to do the GEIS . They drove all around on Elm Street and so on to look for places where an actual view occurred from their dwelling . She was only able to find the one place on Elm Street that permitted a view and it was a very narrow , quick glimpse of these roofs . The roofs are definitely visible but primarily from the land itself . The other views that you can get are long- range views that are also covered there . She looked pretty carefully for actual shocking views and the only real points where you get a look at those roofs are from a great distance . You will see those photos in there , in color. Councilman Niederkorn — Since visibility is one of the major thorns in the side of neighbors that might be on way you might mitigate that problem . Rod Lambert - The one photo that does show the red roofs was taken from there . If you go to the houses themselves and their yards , very little if any can be seen of the houses . It' s not that we ' re contemplating red roofs in the next neighborhood . We are considering using natural wood colors , but we ' re not at a level where we could promise that we wouldn 't use a red roof or not . They certainly won 't be flaming pink . We may go to brown or black . We are at a negotiating stage for the 500 rooftops electrical that the DOE is doing and the NYSEG program is putting an effort to go over to photovoltaics . Photovoltaics tend toward the very black or darker colors . So there will be a number of roofs that will be actually filled with those colors . Beyond that we have not selected all our colors . We intend not to go for anything that is dominating . Certainly , it would be somewhat less than what is there now . Councilman Niederkorn — Will the solar panels , if they are ever installed on these 45 degree roofs , project even higher? Rod Lambert — No . These roofs will not be 45 degrees . They will be at about 23 degrees . If you remember, the library chose to put its solar panels flat . It has to do with zero metering , or reverse metering . In fact , it makes more sense now to place the roof slopes lower to feed the meter backwards when you have a lot of sun , which is a summer slope , not the winter slope that is on the first neighborhood . It causes lower profiles in the roofs and less dominance of that project of a 45-degree roof . The roof slopes are going to be at 22 — 23 degrees , about a 5/ 12 pitch . So the roofs will not be as dominant a feature ? Councilwoman Russell — Did you address noise at all ? 5 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Rod Lambert — No , other than what can you say . Decibel levels are highly attenuated by the some 1 , 500 / 1 , 600 feet of separation that exists there along with the area that is a buffer area . I really find it difficult to imagine that it is that strong a noise factor. We are not a noisy neighborhood . Children at play noises , is that noise ? I don 't know . That' s what it is going to be . We don 't hold wild parties there every night . It is a very domestic setting . It ' s not wall -to- wall college kids . Mr. Kanter — The final scope that was approved by the Planning Board two years ago , April of 1999 , identified the different impact issues and areas that should be analyzed in the environmental impact statement , and did not identify noise as one of the significant impact areas that should be analyzed in the EIS . Councilman Niederkorn — I was curious about the illustrations of some of the housing types . Are these what you are actually going to build out there ? Rod Lambert — They are sample drawings . They are not necessarily the specific ones , but we are following to a large extent those basic bulking and shapes . A couple of models represent what are called stacked duplexes as opposed to side- by-side . The largest so - called trio unit is in fact being built in the duet . There is a stacked solo unit , a slightly larger unit than what is shown there . At the current time no studio , no stacked studios . It is true that the total square footage that is projected right now will be about 20% less than the first resident group . In conjunction with that , if we continue the way we are , we will probably be about 2/3 - 3/a of the population of the first neighborhood . Councilman Niederkorn — It is to be built in phases , the second neighborhood ? Rod Lambert — Yes . The intention would be to build it in phases . Essentially this model attempts to assemble the future residents first in a way to try to build a community first before you build the buildings . That' s kind of the process that we use and the future residents have a great deal of say in what gets built , and how it ' s built , and the cost . We now have 12 signed members . We expect it could be at 14 at build time , which would essentially allow us to build in phases . The west half , literally , is projected to be the first phase . The second half , on the east , would be built later. We are seeking a subsidy partner including working with the Home Loan Program through TCTC to see if we can create even more affordable housing . Affordability was a major concern of this effort to try to generate homes that were really sincerely reachable by local Ithacans . Supervisor Valentino — What price range might that be? Rod Lambert — We' re hoping to start models off at around $70 , 000 and move up from there . There ' s more of a common cost to each one of these units than would be typical of a standard unit if you were to buy a lot along West Haven and build , you common cost or lot cost would be lower. We are attempting to try to keep those costs down , but we have to do GISs and things like that which does add cost per unit . Councilwoman Russell — This seems to be an appropriate time to ask about the issue that Fred Wilcox brought up about the stacking and the ownership . 6 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Attorney Barney — How are the second story units going to be owned ? Rod Lambert — I ' m not the one who can answer that best . Our legal people are working on it . We have retained Brown , Pinnisi , and Michaels to try and work on this , and we have a lawyer member of our group . It' s a co- op legal structure we hope to create , I ' m not quite sure what it will be , a joint tenancy or what . Whether we ' ll need some interim legal vehicle until we are all built out or not is the sticky part that we haven 't completely settled on . Attorney Barney — Are you going the offering plan requirements with the Secretary of State? Rod Lambert — The first phase will be built by the current members and we understand the offering plan is needed for that . But the subsequent and second phase homes an offering plan has to be built and put together and we will be doing that . Councilman Niederkorn — There ' s always a temptation , and it' s a natural one , for us to focus on the environmental impact of the second phase instead of the generic which is what we are dealing with and which is supposed to focus on the total development of the project . Now it seems to me that the concept was more or less blessed by the Town when the first SLUD was designed and established . I presume that somebody came , like Rod , and presented the big picture when the first SLUD was requested . Probably then , the idea of this kind of development up there in that area was thought to be acceptable and compatible with the plan . When you ' re looking now at a GIS which is trying to evaluate all of the other potential developments , and I find that is essentially pretty complete , I don 't see any thresholds that would trigger a future environmental impact statement , some magnitude let' s say , or an assessment of any of the future developments . Maybe there are none , I do not know . But it may be something that you might want to consider before considering this thing complete . The idea being that in a GEIS , let' s assume that you hadn 't built the first neighborhood and so we didn 't have anything that we were talking about or comparing with . You might try to identify at what point and what action would cause some kind of an impact that you hadn 't anticipated where you would have to do a more detailed assessment . I don 't know what it might be . Maybe it' s the nature of your school changes , or maybe there' s a huge response to your public garden , or your berry patch , or your orchards , or whatever and you start to generate a lot of additional traffic up there that you didn 't anticipate . That might be something that you would say , " If this happens in the future we would anticipate doing some additional environmental work relative to that issue" . Or, you change the design of your neighborhoods , or something like that . It seems like that at least ought to be considered . If you don 't identify any thresholds then that also is a response . Councilwoman Russell — Are you saying that this document takes into account all the potential impacts from the future neighborhoods? Councilman Niederkorn — Sure . Councilwoman Russell — In terms of schools and traffic ? Councilman Niederkorn — Sure , that' s what it' s supposed to do ? The stuff that I read on traffic , and drainage , and so forth relates to the entire development . Including the school and other things . 