Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2001-09-10 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10 , 2001 AT 5 : 30 P . M . ITHACA TOWN HALL, 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA Agenda 1 . Call to Order 2 . Pledge of Allegiance 3 . Report of Tompkins County Representatives 4 . Report of Fire Commissioners 5 . 6 : 00 p . m . — Persons to be Heard — if additional time is needed persons will be heard at end of meeting 6 . 6 : 15 p . m . — Discussion of Budget Process and Projected Tax Rate for 2002 7 . Acceptance of Independent Auditor' s Report for the Year Ending December 31 , 2000 8 . 6 : 30 p . m . — Public Hearing — Eco Village Special Land Use District 9 . Consider Adoption of Findings Statement Regarding Eco Village Second Neighborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District 10 , Consider Enactment of Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Regarding Special Land Use District No . 8 and Rezoning Eco Village 11 . 7 : 30 p . m . — Peter Meskill , Tompkins County Sheriff's Department 12 . Consider Approval of Code Enforcement Component of Fire Contract 13 , Supervisor' s Proposed 2002 Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant Budget 14 , Discuss Design Proposal for Phosphorous Removal Facility at Ithaca Wastewater Treatment Facility 15 . Consent Agenda Items a . Approval of Town Board Minutes b . Town of Ithaca Warrants C . Bolton Point Warrants d . Approve Attendance at New York Planning Federation e . Approve Access Training for Town Clerk 16 . Report of Town Committees i 17 . Monthly Report of Town Officials a . Town Clerk b . Highway Superintendent C . Director of Engineering d . Director of Planning e . Director of Building and Zoning f . Human Resource Manager g . Budget Officer h . Network/Records Specialist i . Receiver of Taxes j . Attorney for the Town of Ithaca 18 . Review of Correspondence a . John Thomas Steakhouse — Liquor License Renewal b . Ide ' s Lanes — Liquor License Renewal C . Cornell Cooperative Extension — Farm City Day d . Time Warner — Notification of Road Runner Rate Increase e . City of Ithaca — Town Hall Renovations f . Unified Court System — "Town Hall Meeting" Program g . Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization — Invitation h . Cayuga Waterfront Trail Initiative — Request for Support i . Daniel Walker to Robert Kirby — Reimbursement for Sewer Installation j . Lisa Titti — Robert Freeman to Speak at Ithaca College 19 , Consider Executive Session to Discuss Current Litigation and Possible Easement Acquisition 20 , Consider Adjournment APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY , SEPTEMBER 10 , 2001 AT 5 : 30 P . M . 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, NEW YORK 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 , there were present : PRESENT: Catherine Valentino , Supervisor ; Mary Russell , Councilwoman ; Carolyn Grigorov , Councilwoman ; David Klein , Councilman ; Tom Niederkorn , Councilman . EXCUSED : Ed Conley , Councilman ; Bill Lesser, Councilman , ALSO PRESENT : Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk ; John Barney , Attorney for the Town ; Dan Walker, Director of Engineering ; Fred Noteboom , Highway Superintendent ; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning ; Andy Frost , Director of Building/Zoning ; Judy Drake , Human Resource Manager; Al Carvill , Budget Officer. OTHERS : Will Burbank , 132 Glenside ; Bob Romanowski , Ithaca Fire Department ; Michael Koplinka- Loehr, Tompkins County Board of Representatives Call to Order: Supervisor Valentino called the meeting to order at 5 : 3 p . m . , and led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance . A enda Item No . 3 - Report of Tompkins County Representatives . Michael Koplinka- Loehr, Tompkins County Board of Representatives - The Tompkins County budget process has started up . It is a very tight year for the County . Two of the items that have begun to be discussed in committee that will be of interest to you folks , and I want feedback on , is the Vital Communities Program . There are some board members thinking it is not a priority for the Planning Department . I know that you are utilizing it in many ways . If indeed that is a concern for that to go forward , please let us know so that I can take that message back from the towns . The other is the Aquifer Study . We have received a resolution from the Town about that as well as from other towns . The issue there is if we have sustainable amount of funding to move forward , but also how will the funding go forward . The Budget Sub-Committee reported to me that the present equation about how that is funded is 30% Federal and 70% from the County . Because the towns use that heavily, the thought came up at Budget Committee , that maybe the budget portion is split half-and - half between the County and the towns . These kinds of looking at ways to leverage funds as the County budget considerations go forward because it is a fairly tight year. We are at a 4 . 6% increase in the tax rate . I know that you are in better shape . This is with a lot of heavy duty trimming . Things like , the Library has asked for a $300 , 000 increase just to maintain the level of services . The 4 . 6% increase is meeting basically zero increase . It would not maintain services and people would need to be cut . We are hearing from the State , because the budget impasse and the basic budget that did get passed , there are other things coming down the pike . Today we heard about a Violence Against Women Act . We had expected $300 , 000 to be coming from the State to fund it . Our initiatives are going forward . As of September 1 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED 11 2001 , this is retroactive ; they are not going to continue funding it . It would be upon the County again . Are we going to pick it up with taxpayers dollars ? Will we have to let that go ? It is that kind of year. Please let me know if you want to weigh in on things that might be cut . The jail is at full capacity . It has not been in the news that much . There has been a change in policy there . Most programs that deliver services at the jail have to request prisoners to meet them in the interview room . All services need to meet in the interview rooms . In the past 15 years , one of the organizations was able to walk up and down the halls and talk through the bars . Because of security and staffing issues , we have had to monitor it much more closely . We did lose our County Attorney . It is a tremendous loss . We will be advertising for another. We will be looking at reorganizing the department in terms of how we deliver services . There were some attorneys delivering services through Social Services . We had the loss of a T-Cat bus driver, as well . You might have heard about North Triphammer Road being delayed . It was because of the right-of- way issue . It was almost too late in the construction season . It has been delayed until the next construction season because of that . I think that the board is up to date on Ellis Hollow Road public hearings . The first public hearings are going to be mid -October. There had been advance meetings of some of the citizens in the area to get input and their message coordinated . Councilman Klein - What about Coddington Road ? Mr. Noteboom - They are going to be paving the third week in September. They will be putting the overlay over. Construction is not due until 2006 . Supervisor Valentino - We are concerned about Coddington Road . Mr. Koplinka- Loehr - One of our board members had a question about the timing of the sewer expansion and the Interrnunicipal Sewer Agreement . Dooley Kiefer was interested in the timing of the scoping . Hopefully , as that agreement goes forward we could be kept abreast of that . We are seeking a new Planning Commissioner. Mr. Hanson is stepping down in late September. The Forest Home Improvement Association has received funding through Town funds , New York State Council of the Art.r; and their own fund raising . They brought in a consultant for a one-day visit in late April to look at their traffic patterns and how we could manage traffic and calm traffic . They decided it was necessary to obtain much more broad community input . Those consultants are returning September 25 and 26 , 2001 . Many of the stakeholders are being asked to come at a time on one of those days to meet with the consultants . The Town of Ithaca and other municipalities involved are being asked to come at 2 : 30 p . m . for about a half- hour. That is a specific stakeholder time . Then there are two open public meeting times . The evening of September 25th from 6 : 30 to 8 : 30 p . m . It is somewhat of a workshop . The consultants will do a half- hour presentation . Then the people who are present will break into small groups . They will report back some of their ideas and brainstorm on how can \Ate manage traffic through this small hamlet , which has about 12 , 000 cars per 2 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED ay . Then throughout the day on September 26th , anyone in the public can stop by . It is an open , rop in session . The consultants will be working all through that time laying out visuals . Around 4 : 30 m . to 6 : 00 p . m . , it will be open again to the public for all the ideas that have been collected and what it might look like . There will be design scenarios on poster board and whatever else they might do . From our point of view it is a model for other neighborhoods in Tompkins County in terms of the same kinds of issues of how do we preserve historic neighborhoods when autos are the main mode of transportation and they keep increasing . Forest Home has been pretty aggressive in keeping traffic counts . They have traffic counts from 1973 . Hopefully some of this information will apply to other neighborhoods across the County and Town . We hope that some of you can join us . Supervisor Valentino - I admire the fact that the neighborhood pulled together and organized this . They raised money . It is nice how they have worked together. Agenda Item No . 4 - RE�port of Fire Commissioners . See Attachment # 1 Bob Romanowski , IFD , submitted his report to the board . Agenda Item No . 12 s- Approval of Code Enforcement Component of Fire Contract — See Attachment #2 Supervisor Valentino - We have a checkered history with the City on code enforcement , with it not being clear on who should have responsibility for what areas . It has never been sorted out and cleared up . With thanks to Mr. Frost , who worked with the City , I think that this agreement satisfies the needs of the Town and City . There have been items that were eliminated as we went through it . Councilman Klein - The only other person that we involved , because a lot of this has to do with site plan review , was Mr. Kanter. Mr. Kanter did sit in on one or two meetings . He had an opportunity to make comments and coordinate some of the plot plan and site plan issues . Things are a little different in the Town than they are in the City . Mr. Romanowski - The checklist form that we all agreed on is still in the process of being finished up right now . This will be a form that will be filled out every time an action takes place . Supervisor Valentino - At least getting through this part really cleans up a lot of misunderstandings . It is a huge step in our fire negotiations . Does anyone have any questions? Councilman Niederkorn Who advised on the contract ? Supervisor Valentino - Councilman Klein , Mr . Frost , Mr. Kanter, and myself worked on the contract . We have it on the agenda as something to be approved tonight . Councilman Klein - I think the agreement is just fine . Mr. Romanowski - This does not in any way diminish the power or authority of the Town of Ithaca to ,enact their own procedures . 3 i r APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Frost - The only thing in the document that is different than what we have done over the last several years , is that most everything in this document is what has been going on with the Fire Department and my office . The Fire Department will assume the responsibility of being the clearinghouse for the people who call up the Town questioning open burning that occurs the Town . We would inform people that it is Town policy not to have open burning except for valid agricultural use . The City of Ithaca now will serve as the contact people for the burning process . Supervisor Valentino - This should be tentative approval . It will not be final approval until we approve the entire Fire Contract . Attorney Barney - Maybe it has been agreed upon and accepted , but the Fire Department accesses standard would need to be adopted by the Town . Page 7 states that the Town will commit to the process to revise and adopt as Town law the City' s Fire Prevention Code . Are we comfortable with the City' s Fire Prevention Code ? Mr. Frost - I thought that what I had read was that we would work with the Fire Department in revising some of their stuff and potentially adopt it ourselves . Councilman Klein - It commits us to a process to review it . Mr. Romanowski - It does not change anything in the process . Attorney Barney - I would feel more comfortable if it stated consider adoption . I am not quite sure that we want to commit ourselves to something . Mr. Frost - The first sentence states , " agree to commit to a process to both revise . . . " My understanding of that is that as they sit down to revise it we would participate in that revision . Attorney Barney - I do not have a problem with the revision , but the adoption says that we are committing to adopt the code . Councilman Klein - I think the language says what our intent was . I think it is plenty loose . If we are not satisfied with the revisions , then we do not adopt it . Attorney Barney - It really says it the other way . We are bound to adopt the process . Mr. Frost - I can understand what you are saying . I guess that I would agree with it . Supervisor Valentino - I do not think adding " consideration " would make a big difference . Mr. Romanowski - I can bring it back to the Chief . This is a draft . Attorney Barney - Is the burning notification done through the Fire Department? Mr. Frost — No , I do it . In terms of notifying if someone has a legitimate burning process , the State Code requires that they notify myself , as Code Enforcement Officer, and the Fire Department of the 4 __ I APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED date and time of the burn . It is occurring . State Law dictates the procedure . The first step in the process is someone getting permission to do that . As you know , we have intended a Town Law regarding open burning . We have not done that yet . I am sharing with people right now that the Town policy right now is not to permit the building . If challenge , then we enter into discussion with the Fire Department . Attorney Barney - I wonder again if we might want to say that we agreed to consider the policies . We discussed it a while ago . Mr. Frost - The State Law would not apply to the Town based on our population being under 20 , 000 . There were some differences of opinion on the Town Board at that point as to whether we want regulation or not . From my perspective , I prefer to see prohibition on the open burning . Councilwoman Russell - Was there prohibitions in the sanitary code? Mr. Frost - Those provisions would not necessarily prohibit it . It prohibits burning of plastic materials . It allows burning , but restricts some things from being burned . It would not cover all cases . My concern in areas where we have densely populated properties , I do not desire seeing people having a small fire in the backyard . It would bring the Town into liability of having said yes to the burn and then something going wrong . Attorney Barney - There is no local law . Mr. Frost - People still call me and ask permission . If we tell them that there is no law and they go head and burn , I still feel that we are open to some liability . I have been taking it upon myself to discourage people from burning . Supervisor Valentino - We can approve this component with the changes recommended by Attorney Barney . A_qenda Item No. 12 — Resolution No. 2001 - 107 — Approval of Code Enforcement Component of Fire Contract BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board approves the section of the Fire Contract with the City of Ithaca Dealing with Code Enforcement with the understanding that the changes discussed in the September 10, 2001 meeting will be made prior to incorporation of the section into the final Fire Contract. Moved: Councilwoman Grigorov Seconded: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye . Unanimously carried. enda Item No . 5 - PERSONS TO BE HEARD 5 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED I cavid Richards , 1058 Danby Road - I live near the intersection of King and Danby Roads . I am here ask for the board ' s advice and assistance in calming the incessant disorderly conduct that occurs at the property across from mine . In my opinion , the owner of the property is operating it as a multiple residence with about eight units , as a public nuisance . I have been talking with Mr. Frost , who has been kind enough to attempt to assist me over the past nine months . I have dealt with the Sheriff' s office many times . They have been incredibly helpful in trying to get me to move forward on this issue . We do not seem to be able to get it resolved . At this point , my issue is three-fold . One is , is there actually an enforcement mechanism for the noise ordinance ? It is not clear that there is and how exactly would it be enforced . I understand there is an issue about electronically amplified noise versus fraternity noise . How do we go about getting Mr. Frost to the site at 3 : 00 in the morning ? I have tried for over a year to compile documents from the Sheriff' s office . Another issue is that the property is unmarked . The Sheriff' s Office gets there ; they do not know what unit it is , what the address is . Even to this day , the specific units are not marked . We do not know who is there . The Sheriffs have a great difficulty when they arrive . This is something that occurs every other night or every third night straight from August 15 until graduation . I am talking at times there are over 100 students drinking and urinating on the yard . I can see them from my bedroom window . They are all 18 to 22 years old , drinking . There will be 15 of them lined up , literally standing five feet off the road , peeing in the direction of the highway . I wake up to broken bottles on my lawn . I would like to know what I can do personally and what the board can do to assist the Sheriff in a safe esolution of the problem . It does get out of hand at times . Sometimes it is frightening to go over here when there are 100 people being hazed . I have done everything to contact the owner of the roperty . I have tried to resolve it . I have gone over there many times myself to talk to the students . It is a revolving door. They do not really care anyway. If I call the Sheriff one night , the party will be twice as loud the next night . In any event , the students rotate every year. We have a new group already . I did call Mr. Frost' s office number on August 21St at 3 : 00 in the morning to say it is happening again . I can tell every track on their stereo . This is an instance where , in my opinion , it really violated Article II of the Noise Ordinance . It should have resulted in some sort of sanction . It is my belief that the key in the ordinance is that the sanction is the owner of the property . I believe there was a reason that section was put into the ordinance . It is for exactly the reason I am presenting to you . The owner should not be allowed to operate his property remotely as a nuisance . It is difficult . I apologize to the Sheriff because I have called so many times . They always do come . This is what happens . They have lookouts on the property . They see the Sheriff' s car coming up the hill , they shut- up . The Sheriff pulls up into my driveway and there is nothing going on . The Sheriff leaves and I have to call them back in an hour and a half . The further difficulty is that there should be an ordinance that requires this property to be marked . There is almost nothing the Sheriff can do when the deputies arrive . Councilman Klein - The house should be marked for fire purposes . 6 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Richards - I have called 40 times in the last nine months . They have done a full search of all the records and have only come up with five pieces of paper that document my 40 calls . I understand that with the emergency call that some of them could have gone to the Ithaca College Police . I think the problem is that even the Sheriff's department is unsure what to call it . The reason of why we only have five pages of records , which were all for disorderly conduct citations , is that the deputies have no idea what numbers to put down . If nothing else , that would be of assistance . It is not clear to me that if there is a mechanism that is clear for the Zoning Officer to confront these folks . I think we are reluctant to rest on the documentation for the Sheriff' s office as a sufficient basis to cite these folks . I would like to set the wheels in motion to amend the ordinance to include broader range of violation . Technically , the noise does not violate the noise ordinance if they do not have their stereo on . Supervisor Valentino - We need to figure out how to work through this . Have we tried to contact Mr. Monkemeyer? Mr. Frost - I called him Friday , ahead of the letter that was being sent to him . Supervisor Valentino - We requested that he come tonight for him to discuss this with us . Mr. Richards - I have called Ithaca College . It is not an authorized fraternity . It is off their property so they are unwilling to take any action . Peter Meskill , Tompkin :> County Sheriff - The under sheriff spent his Labor weekend at the property . That Friday , we made 24 arrests at College Circle Apartments , right next door . I went through the property in question , myself , about midnight the following night . There were a few people out . There were not any parties . We were out again looking for them because there were parties there the night before . A young high School girl from the Ithaca area was taken from that party to another location and raped . We are going to come out against the parties a little harder than we have in the past . I will be very blunt with you , on a normal evening at that time of the night ; I have one sergeant and three deputies to cover 500 square miles . I found it kind of interesting when I heard Mr. Koplinka- Loehr talk about the budget cuts . The County Administrator has told me to keep my budget flat , which means that I lose two deputies , two corrections officers and a secretary . It is not the time or the place for me to lose people to go out and enforce the law . That is typically why we do not get to that type of call . If you call at midnight or 1 : 00 a . m . it is the super busy time for us . Our busy time is between 9 : 00 p . m . and 2 : 00 a . m . We have a shift change at 11 : 00 p . m . We had to give up our proactive DWI car, because of the budget, as of Labor Day weekend . That usually ran from 7 : 00 p . m . to 3 : 00 a . m . It allowed us to do some overage between shifts . The budget crunch with the County has caused problems . found three complaints . We did make some disorderly conduct arrests in the spring . I did find one complaint lodge of the ()t"of September about noise . The remarks were " no noise was found when we got there " . That is a lot of what happens . We are out there proactively from 10 : 00 p . m . to 2 : 00 a . m . on both sides of campus . Campus seems to have a new policy this year, " get tough with alcohol on campus " . It is pushing them all out to us on all sides . They know that we do not have nearly as 7 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED many on patrol as the City of Ithaca at any given time or moment . They tend to congregate in the town areas . It is a problem . Councilwoman Russell - What is the status of college officers when they are off campus ? They have responded to a burglary around my neighborhood . Mr. Meskill - They comE' at our request . We have two documents . One is an agreement put together by Bob Howard back in the early 1970s that the College and County signed . It has worked fairly well . The second is that myself and the College pushed through some legislation this year that allows the college patrol officers that have police training to become certified peace officers . Even though they are employees of Ithaca College , they have to be approved by the Sheriff . We need to be provided with certain records and agree to our policies and procedures . We can call them off campus , but they will only come at our request . They are not automatically dispatched . Part of your other problem , in January , the traditional 272-2444 number for the Sheriff is no longer the Sheriff . The number is the Tompkins County Communication Center. You are now talking to a civilian dispatcher. You are not talking to a police officer. Unless they tell you we are sending a car, we do not get a record of your call . Unless you request a car, there is going to be no record in our file that you called and asked to see a deputy. Supervisor Valentino - I think one thing that we need to comment to the County on is maintaining the level of safety with the Sheriff' s Department . In the last few years , we have seen some really good results from the Sheriff' :: Department . Safety is an important part of our community. Mr. Frost , in the address not being clearly marked that is something that you do . Mr. Frost - We have a local law that requires the addresses to be posted . Councilman Klein - What is the enforcement mechanism ? Mr. Frost - I cannot tell you about the penalties . I am not all that familiar with the law as to how we specify penalties . It does require lettering in at least 3- inch strokes . Councilman Klein - We could issue a ticket if the address is not posted . Attorney Barney - We will need to look into the law . Supervisor Valentino - We need to have the address posted . Mr. Richards has asked how do we enforce the noise ordinance . Attorney Barney - When we drafted the ordinance , we drafted it with specific sound levels . At the time someone had a decibel reader. We could take a look to see if there is a device that we could call in to measure . We also need to find the personnel to do it at 2 : 00 a . m . The Town is not really geared to have enforcement people out at that time of day . We might have to consider hiring someone part-time to address the issue . 