7 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Mr. Kanter — That's the idea because the Town Board will have to approve the Special Land Use District amendment that would enable these future things to happen . That ' s why the Generic Environmental Impact aspect was to do those things that Tom was mentioning . We did get into a discussion at the Planning Board meeting the other night , however, that the original intent and again this was a debatable issue , that the original scoping document two years ago , besides assessing the generic impacts of the overall development potential would be looking at specifically the site-specific aspects of the second neighborhood group as well . So it would actually be both a generic environmental impact statement and a site-specific environmental impact statement because Eco Village at this time actually has a proposal for the second neighborhood , that ' s not something out in the future . So , the discussion two nights ago at the Planning Board meeting had to do with whether or not there were enough details relating to the development of the second neighborhood group to fully evaluate those site specific environmental impacts . I think that is what Martha was referring to . It ' s a debate as to whether, at this point , the Board should only be looking at the future development and the Generic EIS or whether it' s appropriate at this point to also be looking at the specific development of the second neighborhood group . What the Planning Board determined as lead agency the other night is that since there is a specific proposal before them for the second neighborhood , they should be doing whatever they need to do at this point to sufficiently evaluate that . And so , some additional materials that were not part of this impact statement were requested including some of the more detailed drainage calculations , and sizing of the pond for storm -water management , landscaping , and some other things you would normally have associated with the site specific development . We did indicate that , if they were done separately , if this were only a Generic Environmental Impact Statement , a future environmental review of the second neighborhood group may very well determine that that development itself would not have any additional significant negative impacts that would need to be further evaluated in an EIS , but that that would have to go , at least an initial environmental assessment , to make that determination . Those are the two approaches . You can either do them as two separate phases of review, a generic and then go to the site specific , but again the original intent of the Planning Board was to do it all in one document since there are details of the second neighborhood group , to do it as a coordinated environmental review. That also helps to consolidate the process , the timing , and things like holding public hearings and all those types of things . Rod Lambert — It is the wishes of Eco Village that they be coincident and allow for a building season this year. Mr. Kanter — What we stated that staff would do after the Planning Board meeting , and after tonight' s Town board meeting , and based on additional staff review , we would take all the comments and put them together into a memo that we would send to the applicant and copy everybody on it . As specific as we can get in terms of any comments from your board it would help to put them in the memo . Councilwoman Russell — John , could you speak to the alternatives issue ? Mr. Kanter — That is actually something that I had noted in my initial notes and didn 't actually end up talking with the Planning Board about the other night . I agree entirely with Martha in that I think that this document should have more detail in terms of the location and illustration 8 i Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved of the alternative site developments on other parts of the site , and more discussion regarding the characteristics of those portions of the site and what those impacts might be . That is something I was planning on incorporating into my memo . Councilman Niederkorn — Relative to the West Haven Road frontage , you mentioned a possibility that you didn 't want that included in the SLUD . There ' s a possibility that might be subdivided in the future ? Rod Lambert — It ' s being held away from that because of the zoning and because Eco Village is a non -profit educational institute . It has sold one lot that was between two other lots down close to where it placed a pump house to one of its own residents , one of the residents of Eco Village . It is kept out of the plan not because it wishes to sell it , but because of remaining solvent . It is being held out because of a desire to retain that as an emergency . But certainly the sensibilities of Eco Village is not to sell it and eventually it would simply be incorporated into the orchards which are planned for that particular sector. Councilman Lesser — Is this emergency access drive system considered to be adequate ? Ed Conley — You should talk with the Fire Department , see what they need . Rod Lambert — We've spent time with them and cut trees , and widened loop roads , added another dry hydrant . They've come up to give us fire escape plans and tell us what to do around the pond . They come up quarterly to train their volunteers . We have a good relationship with them and hope to keep it that way . Councilwoman Russell — There had been a potential problem with emergency exits in that there were large rocks that were in the first neighborhood and they were considerably narrowing the open path through the center of the development . Can you tell us whether that has been corrected ? Rod Lambert — There were some large rocks that came out of the work of excavating . They were placed ornamentally at the heads of the entrances to the parking carports . They have been removed or at least moved aside . I don 't see any that are causing any problems with turning radiuses of vehicles . The Fire Department hasn 't mentioned anything to us about it so I think we have that under control . Supervisor Valentino — The ones that Mary is mentioning are not by the garages , they were down by the homes . They had definitely narrowed the pathway . Rod Lambert — Are you talking about the walkways ? Supervisor Valentino — Yes . Rod Lambert — The plan for the first neighborhood did not contemplate emergency vehicles entering down the middle of the neighborhood the way the second neighborhood is developing . Only that fire trucks could get to within 150 feet of any dwelling . They planned it around that basis . There was not an intention , and there isn 't currently an ability, for 9 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved emergency vehicles to enter right up to the door of all the units in the first group . That is being planned for the second village . Supervisor Valentino — Jonathan , is there anything specific you are looking for other than to have this discussion and pass on to you whatever. Mr. Kanter — If you have any specific comments I ' d prefer that we get them now because we will be putting the memo together tomorrow to send out to the applicant . I 've marked down a notation based on Tom ' s comment regarding the visual analysis that I think it would be appropriate to have a further description of possible materials and colors that might be involved in the second neighborhood group buildings to factor in what their impacts and mitigating aspects might be because I think that will be an important element . We don 't usually get detailed architectural plans or drawings at this point in the process , but certainly a discussion of what the different range of possibilities is and what their different impacts would be would be appropriate . When the Planning Board has to make the final decision on their site plan that will help them . Councilwoman Russell — I don 't think the pictures in here adequately portray the views of Eco Village from South Hill . There are places where , it ' s my impression , they have a much clearer view , the red roofs are very outstanding . Katherine Wolfe , Trowbridge and Wolfe Landscape Architects - Mary , are you saying that you think there are places on South Hill where you can see Eco Village more prominently? Can you be more specific? Councilwoman Russell — No I can 't because I ' m remembering when it was first built . Katherine Wolfe — We did a pretty rigorous driving around to try to identify what we thought would be the worst case from relatively public places , with the exception of Long House , which of course is a specific concern . We looked specifically from Long House ' s property . But then we tried to say , " if you ' re in the area where is it most visible to the general public ?" The scenic overlook was an obvious choice , the Cornell campus where it is very visible . We made a really serious attempt to find the worst case scenarios of where it is visible . If the Board thinks there are worse cases , we ' d like to hear those specific locations . Councilwoman Russell — I ' d be glad to tell you when I get a chance to go out and look myself . Mr. Kanter — I know one that would probably be what you are talking about . It' s Ithaca College from up near the towers , the high points of Ithaca College . Up from parts even of the South Hill natural area down behind the college there are some high points up there where there are some views going across there . Katherine Wolfe — We actually did look at those locations and , you ' re right , it is visible . We compared it to the view from the scenic overlook and it' s a fairly similar view . So we made the choice , we said how many do you have to do in that general vicinity to best characterize . it . We chose the scenic overlook as being the most public of all places . We went all around the Ithaca College campus and said , "Well it' s not really that different from the scenic overlook" . We sort of felt that was pretty characteristic of locations where it would be visible 10 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved on South Hill . It is true that certainly there are other locations where it is visible . We tried to identify the places that we thought were worst case , most characteristic of public viewing in that general vicinity . Supervisor Valentino — We should contact David Klein for comments . Mr. Kanter — A copy of the draft amendment to the Special Land Use District is at the end of the Environmental Impact Statement . That was something that was drafted up about two years ago . There ' s also a SLUD area map that goes with that , which identified more specifically the areas of the agricultural , natural , and residential areas . It' s a little different from the future master plan map . I don 't think it was appended to the text , if it wasn 't , it should be added into the EIS . There were no further comments or questions Communication — Supervisor Valentino circulated a thank you letter from Cornell Law School for the use of the meeting room. Agenda Item No . 4 — Consider Approval of Job Classification Listing Supervisor Valentino — We have spent maybe a year or longer on the classification system for our employees . You have already approved the Point System . Tonight what you see (Attachment #2) on the right , is the current , on the left is the proposed Job Classification System We've tightened up the classifications , mainly because we have sort of a small work staff here . Some of the classifications seemed to be so close to each other that we took them out . As you can see H , G , F , D , and C are now gone . With the new point system that we have worked out , worked with the department heads to refine the point system that the County used . We went and applied that point system to the job descriptions and set up the categories based on that point system . The new classification sets up that . The next thing that we will do is the salary ranges for the classifications . Supervisor Valentino reviewed the new job classification schedule with the Board. Councilman Lesser — I wonder what the overall salary ramifications are going to be for the number of positions that have been upgraded ? Ms . Drake — Taking into consideration what we already have budgeted , we ' re looking at around $45 , 000 to $47 , 000 increase needed for July 1 through the end of the year. That is taking into consideration a couple positions that have come and gone so that we are using some of that money . Councilman Lesser — I was personally a little surprised that the points for the budget officer would be this low . I would personally think that in what we do we are extremely dependent on having careful budget analysis done so that we know where we stand . I was personally a little surprised that the point system didn 't rank that a little higher. 11 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Supervisor Valentino — With Judy' s position and AI ' s position , although they are given a lot of autonomy and leeway , I am still their direct supervisor and I am directly responsible for what they do . If you look at Dan ' s position , for example , he has to take responsibility for what he does because there is no way I am going to be able to say where the sewer line should go , those kinds of things are just a tad beyond my realm . The same thing is true with Jonathan and Planning . My responsibility with Al is to go over those budget numbers from time to time and say this is what I really want to do with the budget , I want to achieve this , or I want to move that . With Judy too , we have more direct communication about how to deal with personnel . They both work directly for me and I oversee their work on a more regular basis . If we wanted to move some day more towards a Town Comptroller or somebody who really has that kind of autonomy separate from the Supervisor, then you would definitely be looking at a job that would go up . There certainly could be a little tweaking of things here and there , but we 've spent an awful lot of time and effort to try to refine the County system and turn it into our own , working in great detail on the job descriptions . I hope we have finally got this to a spot where it is something that we are not going to have to revisit . It is going to make life easier to have this system . If a new job gets created , we can take the job description and go right to our point system . Ms . Drake — We did a little exercise last week . We handed out to all the employees their job description and the classification criteria that was approved at the last Town Board Meeting and allowed them to evaluate their own job descriptions . Some of the points that came back were rather interesting , some were very very close , it was a good exercise . Supervisor Valentino — The other thing that we did when we looked forward to the wages that matched these was to look at a lot of jobs around the area , mainly the County , the City , Cornell , other municipalities . The highway workers themselves went out and got wage ranges from a lot of the other highway departments around the County . They brought them in and basically said , you know what , we ' re kind of falling behind here . They were right . If we want to keep our wages competitive , not the top , but at least in the ball park , I think that we have developed a really outstanding staff here , all the way up and down the line . In the long run , it ' s going to cost us something to bring them up if that' s the level of dedication and kind of work we want from people then we have to recognize that , a fair wage . Resolution No. 49 — Approval of Job Classification Listing WHEREAS, the Town Board approved the Point Factor Job Evaluation Criteria and the Point Scale on April 9, 2001 ; and WHEREAS, the Town Supervisor and Human Resources Specialist have evaluated the town 's positions using the approved criteria to determine the appropriate job classification for each position; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approved, as recommended by the Town supervisor and Human Resources Specialist, the attached Job Classification Listing. 