8 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Meskill - We try not to dispatch our sergeants to a call . It will be difficult to measure the decibel of music . Attorney Barney - I am troubled with the situation . Have you tried video taping ? Mr. Richards - The problem is the quality of the proof and who would accept it . How would we verify its validity , timeliness , and how would we go forward with that? Attorney Barney - I would assume that if you were the one video taping it , you would be the one to verify it . Mr. Richards - If you would take it as evidence I will buy a video camera tomorrow . I do not believe that the existing ordinance would permit that to be enforced . Attorney Barney - I am not totally hung up on the ordinance . The ordinance was designed for a specific type of noise problem . It was not designed to take care of things that are covered by the State Law . Mr. Richards - There are plenty instances when there is electronically amplified noise , which is a direct violation . Attorney Barney - The :Mate Law basically applies to any unreasonable sound . I am not sure , but if you were willing to fill out complaint , use and submit the videotape , it might be tried in a Justice Court proceeding . Mr. Richards - As my understanding of law , it would be found as insufficient . It is not impossible . Attorney Barney - Evidence is evidence . Councilwoman Grigorov - Would it be used the against the property owner? Attorney Barney - There are some due process issues with the property owner. The property owner is not the one out there screaming and hollering . It is the people living there committing the crime . Mr. Richards - The noise ordinance is a nullity right now , as it stands . It is unforceable through any practical method . It is a problem . As far as video taping , they are all 18 to 22 year old white kids , fairly athletic , mingling around drinking and half of them are wearing baseball caps . I do not know how I would come about: identifying anyone of them from videotape taken across the street at 3 : 00 in the morning ; it is unclear to me . Mr. Frost - The history we have had in most cases we can contact the landlord and do not hear a problem again . Mr. Monkemeyer has been contacted several times . What I am curious about is that from what you have been describing sounds really out of control . Yet , I am not aware of any other calls from neighboring property owners to complain . 9 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Richards - I did give you a copy of a complaint from the Sheriff' s office of , and it' s in my letter, rom someone just down the street from me . Mr. Frost - There has not been persistent calls from neighboring property owners . Have you communicated with other people in the neighborhood as well ? Mr. Richards - It is not my intention after being there for a year and a half to make trouble for Mr. Monkemeyer. I am not into stirring up the whole neighborhood to be against this one property . Mr. Frost - From the level of noise that you describe , I am surprised that I have not had calls from other people . The history that 1 have had since I have been with the Town in other areas of the Town is that I receive multiple calls from multiple property owners complaining about a particular property . Mr. Richards - I have heard you say that to me on more than one occasion . It does sting right here in my gut because I am here . I cannot be responsible for my other neighbors failing to complain . I know that I sent you a copy and a certified copy to Mr. Monkemeyer of the five documents the Sheriffs have . I do thank Mr. Meskill for what they did over Labor Day . I have nothing but good things to say about the Sheriff . My role here is to find some way to resolve this problem that alleviates this burden given the shortage of manpower . Supervisor Valentino - I think we all agree with you . Mr. Richards - Of the five papers I gave to the board , there was one complaint from two doors down from me . I know I have called them over ninety times and they only have five documents . My hope is that with calling the Sheriff's department that we would be able to document how many people have complained . But if you call the dispatch office , the Ithaca College safety office , and the Sheriff' s office , all they will be able to tell you is that there were three complaints filed by Mr. Richards and one filed by a neighbor two doors down the street . Councilman Niederkorn - We could work more with the Campus Police . They have a group of people there five minutes away . They might not be able to arrest anyone , but they could show up every fifteen minutes . It might help . Mr. Meskill - They have no legal recourse from being up there . They have to be requested on a case by case basis . Attorney Barney - Is there a mechanism someone could set up that that request could be made ? Councilman Klein - Could we request that Ithaca College be called if you are short manpower? Mr. Meskill - We could do whatever you want . I stopped at their office myself to talk with them to get a car operation going at 10 : 00 on a Saturday night and they had two people going off and two people coming on . They have just two people for campus . They are not going to give me someone for a rookie patrol situation as a rule , unless something is coordinated ahead of time . I know the relationship we have with the college and how it works . They have been good to us and we have been good to them . I would not want to jeopardize that . If it is an emergency situation they will come 10 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED t p . The basic thing they usually come up for is answering an alarm or checking on a motor vehicle ccident or a crime in progress . Attorney Barney - Mr . Richards' s problem as I see it is finding someone to be there at a time to witness what he is witnessing and being able to put an end to it . We need to find a way to do it fairly economically , but never the less , something that Mr. Richards and his neighbors can rely on . Councilman Klein - I would think that Ithaca College is interested in being a good neighbor. Perhaps someone other than the Safety Division needs to be approached . It might be the College President or Vice President . We need to let them know of a serious problem with a hundred of their students within our neighborhood . We need for a little bit of time before we can really make an impact here to have them be more readily available to assist the Sheriff . Mr. Richards - I have spoken to the Associate Dean of Students and the head of the fraternity organization as well . It took me nine months before I came to this meeting . Councilman Klein - Our Town Supervisor would be more effective . Mr. Richards - My perspective that I got from them was that it is off campus . They do not have enough manpower. I have talked to the head of Ithaca College Safety . Agenda Item No . 8 - Public Hearing - EcoVillage Special Land Use District. Supervisor Valentino opened the public hearing at 6:30 p. m. The Town Clerk had proof of posting and publication. Agenda Item No. 5 - PERSONS TO BE HEARD Continued . Supervisor Valentino - I will try to make some contact with the Vice President of Ithaca College . We have got to be able to establish the location . Mr. Meskill - There are .several off campus locations on east and west side of Ithaca College where we have these troubles . There are parties in access of 100 people . Mr. Richards - There has not been any noise in two weeks . Mr. Meskill - We are having a meeting scheduled at 9 : 00 a . m . Wednesday morning in my office to try to find the appropriate people at Ithaca College to be there . The landlord of College Circle Apartments will be there . I would like someone from the Town Zoning Office to be there . I will extend the invitation to Ithaca College Safety . I would like to talk about the issue to see what we can do . can set- up a special detail on Fridays and Saturdays from 1 : 00 a . m . to 3 : 00 a . m . to get the evidence that I need . I want to try to make that work in an economic fashion . It becomes very expensive very fast . 11 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Richards - I appreciate that . My conclusion is that the real problem that the board can address is hat in fact even though we have a piece of paper with a noise ordinance written on it , we really do not have a noise ordinance in the Town . Attorney Barney - You are taking shots at the noise ordinance and I think that is unfair. There needs to be enforcement . You are having a problem with which the Town is not really the entity that enforces nighttime kind of things . We will look into it . We will work with Mr. Meskill to get enforcement done . To keep harping on the fact that ordinance is inadequate ; the ordinance was not designed for this . State Law is designed for this . There is an unreasonable noise section . Supervisor Valentino - A lot of things have changed since the ordinance was written . We need to go back and revisit it . Mr. Richards - Will there be some mechanism to move forward and have public hearings on that? Supervisor Valentino - We have set- up a committee to look at the ordinance . Agenda Item No. 7 -_ Acceptance of Independent Auditor ' s Report for the Year Ending December 31 , 20009 Supervisor Valentino - I have opened the public hearing for EcoVillage , but at 6 : 15 p . m . we were supposed to have a report from our Independent Auditors . I would like to let them come up and talk about the budget report and answer our questions . ave Isles , Scriabba Walker - I am a partner with the firm . My responsibility is to make sure the annual audit is done at professional standards . Jay Ingles is responsible for being here performing the audit procedures . The financial records of -the Town are in outstanding shape . Your accounting staff is very strong , very active . The accuracy of their records is of high quality . I would think that you should feel comfortable with the information that you are getting during the year to be able to make decisions . This is the fourth year that we have done the audit and the fourth year of good sound records . The accounting records continue to improve each year . We have made a few recommendations over the year. Consistently we come back and the first thing we do is address the prior year' s recommendations . We are finding that improvements are being made . If we go back a few years and look at our recommendations , we can see a clear pattern of implementation of the recommendations . You will see improvements in your cash controls , improvements in internal controls , departmental reporting , efficiencies of the accounting operations . I would like to commend the financial folks here at the Town for that . It is good to see an organization that takes the audit process seriously and is always trying to improve . The financial statements that you have seen are a standard package . If you look at any municipality you see very similar financial statements . The opinion that we issued was a clean opinion saying that books are a fair representation of generally accepted accounting principles . You will also notice a report on internal control and report on compliance of law . Again , we had no findings there and that ,the s good . 12 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED would like to make a couple of general comments . Our firm is very impressed with the way you ave been managing your fund balance and the liquidity of your assets . I would like to compliment that it is a reflection of the staff , management and the board for taking an active process and managing your fund balance . New York State seems to be loosening the ropes a little bit on what is an appropriate fund balance . Before they were pretty strict in saying a certain percentage of next year' s budget . Now , recently , a memo has come out that is giving the local municipality more say in what is an appropriate fund balance . It is good news for managing your financial affairs . The only other comment that I would make is that if I had to give a general assessment of characterization of your accounting records and staff , it seems that you have a very accountable staff. Anytime we have questions answers are there . If they are not there , the research is thorough and accurate answers are provided quickly . Accountability is a theme of your financial group . You should be proud of them . Supervisor Valentino - Thank you . We have appreciated working closely with you folks , too . It has been great two-way communication . If there is ever a problem , we always feel very open with the auditors . Resolution No. 2001 408 - Town of Ithaca Independent Auditor's Report for the Year Ending December 31 , 20000 WHEREAS, the governing Town Board and the Budget Officer have received the Certified Financial Statements for the year ended December 31 , 2000 for the Town of Ithaca from the I,ndependent auditing firm of Sciarabba Walker & Co. , L . L . P. , Certified Public Accountants; and WHEREAS, Town Law requires that the said statements must be made available for public inspection at the Town Clerk 's Office; now therefore be it RESOLVED, that this governing Town Board does hereby accept for filing the Independent Auditor's Certified Financial Statements for the fiscal year ending December 31 , 2000 for the Town of Ithaca; and be it further RESOLVED, this governing Town Board does hereby authorize and direct the Town Clerk to advertise that the said statements are available for public inspection at her office as prescribed by law. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilwoman Russell VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. 13 �e APPROVED OCTOBER 4. 2001 APPROVED Agenda Item No . 8 - Public Hearing Continued — Attachment #3 Supervisor Valentino - Is there anyone here to speak on the EcoVillage Special Land Use District ? Liz Walker, EcoVillage - I wanted to review what we are going over with the Special Land Use District ( SLUD ) . We did apply for a SLUD back in 1995 . It basically covered 34 acres of land . We are now applying to amend the SLUD to extend to 169 acres . It would cover all of the EcoVillage land except for the small strip along West Haven Road . We are asking that it be designated as three basic areas . The first is a natural , which will be left as it is . There will be the possibility for walking trails . The second is an agricultural area , which is most of the land . It is currently being used on part for farming and in part for open areas . The third area is an additional residential area . We currently have one neighborhood of 30 homes . We are planning in the very near future to build another neighborhood of 30 homes . Then , subsequently , leave ourselves room for up to three more neighborhoods . Martha Armstrong , 766 Elm Street Extension - I live at Longhouse Cooperative , which borders the EcoVillage property on the south side . I mentioned to Councilman Niederkorn last week that I was going to come to this meeting . He said he noticed that a couple of your neighbors wrote in favor of the project . I wanted to mention that two of the neighbors that listed 766 Elm Street Extension as their address are members of the second neighborhood group . They are very up front about it in their letter. EcoVillage came before the Town in 1994 and 1995 for the initial development . At that time SEQR process was segmented and the development was approved without the benefit of a GEIS review. At that time the Town Board had a number of concerns about development of the site . This included fragmentation of open space , distance to the school bus and transit stop . EcoVillage has confirmed that they have low transit ridership because of the distance to walk out to the road where the bus stops . Distance to provide emergency services , extension of water and sewer infrastructure , and also concern that the Town might one-day need to take over the private access road was expressed concerns . At that time there had been a recent precedent for that concern with another cooperative development . In response to these concerns and other concerns , the Town Board voted to limit the length of the access road to 3 , 000 feet . The current EcoVillage proposal chooses to ignore that limit . The proposed plan extends the access road from 208-foot access road with a 580-foot spur road , plus an unspecified length of internal loop road within the second neighborhood location . It is about 350 feet from the end of spur road down to the pond hydrant . The overall extension ends up being 735 feet beyond the 3 , 000 -foot maximum when the developer first applied for a SLUD . It is about 25 % increase . These are the primary access to the second neighborhood . The Planning Board , which has finished reviewing the GEIS , at their August meeting said that they would defer to the Town Board on deciding if it were acceptable to exceed the 3 , 000 limit as proposed . It seems rather late to do that , but I still think there are some serious issues we should look at in considering that choice . Now that we have an opportunity to look at the GEIS , there are some consequences of the EcoVillage proposal that are approved within the GEIS as potential things that could happen on that 14 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED site . One that they do not discuss , but I think the Town should keep in mind that for the same reasons in 1994 was concerned , you may be asked to take over that road . The second item is water for fire protection . According to the GEIS , the Fire Department suggests a pressurized hydrant system for the future co -development of the site . They do not have great detail from the Fire Department beyond that . To accomplish this on the EcoVillage property would require a tank elevated 100 feet high and sized to supply 48 , 000 gallons over a four hour period . That is 2 , 000 gallons per minute . The alternative is a ground tank located on terrain that is 70 feet higher in elevation than available on the EcoVillage land . The closest land that has that , 1 , 210-foot elevation that would be required for a ground tank is one mile west of EcoVillage . It is across the upper reaches of Coy Glen where there is a valley . It is just 2 , 000 feet east of Sheffield Road . It is quite a distance from their property . I do not know if they could purchase that land and then possibly run a mile of pipe back to EcoVillage . It seems that it would be expensive , problematic and difficult . It would , of course , have its own environmental issues , which were not discussed during GEIS review. I would say that the elevated tank seems like the likely approach . This , I would suggest , could have significant growth enducing impacts . This is the main concern because there is quite a bit of land west of there that would be low enough in elevation to be served by such a tank. Secondarily , it would have visual impacts . The second item I want to point out without going into great detail is the domestic water. According to the GEIS the current pump system will not be able to handle full build-out . The proposed solution is a 110-foot high tank with a 70 , 000-gallon capacity or a land based tank with similar design issues . That information is from the GEIS originally submitted in May . Are there other alternatives ? I would suggest that there are . You can look at the last drawing , Alternative D . It shows some of the clusters being located down in the lower portion of the site closer to Mecklenburg Road and West Haven Road . There is public water and hydrants on West Haven Road already . Secondarily , it would be a much lower point on the site . Where they have selected to build is very nearly the highest area of the site . It is the highest area for quite a ways . It is a mile away before you get 70 feet higher. This is lower. You could possibly put a land - based tank up here where they are suggesting building to provide pressurized fire fighting and domestic water if the Town ' s water on West Have Road was unable to do that . In closing , I request that the Town Board not reneg on the road length limitation , which affords some protection to the fiscal and planning interest of the Town . Thank you . Will Burbank , Glenside Road - I live about a mile or two down the hill from EcoVillage . I consider them to be a neighbor and a very good neighbor indeed . 1 am very glad that Ms . Armstrong brought to your attention the detail and critique of what she perceives to be problems . I think that EcoVillage should be held to the same high standards of any other project . I certainly understand her frustration . In seeing the immediate environment that is naturally undeveloped , become developed . I live on Glenside Road and look out onto a hundred acres of very developable land . It has yet to be developed . I know that someday it may . I know that when that happens I will be quite frustrated as well . I could only hope that it is developed the way that folks at EcoVillage have attempted to do . hink it is exactly the kind of cluster development with maximal preservation and open space that I would like to see in the Town of Ithaca . I am also very appreciative of the concerns Ms . Armstrong 15 APPROVED OCTOBER 4. 2001 APPROVED aised concerning the endangerment of very vulnerable areas of Coy Glen . I know that Coy Glen is n area that needs to be treated with great care . I do encourage the Town to do anything possible to ive due treatment . I do support the overall move to expand EcoVillage . I hope the board will act accordingly . Ms . Armstrong - I am riot negative about the concept of EcoVillage . I think the cluster housing is great . My issue is the location of it , the fiscal and planning impacts on the Town . EcoVillage is a very lovely neighbor . I know many of the individuals there . I have no problem with that . This is a planning and fiscal issue for the Town that was discussed six or seven years ago . I think it is worth looking at it again . I also hope that they complete their project . My problem is with the plan . Supervisor Valentino closed the public hearing at 6:55 p. m. Aqenda Item No. 9 - Adoption of Findings Statement Regarding EcoVillage Second Neighborhood & Amendment of Special Land Use District - See Attachment #4 Councilman Niederkorn - Supervisor Valentino , I would like to hear more from our staff of the water pressure and the need for high tank or a larger ground tank. I do not know if whether it deals with this phase or whether that is something that would need to be addressed when a subsequent phase comes along . Mr. Walker - Currently , they are providing domestic water to the first residence group with a hydramatic pressure system . They have pressure tanks in the Common House and the pump station on West Haven Road . They are planning a basic expansion of that with additional pressure tanks using the same pumps for the second residence group . That has been functioning quite well . There is no fire flow from that system . So they have a dry hydrant that has been put in by the pond . The access to it has been improved . The Fire Department has used it . They have made recommendations and improvements so that they have an on -site source of water if they get into a major event that cannot be handled with the water in the trucks . They are proposing an additional pond above the second residence group at some point with another dry hydrant . They have talked about additional in -ground storage that can be pumped by the fire truck as opposed to gravity fed . Everyone prefers to have a pressurized fire system for fire flow . Sometimes the expense does not justify that kind of system . An emergency source of water can be pumped with the trucks is adequate . With the second residence group they will be providing a new access to the other side of the pond . They will have two points to pump . They are installing an on -site fire system . A fire truck can be hooked to the dry hydrant at the pond and connect to an additional hydrant that they can pressurize and provide water to different points within the second residence group . This water will be coming from the existing pond . Initially , when they came in for the planning several years ago , we talked about the domestic water system supplied by the Town . That would require a tank up on a high tank a couple thousand feet away from the EcoVillage property . It was not a fiscally viable solution for the Town to provide that much water service . It also was not in keeping with the open space policies of the Town in that area . Extending the water district was not justified . Building a new tank was a cost that could not be 16 Inn= APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED ustified by the Town . It was also a cost that could not be justified by the developers . That uggestion was not followed through on . For domestic supply for the other two or three residence groups , they have considered some form of elevated storage or larger pressure tanks . It is further on in the design phase . It would cost money to design that . They have not pursued and actual design for those facilities . They could continue to use the hydramatic storage system that they are using now for the other residence groups . They would probably have to increase the pumping capacity or provide additional storage that would be pressurized by pumps . The options are open . We are in the process of designing a tank to be a sister tank to the Trumansburg Road tank . We currently only have one tank on the hill . That tank is being designed to be at a slightly higher elevation than the Trumansburg Road tank to improve the pressure along the higher portions of West Haven Road . It will also improve the fire flow in that area . Two of the sites that we are looking at are actually on EcoVillage property . One would be on Mecklenburg Road near their entrance and the other is near their emergency entrance . We are just starting with the site evaluations at this point . This board and the Planning Board will see those . We are very aware in the Town of the visual impacts . One thing a higher tank would do , it would allow a Fire Department hydrant at the base of the tank . It would not provide much pressure , but would provide all the flow the Fire Department would need . If it t ere located on the emergency road , a hydrant would be located at the entry point into EcoVillage . It ould provide plenty of volume that could be easily connected to the Fire Department ' s resources . ouncilman Niederkorn - What do the pressure tanks look like and their capacity? Mr. Walker - I have not seen them . They are about 450 -gallon tanks . It is a large oblong tank . They are inside the building for cross protection . The pumps are in the building off West Have Road . Councilman Klein - They are proposing to build a total of 150 units . Are you satisfied with that the fire service would work in that area? Mr. Walker - Especially if we had a source of water that was within 1 , 000 feet of most of the buildings . A tank up there would give that to us . Councilman Klein - Would the tank be a growth enducing element for West Hill ? Mr. Walker - No . What we are proposing is a tank that is higher than the Trumansburg Road tank , but not high enough to really extend the service area beyond the limits of the residential area shown in the Comprehensive Plan . It will not provide water pressure to current EcoVillage properties . It would not do anything to the west of that . It would not be adequate pressure to provide domestic flows to the buildings at EcoVillage . Councilwoman Grigorov - It could provide fire service . 