12 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved MOVED: Councilman Niederkorn; SECONDED: Councilwoman Russell. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Lesser, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. Motion carried. Agenda Item No. 5 — Discussion of the Tompkins County Communication Towers Project Councilwoman Russell — I guess we should start with the meeting we had here the other night with the supervisors from the other municipalities . At that meeting there seemed to be a consensus to move forward with the law suit against the County on the Towers Issue since we've gotten a reply back from Barbara Mink and the County Board basically that they would not consider us an involved agency in the SEQR process . We came up with a plan to move forward with that law suit , including a meeting , we propose to have a meeting with the County Board of reps to clarify our position and let them know that that is where we are going . Supervisor Valentino — I think that we have 9 municipalities at this point . The Town of Lansing voted last night to join us and to pay their share . The Village of Lansing is going to come on board . Dryden is on board . Danby will be coming on board . We don 't know for sure about Ulysses . Enfield won 't and Groton won 't . Councilwoman Russell - The Village of Trumansburg , probably , but we don 't know that yet . Supervisor Valentino — It looks like the City might but they didn 't come to the meeting so we don 't know for sure . Councilwoman Russell — We ' re at least up to 6 , we may be at 7 . Councilman Niederkorn — What did you say Lansing did ? Because at our meeting down there they said they would participate but they wouldn 't help pay. Supervisor Valentino — They' ve decided to pay . I talked with Steve Farkas this morning , he said the meeting went very well and , in fact it was interesting , because I think it was Joan Jerkawitz , he ' s not sure who came out from the County to talk to them about the Towers Issue , but he said she did the best job of convincing us that we need to move forward with the lawsuit because every time they would say , "when you say you ' re going to cooperate , what does that mean ? " Of course , poor Joan is a staff person , she couldn 't go beyond saying , "well , we ' re going to cooperate" . Are you going to abide by our ordinances and land use? She would basically say " No , that is not our intent" ? He said that they voted unanimously to join with us and moved forward . He also said that he talked with Tom Farr, who was there from the County , after the meeting and Steve felt that he is really beginning to see our point of view . Once you can separate the Tower issue from the home rule land use issues , he said that Tom Cobb could understand what it is really all about . That might be good news . Councilman Conley — Have we heard anything from the Association of Towns in response to our letter? 13 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Councilwoman Russell — No . That was just sent out on April 12 . Supervisor Valentino — From the meeting the other night , and from talking to them , we 've sort of come up with a plan to move forward . Ed Conley — Can I ask John what our legal position would be? Do we knuckle under to the County if they say they' re going to do something in our town ? I wonder what powers they have . Attorney Barney — It' s an issue of what I would call almost first impression , and it is going to be very difficult to assess or predict how we are going to wind up on this . The question is whether the County must come to the Town initiative or whether they can ignore it . If they can ignore it based on these nine criteria set forth in the court of appeals case , a Monroe court case , and they make the determination , they do the balancing of the criteria and they conclude , "we ' re not subject to your jurisdiction and just move ahead " . Or whether, as Mary has analyzed in her letter to Kevin (Attachment #3), they are obliged to come to the local municipality , submit to local municipalities regulations , and then if they are denied their permit they can go to court . I ' m not quite sure I fully concur with that call . I think it ' s the argument we want to make . It seems to me a stronger position is to say you at least have to come to the local municipality and let that local municipality make the determination whether you ' re subject to the local municipality' s regulations or not . Ed Conley — What I ' m hearing is that there are several of these towers that have to be put around in different places . It appears that there is going to be more than just one in the Town of Ithaca just because of our topography . Attorney Barney — I don 't think we are going to have any . Councilwoman Russell — According to what I 've heard from Dan , we will have an extension of the tower that we now have now on South Hill . So it will be a new tower. Ed Conley — We have a road to it and all of that stuff now don 't we ? Councilwoman Russell — We have a road , but we have a specific tower ordinance that addresses the issues involved in putting up one of these towers . It allows the Planning Board and ZBA to put requirements on that address safety issues and also the visual impacts . Ed Conley — The County is basically saying , "We don 't need to come to you " . Councilwoman Russell — We don 't want to be in the position of delaying the project . And they don 't even have a project right now . They are telling us that they have gone back to square one and they are starting to try to figure out exactly what the project is . So we are not delaying the project at this point . Supervisor Valentino — Based on the discussion with the other supervisors at the meeting last night we would like to take this approach . First , the municipalities are going to send me a letter or resolution saying that they will join in the suit and be plaintiffs in the suit with us . 14 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Those letters should be coming shortly . Some of us from that group are going to get together and have a meeting with the Ithaca Journal staff to give them the background so that they understand the issues . John Barney will begin to draft our legal letters and the petition , and have them ready for filing . The draft papers will be available by the time we have the meeting with the County reps , because the next think that we want to do is we are planning on April 30 , here , at 5 : 00 p . m . , to invite all the County reps to a meeting with the Town Supervisors and their Boards to try to let them understand our point of view and hope they will comply with our point of view . That is worth trying one more time . If the meeting is not successful , we go ahead with the filing . We hold a press conference so that the people know exactly where and why we are doing it , and we file . We weren 't sure of just where the meeting with the other fire companies and emergency response folks might take place . I talked with Chief Wilbur to some extent . He understands why we need to do this and why it is not about trying to hold them up on the towers . It is certainly our intent to try to move everything as quickly as possible so that we are not the ones responsible for holding up that project . The other municipalities have gotten , basically , their approval from their boards to move forward with this . That is what we are asking for tonight . Ed Conley — I would move that we proceed with according to this letter. I 've heard that this thing needs 7 towers in the County . It is not just a matter of having one in each town . That could be us . Mr. Walker — There is one existing tower in town at Ithaca College that they are trying to reconstruct . Ed Conley — We are not trying to stand in their way . All we are trying to do is get our say so in about where and how . I would move anything you want to follow through on this lawsuit . I think it is important to do this . Especially if all the other towns are feeling the same way . Councilman Lesser — First I wanted to say something and then I have several questions about this . I would just like to say for myself that I ' m really sorry the process is this far advanced and this is the first we've heard about it formally . Everybody else has apparently approved and gone on . Apparently the process has been under discussion for some period of time . Councilwoman Grigorov — You must have missed a meeting . Councilman Lesser — I was here the last time . I know that we mentioned that it was coming up , but that was a couple weeks go . Councilwoman Russell — It' s been mentioned before Bill . Councilwoman Grigorov — Last time was sort of a follow- up on the previous meeting ? Councilwoman Russell — They have started the EIS process and that is what kicked us into a formal role . Councilman Lesser — I am not entirely sure if what we are seeking here is a general precedent or whether the feeling is that the issue about the siting of the tower potentially in the town is sufficient to justify a fairly substantial undertaking . 15 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Attorney Barney — My understanding is we ' re seeking the more general precedent . In areas of local regulation the County should , absent legislation specifically exempting them , comply with that legislation . Councilwoman Russell — A lawsuit is , as you probably know , an expensive endeavor . This is a unique opportunity for all of the municipalities to share in the cost of a lawsuit , whereas , the county has done several projects where municipalities felt as though they were verging on suing them but could not accept the financial impacts of that . Councilman Lesser — I can appreciate that . I think we certainly all have enough connection with the County to know how high handed they can be . I just wonder, before you bring a suit you make some judgement about how likely you are to win and , indeed if you lose , are you substantially worse off, so there is a reasonable balance . If we were to bring this suit and lost , are we going to be substantially worse off than we are now. I gather there ' s differences of opinion but there is at lease some presumption that we have some rights and indeed if we lost it would be clear that we didn 't have rights? Is that a reasonable assessment of a negative outcome in this case ? Are we substantially worse off? Attorney Barney — Let me put it this way , Bill , at the moment the County is not voluntarily coming in and submitting to the localities jurisdiction . I don 't know that we ' d lose anything by bringing a lawsuit in that framework because they' re not doing it now , if we bring a lawsuit and they win , we ' re in exactly the same position . Yes , it is a precedent that then would govern future actions . That probably could bother us at some time in the future , although the next action would have to do with the Town of Ithaca itself , then the Town of Ithaca itself would have to bring suit . It ' s clearly your folk' s decision to make , we ' re not pushing a lawsuit , quite frankly I always view lawsuits as being a pathology of the law where reasonable people have not been able to come to a reasonable solution of a matter. On the one hand , if they' re not doing it now and the only way we can even have a chance of getting them to do it is with the club , albeit a somewhat expensive club , of a lawsuit versus not doing it all and they go on their merry way where is the harm , where is the loss , other than the monetary expenditure for the lawsuit itself . We' ve quoted a price . We've indicated we think we can bring the initial part of the action to the lower court for a price of $2 , 500 to $3 , 500 . Councilman Niederkorn — Per municipality? Attorney Barney — No , total . So we ' re talking basically a $500 expenditure from each municipality . If we have to appeal it , we ' re looking at probably somewhere around $4 , 000 . And then there ' s the court of appeals and that' s a little harder to predict , because to get into the court of appeals it is a double whammy . In order to get in , you have to make an application to be permitted to appeal and then if they grant you that permission you go on to appeal . You could see that one being a $6 , 000 or $7 , 000 expense . So the whole shot , probably from beginning to end , if it were necessary to go that far, is somewhere around $ 13 , 000 to $ 18 , 000 . 16 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Councilman Niederkorn — I think that is nothing . Attorney Barney — This is assuming there are no trials . If you get a trial and discovery , then it' s a completely different ball game . What we are looking for here is basically a ruling of the law ; the facts aren 't really in dispute . Councilman Niederkorn — That is what appeals to me about this . I can 't get as excited as everyone seems to be about this because I think that the law is what we are after and if it hadn 't been for Monroe County verses City of Rochester we wouldn 't have had anything to write about . That has come up time and time against as a precedent for this . Whether or not it applies here , I don 't know, but that is what courts are for. My opinion is we should not waste any more time . If the County is going to cave in , that is one choice . Or we can cave in . Or we can go to court . But we shouldn 't waste much more time fooling around with it , let' s just do it . Attorney Barney — I do want to address Bill ' s other question , and that is the likelihood of success . I ' ll be candid , I really don 't know . I think slightly better than 50/50 . It is not by any means a slam -dunk . You could go in , you could spend the money , we could go the route , and we could come out losers . Supervisor Valentino — But we would still know something that we don 't know now . Councilman Niederkorn — Do you think the decision would be based on the Towers issue or on the principal of the intruding unit? Attorney Barney — We want to try and direct the discussion to the invading municipality versus the host . That has impacts across the board for all kinds of things . Councilman Niederkorn — The thing that is of interest to me here , and it seems different , is that there are multiple municipalities that are being intruded upon by the County in this case . Whereas almost everything else that I 've read there' s just one municipality versus another. Here you 've got 6 or 7 municipalities who feel that they are being violated and if the County loses I kind of shudder to think what might happen as a result of that . If each one of these 7 municipalities has to make a decision on an issue , what happens if one or two of them don 't want to go along with it , then the issues dead ? Councilwoman Russell — No . Then the whole idea of the balancing the interests test kicks in . The County would then appeal that denial to the court and the court would apply the balancing the interests tests . Councilman Lesser — If there is a decision in our favor, would the decision likely say that if towns had the right to be involved parties and they rejected a County' s proposal in something like towers , which I understand from Mary we can 't prohibit , that would go to court . Attorney Barney — The County like any other applicant can come in and say I want to put up a tower, and produce all the information and request a special approval and the Town turns me down . I have the right as a nextel to appeal that in an article 38 procedure to the courts and try to get it overturned . If the Town has acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner I will get 17 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved it overturned . The County is not without remedy here , it' s just basically the issue is you come to us first or do you as a County unilaterally say, "we ' re the boss we discern where it is going to go . " Supervisor Valentino — Any