17 EN1I=fflI11 I= APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED t r. Walker - It would be able to provide fire flows with a booster pump . One area it would provide dditional pressure is on the area off Elm Street . It would not go beyond West Haven Road . A tank ith a hydrant on the EcoVillage property would make them a lot happier. Their ideal is to have a hydrant in front of every house to provide 600 to 1 , 000 gallons per minute at 20 to 50 pounds of pressure , but we cannot do that . Councilman Niederkorn - Does anyone remember why 3 , 000 feet was agreed upon for the maximum length of the access road ? Mr. Kanter - It was an arbitrary number, but it was because of the specific proposal at the time . We wanted to put in the original SLUD language . It by far exceeds our normal standards for dead end cul -de-sac , which is normally in the range of 1 , 000 feet . We try to build into that zoning language other provisions for access . The emergency access road was required and completed . We are satisfied that it is functioning properly . I think there were also a lot of things built into the . SLUD language dealing with the construction of the main access road , which had been accomplished . Another provision in the SLUD that is still in there is that no housing unit would be more than 1200 feet from the juncture where the emergency access road meets the main access road . It would be the case with all the five neighborhoods . No building would be further than that point . I think we have been satisfied through the process with the access provisions are working . Supervisor Valentino - What is the standard road for emergency vehicles ? Mr. Walker - Our standard road is 20 or 22 feet with a 4-foot shoulder. The main entrance road driveway to EcoVillage is almost 40 feet with shoulders with hard shoulders . It was built extra wide to provide four 10-foot wide lanes . It would have to be a pretty significant problem to have that whole road blocked at any given point . It was one of the considerations . It is 40 feet of trafficable surface . It adds a lot of protection . A property off Danby Road was developed . It was going to be a long loop road with over 1 , 000 fE.,et in length . The Planning Board required two roadways with a median separating it . It is very :similar to this . The emergency access road that comes off the main entrance just before the garages and heads to West Haven Road provides the secondary access . It does not make it a dead end . From that point where the emergency road intersects the main driveway , the 1 , 000 feet that we put into our subdivision regulations for a cul -de- sac is not being exceeded . Mr. Kanter - The Planning Board did pass on their affirmative recommendation regarding the amended SLUD . They did talk specifically about the 3 , 000-foot road length . I think they were comfortable with that . They , of course , deferred to the Town Board 's judgement in any matter regarding a zoning change . It is the jurisdiction of the Town Board . They were comfortable with that and the road access provisions that have been set- up and now specified in the amended SLUD . Councilwoman Russell - Could someone from EcoVillage explain the process of how you came to this arrangement ? lMs . Walker - This has been a plan that is many years in the making . It has included lots of people . We have had land use planning forums in which we invited the public . Our concern in creating this 18 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED plan of the neighborhoods was that not only do we want to densely cluster each neighborhood , we also wanted to cluster the neighborhoods together into a village . The idea is to have a lot of social interaction between the neighborhoods in addition to within each neighborhood . If you start moving the neighborhoods away from each other, you both impact the open space that is remaining and also you take away the social interaction that we were looking for in our plan . As you notice in this plan , the first and second neighborhoods are very close together. We like it that way because already the children of the different neighborhoods are playing together. There are a lot of relationships developing among the adults . We want to make sure that continues . We did take the Planning Board out on the site . We explored the different areas that had been proposed by us as alternatives and also by Ms . Armstrong as alternatives . There were some very clear problems with some of the alternative sites that were too close to the traffic of Route 79 or in too steep areas or too close to the agricultural areas . We did go through them one by one. The Planning Board really looked at the alternatives . Councilman Klein - Aquacultural is mentioned as a use in both the natural area and agricultural area . Could you explain what you mean by Aquaculture since that is not a word defined in our Zoning Ordinance ? Rod Lambert , EcoVillage - The aquaculture is somewhat of a catch phase . It is know that a realistic approach is to bring water into the equation . Most people in the early planning envisioned some kind of aquatic agriculture . At this time we do not have a specific requirement for a particular type of use of the ponds . There are+ two existing ponds on hand now . They are surface water ponds . Given the subsequent studies of the amount of rainfall and catchment that we have , what you see there is about it . It is more a question of what we would do with those existing ponds . Aquaculture really integrates more with its educational function than it will with an agricultural function . A demonstration of how ponds and other water catchment basins could be use productively instead of just being recreational . They are providing irrigation . It is a possible source of further edible plants . It teaches about the ecosystem in a more holistic way with pond culture integrated into the farms . The one pond is very close to the farm that we have active . It is conceivable that it would provide further production as a supplement of what the farm produces now . It might integrate into a production source for 1 , 000 people . It would be more down home than industrial level production . Councilman Klein - Does it involve intense fishing lagoons and industrial buildings that bring out lots of smells ? Mr. Lambert - A smell would probably indicate a dysfunction of the pond . It would suggest anaerobic activity . There is no industrial intentions related to the use of the pond water. Councilman Klein - There have been fish farms that have created a great deal of controversy . Mr. Lambert - The largest pond now is purely recreational . There are some fish in it . It is highly improbable that you would find that used . Mr. Kanter - I did come up with some wording . This is on page 3 of the proposed amendment , tection 3 ( b ) ( 1 ) . In the middle of the paragraph where it refers to " outdoor areas for aquaculture " , 1 ould strike those four words and substitute , ' outdoor use of ponds for agricultural production to 19 it APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED demonstrate how natural ecosystems can produce edible plants , fish or other aquatic species for omestic consumption " . It characterizes the use . Attorney Barney - It might be just as easy to say that for this purpose aquaculture is defined as what Mr. Kanter stated . Mr. Kanter - Attorney Barney would leave in the original wording and then add the definition . Mr. Lambert - I think outdoor use of ponds is redundantly repetitive . Attorney Barney - It could define aquaculture as " use of ponds for agricultural production to demonstrate how natural ecosystems can produce edible plants , fish and other aquatic species for domestic consumption " . Councilman Klein - Hog farming has come up at Codes and Ordinances . Do we really want to allow hog farming in the agricultural area? It is not as isolated . This is still basically a residential zone . Mr. Lambert - A commercial hog operation is very unlikely . If it is needed to be struck , then we could live with it . Mr. Kanter - The original SLUD language allowed garden , nursery , or farm accept for a hog farm where the principal food is garbage . I am presuming that since the amendment proposed does not further adjust that , the provision still would apply . Councilman Klein was concerned about hog farms that might not be using garbage as a source of food for the hogs , but others as well . Mr. Lambert - Could we apply commercial use to this as well ? Our production would not be commercial hog farming . Attorney Barney - In prior law we had spelled out a number of different uses . Councilman Klein - Anything that is allowed in that district is now allowed here . Does that pose any problems because it is not as isolated ? The Planning Board has spent more time talking about where they should cluster the homes than some of the details of the uses . When we do revise our Zoning Ordinance , we are going to leave the SLUDs alone . This is not intended to be revised . Attorney Barney - We could revert to the use that is in the original SLUD . Mr. Kanter - I am reading it that that is the case . The way you worded the amended local law, it says on Page 3 , Section 3 ( b) , entitled " Principle Use Regulations as Amended " . By adding a new subparagraph 3 , reading as follows and renumbering former subparagraphs 3 through 11 to be subparagraphs 4 through 12 , which to me says that those are still applicable . Attorney Barney - We have said in one place that anything is permitted in agricultural districts and then elsewhere we are retaining the prior limitations . We probably ought to say that for all principle and accessory agricultural uses permitted below . 20 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr . Kanter - We are on two documents . It made it difficult for me to go through it . Attorney Barney - The old local law spelled it out . Mr. Kanter - I would prefer not referring strictly to the agricultural districts listed in the current zoning . It is not very expansive in terms of uses permitted . I liked the way we had it worded in the original SLUD . Attorney Barney - I do not have a problem with that either . We need to address it . Councilman Niederkorn - We can put any restrictions we want in the SLUD . Do you contemplate commercial production of livestock? Mr. Lambert - We would like to have that option available . We have had trials with small quantities of turkeys , sheep , etc . It has been at the hobby level at this point . It is quite conceivable from a cultural standpoint that animals are integrated into the overall system . The option at least on a small level to have animals involved is important to us . Non -commercial is an acceptable phrase for us . Councilman Niederkorn - Commercial is a certain volume of activity that would cause a problem . It is not cultural farming . Ms . Walker - When we did have a trial turkey farm , there is some discomfort among some residents touncilman bout that . It is highly unlikely that we would have any kind of commercial livestock . The only xception that we might see is sheep for wool . Niederkorn - It is clearly a different type of animal if you are talking about raising something that is going to be sold off the premises . Ten sheep could become a thousand sheep very quickly . It is a different story . Ms . Walker - I do not see a problem with the SLUD saying non -commercial at this point . We do not have any plans for the future that I know of to raise livestock for commercial purposes . Supervisor Valentino - Are there any other questions? Attorney Barney - We presently state sale of farm or nursery products should be subject to provisions of Section 18 and 77 of the ordinance . It allows a roadside stand with a display and sale of products . Councilman Niederkorn - I do not have a problem with commercial sales of fruit and vegetables . I have a problem with the livestock . It seems like in the second paragraph ; we need to say " except " in the third to fourth line down . Mr. Kanter - I think we could go back to number 5 in the original language and say something like " garden , nursery , or farm except for commercial production and sale of livestock " , or something along those lines . 21 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED t ouncilman Klein - The amendment on Page 4 , the section that talks about community centers . It ays at least one , but no more than one community center shall be constructed for each thirty sidents . Why would you say " at least one , but no more than one " ? Why can 't we just say one ? Attorney Barney - With this language you are not required to have any , but if you are over thirty then you are required to have at least one . You are not entitled to have two . The " at least one " is for less than thirty residents . Councilman Niederkorn - There was some disagreement between your language and our language regarding the depth of the R- 15 zone from the road . Ms . Walker - Attorney Barney and I talked about this today . Essentially , we wanted to preserve one lot within from the road . It is 225 feet from the centerline of West Haven Road . Councilman Niederkorn - It would leave 200 -foot lots with the right-of-way . Is that large enough ? Mr . Kanter - The R- 15 depth is 150 feet . Attorney Barney - Each lot is required to be 15 , 000 square feet . Ms . Walker - It is possible to divide them into one- acre lots . We sold one lot to one of our residents who is going to build a rental house there . There is one more , which we have not yet sold . We are hoping not to have to subdivide any more lots . We wanted that as insurance to pay down the ortgage if we cannot raise it through other means . Councilwoman Russell - How close are you to Coy Glen ? Ms . Walker - The critical environmental area of Coy Glen is farther away from the second neighborhood . The area is very steep . Very few people go down there . There are no pathways . It is like walking in a gorge without a pathway . It is pretty tough going . Councilwoman Russell - Do pets wander through this area ? Ms . Walker - We do not have a policy on pets . We have a lot peer pressure . Basically , almost all the dogs in the neighborhood are put on a leash as soon as they go out of the neighborhood . If not on a leash , then they have to be under voice control . We strongly encourage people who own cats that spend time outdoors to keep them in at night . They are nocturnal hunters . We ask them to keep them inside during the ground nesting bird season . We are quite sensitive to pets and the possible. impact that they can have . Mr. Kanter - The distance measurement is on Page 1 of the Final Environmental Impact Statement . The closest Second Neighborhood Group ( SONG ) house would be 1200 feet from the edge of the Coy Glen Natural Area and 2000 feet from the critical environmental area part of Coy Glen . n this case , SEQR is the Statement of Findings . The board needs to approve the Statement of indings first . 22 APPROVED OCTOBER 4. 2001 APPROVED t esolution No. 2001 - 109 — Adoption of Findings Statement — EcoVillagge Second ei hborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District WHEREAS, Eco Village at Ithaca has requested the proposed amendment of Special Land Use District (SLUD) No. 8 to be applied to the overall Eco Village property (with the exception of the R- 15 Residence portion along West Haven Road) on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 's 28- 1 -26. 2 and 28- 1 - 26. 8, consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres, and Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the proposed development of a Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units and a common house, located off of Mecklenburg Road at Rachel Carson Way (a private drive) . Ecovillage at Ithaca, Owner/Applicant; Liz Walker and Rod Lambert, Agents, and WHEREAS, this is a Type I action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has established itself as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review with respect to this matter, and the Town of Ithaca Town Board is an Involved Agency, responsible for enacting the proposed zoning amendment and rezoning, and WHEREAS, EcoVillage at Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca Planning Board at the February 2, 1999 meeting have mutually agreed to conduct the environmental review of the above-referenced actions by means of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to evaluate potential specific impacts of the proposed Second Neighborhood Group and cumulative impacts related to the amendment of the Special Land Use District and potential future development, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public scoping session on April 6, 1999 to hear comments from the public regarding the scope and content of the EIS and approved a Final Scope for the Environmental Impact Statement , as revised at the April 6, 1999 meeting, to identify relevant environmental impacts to be addressed in the EIS, and WHEREAS, EcoVillage at Ithaca has prepared and submitted to the Planning Board on April 3, 2001 , a Draft EIS which has examined possible environmental impacts of the proposal, and based on a request from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, Town Board and staff, has provided additional information regarding possible environmental impacts in an addendum to the Draft EIS, entitled "Errata and Additions Submitted May 7, 2001 "; and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as Lead Agency, has with the assistance of Town Staff and the participation of the Town Board, reviewed the Draft EIS at their regular public meeting held on April 17 2001 , and has reviewed the "Errata and Additions Submitted May 7, 2001 " at their regular public meeting held on May 15, 2001 , and has found the Draft EIS to be satisfactory with respect to its scope, content, and adequacy for the purpose of public review, and has therefore, determined the Draft EIS to be complete, and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has held a public hearing at the June 5, 2001 meeting, which was continued at the June 19, 2001 meeting, to hear comments from the public t garding the Draft EIS, and the period to receive written comments from the public was extended til June 29, 2001, and 23 APPROVED OCTOBER 4. 2001 APPROVED WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a Final EIS on July 3, 2001 , which includes by reference the Draft EIS, dated April 3, 2001 , and the Errata and Additions, dated May 71 2001 , and also includes a copy of all comments received regarding the Draft EIS and responses to all substantive comments, and WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca, as Lead Agency, on July 17, 2001 , accepted the Final EIS for the EcoVillage Second Neighborhood Group and Amendment of Special Land Use District No . 8 for filing, having duly considered the potential adverse environmental impacts and proposed mitigating measures as required under 6 NYCRR Part 617 (the SEAR regulations), and WHEREAS, the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca, as Lead Agency, has filed a Notice of Completion of Final EIS, issued the Final EIS, and distributed the Final EIS to involved and interested agencies and the public, as required by 6 NYCRR Parts 617. 9 through 617. 12, and WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on August 7, 2001 , the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed and adopted their Findings Statement for the EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District (August 7, 2001), and WHEREAS, at its: regular meeting on September 10, 2001 , the Town of Ithaca Town Board has reviewed and discussed their Findings Statement for the EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and mendment of Special Land Use District, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, as an t volved Agency, on September 10, 2001 , does hereby adopt the Findings Statement for the Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District, AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that having considered the Draft and Final EIS and the relevant documents incorporated therein, and having considered the written facts and conclusions in the Findings Statement relied upon to meet the requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Parts 617. 9 through 617. 12, the Town of Ithaca Town Board does hereby certify that: 1 . The requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617 have been met; 2. Consistent with the social, economic, and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives thereto, the action to be approved is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable, including the effects disclosed in the environmental impact statement; and 3. Consistent with social, economic, and other essential considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact statement process will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures which were identified as practicable. 24 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED OVED: Councilman Niederkorn ECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Aqenda Item No . 10 - (Enactment of Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Regarding Special Land Use District No . 8 and Rezoning EcoVillage Supervisor Valentino - I need to sign the Certificate of Necessity . Supervisor Valentino signed the Certificate of Necessity. Attorney Barney read the necessary changes to the board. Mr. Kanter - Besides the Planning Board resolution with the recommendation on the Zoning amendment , there is also a letter from the County Planning Department indicating that they have no problem with the proposal and that there is no negative community , County or State impacts . 2C'01 - 110 Resolution No. 2001410 - Adopting the Local Law Amending the Zoning Ordinance and Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1995 to Expand the Geographical Area of Special Land Use District No. 8 (Limited Mixed Use - EcoVillage) and to Amend the Zoning Provisions Applicable to Such Special Land Use District WHEREAS, a resolution was duly adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca for a public hearing to be held by said Town on September 10, 2001 , to hear all interested parties on a proposed local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO. 1 OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO. 8 (LIMITED MIXED USE - ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT, and WHEREAS, notice of said public hearing was dult advertised in the Ithaca Journal, and WHEREAS, said public hearing was duly held on said date and time 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, pursuant to Park 617 of the Implementing Regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) a Final Environmental Impact Statement was prepared and adopted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as Lead Agency related to this rezoning; and WHEREAS, the Town Board has adopted a findings statement relative to such Final Environmental Impact Statement and the proposed rezoning, NOW, THEREFORE, be it 25 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopts said local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO. 1 OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO. 8 (LIMITED MIXED USE-ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT, " 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 and to cause a copy or abstract of such local law to be published in the Ithaca Journal as required by law. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilwoman Russell VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye Councilwoman Russell, aye Councilwoman Grigorov, aye Councilman Klein, aye Councilman Niederkorn, aye Agenda Item No . 11 - F'eter Meskill , Tompkins County Sheriff' s Department. t r . Meskill - My main purpose to come here tonight , which has nothing to do with what we started ith at the beginning of -the meeting , is to check with you if they are things in the Town that we can do at we are not aware of . We are aware of Mr. Richards ' s problem . We have taken some action and can take further action . Traffic is a complaint that we get on a daily basis . I would urge you to call our office and give us that . If it is an emergency , go ahead and call 911 or 272-2244 . If it is a business call that can wait , call Monday through Friday 8 a . m . to 5 p . m . Sometimes things get lost in the translation from the communication center to our office , even though we give them specific instruction of what we are looking for. We have one speed cart now . I believe that we are going to receive a grant at the end of the month to purchase the second one . Our new program is the Child Safety Seat Program . We have been doing that for about a year. It works very well . Hopefully , we will receive notification in the very near future that we are going to receive money to extend the grant . The Governor gives us money to purchase seats and we provide the labor. Then we have the Retrogression Defense Training Program . I have two female officers in the department . One is on the day shift and the other is on the overnight shift . They happen to teach this . They do an excellent job and can communicate to women of all ages about this . Our law enforcement is a little different than straight police office . We do a lot with civil and the jail . They are our two Constitutional responsibilities that we are required to deal with . 26 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED t he budget was brought up in the beginning of the meeting . I am glad I caught the end of Mr. oplinka- Loehr' s presentation . I was going to politely ask the board to consider what is going to be aid over the next couple of weeks at the County budget deliberations . We are not asking for any additional positions this year. We have received some additional deputies over the last couple of years . It has been helpful , but I do not want to lose that ground . The amount of recommendation that the County Administrator has give from the police side is a 2 % over-target request . They have made us present a budget with a 2 % decrease , plus absorb all payroll and fringe increases . In our case it is about a 6% to 8% absorption besides the 2 % decrease . It becomes very difficult to run a department when on the police side of things 95 % of your budget is people , fringes , vehicles and the supplies to keep the vehicles going , Any support that you can lend that way would be appreciated . I wanted to hear from the board if there are any specific issues or concerns . Supervisor Valentino - How have things been going with working with the State Police? Mr. Meskill - We did two road blocks this weekend . One in Trumansburg with the State Police and the Village Police . We arrested two people for DWI from 11 : 00 a . m . to 2 : 00 p . m . , along with 50 plus tickets . Saturday we were in the Town of Caroline with the State Police running a road block . Today we were running a road block at the Town of Ithaca and Town of Dryden line . We work closest car concept with them . The problem is the State does not have the number of people in this County that they used to have in the past . t upervisor Valentino - Has the number of State Troopers been cut back? r. Meskill - I do not know if it has been cut back . It is how they assign their people . They have to over the entire State , where we have one county to deal with . They are a very good resource . We use them for specialized work . They come in a do great crime scene work for us whenever we have a violent crime or murder. They have a special attack team . We do not feel that we can justify the expense to have one . We are working with the City and we are exchanging mutual aid agreement and tactical team agreement . We hope by the first part of the year to have an agreement where we will have a multi -jurisdictional tactical team . Supervisor Valentino - I would rather see the County cut back on other departments rather than the Sheriff' s department . Firefighters provide a very basic service . We need the Sheriff' s department . Mr. Meskill - We are doing the best that we can to utilize the money . The budget that I have proposed , the overtime dollar amounts for the road patrol and criminal investigation unit are the same dollar amounts that Sheriff Guest had in 1995 . We are trying to do more with the same amount of money . There are certain contractual issues and certain supplies that we cannot skimp on . The one important thing is that the County Board has seen this , but has not had the chance to speak . I do not know the level of support that individual County Board members have . In a tough year and an election year , it is an easy thing to fall back on . Councilman Niederkorn - Does the trend in jail population signify future problems ? 