citizen could bring an article 78 against the County . Councilman Niederkorn — How can we decide where these towers are going to go ? Councilwoman Russell — We won 't decide that . Councilwoman Grigorov — That' s not the point . Councilman Niederkorn — That is the point in my mind . We have to be able to do what we want to do . Councilman Niederkorn — This is a fairly exotic kind of a system that we are talking about . They' re hiring some fairly high quality consultants to deal with it . These people have expertise that I don 't think we have on our staff . Attorney Barney — We have the authority to hire that expertise for ourselves , if we want to do that . Councilman Niederkorn — Do we want to do that? Attorney Barney — We may or we may not? It depends what the implications are . What I quite frankly perceive happening here if we win is that the County comes in , they bring their expert in , they bring the tower in , they show that it ' s going to be a 190 ' tower, there ' s some discussion about its location and discussion of its visual impacts . Then you give them the approval . I don 't think the Town is going to stand in their way , but they ought to have an opportunity to look at it . Councilman Niederkorn — We also have resources that Dryden doesn 't have , that Lansing doesn 't have , that Groton doesn 't have , the Enfield doesn 't have . Attorney Barney — All of the other municipalities with the cell tower ordinances pretty much have the authority to hire , at the expense of the applicant , their own expertise . Councilman Niederkorn — That' s the point , they would have to hire their own experts . And let' s hope that the experts can all agree . Attorney Barney — They may not choose to . There ' s nothing that says you can 't rely on the developer' s experts . Supervisor Valentino — When we deal with some developer that is coming to make a profit , isn 't that different? In this case , hopefully , we ' re dealing with another municipality and once both sides realize that these are the rules that we to follow , why wouldn 't we just be trying to get there . When we 've worked with municipalities on other issues , we 've tried to fast track 18 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved things , we 've tried to work with them , we 've tried to get it done . So it ' s a little bit different than dealing with some in.dependent developer. Attorney Barney — If Conifer comes in and says we want to put in another segment of Linderman Creek , and they bring in market studies done by their people , we don 't go out and hire our own market person to determine whether the market study is valid or not . We accept it . We can , if we choose to , but we don 't choose to . Obviously in the engineering we ' re fortunate because we have that kind of capability on staff . Councilman Lesser — If indeed every town has the authority to this , I can 't help but be a little bit concerned that projects like this which are public safety projects could be substantially delayed . This project' s been on for a long time and it is a serious public safety project . I am not saying it is our doing , but if indeed every participating town has the right , even if we believe they ought to in an instance like this , there is a real possibility that projects could be substantially delayed . If everybody objected and wanted to bring in their own things . We need to recognize if we go down this route we are potentially opening up a real can of worms that could make it very difficult for a County level government to establish something of universal need and benefit which this system happens to be . Supervisor Valentino — We don 't often have a project that is universal like this . I think there' s another aspect to this . All the towns and villages have fire departments , volunteer or paid , that are pretty vocal and every municipality that we 've talked to are somewhat concerned that they have the support of those emergency people and fire people during election campaigns . Every single municipality that we 've talked with said the very last thing that they want see happen is for them to be the ones that are delaying this project . Councilman Niederkorn — Do you have any indication that the County is going to change its mind . Supervisor Valentino — We just got a little glimmer of hope from Tom Todd . It sounds like , from what Steve Farkas tells me , that from their conversation Tom ' s beginning to understand and come around a bit . I think Peter Penniman is certainly interested in our case and understands it to some extent . Councilwoman Russell — Joe Lolly , the new guy from Dryden . Ed Conley — We have 3 reps representing us , wouldn 't it be kind of tough on them to vote with the County? Councilwoman Russell — No . Supervisor Valentino — Just like we want to protect what we think is our valid jurisdiction , they want to protect what they think is their valid jurisdiction . Everybody is just locked in where we are . The only way we will be able to resolve it is through the courts . Ed Conley — I see no winners in this . 19 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Councilman Niederkorn — The last chance meeting is to give them a chance to say you were right , we were wrong . In the meantime , we ' re going ahead , I hope . We' re not waiting until the last chance . Supervisor Valentino — Yes . We ' re going to make it clear to them that we ' re moving and we ' re moving as quickly as we can because we don 't want to hold up this project . We don 't want to do anything to delay it . Resolution No. 50 — Authorizing the Attorneys for the Town to Institute Proceedings Seeking a Determination Regarding the County 's Communication Towers Project — (Attachment #3y BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby authorizes and requests the the law firm of Barney, Grossman, Dubow & Marcus, John C. Barney of counsel, to institute proceedings on behalf of the Town of Ithaca and other joint municipalities seeking a determination as to the applicability of the Town 's processes to Tompkins County's Communication Towers Project. The following discussion took place before a vote was taken: Councilman Lesser — If there are no legal down sides , are there personal or interpersonal downsides? You are certainly involved with the County on several projects that require good cooperative action . Would you anticipate that something like this could encumber other agreements or cooperative activities ? Supervisor Valentino — I don 't think so . I ' ve talked with Barbara Blanchard on some of the other things we ' re working on , and some other staff . I think the feeling is that we all try to be professionals . We understand that sometimes we disagree on something and this is where we have to go , but that doesn 't stop us from moving forward on the Recreation Partnership or the other projects we ' re working on . Councilwoman Russell — That was also the essence of a discussion that we had with the committee that Barbara Mink chairs , Intermunicipal Planning Committee , we just need to have this issue resolved and we intend to keep cooperating with each other. Councilman Lesser — I ' m very much encouraged by that . If the County cedes to our request , does that itself set a precedent? I presume that means that they would agree that all the participating towns would be involved parties . Councilwoman Russell — It is not a legal precedent . Attorney Barney — Here you have 8 , 7 , 6 other entities ganged up against you and so it is as good a time as any to cede . I think they' re talking about they want to cooperate with us anyway , we ' ll accede this time , but we ' ll make it absolutely clear that by doing it this time we ' re not necessarily agreeing we ' re doing it the next time . Councilwoman Russell — There are two other projects out there right now . The DOT facility in Dryden and the Emergency Communications Project for us on South Hill . 