27 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Mr. Meskill - I have trimmed my jail equipment and food budget so that I could reduce the number of eople that would be affected by a layoff if we have to do that . We did increase our medical budget inside the jail . It is very expensive . It is not out of control at this point . One of the three Commissioners of Corrections from New York State paid me a surprise visit today . I have a meeting with them in October to try to gain another variance . He was very direct and indicated that I probably would not get a third variance . The County needs to start thinking about what they are going to do for a permanent solution . Those words are beginning words to you have a few years to get your act together otherwise we are going to come in and tell you what to do in relation to space and size . They have been very lenient with that . It has allowed us to run an operation that is fairly efficient from a dollar standpoint and hold everybody here in the County . There will be a point when they no longer want to do that . Councilman Klein - The County did a study with Cortland . It was decided was not practical for a joint jail . Mr. Meskill - The County did not decide that . The Sheriff of Cortland County decided he did not want to participate any further. Councilman Klein - Is our County on a holding pattern right now? Mr. Meskill - Yes . I think what our County is doing right now is studying the alternatives to incarceration and trying to determine what if any affect that will have . They want to see if it will make a substantial difference before we spend permanent capital money . I agree with it . I suggested that they do something similar to what they are doing this year and next . We need to try that to put that issue to rest . There are some people that firmly believe that it will work and stabilize and decrease our population . I personally do not believe that . Crime has dropped over the last ten years , but the population in jails has increased nationwide . I can tell you when we have certain people in our jails during certain periods of time , there are a lot less larcenies , burglaries and robberies going on . Councilman Niederkorn - I think if you keep decreasing the food budget you will be on the right track . Mr. Meskill - That is kind of where we are going . We are trying to work with hard with the other municipalities to not reinvent the wheel and duplicate services where it is not necessary . Councilman Klein - Periodically , we get constituents here , as we did tonight , with specific complaints . We have had a number of complaints of speeding on Mecklenburg Road and the west side of the City . How do you respond to those requests? Mr . Meskill - One of my deputies lives in the 1300 block of Route 79 . Councilman Klein - Maybe he could take a car home and park it in his driveway . Mr. Meskill - We have done things like that before . I have a deputy that lives on Route 96 out towards the Danby area . I will park a car out there on graduation weekends . It is dummy car for a weekend . We have done a couple of things like that before . We will do it as long as it is in an area where it can be observed . 28 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 200 / APPROVED ouncilman Klein - How do you decide to set- up radar traps ? Mr. Meskill - It is based on complaints and areas where we know we have trouble . It is also based on a deputy's time to do traffic enforcement when they are not running from call to call . We do have a couple of cars that are specialized traffic cars . We are expecting a visit from Senator Seward next week with a gift that will enhance those vehicles . We are looking forward to things like that that will help us . I am a firm believer of large , heavy doses of traffic enforcement . I think it is the single most important thing that we can do to preserve quality of life in the neighborhoods and on the roads . I was coming home Wednesday night from a meeting and was run off the road by a drunk driver. It was on Route 13 . 1 do cooperate with the State Police . My car was already in with a DWI arrest . I turned him over to the State so that they could process him . I had one last year on the way home from work about 10 : 00 p . m . on Route 96 . He pulled right out in front of me . The look on his face was priceless . It is scary out there . We run into those ourselves . You would be surprised the number of complaints that my 11 : 00 p . m . to 7 : 00 a . m . shift writes up on DWI arrest where they are almost hit or run off the road . Councilman Klein - They have lowered the speed limit on Route 79 west . Yet , people are still coming out of the City rapidly and accelerating . It is still 30 mph in that area . They are driving 60 mph . Mr . Meskill - I did receive a call from the high 1300 blocks and we did put a car out there Friday afternoon . His was truck traffic . Please call us with any concerns . We will address the issue . upervisor Valentino - Thank you for your help . Agenda Item No . 6 - Discussion of Budget Process and Projected Tax Rate for 2002 . Supervisor Valentino - Mr. Carvill and I have discussed the budget process . We will not need to increase our tax rate for the sixth year. He was able to lower the fire tax rate . We thought it would be important for us to maintain some fund balance . We have been able . to reduce our lighting district tax rate . We have put in energy efficient light bulbs . They are found to be less than what we were paying for. It has been a steady , on going basis for us to look at each of the areas and analyzing them to make sure that what we are paying on is correct . The process is long . It is pretty much completed now. We have increased the overall pool for wages . The big increase in wages is done . We have passed the resolution for the cost of living adjustment . This is included in the budget . We have used a fair amount of fund balance this year. Our fund balance is not low . Councilman Niederkorn -- I think you and those people working on this should be congratulated . This is not the song that we are hearing from around the County . For you to be able to do what you have done is a remarkable thing . Congratulations to all . 29 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED upervisor Valentino - Mr. Carvill and the staff deserve a lot of the credit . The department heads ave worked very hard at assessing their needs and keeping their budgets down . We have had elpful suggestions from other staff members as well . We are always testing the numbers . Mr . Carvill - Could we go to my report so that I may be excused ? Supervisor Valentino - Yes . Agenda Item No . 17 on Monthly Report of Town Officials . g . Budget Officer. Mr. Carvill - There are two important things attached to this month ' s report . I received a memorandum from the New York State ' s Comptroller' s Office . The memo relaxes the fund balance . It is up to the local municipality to make the decisions of what goes on internally to keep the municipality fiscally sound . We have taken that role and have side skirted prior requests or mandates by the State to say that you should only keep 5 % of the ensuing years budget . We have tightened up and maintained that a little bit tighter. What is important to us to fiscally manage our Town may not be what is needed to manage another town . What we deem is critical for us to remain fiscally sound and how we see what should be expended today or in the future is up to us . I think it also sends a strong message that it clearly identifies that we are on our own , with no State aid . Federal aid is not going to be funneled down to the State and trickled down to us . Fortunately we are not co-dependant nd have not been co- dependant on a heavy sum of State aid . Our entire State aid comes from a iggest portion of per capita and consolidated highway improvements . It totals about $ 130 , 000 per ear. Of our entire $ 11 million of operations , it is not going to have an impact to our direct day to day perations . We have been fortunate to maintain this independence . It amplifies our fiscal position . Supervisor Valentino - I think it is really important that we have been able to reduce our debt in water and sewer. The municipalities that have been dependent upon borrowing for their basic needs are going to be left in serious conditions . It turned out to be a good decision on our part to reduce our debt . Mr. Carvill - Another point of concern is that we need to keep our eye on the Maple Avenue project . The State has certainly committed us to that money . We have already heard from the County level that they have pulled the plug on some of those programs . We have already funded that $263 , 000 project with $72 , 000 of seed money with the hope to receive the rest . Mr. Noteboom has called DOT and they have never heard of this , but it is built into the budget that we will receive it for the project . We certainly have to keep our eyes on that target . Supervisor Valentino - Should we be concerned about the William Hannah Pew Trail ? Mr. Carvill - No . The Pew Trail is Federal funds trickled down to the States . Supervisor Valentino - I am very nervous about going ahead with the project until we get the money. 30 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED enda Item No . 13 - Supervisor ' s Proposed 2002 Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant ud et — See Attachment #6 Supervisor Valentino - This is really Mr. Cafferillo ' s Waste Water Treatment Plan budget . They gave us one earlier and it raised the percentage . They have taken it back and reduced the Town ' s percentage . I am not totally convinced that this is our portion . What is the rate ? Mr. Walker - The rate to our customers will stay the same . Mr. Cafferillo takes the total budget , then based on last year' s consumption ; it is allocated among the partners . Last year the City consumed 144 , 000 , 000 cubic feet . The Town ' s consumption was 73 , 000 , 000 cubic feet and Dryden ' s was 3 , 000 , 000 cubic feet . This year the City had a consumption of 130 , 000 , 000 . The Town ' s consumption was 71 , 500 , 000 and Dryden ' s consumption was 3 , 600 , 000 . We paid in $ 433 , 405 last year. We are being asked to pay in $ 501 , 787 for this year. This is $ 59 , 000 more . It is based on that we a had higher percentage of the flow last year than the City did . It is about a 16 % increase for our contribution . It is not a problem for us . We have the funds in our sewer project . Mr. Cafferillo takes the total consumption and divides that number into the total budget and comes up with a cost per hundred cubic feet . Last year it was $ 0 . 59 per hundred cubic feet . This year it is $ 0 . 76 per hundred cubic feet . Total line for last year was higher than the total line for this year. He is playing some number games . Basically , the budge is about as safe as it was last year. We are paying a slightly higher portion of it than we did . Supervisor Valentino - The only reason that I have not raised a big stink about it is that our ndependent auditors are currently auditing the SJS . I want to see the auditor' s report . We have lenty of time to approve the budget . Mr. Walker - There are some functions of staff at the Waste Water Plant that provide some services to other City governments . There is also a portion of administrative costs that go back to the Waste Water budget . It has been hard to get details from Mr. Cafferillo , but he is starting to come through . Agenda Item No . 14 - Design Proposal for Phosphorous Removal Facility at Ithaca Waste Water Treatment Facility — See Attachment #7 Supervisor Valentino - Mr. Walker, could you just hit the highlights ? Mr. Walker - I put a memo together for the board . The plant has been re- rated to 13 , 000 , 000 by the State . We have put new adapters in some of treatment tanks . One of the requirements in the re- rating and the new permit is that we hold the total amount of phosphorous for dumping into the lake at the same level . We were permitted to discharge 83 pounds per day . We were actually only discharging about 40 pounds per day . The State reduced our permit to 40 pounds per day . It is a positive thing for the lake . What has been happening is the operators of the plant have been using or adding some chemicals to keep the phosphorous down . The problem with doing it at the head end of the process is if they tried to increase that amount it will make the activated sludge process less effective . You are taking out nutrients before the bugs that work in the plant are actually taking out the other materials that we want to get . We are looking at an affluence filtration for phosphorous 31 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED t emoval . We are a secondary plant right now . We would be adding additional chemicals and occulent in a filtration system to settle phosphorous out of the water after it has gone through the ctivated sludge process . It will allow us to discharge down to 0 . 2 milligrams per liter of phosphorous . Currently the limit is around 1 milligram per liter . We have actually been achieving about 0 . 6 effectively . This will allow it to reduce it down significantly more . Sterns and Wheler has been our design consultant on the plant from day one , 25 years ago . They have been our consultant right along and they have the expertise . They have prepared a proposal , which the preliminary proposal was in the packet . It was a not to exceed figure that seemed very generous on our part and very conservative on their part . I have the actual contract proposal where they broke down the different dollar amounts for each element of the scope . I do not particularly like that there are two basic proprietary vendors that have similar filtration processes , but different equipment . Both of these processes have been developed as a pilot project in Syracuse . Sterns and Wheler has been involved with those projects . I would be much more comfortable if we had a $20 , 000 or $30 , 000 evaluation report stating a process that they want to use . I think they are concerned that by naming just one process it might be in violation of the State under bidding . The major difference between the two in Mr. Fabbroni ' s letter is that we would be saving $50 , 000 is that we settled on one rather than the other. We have two existing tanks that were built when the plant was originally built for phosphorous removal . It was a very expensive and complicated process . They have not been used . One of the processes will fit within that tankage pretty well . The other process would require additional design and different tankage . If it sounds like you are not getting a clear picture , you are not . I have not been given a clear picture . The numbers are real high . There is a good profit margin . The design and mechanical process for setting up is $ 143 , 000 . My understanding is process is already designed by the vendor. I do not know why they need 600 to 800 hours to develop the design . I have not had an opportunity to ask Sterns and Wheler that . I think that if I get a message from the board , and you agree with me , that I can go to Mr. Fabbroni and tell him that I need to know exactly what they are planning to do for all that money . Supervisor Valentino - We are being asked to hurry on something that is pretty costly . It seems like we do not have all the answers . I am not going to ask the Town Board to approve this tonight . We need to ask for more information . We need answers to our questions . Mr. Fabbroni thinks this would be a big means to help us with our overall sewer agreement . I a not sure that I agree with that . We just got the new rating that the State wanted us to have . It took four years . Then they gave us the new ultimatum on the phosphorous removal . Mr. Walker - The SJS has been granted about $ 500 , 000 for the first phase . We are looking at about $ 200 , 000 in the next application for additional funds . It would still leave about $ 1 , 200 , 000 as a local cost . I do not know why we have to spend this much on this design . We are looking at almost 15 % of the construction costs or more . The tank is already built . My concern is that they want $ 409000 just to determine the process . They are the consultants . They are familiar with it . They need to say that we already have a tank and this is the filter that we want to put in and this is what we are designing . Then if another vendor comes in and says that he has a filter, but it won 't quite fit into those tanks . We will have to add something else . It is up to them to sell it up to the contractor and then sell it back to us for the lower cost . 32 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Councilman Klein - Is it worth it to put our an RFP ? Mr. Walker - Sterns and Wheler is very much part of this . They are right in the middle of the integrated sewer system . They are very close with DEC . We have a lot of relationships worked up for the permitting process . They know the system inside and out so they have a lot of advantages . We should be saying it is a nice idea , but it seems awfully high . They need to explain to us why it is so high . OTHER BUSINESS : Ulysses Water District — See Attachment #8 Supervisor Valentino - I wanted to receive some direction from the board on the Ulysses Water District . Mr. Kanter - We wrote a letter to the Town of Ulysses . We were quite specific . It stated that we thought the possible growth inducing impacts of this kind of water extension and creation of a water district in an area that has a low level of development , but is also an agricultural district , would be an important element in the SEAR review . The SEQR needed to include specifics on growth inducing impacts and what the master plan of their community says about growth . We were also concerned about what type of zoning they had in place and what type of zoning they were thinking about implementing to help control these types of things . We also asked about the past trends of growth in the town . Little information was provided . We sent a letter asking for this kind of information . We did not really get much of that back . After asking specifically for more information , we did receive a fax from Supervisor Doug Austic indicating that their board had discussed it . They sent us the minutes rom that meeting . They made a very general reference to their comprehensive plan and the statement that the zoning they are working on would be able to handle any of the possible growth consequences of the creation of the water district . We would like to know the board ' s overall feeling in terms of that type of issue and would the board like us to go back with a further request from Ulysses . We need to know what further information would we want to see to be satisfied to be able to proceed with the establishment of the district . Setting up the water district probably involves an amendment to the current municipal agreement that we have . Supervisor Valentino - The Town of Ulysses is not used to doing this type of thing . They do not have a planning staff . Councilman Niederkorn - Where would the water district be located ? I know that Jacksonville will be included . Mr. Kanter - Some of the spurs extend off Trumansburg Road . Cold Springs Road is the long road . Mr. Walker - Cold Springs Road has a lot of frontage houses along the road that have poor quality water. I think they have had a request from those residents for the water. They were originally going to go down to Boyes Road and come back up near the Special Children ' s Center because of 33 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED problems down there . It has been cut out of the initial project . Van Dorns Road is included in the istrict because there is a high point there for a tank location . That section of Van Dorns Road has hirty houses of road frontage development already . Perry City Road and Jacksonville Road is fairly well developed with a number of lots there now . There is farmland on the west side that is undeveloped . It brings it around Jacksonville . To cover the basic costs , they needed to get a certain number of residences on it . Supervisor Valentino - There are some real benefits to the Town of Ithaca . Mr. Walker - They need to boost the pressure above what our system pressure from the Trumansburg Road tank is . They are proposing a pump station on a low plane where we have our hydramatic station . It is the same general location . They have a 210 , 000 gallon tank on Van Dorns Road , which would raise our pressure to satisfactory pressure in the Woolf Lane and Trumansburg Road area without us having to build a pump station and tank . It is part of the mutual benefit . They would provide additional fire flow for us and a domestic water pressure to that end of our system without increasing the service area . We could not justify going up Iradel Road because we would lose pressure within 500 feet up the road . Supervisor Valentino - Do we feel comfortable with the growth inducing impacts ? I think that what they have given us so far is very skimpy . Councilman Klein - Do they have a comprehensive plan with zoning ? Mr. Kanter - It is zoned , but they mostly have one generic residential zone that covers most of the town . They have a couple small spots of some kind of generic commercial zone along Route 96 . 1 took a quick look at their comprehensive plan . It is pretty general . They do not have a lot of data . They do not really base their policy recommendations on very much in land use specifics or trends . Even their recommendations are pretty general . I know that they are working on some new zoning . Supervisor Valentino - They have to do a SEAR review . They are going to leave themselves wide open for a lawsuit . Councilman Niederkorn - I am not so sure that it is our concern as the Town of Ithaca to be worrying about growth in the Town of Ulysses . I am seeing Supervisor Austic put together his budget with costs going up . He says that he needs to have more growth . They cannot do that because the Town of Ithaca is saying they do not want any growth up there . It is a desperate situation . Supervisor Valentino - The concerns we need to address are the growth inducing impacts . We need to be sure that we are getting all of the process . Councilman Klein - Isn 't County Planning involved ? They review all proposals in the County . We have a right to be concerned about the affect on the community in general . Attorney Barney - It is a hard sell to say you need to control your growth . I know the way people feel about it . It is hard to say that since you are using our access to water and vehicle then you cannot do 34 APPROVED OCTOBER 4. 2001 APPROVED something in your area . The City wanted the Town to guarantee certain free areas of open space in he Town when we discussed the sewer expansion . Mr . Kanter - It is a jump . The other is in between . We want to see what kinds of impacts there might be . It is not so that we can say no . We want to know what to expect and so we can help document the SEAR process . The City is going to be involved in the same decision . It is more likely that they are going to be concerned with that same issue . Mr. Walker - One thing that we do need to look at from an engineering standpoint is how much water can we deliver to the area through the existing infrastructure . It is a limiting factor. We are looking at 100 , 000 gallons per day on their maximum . They are looking at 25% growth on their initial demand in this report we have frorn them . We can provide that water to serve their needs today . We cannot provide them 2 million gallons a day through our system . Councilwoman Grigorov - Is there anyway to limit it? Mr . Walker - Yes . We only have enough capacity to give them 100 , 000 to 200 , 000 gallons a day . We cannot do that unless we build a new water main through our system . We have a pump station that we have to deliver water through . We have limitations on that . What they are proposing here is a 200 , 000 gallon storage tank . It is really the limit . Of that capacity , we are looking at 50 or 75 properties in the Town of Ithaca that would be served by that . We are taking back 40 , 000 gallons of water per day . There are physical and economic limitations . If we put water out there , we are giving them a 36- inch main with all the water they want . We are giving them enough water to serve where the need is . If they want: to expand it much , we are going to have to expand the whole system . Councilwoman Grigorov - Is there anyway to keep them from adding more water? Councilman Klein - There is about 500 hook- ups . Mr. Walker - I think it is less than that . Councilman Klein - They would only be able to go 25% beyond that . Councilman Niederkorn .- It would be another issue if they wanted to expand their system . Councilman Klein - We only have 10 to 12 inch pipes . Mr. Walker - It could move from Route 96 towards the lake because it is down hill . One of the areas where they have a problem with water is along the lakefront properties . One of the issues is that if we give them water along the lakefront then we need to provide sanitary service . Those houses are on cliffs and that is why they bring up water. That means you also have no place for the sewage to go . Supervisor Valentino - We want to get some direction for the board . We need to go back and talk to the Town of Ulysses about having a more complete SEQR review . What they have so far is not going to hold up . 35 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED ouncilman Klein - Are you writing them a formal letter? upervisor Valentino - Yes . We wanted to make sure the board agreed that there needs to be additional information . Councilman Niederkorn - I do not think that we ought to be intimidating . The letter ought to be clear. Councilwoman Russell They are not used to this type of project . Agenda Item No . 15 - Consent Agenda Items : Resolution No. 2001 - 111 — Consent Agenda Items. BE IT RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the resolutions for Consent Agenda Items Numbers through as presented. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2001 - 111 (a) — Town Board Minutes WHEREAS, the Town Clerk has presented the minutes for the Regular Town Board Meeting held on August 6, 2001 and a Special Town Board Meeting held on August 10, 2001 , to the governing Town Board for their review and approval of filing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the governing Town Board does hereby approve for filing the minutes for the meeting held on August 6, 2001 as presented at the August 10, 2001 board meeting. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2001 - 111 (b) - Town of Ithaca Warrants. WHEREAS, the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for approval of payment; and 36 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED 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. General Fund Townwide 311437. 87 General Fund Part Town 986. 16 Highway Fund Part Town 47, 278. 05 Water Fund 176, 936. 96 Sewer Fund 51009. 98 lacovelli Neighborhood Park 21236. 00 Hanshaw Road Sanitary Sewer 66, 859. 10 Risk Retention Fund 100. 00 Fire Protection Fund 13, 622. 03 Lighting Districts 11134 . 12 Trust & Agency 1 , 150. 00 TOTAL 346, 750. 27 MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2001 - 111 (c) — Bolton Points Warrants 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 RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers. Voucher Numbers : 426 through 558 Operating Fund $ 172, 363. 94 2001 Backup Electrical Power 31193. 50 37 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED TOTAL $ 175, 557, 44 MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2001 - 111 (d) — Approve Attendance at New York Planning Federation Councilman Klein - Were there only two Planning Board members who volunteered ? Mr. Kanter - Our newest member was not able to make it at that time . Councilman Klein - Eva Hoffmann and Fred Wilcox have probably been to a number of conferences . Mr. Kanter - Mr. Wilcox has been to one recently . Ms . Hoffmann has not been to one in recent years that I can remember. We also tried to get Tracy Mitrano to attend , but her recent job change has not enabled her to get the time off . Those are the two that indicated if we could not get the others to go , and then they would like to attend . It looks like a good agenda for the conference . Ms . Balestra- Lehman and myself will be going as staff . Councilman Klein - Was everyone offered the opportunity ? Mr. Kanter - Yes . We included Attorney Barney in the resolution in case he is able to go . WHEREAS, there are many new developments impacting the Town regarding land use, zoning and other regulatory issues, and WHEREAS, the New York Planning Federation (NYPF) is holding its 2001 Annual Planning & Zoning Conference from October 7th through October 10th, 2001 , in Saratoga Springs, New York, which provides programs and workshops on a number of current planning and zoning topics, basic training for planning and zoning board members, and continuing education credits for professional staff, and WHEREAS, it will be beneficial to the Town to send staff and members of the Planning Board to this program, and WHEREAS, the current Planning Department budget includes sufficient funds for this purpose, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the attendance of Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Christine Balestra Lehman, Planner; and Fred Wilcox and Eva Hoffmann, members of the Town Planning Board, at the NYPF 2001 Annual Planning & Zoning Conference from October 7th through October 10th, 2001 , at a cost not to excede $ 2, 280. 00, which includes registration, accommodations, meals, and other travel expenses, charged to Account B8020. 403, and 38 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby pprove the attendance of John C. Barney at the above -referenced NYPF Annual Planning & Zoning Conference, representing the Town of Ithaca as Attorney for the Town, expenses of registration, accommodations, meals, travel and other, to be borne by Mr. Barney. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Resolution No. 2001 - 111 (e) — Approval of Access Traininq for Town Clerk WHEREAS, Tompkins Cortland Community College is offering a series of four Access training courses at the Business Development and Training Center during the fall of 2001 ; and WHEREAS, the training will assist the Town Clerk in maintaining the Town 's Records Management Data Base; and WHEREAS, the Town Clerk is requesting permission to attend the training at a cost per session of $99. 00, for a total cost of $396. 00; and WHEREAS, funds are available in General Fund Account A1410. 10, Town Clerk — Conference/Mileage; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, the Town Board hereby authorizes Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk to attend the above referenced series of courses. MOVED: Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED: Councilman Klein VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Russell, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Klein, aye; Councilman Niederkorn, aye. The motion was carried unanimously. Agenda Item No . 16 = Report of Town Committees . Agenda Item No . 17 - Monthly Report of Town Officials . a . Town Clerk — Attachment #9 39 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED Highway Superintendent - Attachment # 10 r. Noteboom - One of our gentlemen has contracted Lime ' s disease . It is an issue to keep our eyes on . We think it happened up at the Sapsucker Woods tank . We were clearing there at area . Several of our guys got poison ivy . He went to the doctor because he thought he had poison ivy that was not going away . They gave his some chlorine bleach . Then he developed shingles after a while . He has been going through this whole process . There are three shots that they need , but I think it is voluntary . Mrs . Drake - We are also checking with Univera because there are certain area where they will pay for it . c. Director of Engineering - Attachment # 11 Mr. Walker - We will start construction on the West Hill water pump station next week . d . Director of Planning — Attachment # 12 e. Director of Building and Zoning — Attachment # 13 f. Human Resources Manager — Attachment # 14 h . Network/Records Specialist — Attachment # 15 Agenda Item No. 18 - Review of Correspondence . Correspondence circulated to the board at the meeting. a . John Thomas Steakhouse — Liquor License Renewal b . Ide ' s Lanes — Liquor License Renewal c . Cornell Cooperative Extension — Farm City Day d . Time Warner — Notification of Road Runner Rate Increase e. City of Ithaca — Town Hall Renovations f. Unified Court System — "Town Hall Meeting " Program g . Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization — Invitation h . Cayuga Waterfront Trail Initiative — Request for Support i . Daniel Walker to Robert Kirby — Reimbursement for Sewer Installation j . Lisa Titti — Robert Freeman to Speak at Ithaca College OTHER BUSINESS : East Shore Park. Supervisor Valentino - At our October meeting there are going to be few people that will come to the meeting . They are going to request that our East Shore Park be re- named in honor of someone . There will be a number of people in support of it . They do not want to be pushy or overbearing . They were afraid the Town Board would feel they would be overbearing if they had people come to the meeting . I told them it would be okay to have people at the meeting . 40 APPROVED OCTOBER 4, 2001 APPROVED ouncilman Klein - When will the pavilion be built ? Mr. Frost - It was supposed to have been started already . I was by there Friday and they have backhoe down there and that is it . Supervisor Valentino - We have never really set any criteria on how we name Town parks . Councilwoman Grigorov - Are you worried a precedent? Supervisor Valentino - I am not worried about a precedent . Agenda Item No . 19 - Executive Session to Discuss Current Litigation & Possible Easement Acquisition . Motion made by Councilwoman Russell , seconded by Councilwoman Grigorov to enter into an Executive Session to discuss current litigation and possible easement acquisition . Carried unanimously . The Board entered Executive Session at 9 : 07 p . m . Motion made by Councilwoman Russell , seconded by Councilwoman Grigorov to resume regular session . Carried unanimously . The Board resumed regular session at 9 : 35 p . m . touncilwoman enda Item No . 20 - ADJOURNMENT .As there was no further business to come before the Town Board , a motion was made by Russell , seconded by Councilwoman Grigorov to adjourn . Carried unanimously . Supervisor Valentino adjourned the meeting at 9 : 36 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Tee -Ann Hunter, Town Clerk * NEXT REGULAR MEETING — October 5 , 2001 at 5 : 30 p . m . * * Minutes Transcribed by Carrie Whitmore . 41 orvN o � LT"N•Ac� 2�.�T /'� �' ATTACHMENT # 1 0 - 4A.) .4-UP: J7oA)A [ /trva c� ,p1A016 7'ft� � s�iu'� y l� C's�,,�,P�c7' ��,eov�� b�c • �f sr �oo� �-s .6��.✓ .�� Cc� i� _ �, _' si�'.��c�7Fc�ts' � 1�'// ��+��.4� - 'T� �4�� d�i� �, sC.,�•.crG � ysr.y 1$ .¢ .`�%C /V! s�lG9 dJ riJ�'- ,��/S'T C %ff� f�✓�.� -.4L� L3pMIJl�ivldi�t/S T/5 �. O;Ocr IS d4J5r 4r7A4A 4& 77e ,ee4 Per. Av.�s' (ra�,e xJZJ ?40777 &A41AfG Tlc is X, ,eel r s lz4e� do %S .SSluX s. XWVZ 7A e-XJ /�.0 4CZ 456;04400 APHIA) rs7Av. pr12%V d owo , 7722 tl G < , IAi u 7`- i�[ pl•�4.. 7so N S ,�'�� T�rro %� ,�i� 1..�.r.�s� ��� �� �.A rSi �ri�.� ! ��`1S I� , Y lvl77le 7WAOW ,* AjVZ -OA /dT Ajrws7� $60 �J� Gt'SS/ a• IS �� ew a !iv-a _ 491 i . M .s '400 /714G /��.�i l6.a/7' ��D OZ�f4&.e o4�Ae S hrss o rr� 1-145 4Aa6l "P"may .W ,4 4dl.k,�IZ . d ecciae. �fS c u 59 lAo) ACS. R4V6oe7 'tICW Tc% r&Ad v) 1i16j4 VIWa 6w?oe1;AwlS * AJO o %7th PUA1A,tJ6 7ylev T7,qTE o a►1J L Sc1u.9c'ES7 .4Xo r16 6oen,+ o �ffE.� Fut,10 /��' l�ui�i4Tt✓cS �m2 AlrF&zetlr 44&v eve rsvz A!A94 � Zr is i400&v17ejO Tv 77-le oal" �jaT 7A4je %CZ 4&VD 7#z if;�4 s;; aE,,44P AU141,46ay I,W y .0� ge ,aeoyews .,J GIs 000" re4 . T.94 145OW Z4 v:)rq o 444oN fA$ .s �L Scf j6"oO i N ✓GL ✓e p a V 72V 7 i' ,/�<Sc ci�S�d r1s . Z.0 4 D�Trery To �/iG�6 �� /�IJiPJ.D$� TiiL/„�; /d�•�c i- [lJIC L �e'�!X 4� diSCIUSS/Cel IUET!'fNY.� ��'k� !'a �=�¢ C/`4T.� 7"t�s �E r#15 A/4&SZ rA c)N.5 15 77&X X Owo4ec.T _ /Fo fs zw.�IAIAZ) dulleto 2 ?7 - bra s e4vt p. 1�?eA 4LL AWS ;%OOVA19V 1VZe%,O.WiCc ;� copy ose >Ne SoF c . i4`AL4 o l AoINL)rrS w1r11 Tme ovRlLev eee*40i op4cw,,D ATTACHMENT # 2 Agenda 12 . % CITY OF ITHACA (is ' �t 310 West Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850- 5497 e Z Age !� yC Po r0� OFFICE OF THE FIRE CHIEF O,PQ Telephone : 60' 2 —?- 123 4 Fax: 60 7'2 ' 3 - 2 -93 Memorandum To : City-Town Fire Contracts Negotiations Teams Cathy Velentino ✓ Alan Cohen David Klein Joan Spielholtz Bob Romanowski Dominick Cafferillo Andy Frost c From : Brian Wilbur Date : 8/20/01 Re: Code Enforcement Relationship Description Attached please find the most recent version of the City-Town Code Enforcement Relationship Description document. This incorporates the 21 JUN 01 meeting changes . Still missing is the checklist form (page 3 . § 11. 2) . As I will be on vacation the last week of August, I will get a fresh MOU prepared this week to extend the agreement until 31 OCT 01 . Hopefully this will be enough time to finalize negotiations and prepare final copies of the successor agreement and other pertinent materials. We are prepared to draft a new agreement as soon as proposed changes are made available to work with . If there is anything else we can do to facilitate this, please let me know. Thanks . 1 ",fin Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification . " CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION Items scut are deleted . Items underlined are new . Subscript Subscript dates indicate the date the change was made . I . Overview It is recognized and agreed that shared involvement in code enforcement is mutually beneficial to the residents of the Town of Ithaca , Ithaca Fire Department personnel , and the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department . More specifically , the safety of Ithaca fire fighters is directly affected by the level of compliance achieved through the combined efforts of the code enforcement system . The Ithaca Fire Department has specific and implied responsibilities for code enforcement within the City of Ithaca , and has an ongoing relationship with the City of Ithaca Building Department to facilitate these responsibilities . It is desired to develop a similar series of relationships with the Town of Ithaca. However. the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Officer will be the authority having,lurisdiction in all matters relating to codes enforcement within the Town Of It -06 JUN 07 II . Site aid Pl t 07JUN01Plan Review Fire Department Access Standards Although the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code authorizes that fire lanes be established by the Code Enforcement Official , and that buildings subject to the code be accessible to local fire department apparatus , it does not stipulate what those lanes should be , nor how the access shall be provided . The Ithaca Fire Department has established a "Fire Department Access Standard" which stipulates various aspects relating to fire department access . The Town of Ithaca agrees to adopt a local regulation requiring compliance with the provisions of this standard , under the provisions of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code , and compliance with which shall serve as evidence of compliance with the state code regarding access . 8 / 20 / 01 page 1 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Ithaca Fire Department shall submit for review and approval by the Town of Ithaca any changes proposed to the Fire Department Access Standard prior to such changes taking effect . Site and PI )1 07JUN01Plan Approvals i . For purposes of this part. "site Ip an approvals" refer to the process used by the Plannino Board to evaluate arolect according to criteria administered by that Board . " Plot Plan Approvals" refer to reviews of plans submitted for compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code by the Town Building and Zoning Inspector. 07 JUN 01 Tn �-rhnv A% ;; nwreed that aswirino i , ' nit for timnl i rQvit wr of nortr+ in sitQ I ;4A r f_or_ tho niirnnan of nvWdatine fire dQpQrtmnnt rnnrnrps in rvmiitilaul , hnnnfiri;; I for III ;; rtinc s' u :: - Q1 Thn A- 11 GGGWPaAG!G&) j r Thn 4.09itten Q_ Q_ PfirP; ;_; tiQ_ A that the site plaR has bee;4 reviewed . &.;G4 44-44 id@Rtifi9GI 13Y the F:iFG rni� l nr rlic + rni-, 1 hill hn rnti irnnrf to thn (`nrlo t Offirnr jolithin tnn dpi c of rnrnint ` 07 JUN O7 8 / 20 / 01 page 2 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION Site plans submitted as required by Town law or ordinance for review by the Town Planning_Qeaa#a3e44.13oard shall be evaluated according to the checklist form to be developed 91 , , , o, and attached as addendum to this agreement If such evaluation indicates that the plans must be provided to the fire department for review of fire department issues . the Town shall cause a copy of such plans to be delivered to the fire department , The Town agrees that no per iect meeting the above criteria shall receive final site Ian approval until after such referral has been Made . 07 JUN 01 III. Building Code Enforcement Building Permits as follgws ; NJ Fire Ghiefy the Board of %4QrkA7 !he 139aFd G4 &uGh approval , iR WFit ' Re , shall have first beep 6 JUN 01 1 The Town of Ithaca agrees to stipulate that applications for building permits for the following activities shall be referred for fire department review : Commercial or institutional structures (C occupancies ) ; multiple family dwellings ( B occupancies ) ; permits which include fire protective systems , including , but not limited to , fire sprinklers , fire suppression , and fire detection systems . 2. The City of Ithaca agrees that Plan 07 JUN o, reviews will be conducted in a timely manner and approyal8 n° rtif GatiQRO 06 JUN 01 07 JUN 01 will not be 8 / 20 / 01 page 3 i CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION unreasonably withheld . It is recognized that resource constraints may result in some reviews not being completed in a reasonable period by the fire department In those cases . the Town Building and Zoning Ins, ep ctor may contact the fire department to determine whether or not the review is complete . If it is not. the Building Inspector may proceed without receiving_ comment . The fire department may still submit such comment after their review is complete . but the Building Inspector is not obligated to accommodate changes requested as a result . 07 JUN 01 The Town of Ithaca agrees that the Ithaca Fire Department shall be afforded the opportunity to observe and approve all acceptance testing of fire protective systems,,, aAd that Al such systems 07 JUN o1a ^° 'S 06 JUN 01 07 JUN 01 must be properly certified 07 JUN 01 renangQd prior to any fioal 07 JUN 01certificate of occupancy or compliance being issued for the affected property . 4 . In all cases . final approval shall be by , and in the name of . the Town of Ithaca. os JUN 01 Variance and Appeal Petitions The rules and regulations enacted for the administration and enforcement of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code include provisions for persons to petition for a variance from the strict interpretation of that code , or to appeal the decision of a local code enforcement official . At such time as the hearing on such petition is heard , the local agencies having jurisdiction or which would be affected by such a variance are provided the opportunity to comment on the petition . The petition form includes the opportunity to indicate the local fire department affording protection , and the name of the local fire code enforcement officer . The Town of Ithaca agrees that any petition for a variance shall include the Ithaca Fire Department and its fire marshall as agencies/persons to be notified of the petition . 8 / 20 / 01 page 4 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Town of Ithaca agrees that , upon request of the Fire Department , the Town Building and Zoning Department and the Ithaca Fire Department will confer on the matter at hand prior to the variance/appeals hearing . The purpose of the conference will be to achieve a common understanding of the issue (s) involved , and of the appropriate position to take with regard to the petition . It is agreed that there will be times when the parties diverge in their professional opinions and presentation of such differing opinions may occur. In au cases before the New York State Board of Review , the decision of the Board of Review is binding on all ap rties . os JUN o, IV. Fire Prevention Code Enforcement Fire Safety Inspections The Building and Zoning Department of the Town of Ithaca has routipely does by IaA conducted os JUN o, fire safety inspections in certain occupancies in the Town of Ithaca . The department has provided the Ithaca Fire Department with copies of all fire safety inspections which have been done since 19 88E. It is agreed that , whenever possible , joint inspections of high - risk occupancies shall be conducted by the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department and the Ithaca Fire Department . High rig sk occupancies are those with a high hazard or risk classification (e,g NYSUFP&BC classification of 3 . 3 . 4 . 3 . 5 . 3 . and 6 . 2 . or 6 . 3 . oe JUN o , Evacuation Plan Approvals Chapter C of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires the management of any building or facility , other than one- or two -family dwellings , or B1 dwellings three stories or less in height , shall in writing develop evacuation procedures for each building in their management . It further requires review and approval of such plans by the code enforcement official . 8 / 20 / 01 page 5 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION Evacuation plans should be coordinated with the actions the fire department would take in responding to a fire or emergency at that particular building or facility . To facilitate this , the Town of Ithaca agrees that evacuation plans must be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy or compliance . Outdoor Fires By state and local law, outdoor fires are generally prohibited within City limits , and within 1 /8 mile of City limits . A permit is required prior to any outdoor burning activity . Certain outdoor fires are currently permitted within the Town of Ithaca , provided that the code enforcement official and the fire department are notified in advance of such activity . Enforcement of state and local laws related to open burning in the Town has been performed by the Building and Zoning Department . The Town of Ithaca agrees that the Ithaca Fire Department will serve as the clearinghouse for open burning notifications in the Town of Ithaca . con AD ` r The Town of Ithaca agrees to pursue a P. os cur, o, that would require a permit be received prior to any open burning in the Town of Ithaca . V . Local Laws The city of 'c Code; whiGh a F t G Winn anal ,e Garr . POFFnit6i r asp , hnnf ' , 8 / 20 / 01 page 6 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION r, fir r fl • fnlln+, r and ape GE 1 c-i hnvo Qnk vvre-ovscvi r r r r efc-zeirtaip + r 07 JUN 01 Coordination of Codes ft ' The 06 JUN 01City and the Town of Ithaca agree to engage in Commit to 07 JUN 01a process to both revise the City fire prevention code , �`drGJ andnadopt` the revised code , in whole or in part , as Town law , thereby Cow making consistent the rules and regulations regarding fire safety in the City and Town of Ithaca . This process will also include an effort to coordinate implementation of the new New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code ( e . g . International Code with NYS Enhancements ) . 07 JUN 01 VI . Miscellaneous Items Street numbers The fire department has assumed responsibility for assigning street numbers within the City of Ithaca. The Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department has discharged this responsibility for the Town . Given the nature of the use of these numbers , emergency services perspective is useful and has been sought by the Town as various situation arise . T149 • 8 / 20 / 01 page 7 i CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT. , DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Town agrees to continue to work with the fire department on the assignment and coordination of street numbers as has been the practice . 07 JUN 01 V4. Go5t ShaFi ;;q >R& I Inrl t t the Dro.Gs l Iloin t . t and-t h4944 8 / 20 / 01 page 8 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION • 07 JUN 01 : (material to be introduced for discussion into main agreement.) 8 / 20 / 01 page 9 S ATTACHMENT # 3 Eco-Village SLUD hearing — Talking Points History : When the first neighborhood of EVI was brought before the Town in 1994, SEQR was segmented, and the development was approved without the benefit of a GEIS review . At that time the Town Board had a number of concerns about development of the site . These included: • the fragmentation of the open space (the creation of the "donut effect") • distance to the school bus • distance to the transit stop (EVI confirms low ridership because of this distance) • distance to provide emergency services • extension of wager and sewer infrastructure • concern that the Town might need to take over the private access road In response to these and other concerns , the Town Board voted to limit the length of the access road to 3 ,000 feet. The current EVI proposal chooses to ignore this limit. The proposed plan extends the existing 2, 800 foot access road "with a 585 foot spur road" plus an unspecified length of "internal loop road within the neighborhood. " The length of the internal road to the pond hydrant is about 350 feet according to the scale on the map . Thus the road is extended about 735 feet beyond the 3 ,000 foot maximum set when the developer first applied for a SLUD to commence development. This is about a 25 % increase . These extensions to the road provide the primary access to the second neighborhood. (Source : page 6 of the GEIS version 7/20/02) The Planning Board stated at their August 2001 meeting they would defer to the Town Board on deciding whether it is acceptable to exceed the 3 ,000 foot limit as proposed. Some Consequences of the EVI proposal that affect the Town , • Town may need to take over the road, for reasons discussed by the Town in 1994 • Water for fire protection • According to the GEIS : the Fire Department suggests a pressurized hydrant system for the future development. To accomplish this on EVI property would require a tank elevated 110 feet and sized to supply 480,000 gallons over a 4 hour period (2 ,000 gallons per minute) . The alternative is a ground tank located on terrain that is 70 feet higher in elevation than available on Eco-Village land. According to the USGS topographic map , the closest land with the required 1 ,210 foot elevation is one mile west of EVI — across the upper reaches of Coy Glen, just 2,000 east of Sheffield Road. Running extensive piping from this suggested ground tank — assuming EVI could purchase the site for the ground tank -- would be expensive and problematic and have its own set of environmental impacts . The elevated tank seems more likely . This would have significant growth inducing impacts — providing land to the west of EVI with public water. It would also have visual impacts . Comments of Martha Armstrong, RA AICP, 766 Elm Street Extension, September 10, 2001 page 1 • Domestic water: • According to the GEIS : the current pump system will not be able to handle the full build out. The proposed solution is a 110 foot high tank with a 70 ,000 gallon capacity — or a land based tank. Comments above for the fire tank apply to this proposed tank as well . (Source for the water tower information : page 22 of the GEIS originally submitted May 7, 2001 ) What are the Alternatives • My alternative D shows building some of the clusters on the 40 acre field at the intersection of Mecklenberg and West Haven Roads . West Haven Road has public water and hydrants . Also the lower elevation could be served with a ground tank located on EVI land. • EVI' s proposal locates the development near the highest point of the 170 acre site . Since almost the entire site is lower than their chosen development area, there may be a number of alternative development sites that could be served by a ground tank located on EVI land. In closing : I request that the Town Board not renege on the road length limitation which affords some protection to the fiscal and planning interests of the Town. Comments of Martha Armstrong, RA AICP, 766 Elm Street Extension, September 10, 2001 page 2 • \ . . . Tbwp OF ITIdCA ,vrr 0 aloof All oII oR c Y R f r h i-y .� a X_ 8 - N Zi lots 5 :s CZ u v000000i cz i� � I ' °n G '''�' •.' VII U ty,y Q� L�� •cn .: _ Y • ' •�° Y - r bbA Lt O 3 - 4 Igo F O � U Q Ioo e C " v Ln wU1 Cd O ' Loon Q� }y u = ✓ y oIIIII �n1 ' C J '•-2 1••1 nr . •.'l 1 4 V Ly ' !• IN It- _ 'O O L""' Q O � ccz N .-fir C * t °' . S .• u a: Pill O � •V O • 'y (� ' fifp � „ O Loo .� c it . � �. • x . - ° a 4 r cUC U cn �. • -r CC U �J �. Y . ,... x x t YO. V] ° G _ N e a Moo Q.i U { {i( Jar . { Zi1g} j a l0000000dol 'C7 Twy+ cn (+� 3 Is! Cori U U JIM a/ CI3 Sol O C la � 44 ; S..a OF JTHAC'4 TOWN •' 1, O ( •—• :wF u: TOWN OF ENHUM ! NJ o a l; ' i 171H ACA �.�rr. N CITY ? i �. •� Ci�-1 k ! i Y L o�: yr in 2 rg 1 O O U C c3 Win 4=� y a r: n o c, a s a r.: I bA U ' ;> t z C/] (V , v n p=3 s: N U 3 'b { 1 r -n.. .. . •i YY. L I �C1S O L,,,^ • � U r cl COO r, ;-4 O� VV G coo) O N o °il�III t -• N 'C p 5 5 8 = X -. - r O � ^ a •. ' u I IN � . r. N N U COO C ; a e.7 E Aa' O ^ YY , • AR n - ...75522 e ^ I < , n c - a - f 1 n � Ek ... • C40) p b0 e e +� C ^d U : ! cn r . ` . Y R C/) N cz cn U N o sy- x ,� U t-r U r � f • t , i , �-. QJ : a : " Y ya a � X �• .--x �, C.i % i . i , �-i Y ��O// V] CIOr-i V1✓. �; ? ��i1 " 1 3 c3 O x ti� + � fiJ1i4�F . .