20 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Mr. Noteboom — I feel that staff picks up on this type of issues , County staff will say we don 't have to cooperate . I know from Coddington Road , they feel that they don 't need to answer your questions or even be concerned about your comments . I ' m pretty much getting those statements . Councilman Klein — They mouth cooperation but when it comes down to any particular request they say "well , not in this case or not now or we ' re not quite sure" . Supervisor Valentino — Barbara Mink said "Oh , we ' re going to cooperate with you , but in the end someone has take responsibility for the final decisions and it ' s going to be us" . Vote on Resolution No. 50 MOVED: Councilman Niederkorn; SECONDED: Councilwoman Russell. A vote on the motion resulted as .follows: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Conley, aye; Councilman Lesser, aye. The motion was carried. Additional Agenda Item No. 1 - Executive Session Motion by Councilwoman Grigorov , seconded by Councilman Lesser, to enter into an Executive Session to discuss a personnel issue and litigation . Carried unanimously . The Board enter into Executive Session at 7 : 30 p . m . Motion by Councilman Lesser, seconded by Councilman Conley , to resume regular session . Carried unanimously . The Board resumed regular session at 8 : 15 . 21 Approved Approved Approved - June 11 , 2001 - Approved Approved Approved Agenda Item No . 6 — Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Town Board , a motion was made by Councilwoman Russell , seconded by Councilman Conley , to adjourn . Carried unanimously . Supervisor adjourned the meeting at 8 : 20 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk 22 TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD Special Meeting SIGWIN SHEET DATE : April 19 , 2001 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS / AFFILIATION ' ATTACHMENT # 1 t 1 MEMORANDUM To : Town Of Ithaca Town Board and Planning Board From : Martha Armstrong, RA, AICP -- 766 Elm Street Ext . Date : April 19, 2001 Re : Eco-VillagedGEIS -- adequacy I would like to submit three comments in regard to adequacy of the Eco-Village dGEIS . The first two are brief, and the third is a more lengthy in response to a discussion during the Planning Board meeting on April 17 , 2001 . 1 . As part of Community Character, the visual impact of lights at night, as well as day impacts should be discussed. 2 . As part of the Community Character, noise should be discussed. In particular: • The common house is the site of regular large gatherings and parties which periodically generate significant noise . The impact of this and future common houses on the surrounding neighborhood should be discussed. • The pond serves as something of a country club for the first 30 households . This is a busy place in the summer. A lot of sound travels across the open fields to the neighbors . The impact of the FROG and cumulative noise as more neighborhoods use this or other ponds should be discussed. 3 . Discussion of alternatives The New York State SEQR Handbook discusses alternatives under the GEIS and regular EIS sections . Portions of these sections are quoted below : page B-42 : "It is important to discuss the reasonable alternatives to the generic action. . . Because the Generic EIS usually addresses actions at the conceptual stage alternatives may be very flexible. . . The Generic EIS should include a more comprehensive alternative analysis . This opportunity for a more broad-based consideration of alternatives at the conceptual stage permits the Generic EIS to perform its environmental planning function ." page B -35 "Discussion should be sufficient to permit a comparative assessment of the costs, benefits, and environmental risks for each alternative . It is not acceptable to make simple assertions that a particular alternatives) is or is not feasible . " Thus, the Handbook indicates that the GEIS should show reasonable alternatives at a comparable level of detail to the proposed plan so that they can be compared . Comments to the Town of Ithaca on the adequacy of the dGEIS for Eco-Village from Martha Armstrong April 19, 2001 Page 1 Second -- and this pertains to the meeting on April 17 , the GEIS does not need to develop site specific detail, because this is not a site specific action. If the Town requests lots of site specific detail for the SoNG location, it will limit fair and honest evaluation of alternatives for the overall development plan . Requesting extensive information about the proposed SoNG site also puts the developer at risk of losing investment in design costs should another site be found to have lower impacts during the GEIS review. Greater site detail of the approved SONG location can be requested and reviewed during Site Plan Review. This approach of comparing alternatives during the GEIS process is in keeping with the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan. Page III-4 discusses Managing the Built Environment. Item 6 discusses the importance given to minimizing environmental impacts and says that it is better to develop a lower impact alternative than to mitigate a higher impact. In closing, I would like to emphasize that the dGEIS needs to present reasonable alternatives at a comparable level as the proposed development plan in order to allow real discussion and assessment of which alternatives have higher and lower environmental impacts . The dGEIS is inadequate without this . Comments to the Town of Ithaca on the adequacy of the dGEIS for Eco-Village from Martha Armstrong April 19, 2001 Page 2 I i #__ a .. -.. IE Director of Engineedng S 573t,,597 61010L1 Director of Planning S • / f a , � • t RON 4 ON t,t 0�11160MIM,Wme MIA I If I wit Assistant Town Planner 0 473497 - - - I - i Assistant Town Engineer • aj I a. • • • i Deputy Highway Super. • Parks ! • EfE " Super • l iNetwork/Records Specialist iEnvironmental Planner N 448472 Asst • - i • • • M 423=447 Administrative Assistant L 398422 Bookkeeper to the Supervisor L 1 [ Principal ' • • Court Clerks I 323wiIUZ I Secretary i 348=37021- s I 'AF Senior • Typist 'iEngineering Technician Heavy Equipment Operator ' • • Y17 b , k If • s • • - • • ' - • • ; � - i • • ! ATTACHMENT # 3 MEMORANDUM TO : Supervisors, Mayors and Board Members (Supervisors and Mayors please distribute to your board members) FROM : Mary Russell RE : Towers lawsuit DATE : April 19, 2001 Cathy and I decided it might be helpful to try and draft a memo that outlined the next steps that we (all of us) want to take regarding our dispute with the County Representatives over the towers issue. • Municipalities that wish to be plaintiffs in the lawsuit will send letters and/or resolutions to Cathy. • Some of us will meet with the Ithaca Journal staff to acquaint them with our side of the story . • John Barney will begin to draft our legal papers (petition and supporting memorandum) to ready them for filing . The draft papers will be available by the time of the meeting with the County Reps . If they are ready before that meeting, we will circulate them to the County and to our group . • We will set up a "last chance" meeting with the County Reps. We are proposing that this meeting take place on Monday, April 30`h at 5p . m. here at the Town of Ithaca Town Hall in the Raffensperger Room (front) . Assuming that meeting is unsuccessful : • Also before filing, we will hold a press conference for the rest of the media folks . Cathy and I will work on a draft press release . • We file. • We hold meetings with our emergency response folks . I would like to assemble an e-mail list for quick communication so please send your e-mail addresses to me along with any comments on the above to : MRus sell @town . ithaca. ny . us ATTACHMENT # 3 o � OFIT� TOWN OF ITHACA 215 N . Tioga Street , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks, Trails, Water&Sewer) 273-1656 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 April 12 , 2001 Mr. A. Kevin Crawford Counsel Association of Towns 146 State Street Albany , N . Y . 