� . .�.r � x •' X y u .� ' Su'' .. '� � :,nw + � S'•, it L-: � tF Fr , lIlf tot Jill a R i it L � S~ " Y R ' a• a ... ` f : � ( j! cz � ' ' lfit r ROOT E 71 I ; cull " t IGI I C 11 .• �I i_.< ` „` \ aw. ' I 1 1 1 1 1 111 I l l j ACI r W- 4TE A f;ca •�ILl.a�e �Ir� -- IJ I / I � - � / � � 1 I 11 � I � I I 1 I I TLq. I-IIUF R R_!.N bu PPI.iGD _ I Pr/ TDL�tI,I or ITHPCA . 1 I It I �* Ir I �r t �j i I If �`'1� 107E lo I 7f ° t P17,0 i 1 - } / / Oz , / ;041 ..t ® ., S3 EL i 0 �q 4 I a I� r 1 IG ° n LO, VL � !7.•Tc . 9 9 I�, I� � 4 � � i � I 1 ` I � 14d�1�1 �� eco •JILLP(ae �17E � I � � 1 Ij�, I I I r� � � � ! , LJCALE:f 201 = I° � I I y raw+ ves CsfIrWTe:o pRoM / I TG. Mai.&FR P b%H 5u PP6160 I \ I 11 I 7� Pw TOwN OOFF rrHP-CA. ' I \ - - -o - v' s i /- . , - / - ' - -. � _. '1, ' Iwo 1 Ln -. ` _ . . . 1 i2.' ;SJc ;, ' ''• I 1 I - _fr {' \ ii\ 12 NN ry Id N. ort L \ J °s Ego 07 ' to7i- IN j' ii;�. Y . S . RO TE \; k 11 li l Eco-Village Site Plan �, y `; � � i� 'r ON Ire a , Alternative C Drawn By Martha Armstrong � IiI June 1 , 2001 ` i ' . Ah I C to to 4 11 now O 1 ( r - woo woo woo WATERSHEC�� � ,5/> \ EX TIN ;;�� Y D ' i 1 � > ? FARMir POND ' UPPER / ;, - - O ' j Nam o I ' I EXISTING ^ 1ST NEIGHBORHIOOD RI's tV� t j TERSHE WATERSHED C Rj Q r EIS ST 11I l EC \ALLAGE FOND It Et 5 � � Kra �r. .-r•-+-�ry l) . .i y- - .-Kl-i- rri-r•.-.-•r•F'^"-rn - . -ev,v� Jila-f';.-WIiYDIiY -• N•• � i► S - / ���� % I .mss- .. .. ,-,,,.,"._.,u _•1:� I T r I I I J t y1 / Eco-Village Site Plan % he ROTE\ � 9% � � rr li I ` I� ,l — � he sphorgethe Alternative D v Y I �t r P � I Drawn By Martha Armstrong j' i{ . )e the" gee. June 1 , 2001 ® m.. I ' I . I L _ L \1 it goo Ig RECOMMENDED ACTION = . ` ', he I' Approve up to 150 units with up to 110 in the S center of the site and up to 70 in the northeast ! ~ corner near Route 79 and West Haven Road . gh hg I •• L V.1 Vol' \. 5 �i ill a- } t I{ Ir WOO' \ EX STING " 7 ' ` .• I Ift e he goo ATERSHE� = . L•JA�i . I "f ' ' D ' UPPER � 1 FARM . POND, � s , - _ _ -_ j E � ' I L he get gh . .. �! •.,1. .:rA l.`.L.. . Y. �.v_ t= i ; r((1L"J( �CJ� Q I � �.^+ .—ri 4 Jw.t.V"•r <' V m _ ' EXISTING ^ 1ST - - � _= I �. I , _ NEIGNBORH'OOD ' " (1 the,keh gel Al edge he g,I > > WATERSHED ' a ' ' r _ . �� TERSHE teepee it R 11 1 1 . iggoe S E 1STI I i"h he t EC ILLAGE FOND y - the, Ile 5 _/,._....r. •• v K / leggeth / I I the hell eg. elf Yr he 1 ' / Ir the behe hee ®r iz> \/ 4 ♦ f T i _^^ _ . \h - EEP lip feel \ / i / / rl 0 ATTACHMENT # 4 FINDINGS STATEMENT TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District September 10, 2001 Pursuant to Article 8 , the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617 , the Town of Ithaca Town Board, as an Involved Agency, makes the following Findings . Name of Action : EcoVillage at Ithaca Second Neighborhood Group and Amendment of Special Land Use District Project No . : 9802266 Description of Proposed Action : Amendment of Special Land Use District (SLUD) No. 8 to be applied to the overall EcoVillage property (except for the R- 15 portion along West Haven Road) for the proposed development of a Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units and a common house, as well as development of future neighborhoods , located off of Mecklenburg Road (State Route 79) at Rachel Carson Way ( a private drive) , on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No ' s . 28 - 1 -26 . 2 and 28 - 1 -26 . 8 , consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres . EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner/Applicant ; Rod Lambert , Agent . Site plan approval and Subdivision approval are being considered by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the proposed Second Neighborhood Group . Location : 200 Rachel Carson Way (off Mecklenburg Road/Route 79) , Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, NY . Agency Jurisdiction : Town of Ithaca Town Board is an Involved Agency and is responsible for amendment of Special Land Use District (SLUD) No . 8 and rezoning of the EcoVillage property to the amended SLUD . Town of Ithaca Planning Board is Lead Agency and is responsible for Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval . Date Final EIS Filed : July 18 , 2001 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 I. INTRODUCTION A . Compliance with State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA ) This document is a Findings Statement prepared pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 11 . It pertains to the proposed development of a Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units at the EcoVillage property, as well as future development on the remainder of that property. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is the Lead Agency and is responsible for Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval . The Town of Ithaca Town Board is an Involved Agency and is responsible for the enactment of an amendment of Special Land Use District No. 8 . This Findings Statement is based upon the facts and conclusions in the combined Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS ) for the Second Neighborhood Group and the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS ) for EcoVillage at Ithaca (Submitted April 3 , 2001 ) , and the Errata and Additions Submitted May 7 , 2001 , all accepted as complete by the Town of Ithaca Planning; Board on May 15 , 2001 , the public hearing and comments received in connection with the above-referenced documents , and the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS — submitted July 3 , 2001 , and revised July 20, 2001 ) accepted by the Planning Board on July 17 , 2001 . This Findings Statement demonstrates that the Town of Ithaca Town Board, as an Involved Agency, has complied with all of the applicable procedural requirements of Part 617 in reviewing this matter. This Findings Statement also demonstrates that the Town Board has given due consideration to the above-referenced documents prepared in conjunction with this action . Further, this Findings Statement contains the facts and conclusions in the DEIS/GEIS and FEIS relied upon by the Town Board to support future decisions related to these documents . B. Potential Environmental Impacts Leading to Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Potential site specific impacts were identified in the Final Scope document, accepted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on April 6 , 1999 , relating to the proposed Second Neighborhood Group , as well as cumulative impacts associated with the amendment of Special Land Use District No . 8 and future development potential of the overall EcoVillage property, including the following : • Traffic and Transportation : Size , capacity and condition of the existing transportation systems (i . e . , highway capacity, intersection level -of-service, safety, pedestrian access ) ; demands on public transportation facilities and services . • Stormwater Management : Increased downstream sediment deposition during construction ; degradation of surface water from roads and parking facilities ; increasing rates of runoff and erosive velocities in downstream channels ; 2 I Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 exceeding capacity or altering the function of existing stormwater management facilities ; watershed shifting resulting from landform changes . • Community Services : Capacity of municipal water and sewer systems ; greater demand on emergency services ; adequacy of school systems to accommodate anticipated school-age children . • Community Character: Compatibility with the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan and any specific plans , such as recreation and open space , that affect this area; compatibility with and relationship to existing development in this part of the urban area; nature and significance of the visual impact of the proposed development on the surrounding neighborhood, on West Hill and the community at large ; anticipated impact of the proposed development on future land use patterns in this part of the Ithaca Urban Area; extent of loss of identified archeological or historic resources on the site . • Natural Resources : Nature and significance of the development impact on the Coy Glen Natural Area and other identified unique or sensitive areas in the vicinity; loss or modification of existing wetlands , if any ; nature and significance of the impact of the development on wildlife habitat and on endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species ; irretrievable loss of viable agricultural land in County Agricultural District No . 2 . The Town Board is considering the proposed amendment to Special Land Use District No. 8 and its application to the overall EcoVillage property (except for the remaining R- 15 Residence District portion along West Haven Road) , The Town Board is the agency responsible for approving the zoning amendment, and the EIS has considered the environmental aspects of the proposed zoning amendment . II. Environmental Impacts A . Traffic and Transportation 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The traffic evaluation studied traffic volumes projected from the full build-out of EcoVillage and the resulting impact on Route 79 and nearby intersections. Most of the intersections included in the study currently operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS "B " or better) . The study documented that no change in LOS is anticipated under background or full development conditions for the following intersections : Mecklenburg Rd ./Rachel Carson Way; Mecklenburg Rd ./West Haven Rd . ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Warren Place ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Oakwood Lane ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Campbell Drive (operates at LOS "C" at pre- and post-development conditions ) ; and West Haven Rd ./Elm St . The eastbound Hopkins Road approach to Route 96 currently operates at LOS "E" . In the background growth projection , this LOS degrades to "F", with minor additional delays with the addition of projected full EcoVillage development traffic . Northbound traffic 3 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 exiting Floral Avenue to Hector Street currently experiences long delays and LOS "F" conditions during the AM peak hour. The proposed development will not add to this movement during the AM peak hour. The PM peak hour LOS declines from "C" to "D" with background and full development conditions — the increase in delay is 9 . 3 seconds per vehicle . This is not considered to be a significant additional delay . Signalization of the intersection would improve operations , however, the traffic study indicates that the intersection is not likely to meet warrants for signalization . Therefore , no mitigation is recommended for this intersection . The analysis of traffic impact on neighborhood streets indicates that the EcoVillage development is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on neighborhood roadways , including Campbell Avenue , Oakwood Lane, Warren Place , and West Haven Road . Full build-out of the EcoVillage development is not anticipated to have a significant adverse affect on traffic operations in the study area . Therefore , no mitigation measures are recommended or proposed . Capacity and ridership on the Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) buses is not considered to be an issue . TCAT indicates that the addition of more riders from EcoVillage may actually have a positive affect on this particular bus route . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to traffic or transportation are anticipated . B. Stormwater Management 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation A general drainage study, entitled Final Drainage Study for EcoVillage CoHousing Cooperative (6/ 16/95 ) was conducted for the overall EcoVillage property, and is included in the EIS . A site specific stormwater management study examining the potential impacts of the Second Neighborhood development is included in the Errata and Additions Submitted May 7 , 2001 . Development of the Second Neighborhood will result in a net increase of approximately 1 . 5 acres of impervious surface . To mitigate the effects of increased runoff, the applicant proposes to modify the existing pond outlet structure and embankment height to increase the detention capacity of the pond . Runoff from the Second Neighborhood area will be channeled through dry swales and storm pipes into the pond . A concrete-lined sluice leading from the weir will convey flows over the pond embankment and into the downstream stone-lined ditch. The stormwater management facilities will provide on- site detention to maintain the peak rates of runoff equal to or less than the peak rates for 4 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 existing conditions during the 2 , 10, and 100-year storm events . Controls on the pond outlet will reduce the rates of overland flow to the Elm Street Extension , and will result in minimal impacts on downstream properties , including Longhouse Cooperative and the Coy Glen natural area. Water quality control measures will be put in place during construction to minimize impacts of sedimentation and erosion . Temporary silt traps at the locations of the proposed dry swales will capture runoff from the construction site and help to filter silt. Silt fencing will also be installed along the perimeter of the site for areas not draining to the silt traps . Permanent water quality control measures are also incorporated in the Second Neighborhood plans . Runoff from the parking lots and the northern half of the Second Neighborhood will be channeled through a dry swale , which will treat the "first- flush" volume of runoff, and aid in removing sediment and common pollutants found in runoff from developed areas . The vegetated overland flow route downstream of the southern half of the Second Neighborhood is considered sufficient to treat the runoff from the rooftops of structures and from paths in that area. Runoff from this area will flow across lawn and existing meadow , where filtration , sedimentation and biological removal of sediment and pollutants will occur, before entering the pond . Based on the implementation of the above-described measures , no adverse impacts on water quality are anticipated . The Final Drainage Study for EcoVillage CoHousing Cooperative (6/ 16/95 ) describes the overall drainage characteristics of the EcoVillage site and surrounding watersheds . The DEIS indicates that peak runoff flows from future neighborhoods can be controlled by additional wet ponds or constructed wetlands . However, no specific details for stormwater management for future development beyond the Second Neighborhood is described . The Planning Board , as Lead Agency, has indicated in their Findings Statement that such details will be required in conjunction with review and approval of any future development on the EcoVillage property . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts regarding downstream flooding , peak rates of runoff, or water quality are anticipated, with the incorporation of the stormwater management measures described above and in the EIS documents . C. Community Services 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Water: The EIS and supporting documentation indicates that supplying water to the Second Neighborhood Group will have no significant impact on the Town water system . Water will be delivered by the existing booster pump station and 4-inch transmission main . Additional pressure storage tanks will be provided in the Second Neighborhood 5 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 area. Water for fire protection will come from the pond . Dry hydrants installed along the perimeter of the pond will serve as connections for fire department pumper trucks . A new hydrant will be placed on the west side of the pond , and will be accessible to emergency vehicles from a stabilized walkway/emergency access way. A dedicated fire water supply main will be constructed connecting the new pond dry hydrant to additional fire hydrants in the core of the Second Neighborhood . The fire department can pressurize the fire water supply main and utilize the fire hydrants in a traditional manner. This approach has been recommended by the Ithaca Fire Department (IFD) . The EIS indicates that supplying water to future neighborhoods may present operational difficulties for the existing booster pump station . Several alternatives for future water supply are discussed in the EIS , including the possibility of altering the existing booster pump station , or providing either an elevated or ground tank, but no details are provided, and no proposals are being considered at this time. The Town of Ithaca is exploring alternate locations for a new West Hill water tank to improve flows and pressure in the existing West Hill water system, but this may not be at a sufficient elevation to serve the EcoVillage property. The EIS indicates that if a new water service area is not able to accommodate fire service needs at EcoVillage , future neighborhood plans will incorporate additional ponds and dry hydrant systems . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that any additional approvals of future neighborhood plans will have to consider the feasibility and adequacy of fire water service on the EcoVillage property. The Town Board concurs . Sewer: A new sanitary sewer main will be extended from the existing main that services the First Residents Group . The capacity of the main , downstream facilities , and the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant are sufficient to accommodate the waste loads that would be generated from all EcoVillage neighborhoods without expansion or modification . Emergency Medical and Police Services : The EIS adequately documents that full development of all of the potential EcoVillage neighborhoods will not have a significant impact on the provision of emergency medical or police services . Fire Services : In addition to water supply for fire service described above, the proposed site plan for the Second Neighborhood Group addresses additional IFD concerns . The plan includes a system of stabilized paths that can accommodate the weight and width of emergency vehicles . Turning radii have been designed to accommodate fire vehicles . The path system will allow fire and other emergency vehicles to access the neighborhood , as well as provide a pedestrian walkway system. Schools : The EIS estimates that an additional 16 students from the Second Neighborhood Group could attend Ithaca City School District (ICSD) schools (based on an existing 16 students attending Ithaca schools from the First Residents Group) , and that up to an additional 48 students could attend ICSD schools if all future EcoVillage neighborhoods are built. Although some ICSD schools are experiencing shortages of space, the impact of additional school age children from the EcoVillage development is not considered 6 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 significant . The impacts will occur over time and over a number of different ICSD schools . Adequacy of classroom space is likely to be an issue regardless of whether or not the EcoVillage development occurs . In addition , the EIS estimates that up to one- third of the families moving to EcoVillage will come from the Ithaca area and would have been sending their children to ICSD schools anyway. No additional mitigation measures relating to community services are proposed . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts on community services are anticipated . In particular, adequate water and fire service can be provided for the Second Neighborhood Group . The Planning Board is requiring that the final site plan should be reviewed by the IFD prior to Planning Board approval to ensure that all details have been adequately addressed . The Planning Board is also requiring that further planning and documentation for these services for future neighborhoods will have to be provided prior to any further approvals by the Planning Board for future neighborhoods on the EcoVillage property. D. Community Character and Visual Resources 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The EcoVillage development is consistent with many of the goals stated in the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan ( Sept. 1993 ) , particularly as they relate to the provision of diverse and affordable places for people to live and the preservation of significant areas of open space . Although the Anticipated Land Use Patterns map in the Comprehensive Plan designates the EcoVillage site as "Agricultural" , the site is currently zoned R-30 Residence, and is on the edge of the area planned for "Suburban Residential" development on the Land Use Patterns map . The concept of clustering the developed neighborhoods on a relatively small portion of the site, and preserving the remaining portions of the site for agricultural use and as natural areas is entirely consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan . The proposed EcoVillage development, including the Second Neighborhood Group and future neighborhoods , is compatible with surrounding land uses and the character of the West Hill area, which contains a mix of low density residential development, agriculture and other open space . The proposed development is compatible with anticipated land use patterns in the area, and is not expected to have significant growth inducing impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed total number of dwelling units at EcoVillage (up to 150) is equivalent to what could be built under the current R- 30 zoning . Water and sewer mains have been extended from the Town ' s system through EcoVillage property and are not anticipated to serve other properties or to promote growth in the area. Based on the 7 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 above , and the information provided in the EIS , there are no significant impacts on existing or future land use anticipated . The EIS and related documents include a comprehensive visual impact assessment in regard to the Second Neighborhood Group . Key areas of potential visual impact that were evaluated in the assessment include views from Route 79 , Elm Street Extension , Longhouse Cooperative , and selected areas on East Hill and South Hill . The assessment demonstrates that the Second Neighborhood Group will not be visible from Route 79 and only minimally visible from Elm Street Extension with occasional glimpses through existing trees . The Second Neighborhood will be seasonably visible from some of the developed portion of Longhouse Cooperative . The Second Neighborhood Group will be visible from an area at the northeast edge of the Longhouse property along a trail that is used by both Longhouse and EcoVillage residents . This view will be impacted by the addition of the Second Neighborhood Group . To help reduce this impact, the Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that it will be important for the materials and colors of the buildings , including roofs , to be neutral in color (e . g. , earth tones) to help blend with the landscape . The assessment of distant views from East Hill and South Hill indicate that the First Residents Group buildings are visible from a number of viewing points because of the open character of the EcoVillage fields . The Second Neighborhood Group will similarly be visible from these viewing locations . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that the red color of the roofs in the First Residents Group creates a sharp contrast to the surrounding open space in this viewshed, especially during seasons when there is snow cover on the ground and no foliage on trees . The Town Board concurs . It is anticipated that the Second Neighborhood Group will have a similar impact on these distant views , and that to mitigate this impact, the buildings and roofs should be neutral in color (e. g . , earth tones) to help blend the buildings with the surrounding landscape . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that they will include this requirement as a condition of site plan approval . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives or existing and future land use on the West Hill area are anticipated. Visual impacts of the Second Neighborhood Group on the northeast edge of the Longhouse property and on views from East Hill and South Hill can be mitigated by ensuring that materials and colors of the buildings blend with the surrounding landscape as described above . E. Natural and Cultural Resources 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation 8 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 Unique Natural Areas : EcoVillage will be permanently setting aside approximately 30 acres as a natural buffer between its most westerly residential development (the Second Neighborhood) and the Coy Glen Unique Natural Area (UNA) . The proposed amendment to Special Land Use District No . 8 includes provisions to ensure the protection of this natural buffer area. There is expected to be a small but gradual increase in pedestrian traffic in the Coy Glen as EcoVillage and the surrounding residential community grows . The Coy Glen Critical Environmental Area is found in the steepest, most remote area of Coy Glen . Pedestrian traffic in the Critical Environmental Area is low now , and is not expected to grow significantly as a result of the EcoVillage development . Storm water from the EcoVillage site both during and after construction will be directed toward the existing pond and is not anticipated to impact the Coy Glen UNA . Visual impacts on the Coy Glen UNA are expected to be minimal as EcoVillage ' s residential areas will not be visible from trails in Coy Glen . Vegetation : According to the EIS , no endangered , threatened or rare plant species are known to exist on the EcoVillage site . Removal of approximately one-half acre of brush and woodland , including seven large trees (common species) , can be considered a slight negative impact. No clearing of significant vegetation is proposed for the future neighborhoods . New plantings in and around the Second Neighborhood will more than compensate for the loss of existing vegetation . In addition , the natural buffer area described above will be allowed to return to woodland and will be permanently protected . No wetland areas were identified in the Second Neighborhood or future neighborhood development areas . Wildlife : According to the EIS , no rare or endangered animals are known to exist on the EcoVillage site . In addition , no critical wildlife habitat is known to exist on the site or is proposed to be disturbed . The natural area will be allowed to return to woodland. The existing fields will be maintained as open meadow . Therefore, except for the relatively small areas that will be disturbed for neighborhood development, much of the site will be left open and will be available as diverse wildlife habitat. Loss of Agricultural Land : No actively cultivated agricultural lands will be taken out of production to accommodate the proposed project . The construction of residential neighborhoods will result in the loss of potential agricultural land of the 15 to 20 acres that will be committed to residential development. The proposed amendment to the Special Land Use District includes an Agricultural area that will be preserved primarily for future agricultural use . In addition , a conservation easement has been established on the eastern portion of the EcoVillage property and held by the FingerLakes Land Trust, that will ensure the availability of this land for agricultural and related use . The loss of agricultural lands iri the proposed development areas is mitigated by EcoVillage ' s plans to devote approximately 25 acres , or 14 percent of the property to agricultural use . This includes the organic vegetable farm, a U-Pick berry farm, and orchards . Additionally, areas of open meadow will remain . Although the meadows will not be actively farmed, they will retain their rural , open space character. 