12207 Dear Kevin : This letter is to provide you with more information on the issue we discussed at the Association of Towns regional lobby day on March 23'd and to formally request your opinion in this matter. The Town of Ithaca and 8 other municipalities here in Tompkins County are having a disagreement with our Board of Representatives over the extent of our jurisdiction over their proposed emergency communications project. Enclosed please find a letter dated March 2"d from Barbara Mink, Chair of the Tompkins Board of Representatives which refers to the attached memorandum from the County Attorney, an "opinion letter" from the New York Association of Counties , a response from the County Board to our request to be considered as involved agencies in the form of a brief letter and resolution (April 40') and a copy of a letter from DEC to Mark Varvayanis , Supervisor of the Town of Dryden . Also enclosed please find some information which , I hope , will ease your research burden . They are relevant pages from the ALI ' s Model Land Development Code cited by Judge Bellacosa in the Court of Appeals' County of Monroe v . City of Rochester opinion , 72 N . Y . 2d 338 , and a copy of the Harvard Law Review article which proved to be so influential in persuading courts all over the country to abandon the "governmental -proprietary distinction " as the test in immunity cases . Our County Board is taking the position that they will perform their own "balancing of the interests" test and that this will satisfy the County of Monroe requirements . Our position is explained in the letter to me from John Barney which I gave you on March 23'd . It is , briefly , that the County needs to , at a minimum , make application to those municipalities which are host sites for the 2 communication towers for a " balancing of the interests" test to be performed by the appropriate local board so that board ' s jurisdiction can be determined . I say "at a minimum" because I believe , after a close examination of some of the cases cited by Judge Bellacosa in the County of Monroe opinion and some initial research into how the "balancing of the interests" test is operating in other states , that another interpretation is possible and I would like your thoughts on this issue . That is , Judge Bellacosa could have intended that there be no initial application of the " balancing of the interests" test and that the encroaching governmental unit is simply subject to the host government' s zoning requirements . The test would only come into play when a project had received a denial at the local level . At that point , the test would be applied by a reviewing court to decide if the project merited immunity. This approach is outlined in Lincoln County v. Johnson . 257 NW2d 453 , quoting the earlier decision Orange County v . City of Apopka . 299 So . 2d 652 . Both cases were cited by Judge Bellacosa in County of Monroe . We hold the better rule , the rule allowing for the greatest flexibility and fairness , is the newly emerging "balancing of the interests" rule . This rule requires that one governmental unit (intruding unit) be bound by the zoning regulations of another governmental unit ( host unit) in the use of its extraterritorial property . . . , in the absence of specific legislative authority to the contrary. If the proposed use is nonconforming the intruding unit should apply to the host unit's zoning authority for a specific exception or for a change in zoning , whichever is appropriate . The host zoning authority is then in a position to consider and weigh the applicant' s need for the use in question and its effect upon the host unit' s zoning plan , neighboring property, environmental impact , and the myriad other relevant factors to be considered for modern land use planning and control . If the intruding unit is dissatisfied with the decision of the host zoning authority it may seek appropriate judicial review, wherein the circuit court can balance the competing public and private interests essential to an equitable resolution of the conflict. In addition to the zoning factors considered by the host authority the trial court can consider the applicant's legislative grant of authority, the public need therefor, alternative locations in less restrictive zoning areas and alternative methods for providing the needed improvements. If, after weighing all pertinent factors the court finds the host govern- ment is acting unreasonably, the zoning ordinance should be held inapplicable to the proposed improvement. (emphasis added ) i 3 The first part of the above quote is similar to the wording used by Judge Bellacosa in the County of Monroe opinion . This balancing approach subjects the encroaching governmental unit in the first instance , in the absence of an expression of contrary legis- lative intent, to the zoning requirements of the host governmental unit where the extraterritorial use would be employed . (72 NY2d 343 ) Judge Bellacosa then quotes Rutgers State Univ , v . Piluso . 60 NJ 142 , and Orange County to create the list of factors which must be weighed in the "balancing of the interests" test. Both cases were appeals from denials . This is what he says about Orange County . In Orange County . . . , the catalogue of potential factors to be considered by the reviewing court was expanded to include the applicant' s legislative grant of authority , alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas , and alternative methods of providing the needed improvement . . . (emphasis added ) The idea of considering alternatives also suggests that this is a test for an appeal after a denial . Alternatives are not usually considered in the ordinary initial application process for site plan approval , subdivision approval or variance (unless there are negative environmental impacts under SEQR and an EIS has been prepared ) . I have found no indication that the "balancing of the interests" test is being used as a pre-test for jurisdiction in New Jersey . (The Rutgers case was the earliest "balancing of the interests" case cited by Judge Bellacosa . ) The reason I am providing so much detail on my research on this issue is that the Department of State (web site ) and at least one case , Nanuet Fire Engine Co . v . Amster, 177 Misc . 2d 296 , have expressed the opinion that the "balancing of the interests" test is applicable as a pre-test to determine local jurisdiction . However, under either theory , the direction our county has elected to proceed is faulty . The Florida Court of Appeals in the Orange County case made an interesting observation . It strikes us as anomalous to allow one governmental unit charged with a specific responsibility , such as supplying housing , airports , or sewerage facilities , to enter another governmental unit and unilaterally decide to locate one of its governmental facilities any- where it may choose . One can envision rather absurd results in the wake of such a rule . If the legislative intent underlying The Airport Law of 1945 were the granting to a municipality of absolutely unbridled power to build an airport wherever the municipality deemed it proper to do so , nothing could prevent the TrkCity Airport Authority • 4 from building an airport in the finest residential area in the City of Orlando or even in the heart of downtown Orlando . (299 So . 2d 652 ) Also please see Section 12-201 of the American Law Institute' s Model Land Development Code ( 1975 ) (enclosed ) cited by Judge Bellacosa in Counly of Monroe and its note . Compliance with Local Regulations Each governmental agency authorized to undertake development and any person authorized to undertake development on land owned or controlled by any governmental agency shall comply with development regulations . . . After a discussion of the state of immunity law in 1975 the note to that section reads : The Code substantially departs from most existing law . This Section provides that, unless exempted by statute , governmental development is subject to regulation by local governments , . . We have decided not to seek an Attorney General ' s opinion at this time . Thank you for offering to draft an opinion regarding this matter. It is an issue of great importance to all municipalities in New York with zoning power. I look forward to your response . Sincerely , Mary Russell Deputy Supervisor enc. cc. John Barney , Attorney for the Town of Ithaca Supervisor Catherine Valentino Don Barber, Town Supervisor, Town of Caroline Mark Varvayanis , Town Supervisor, Town of Dryden Ed Inman , Town Supervisor, Town of Danby Doug Austic, Town Supervisor, Town of Ulysses Mary Beth Holub , Town Councilwoman , Town of Newfield Gerard Ferrentino , Mayor, Village of Trumansburg Don Hartill , Mayor, Village of Lansing Steve Farkas , Town Supervisor, Town of Lansing