9 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 Impacts to Surrounding Farm Operations from Growth Inducing Aspects : No infrastructure has been developed or is proposed by EcoVillage that would induce further conversion of farmland to other uses . There are no active farms directly adjacent to EcoVillage . The closest active farm is to the north across Route 79 . Based on the information provided in the EIS , there are no identified impacts to surrounding farm operations . Archeological and Historic Resources : There are no identified prehistoric or historic sites or structures on or adjacent to the EcoVillage property. The site is not part of any historic district . The proposed project will have no impact on any historic or cultural resources in or eligible for inclusion in the State or National Registers of Historic Places . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to natural or cultural resources are anticipated . K Zoning 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation EcoVillage is proposing an amendment to Special Land Use District (SLUD) No . 8 and the rezoning of the entire site to the amended SLUD , with the exception of the R- 15 Residence portion along West Haven Road . The amended SLUD includes numerous provisions that would regulate development on the EcoVillage property. It includes three general land use areas , each containing specific permitted uses : natural , agricultural and residential . The natural area will remain permanently preserved as open space. The agricultural area will allow agricultural and related uses , as well as a future education center and a biological waste treatment plant . The residential area will permit up to 150 dwelling units in up to five neighborhoods . Also included are regulations regarding minimum size of neighborhoods , number of common houses , maximum number of dwelling units per neighborhood , neighborhood lot coverage , buffer areas (both around the overall SLUD and each neighborhood) , site plan and special approval requirements , subdivision requirements, among others . The EIS and related documents have adequately demonstrated that the amended Special Land Use District as applied to the overall EcoVillage property (except the West Haven Road frontage) provides appropriate controls to guide future development on the EcoVillage property, and that its impacts on surrounding areas are not significant . The amended SLUD and rezoning of the EcoVillage property are consistent with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan in that they will promote the reasonable development of the site by concentrating development on appropriate portions of the site, while preserving significant areas of natural and agricultural open space . 2 . Discussion and Findings 10 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to the proposed zoning are anticipated, and • Certain aspects of the development of future neighborhoods may require further environmental review , such as , but not necessarily limited to drainage and stormwater management , visual impacts , and water supply and fire service , as previously stated in this document . III. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES Several alternative site development plans were presented and evaluated in the EIS , including Alternative One , which would move the Second Neighborhood Group to the corner of Route 79 and West Haven Road ; Alternative Two, which would move the Second Neighborhood Group to the area of the berry farm; and Alternative Three, which would include only three neighborhoods instead of five . In addition , the Final EIS includes descriptions of four additional alternatives ( A , B , C and D) that were submitted by Martha Armstrong and Lois Levitan in their letter dated June 5 , 2001 . The Town Board has considered each of these alternatives in reaching its determinations regarding the EcoVillage proposal , and finds that the EIS contains adequate information regarding these alternatives to make an informed decision . The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board ' s finding that no significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified for the proposed siting of any of the residential neighborhoods that cannot be adequately mitigated as outlined in this and the Planning Board ' s Findings Statements . While any of the alternatives could be implemented and could be considered to be reasonable , the proposed neighborhood development plan presented by EcoVillage is a well formulated plan that demonstrates several years of collaborate planning on the part of EcoVillage and neighborhood constituents . The proposed Second Neighborhood Group and future neighborhoods represent a reasonable level of development in appropriate locations on the EcoVillage site, and are in keeping with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan and adhere to sound planning principles . The Town Board further finds that the EcoVillage proposal , in due consideration of the alternatives presented in the EIS , has minimal environmental impacts that can be mitigated as described herein . 11 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 IV. CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO APPROVE Having considered the Draft and Final EIS and the relevant documents incorporated therein , and having considered the preceding written facts and conclusions relied upon to meet the requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Parts 617 . 9 through 617 . 12 , this Findings Statement certifies that : 1 . The requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617 have been met ; 2 . Consistent with the social , economic , and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives thereto , the action to be approved is one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable , including the effects disclosed in the environmental impact statement ; and 3 . Consistent with social , economic , and other essential considerations , to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact statement process will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures which were identified as practicable . Catherine Valentino, Supervisor Da e Town of Ithaca Town Board Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street , Ithaca, New York 14850 12 ATTACHMENT # 5 CERTIFICATE OF NECESSITY The undersigned, Town Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca, hereby certifies to the necessity for the immediate passage of the local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO . I OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO . 8 (LMTED MIXED USE- ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT " . 1 Catherine Valentino Supervisor Dated : September 10, 2001 Local Law Filing NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE STREET, ALBANY, NY 12231 (Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary of State.) Text of law should be given as amended . Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter. - 8ennly Ithaca -Elei� of - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - Town -i41 age - Local Law No. . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - . - - - - - . - - of the year 20. 1- - AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO , 1 OF A local law - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - - --- - - -- -- - ------ - - - - -- rl u rr nlle) THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- -- --- - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - -- --- --- - - - - - - - -- ---- - - - --- DISTRICT NO . 8 ( LIMITED MIXED USE - ECOVILLAGE ) AND TO AMEND THE - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- --- - - - --- ------- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - --- ------- - -- - -- ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT -- - - - . . . . . . . . . .. . - - -- -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - ---- - - - - -- - - --- --- - - - ---- -- - - -- ---------- -- --- -- Town Board Be it enacted by the - - - - - - --- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - --- - -- - - -- - - - - - - --- - - -- --- -- - --- - of the (Howe afLe;:.talir. Body► Goonly GRY- - Ithaca - - - - -- - - - as follows . Townof - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - - - - - Wig. ( Attached pages 1 through 12 ) (If additional space is needed , attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.) DOS-239 (Rev. 11/99) ( 1 ) Town Board Meeting 9/ 10/01 Agenda Item No . 10 LOCAL LAW NO . 4 OF THE YEAR 2001 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO. 1 OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO . 8 (LIMITED MIXED USE-ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT Section 1 . Findings. A. The Town Board of the Town of Ithaca adopted Local Law No . 1 of the year 1995 to rezone certain lands as Special Land Use District No. 8 for the purposes stated in said local law which included the development of approximately 34 acres , then owned by Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . in an environmentally sensitive manner as set forth in said local law ; and B . In accordance with such local law , Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative, Inc . developed a number of residences and related facilities in furtherance of the goals and objectives of Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . and in accordance with the purposes of said local law ; and 3 . A Second Neighborhood Group is now being formed under the laws of the State of New York, to complement the Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative (also known as "First Residents Group") for the purposes of developing and constructing additional residences on other property owned by Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . ; and 4 . It is deemed desirable now , with the consent of the Second Neighborhood Group and upon the application of Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . to enlarge the area originally rezoned to encompass virtually all of the property owned by Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative , Inc . and Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . except for a 200 foot deep strip along the west side of West Haven Road which is intended to remain zoned R- 15 ; and 5 . Such rezoning will , in accordance with the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan, foster: 1 . Conservation of up to 80% of the 176 acres of land originally owned by Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . for agriculture, open space, woods and wetlands . 2 . Development of approximately 150 residences using passive solar and other environmentally benign techniques , in up to 5 "cohousing" style neighborhoods with a village center providing village-wide services . 1 1 . Development of residential areas planned to : (a) contribute to the variety of housing styles and patterns of development: available in the Town ; (b) develop and model neighborhood designs for pedestrians , with minimal traffic , attractive landscaping, and safe play areas for children; (c) utilize clustering to create an aesthetic , quiet and safe neighborhood space to help foster a sense of community both within the neighborhood clusters and within the Village as a whole . (d) utilize interior acreage for housing , which will allow preservation of better agricultural soils, avoid strip-type residential development along roadways, create a safer environment, preserve existing rural character and existing views along roadways ; (e) demonstrate the manner in which housing may be developed to conserve energy and water, by utilizing passive solar designs, super-insulation, careful landscaping for wind protection and low-flow water devices ; (f) demonstrate how housing may be developed which conserves energy by building smaller individual dwellings and concentrating otherwise- duplicated, energy-consuming spaces into a community center or "common house" ; (g) demonstrate how meaningful open space may be preserved in conjunction with construction of new housing at ordinarily-permitted densities. 4 . Investigation of sustainable agricultural techniques through the development of orchards , gardens , aquaculture, and other projects . 5 . Incorporation of leading edge technologies to demonstrate wise use of diminishing resources , the reduction or elimination of wastes , and minimal use of expensive infrastructure systems . 6 . Significant reduction in vehicle numbers and travel by facilitating resident on-site self employment . 7 . Building an education and research facility which serves all ages, emphasizing sustainable development issues in its programs and continuing to welcome local , national and international access . 2 Section 2 . Purpose. It is the purpose and intent of this local law to allow , by expansion of the Special Land Use District, increased opportunities for the implementation of the foregoing goals and objectives in an environmentally and ecologically sound manner. Section 3 . Amendment of Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1995 . Local Law No. 1 for the year 1995 , is hereby amended as follows : 1 . Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , is amended by deleting the introductory paragraph and inserting the following : `B . Principal Use Regulations . In Special Land Use District No . 8 (the "SLUD") the following areas , as shown on document "BcoVillage Site Usage Areas 1998 " on file with the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, are defined with their permitted uses : L Natural Area: This area is a permanently preserved natural , open space with the following permitted uses : forest, natural succession , forest management including logging in accordance with good forest management practices , no more than one retreat cabin not exceeding 500 square feet in floor area (unless up to two additional cabins are authorized by the Planning Board) , outdoor areas for aquaculture, constructed wetland or other water cleansing demonstration projects , an auxiliary utility building, gardens , walking trails , and other similar non-intrusive types of uses . Structures other than related to the above are prohibited in the Natural area. For the purpose of this local law, aquaculture means use of ponds for agricultural production to demonstrate how natural ecosystems can produce edible plants , fish and other aquatic species for domestic non-commercial consumption . H. Agricultural area: Permitted uses shall include all principal and accessory agricultural uses (except residential uses) set forth below, except as the same may be limited by other restrictions placed upon the land by Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . or others . III. Residential Area: This area will be allowed to contain up to 150 dwelling units in up to five neighborhoods . Each neighborhood shall consist of a minimum parcel of five areas of land. Subdivisions of land (as defined in the Town ' s Subdivision Regulations) whether for sale , lease or other transfer shall be permitted only within the SLUD area designated as "Residential ." In the Residential Area no building shall be erected or extended and no land or building or part thereof shall be used for other than any of the following purposes : " 2 . Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , is amended by adding a new subparagraph 3 reading as follows and renumbering former subparagraphs 3 through 11 to be subparagraphs 4 through 12 : 3 443 . A multi-family dwelling . Each dwelling unit in a multiple residence shall be occupied by no more than (a) One family or (b) One family plus no more than two boarders , roomers , lodgers or other occupants ." 3 . Section. 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , subparagraph 4 (formerly subparagraph 3 ) is amended to read as follows : "4. Up to 5 community centers , also known as "common houses" which may house recreation, meeting, and dining space , children ' s playrooms, kitchen facilities , common laundry facilities , and other accessory uses permitted in this Special Land Use District and/or other community space, compatible with its purpose of being an extension of residents homes provided, however, that the community center is to be used primarily by the residents of the dwellings located within this Special Land Use District . At least one, but no more than one, community center shall be constructed for each thirty residences , unless the Planning Board issues a waiver of this requirement or limitation in the process of site plan review for good cause shown." 3a. Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , subparagraph 6 (formerly subparagraph 5) , opening paragraph, is amended to read as follows : "6. Garden, nursery, of farm, except there shall be no hog farm where the principal food is garbage and there shall be no commercial raising or sale of livestock or fish . Sale of other farm and nursery products shall be subject to the provisions of Section 18 , Subdivision 7 or the Ordinance . Usual farm buildings are permitted, provided that: . . . " 4. Section 3 , Paragraph C, entitled "Accessory Uses" , subparagraph 3 , subsubparagraph (g) is amended by changing the number "200 " to 46300" . 5 . Section 3 , Paragraph C , entitled "Accessory Uses", subparagraph 3 , subsubparagraph (h) is amended to read as follows : ( 1 ) "(h) The total number of offices or occupations set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 located anywhere in this Special Land Use District, whether in common houses or in residences , shall not in the aggregate exceed the number of dwelling units . (I.e . , there shall be no more home occupations or professional offices authorized within the Special land Use District than if the property were in a residence district R30) . " 4 6 . Section 3 , Paragraph D, entitled "Manner of Land Ownership", is amended by changing the period at the end of subparagraph 3 to a semi-colon and adding the word "and" , and by inserting two new subparagraphs to be numbered 4 and 5 reading as follows : "4 . Common land, facilities and infrastructure (roadways , water and sewer lines and other infrastructure) may be owned by a separate corporation controlled by the residents of all EcoVillage neighborhoods . 5 . Open land with or without building structures may be owned by the non-profit EcoVillage at Ithaca, Inc . " 7 . Section 3 , Paragraphs E, entitled "Density Limitations", and Paragraph F entitled "Yard Regulations" are amended to read as follows : "E. Density Limitations. There shall be no more than 150 dwelling units constructed within this Special Land Use District . There shall be a maximum of 30 dwelling units per neighborhood unless otherwise authorized by the Planning Board. For every 6 dwelling units, a minimum of one acre of land will be designated as part of the neighborhood footprint, as defined in the approved site plan . F. Yard Regulations . The minimum distance between buildings shall be in compliance with the New York State Building Code, except in the case of multifamily dwellings in which case the distance between any two buildings shall be no less than the height of the two buildings when averaged together, or twenty feet, whichever is greater. " 8 . Section 3 , Paragraph H , entitled "Lot Coverage" , is amended by adding at the end the phrase : "or more than 50% of each neighborhood footprint. " 9 . Section 3 , Paragraph I, entitled "Parking", third line, is amended by deleting the word "two" and inserting the words "one and one-half" . 10. Section 3 is amended by adding two new paragraphs as Paragraphs J and K reading as follows and relettering former Paragraphs J through U to be Paragraphs L through W : "J . Size Limitations . The maximum square footage for any dwelling unit shall not exceed 2000 square feet. However, these units may be attached in a duplex or townhouse configuration or as stacked units . K. Buffer Zones . No buildings or structures shall be located within 50 feet of the boundaries of the Special Land Use District. In addition , no buildings or structures shall be located within a 25 foot buffer zone surrounding each neighborhood footprint, except for structures that are established for the joint benefit of contiguous neighborhoods . " 5 11 . Section 3 , Paragraph L (formerly Paragraph J) , entitled "Building Permits and Site Plan Approval", subparagraph 1 , is amended by inserting a new second sentence reading as follows : "Each neighborhood' s site plan shall show exact locations and dimensions of proposed buildings . " 12 . Section 3 , Paragraph M (formerly Paragraph K) , entitled "Primary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District" , subparagraph 1 , the opening paragraph of subparagraph 2 and subsubparagraph (a) of subparagraph 2 are all amended to read as follows : "M . Primar Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District. 1 . No building permits shall be issued for construction of any structures within the Special Land Use District unless the following exist at the time of the issuance of such permit to assure adequate ingress and egress to the property: (a) A primary access road from Mecklenburg Road is legally available to all current and potential future residents , constructed, and maintained to the extent of providing, in the opinion of both the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent, a useable, serviceable roadway for ingress and egress of residential, emergency and service vehicles , to all dwellings and community buildings in the Special Land Use District as shown on the final site plan . (b) Suitable provisions to assure continuing legal access and continuing maintenance of the road to a standard which will allow unimpeded passage of emergency vehicles at all times and in all seasons . (c) A sign posted at the intersection of the private road and Route 79 indicating that the road is not a Town road. 2 . No certificates of occupancy shall be issued, and no permits for construction of more than ten dwelling units for any new neighborhood cluster within the Special Land Use District shall be issued, unless and until (a) The road referred to above , plus any additional road necessary to provide fire and emergency protection for the new neighborhood cluster, has been completed in accordance with the applicable Town of Ithaca highway specifications in effect at the time immediately prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any such structure, except that if the Town of Ithaca highway specifications require paving of the road, paving may be omitted , and except that as to spur roads serving individual neighborhood groups from the main road (Rachel Carson Way) the Planning Board may waive the application of any part of the Town Highway 6 specifications (i) If it determines that full compliance with such specifications is not necessary to provide adequate traffic circulation ; (ii) If it determines that such waivers will not prevent the normal and reasonable access in all seasons of fire and medical emergency vehicles ; and (iii) The Town Highway Superintendent and the Town Engineer recommend such waiver, and" 13 . Section 3 , Paragraph N (formerly Paragraph L), entitled "SecondarIngress and Egress to the Special Land Use District", is amended to read as follows : "L. Secondary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District. No building permits and no certificates of occupancy shall be issued for any buildings constructed in the Special Land Use District unless there is in existence at the time of such issuance 1 . A secondary access road from West Haven Road with a surface at least 10 feet wide over a strip of land at least 30 feet wide legally available to emergency fire, rescue, and medical vehicles (in fee or by easement) , constructed, and maintained to the extent of providing, in the opinion of both the Town Engineer and Town :Highway Superintendent, a useable , serviceable emergency roadway for ingress and egress of residential, emergency and service vehicles , to a point where it joins the primary access road at a point no further than 1200 feet from any dwelling unit and community center proposed to be constructed as shown on the final site plan . The surface need not be asphalt provided that the surface constructed is, in the opinion of the Town Engineer and the Town Highway Superintendent, sufficient to provide year round access for emergency vehicles. 2 . Suitable provisions to assure continuous rights of access and continous maintenance of the road to a standard which will allow unimpeded passage of emergency vehicles at all times and in all seasons . " 14 . Section 3 , Paragraph O (formerly Paragraph M) , entitled "Elimination of Cul-de- Sacs" , is amended by changing its title to "Limitation of Cul-de-Sacs" and by changing it to read as follows : "O . Limitation of Cul -de-Sacs . No cul -de-sac of greater than 1200 feet from a point providing two means of access to and from public roads (Mecklenburg Road and/or West Haven Road) existing at the effective date of this local law shall be constructed in the Special Land Use District . " 7 15 . Section 3 , Paragraph Q (formerly Paragraph O) , entitled "Maintenance of Open mace", third line , is amended by adding after the words "housing corporation" the phrase "or the non-profit Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . .' 16 . Section 3 , Paragraph S (formerly Paragraph Q) , entitled "Ownership of Ingress and Egress Roads" , is amended by adding at the end thereof a new sentence reading as follows : "Lots subdivided within the Residential area do not have to have frontage or minimum lot width on a public street, so long as access and the necessary cross-easements for access to the primary EcoVillage road is guaranteed to the satisfaction of the Town. " 17 . Section 3 , Paragraph T (formerly Paragraph R) , entitled "Provision of Sewer Facilities", opening paragraph, second line, is amended by adding after the words "more than ten dwelling units" the phrase "per neighborhood cluster" . 18 . Section 3 , Paragraph U (formerly Paragraph S), entitled "Provision of Adequate Water Facilities", is amended to read as follows : "U. Provision of Adequate Water Facilities . No certificates of occupancy will be issued, and no permits for construction of more than ten dwelling units per neighborhood cluster within the Special Land Use District shall be issued, unless the following exist at the time of the issuance of such permit or certificate to assure adequate water supply for the proposed development: 1 . Water lines built by the developer at the developer' s expense in accordance with the requirements of all applicable governing authorities and laws including the requirements of the Tompkins County Health Department, and applicable plumbing and building codes, as the same pertain to a private water system; and 2 . A pump station owned and maintained by the owner(s) or residents of the Special Land Use District providing pumping capacity adequate , in the reasonable judgment of the Town Engineer, the Town Planning Board, and the Tompkins County Health Department, to provide sufficient flows of water at the dwelling sites for domestic household use and at the common houses for lavatory, kitchen , fire protection (unless other fire protection mechanisms have been approved by the appropriate officials of the Town) , and any other proposed use requiring water. 3 . A meter installed by the developer at the developer' s expense at the point on West Haven Road where said private line intersects the public main for purposes of metering consumption within the Special Land Use District in 8 accordance with the Town of Ithaca, Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, and any other municipal agency' s requirements for water supply purposes . 4 . The developer may request a waiver from the requirements of one or more of the paragraphs above to the extent of obtaining additional building permits earlier than would otherwise be permitted by applying for such a waiver to the Planning Board. The Planning Board may, but is not required to , authorize the issuance of more than ten building permits if the Planning Board finds : (a) The plans for the water line have been approved by all applicable agencies ; (b) Work has been commenced on the construction of the line and station and is progressing with sufficient rapidity that it is reasonable to expect that it will be completed before any certificates of occupancy for any dwelling units are issued; (c) It would be a substantial hardship to one or more individuals to delay construction of more than 10 of dwelling units ; and (d) There is proof provided to the Town Engineer and Planning Board that there is adequate financial support available to the developer to complete the line and associated facilities , such proof being in the form of a dedicated escrow account, performance bond, letter of credit, or other proof satisfactory and acceptable to the Town Engineer, Attorney for the Town and the Planning Board ; and (e) The Town Engineer recommends granting the waiver. If such a waiver is granted, the Planning Board may impose such reasonable conditions upon the grant as it may deem appropriate to assure completion of the water line and associated facilities in a timely and workmanlike manner. " 19 . Schedule A to such local law entitled "Description of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District 8 " is deleted and the attached Schedule A entitled "Description of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District No . 8 -- 2001 Amendment" is inserted in its place. Section 4 . Invalidity . If any provision of this law is found invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction , such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions of this local law which shall remain in full :force and effect. 9 Section 5 . Effective Date. This local law shall take effect 10 days after publication as required by law or upon filing with the Secretary of State of the State of New York, whichever is later. 10 SCHEDULE A Description of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District No. 8 -- 2001 Amendment All that tract or parcel of land situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins , State of New York, bounded and described as follows : Beginning at a point in the centerline of Mecklenburg Road which point is approximately 225 feet westerly from the intersection of such centerline with the centerline extended of West Haven Road ; thence southerly on a line parallel with and 225 feet westerly from the centerline of West Haven Road a total distance of approximately 1282 . 15 feet to the northwesterly corner of lands now or formerly of Robert A. and Elizabeth Hesson (L. 603 , P. 564) ; thence S 1 ' 48 ' 31 E along the westerly line of said lands of Hesson, passing through a point at the southwesterly corner of said lands of Hesson and continuing a total distance of 482 . 53 feet to a point located in the centerline of a creek; thence along the centerline of said creek, being also the northerly line of lands now or formerly of Frank & Rose V . Flacco (L. 548 , P. 9) , the following six (6) courses and distances : ( 1 ) N 76° 25 ' 16 " W, a distance of 76 . 65 feet to a point; (2) thence S 830 51 ' 07 " W, a distance of 185 . 05 feet to a point ; (3) thence S 87 ° 57 ' 22 " W, a distance of 106 . 21 feet to a point; (4) thence N 400 30 ' 59 " W , a distance of 117 . 33 feet to a point ; (5) thence N 8 ° 36 ' 54 " W, a distance of 47 .43 feet to a point ; (6) thence N 520 59 ' 10" W, a distance of 119 . 59 feet to a point being a northerly corner in said Flacco premises ; thence S 3 ° 49 ' 6 " W along the westerly line of said lands of Flacco a total distance of 716 . 89 feet to an iron pin located at the southwesterly corner of said lands of Flacco ; thence S 86° 57 ' 2 1 " W, along a northerly line of lands now or formerly of Donald F. & Genievieve W. Henry (L. 737 , P . 141 ) , a distance of 84 .76 feet to an iron pin located at a northwesterly corner of said lands of Henry; thence S 6° 49 ' 6 " E, along a westerly line of premises of Helen DeGraff (L. 310, P. 15 & L. 448 , P. 1027) , a distance of 1066 . 73 feet to an iron pin ; thence S 87° 37 ' 09 " W , along a northerly line of lands of DeGraff, and continuing along the northerly line of lands now or formerly of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . (L. 546, P. 742) , a total distance of 2072 .73 feet to an iron pin located at a corner of lands now or formerly of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . (L. 635 , P 482 7 L 635 , P. 492) ; thence N 03 ° 14' 12 " W, along the easterly line of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . ," a distance of 400. 29 feet to an iron pin located at a northeasterly corner of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, vic . ; thence N 86 ° 45 ' 49 " W along a northerly line of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . a distance of 1047 . 69 feet to an iron pin located at a northwesterly corner of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . being also an easterly line of lands reputedly owned by Cornell University; thence N V 17 ' 37 " W , along an easterly line of said lands of Cornell , a distance of 700 . 38 feet to an iron pin located at a northeasterly corner of said lands of Cornell , being also a southerly line of lands now or formerly of YMCA of Ithaca and Tompkins County (L. 606 , P. 172) ; thence N 88 ° 01 ' 30" E , along a southerly line of said lands of YMCA , a distance of 421 . 59 feet to an iron pin located at a southeasterly corner of said lands of YMCA ; thence N 2° 23 ' 46 " W , along an easterly line of said lands of YMCA , a distance of 965 .44 feet to an iron pipe ; thence N 87 ° 36' 14 " E along a southerly line of said lands of YMCA, and 11 continuing along the southerly line of lands now or formerly of Robin Bottie and David Warden (L. 633 , P. 728 ) a total distance of 1725 .73 feet to an iron pin located at the southeasterly corner of said lands of Bottie and Warden ; thence N 01 ° 49 ' 46 " W , along the easterly line of said lands of Bottie and Warden and continuing along the easterly line of the lands now or formerly of Joseph and Daisy Schimmenti (L. 557 , P. 454) and the easterly line of the lands now or formerly of Sadegn Deljoo and Ngern Puang (L. 656 , P. 235 ) a total distance of 1281 . 8 feet to a point in the said center line of Mecklenburg Road ; thence N 87 ° 50' 16 " E , along the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road a total distance of 563 . 93 feet to a point; thence S 01 ° 48 ' 31 " E, along the westerly line of lands now or formerly of Michael Carroll (L. 732 , P. 330) a total distance of 721 . 5 feet to an iron pin; thence N 87 ° 50' 16 " E, along the southerly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 404.0 feet to an iron pin ; thence N 01 ° 48 ' 31 " W, along an easterly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 139 .74 feet to a point ; thence N 88' 11 ' 29 " E, along a southerly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 125 .00 feet to a point ; thence N 01 ° 48 ' 3 1 " W , along an easterly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 300. 00 feet to a point ; thence S 88 ° 11 ' 29 " W , along a northerly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 125 .00 feet to a point; thence N 01 ° 48 ' 3 1 " W, along an easterly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 281 .76 feet to a point in the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road ; thence N 88 ° 05 ' 53 " E, along the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road, a distance of approximately 522 . 14 feet to the point or place of beginning, being net 165 . 72 acres more or less. The above description is in accordance with a map entitled "SUBDIVISION MAP ECOVILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE MECKLENBURG ROAD - N . Y. S . RTE. 79 TOWN OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK" with a sheet title of "SUBDIVISION PLAN MAP" Sheet 1 , dated June 11 , 2001 , made by T .G . Miller P .C . , a copy of which is on file with the Town of Ithaca Planning Office. 12 (Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and strike out that which is not applicable.) 1 . (Final adoption by local legislative body only.) I hereby certify that the local law .annexed hereto, designated as local law No. _ _ . . . . ... . . . . . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of 20 1 of the (�euY� )(Town)(i�i�kage-) of --- -- - - - - _ Ithaca _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ was duly passed by the Town SScag)aar 9 J i 6- -- -- - - - 1- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y P - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - 20 - - - - , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. (Name of Legislative Body) 2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or repassage after disapproval by the Elective Chief Executive Offlcer*.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. .. . . . . . .__ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ of 20___ _ __ of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of --- - - - - - _ _ _ - - - - - - _ - - -- -- - - __ _ _ __ _ __ __ ____ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ was duly passed by the - - - - - . . . . . ... . . . . --- - - - .. . . .. . . - - . . . . . . . . . . . .- -- on - - - - - - - - - - -__ - - - - - 20 _ _ _ , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after (Name ofGegislative Body) disapproval) by the __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ and was deemed duly adopted on .. .. - - - - - - _ . . . . .. . 20- - _ _ (Elective Chief Executive Officer*) in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 3. (Final adoption, by referendum .) I hereby certify tha 't the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. .. . . ._ _ _ _ ___ .. .. . . .. .. _ .. . .. .. . . of 2 of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - - - - - ---_ _ _ _ __ .. .. ... . .. _ _ _ __ _ _ was duly passed b -- - - - - - --- --- - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- on - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - 20- - -- and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed (Name of Legislative Body) disapproval) by the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ on- - -- - -- -- - - -- - - -- - - 20 Such local law was submitted (Elective Chief Executive Officer') to the people by reason of a (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 20 __ _ in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. ' 4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting referendum .) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ of 20_ _ _ _ _ _ of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ - - - - - - - - _ . . . . was duly passed by the -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on - - - - - - - - - - - 20_ _ _ _ ' and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after (Name of Legislative Body) disapproval) by the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 - - - Such local law was subject to (Elective Chief Executive Officer*) permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2G - - - in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. ' * Elective Chief Executive Officer means or includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a coup wide basis or, if there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, o the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances . (2) i S. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. _--- - - - - - _ . . . . . . . _ . .. . . . . . . . . . . of 20_ _ _ _ __ of the City of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 20- - -- became operative . 6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. __- - - -- -- - - - _. . . . . . _. .. . . . . . . .. of 20_ _ __ __ of the County of - - - - - - -_ --- - - - - -- - _ --- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - _ - - -- - - - - - - - - State of New York, having been submitted to the electors at the General Election of November _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ 20. -.- , pursuant to subdivisions S and 7 of section 33 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of the cit. ies of said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said general election, became operative. (If any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed , please provide an appropriate certification.) I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner in- dicated in paragraph- - - _1: _ _ _ _ _ _ , above. Clerk of the County legislative body, City, Town or village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body (Seal) Date : September 13 , 2001 (Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK Tompkins COUNTY OF I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law ontains the correct text and that all proper proceedings have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law a n e ereto. Signature John Barney Title ' Attornev for the Town —�eaflt�- of Ithaca Town -�4gage Da to : S PAI (3) Agenda # 3 OPTION # 1 ATTACHMENT # 6 2002 BUDGET lity Consumption 130 , 341 , 600 Town of Ithaca Consumption 71 , 490 , 444 Town of Dryden Consumption 3 , 616 , 912 Total City 1301341 , 600 63 . 443 Total Town of Ithaca 711490 , 444 34 . 797 Total Town of Dryden 31616 , 912 1 . 760 TOTAL ALL 205 , 448 , 956 100 . 000 2002 Budget Required $ 2 , 253 , 041 Less : Estimated Revenue 300 , 000 Appropriated Fund Balance 511 , 000 Net Required $ 1 , 442 , 041 ity Share $ 914 , 874 own of Ithaca Share 501 , 787 Town of Dryden Share 25 , 380 TOTAL $ 1 , 442 , 041 City of Ithaca $ 914 , 874 Share O &M Budget 130 , 341 , 600 CF = 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Town of Ithaca $ 501 , 787 Share O &M Budget 71 , 490 , 444 CF = 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Town of Dryden $ 25 , 380 Share O &M Budget 31616 , 912 CF = . 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Uniform Joint Recovery Rate = . 702 per 100 cf Rate Differential Projected = + 10 . 030 Revised 8 / 28 / 2001 Expended/ Budget Departmental Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 SCHEDULE OF JOINT ACTIVITY FUND ESTIMATED REVENUES DEPARTMENTAL INCOME J2373 SEPTAGE SERVICE OTHER GOVERNMENTS $260, 256 $200,000 $200, 000 J2374 SEWER SERVICE OTHER GOVERNMENTS $ 1 ,325, 974 $ 17309,446 $1 ,442,041 J2375 SERVICES - OTHER GOVTS . $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $ 115861230 $105092446 $ 1 ,642,041 USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY J2401 INTEREST AND EARNINGS $ 114, 704 $150, 000 $ 1001000 TOTALS $1141704 $ 1502000 $1001000 MISCELLANEOUS J2701 REFUND PRIOR YEAR EXPENSE $39, 877 $0 $0 J2770 UNCLASSIFIED REVENUE $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $39, 877 - $0 $0 INTERFUND REVENUES J2808 TRANSFER FROM DEBT SERVICE FUND $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $0 $0 $0 STATE AID J3901 SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $0 $0 $0 GRAND TOTAL - ESTIMATED REVENUES - JOINT ACTIVITY FUND $19740,811 $19659v446 $19742904 Revised 8 / 28 / 2001 CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 2 Expended/ Budget Departmental Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 SPENERAL OF JOINT ACTIVITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SPECIAL ITEMS J1920 MUN. ASSN. DUES $ 1 , 000 $1 ,000 $1 , 000 J1990 CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT $0 $50,000 $30, 000 TOTALS $12000 $51 ,000 $31 , 000 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT 000 51000 31000 Revised 8 / 21 / 2001 CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 3 Expended/ Budget Departmental Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 HOME AND COMMUNITY SERVICES SEWAGE TREATMENT & DISPOSAL J8150 SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT 5105 SALARIES - ADMIN. $57 , 959 $58,803 $61 ,489 5110 SALARIES - STAFF $400,889 $420,853 $450, 171 5115 HOURLY - FULL TIME $1 , 960 $0 $0 5120 HOURLY - P/T & SEAS $28, 876 $303750 $29,075 5125 OVERTIME $46,733 $41 , 000 $40,000 5205 FURNITURE & FIXTURES $0 $0 $0 5210 OFFICE EQUIPMENT $0 $0 $0 5215 MOTOR VEHICLES $0 $0 $0 5225 OTHER EQUIPMENT $35,040 $752500 $0 5405 TELEPHONE $40456 $5, 000 $5,000 5410 UTILITIES $299,034 $350,000 $350,000 5415 CLOTHING $57481 $8,000 $8,000 5420 GAS AND OIL $32902 $3,000 $3,000 5425 OFFICE EXPENSE $20885 $3, 500 $3,500 5430 FEES FOR PROF. SERVICES $65,059 $70,425 $701425 5435 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $283,711 $3369332 $355,400 5440 STAFF DEVELOPMENT $ 141385 $15,000 $ 15, 000 5445 TRAVEL & MILEAGE $0 $0 $0 5450 ADVERTISING $0 $300 $300 5455 INSURANCE $73, 133 $750000 $75,000 5475 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE $57383 $14 ,300 $ 14, 300 5476 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $21 , 535 $20,400 $281800 5477 EQUIP. PARTS & SUPP. $55, 291 $57,600 $29,200 5479 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE $8,892 $11 ,000 $11 ,000 5480 BLDG. MAINT. SUPPLIES $4 , 589 $32, 100 $32, 100 5494 SAFETY MAT & SUPPLIES $5, 379 $79500 $79500 5495 TREATMENT SUPPLIES $117, 764 $137, 780 $137 ,780 5496 LABORATORY SUPPLIES $23, 784 $23, 520 $25,000 5499 SLUDGE DISPOSAL $186,488 $231 ,000 $214,000 5700 PR. YR. ENC. $14,256 $0 $0 5720 PR. YR. EQUIP. $6,432 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL $1 ,773,296 $2,028,663 $ 1 , 966,040 9010 STATE RETIREMENT $10,061 $8, 593 $12,500 9030 SOCIAL SECURITY $41 , 256 $42, 300 $43, 800 9040 WORKERS' COMPENSATION $26,298 $36, 620 $36,620 9060 HOSPITAL & MEDICAL INSURANCE $118, 543 $124,233 $ 143,437 9070 DENTAL INSURANCE $ 1 , 812 $3,000 $3, 000 9080 DAY CARE ASSISTANCE $32060 $3, 000 $33500 9710 SERIAL BONDS 1 $8, 635 $9,420 $10,205 9711 INTEREST ON SERIAL BONDS $4,320 $3, 617 $22939 9731 INTEREST ON BANS $0 $0 $0 9795 PAYING AGENT FEES $0 $0 $0 TOTALS $10987,281 $2 ,259,446 $2 ,222, 041 TOTAL HOME AND COMMUNITY SERVICE 1 987 81 $2l259;446 $22222,041 . Revised 8 / 21 / 2001 CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 4 Expended/ Budget Departmental Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 NTERFUND TRANSFERS 9951 TRANSFER TO CAPITAL RESERVE FUND $0 $0 $0 TOTALS INTERFUND TRANSFERS $0 $0 $0 TOTAL UNDISTRIBUTED $0 $-0 L0 GRAND TOTAL - JOINT ACTIVITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS 1 988 28 2 31 446 1 2 M3 04 Revised 8 / 21 / 2001 CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 5 PAYROLL TITLE NAME 2002 Chief Operator $ 61 , 489 Asst , Chief , Op . R . Denmark 45 , 361 Sr . Acct , Clerk T . Henry 20 , 936 Operator Trainee K . Dzikiewicz 24 , 487 Operator J . Soule 41 , 780 Pre - Treatment Coord . / Safety Officer / Op . F . Gray 32 , 533 Operator G . Snyder 41 , 005 Operator E . Smith 35 , 823 Operator F . Eggleston 32 , 490 Operator R . Gustafson 33 , 418 Instrum . / Elec . / Op . D . McGeever 27 , 334 Operator D . Overstrom 28 , 238 Lab Director J . Lozano 44 , 456 Envir . Analyst R . Johnston 35 , 187 Lab . Technician Vacant 21, 196 Truck Driver - 0 - Maintainer - 0 - Truck Driver / PT . 15 , 000 Part - Time Seasonal / Laborers 15 , 000 Overtime 40 , 000 Total $ 595 , 733 ATTACHMENT X67 OF 17) �� 9a TOWN OF ITHACA Agenda # 14 215 NORTH 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 or (607) 273-5854 ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM TO : Town Board DATE : September 5 , 2001 FROM : Dan Walker, Town Engineer SUBJECT : Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Facility Design Proposal for Phosphorus Removal Long rang planning for the treatment of Waste Water at the Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Facility ( IAWWTF) has included tertiary treatment for phosphorus removal . The recent re- rating of the plant to 13 Million Gallons of Hydraulic capacity limits the total allowable phosphorus discharge to the lake to 40 Ibs per day, which is less than half of the previous permitted amount of 83 lbs . per day . An Effluent Filtration for Phosphorus removal project was included in the Environmental Bond Act funding application submitted by the SJS . The Base project cost for by Effluent Filtration in the application is $3 , 750 ,000 , and the State has already committed $ 1 , 397 , 500 for the project. The SJS intends to request an additional $ 1 , 152 , 500 of Bond Act money for the project which would require $ 1 , 200, 000 of local funds to complete the full project . Stearns & Wheler, LLC , originally designed the plant and has been the engineering consultant for the re-rating project. They have also completed a phosphorus removal pilot project in Onondaga County, which has successfully reduced phosphorus discharges . The design proposal under consideration was prepared by Stearns & Wheler, and assumes that the 2 existing PhoStrip tanks will be used for the process . The scope proposal includes work elements to select and procure the recommended equipment, plans and specifications for the construction contract and contract documents . The design fee is a not to exceed figure of $412 ,000 . 1 think the technical aspects of the proposal are adequate but I would like to see a more detailed proposal with specific work elements and costs . H :\PROJECTS\ISC\phospro j mem .doc T � / ' p/ tool Airenda # 14 To : SJS Committee From : Lawrence P . Fabbroni, P . E . ,L . S . , Asst. Supt . W& S Re : Effluent :Filtration (P Removal) Date : August 20,2001 Attached please :find the Final Design Proposal for Phosphorus Removal Facilities at the Ithaca Wastewater Treatment Facility which you authorized be requested from Stearns & Wheler. The Cos;t-Not-To-Exceed-Proposal is for $412 , 000 on a total construction budget of $ 3 ,750,000 . There are issues of procurement of the actual equipment as part of the design process that could drive the design costs to this maximum of 10% of total budget. There are opportunities, based on Stearns & Wheler ' s recent piloting experience at Onondaga County, where sole sourcing with U. S . Filter Kruger as ACTIFLO would reduce design costs by some $ 50,000 . We have already received $ 1 ,397 , 500 in October 1998 toward tertiary phosphorus removal in a State Bond Act grant. This would fund a construction cost of $ 1 ,644,000, close to half the cost, or one tank. This would enable us to move the project forward, utilitize the existing grant, and build a stronger case for the additional $ 1 , 152,500 requested in the Bond Act Application pending since October 2000 . Proceeding with at least one tank would also enable us to meet the recently approved permit for the plant which severely limits phosphorus discharge to 40 lbs./day from an old limit of about 83 lbs ./day. The new rolling average for twelve months makes a direct comparison difficult . Staff is confident in saying that the new limit will be difficult to meet without considerable additional chemical costs and then there is a limit to removal by chemical means without affecting the secondary treatment phase of the process . Proceeding to tertiary phosphorus removal facilities now is necessary to safeguard the new 13 . 1 MGD capacity limit. Authorization to proceed with design would commit capital project reserves. Existing uncommited capital reserves are about $ 800, 000 . This could almost cover the one half project budget of $ 1 , 875 ,000 + $412 ,000 - $ 153975500 = $ 889,500 unless the SJS decides to borrow more than the deficit $ 89 ,500 at current low interest rates . In any case design could be authorized from available reserves and a better construction budget will be available prior to any procurement decisions . I hope for your early action on this proposal as I believe we are fortunate to have the No . l Stearns & Wheler design team, who successfully built the plant that has performed well for fourteen years, available to us at this time . If design and procurement were complete by March 2002 , it would be in good sequence with going to bid and construction in 2002 . It would also parallel the upcoming DEIS efforts which are separate from this effort in law but not necessarily in the public mind and this progress will certainly give the State incentive to release additional funds that are available for the Finger Lakes . At the very least this project should be in the 2002 Budget you are approving today. b' April 17, 2001 Mr. Lawrence Fabbroni , P . E. Assistant Superintendent of Public Works City of Ithaca DPW 510 First Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Re : Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant Final Design - Phosphorus Removal Facilities Dear Larry: At your request, we have prepared this proposal for engineering services to complete the selection and final design of treatment facilities for advanced phosphorus removal (effluent limit of 0 .2 mg/1) at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant. The following is the basis of our proposal . 1 . The technology to be used will be the high rate flocculated settling (HRFS) process manufactured by U . S . Filter Kruger as ACTIFLO and Ondeo Degremont (formerly IDI Degremont) as DensaDeg. 2 . New treatment facilities will be constructed in the existing PhoStrip tanks (2) to the greatest extent possible. 3 . Secondary effluent (current plant effluent) will be pumped to the new phosphorus facilities by submersible pumps. Two pumps will be provided (no standby) as treating peak flow if one pump is out of service is not critical to meet the proposed rolling average limit. Minimizing the size of the wet well by installing only two pumps may eliminate the need for additional foundation piles . 4 . The new secondary effluent pumps will not be on emergency power. 5 . Variable frequency drives for the secondary pumps will be located in the gallery or on the deck of the gallery between the aeration tank and final settling tank. CAeodora\auach\Fabbroni, Larry - Ithaca GCH 071 .doc Mr. Lawrence Fabbroni, P . E . April 17, 2001 City of Ithaca DPW Page 2 6 . A small enclosure will be created between the existing PhoStrip tanks. Support for this structure will be accomplished by spanning between the tank's foundations with grade beams, thus eliminating the need for foundation piles . 7 . The control panel for the new treatment facilities will be located in Gallery No . 3 . 8 . Power for the new secondary effluent pumps will come from MCC 3A and 3B . Power for the new treatment facilities will come from MCC 2A and 2B . 9 . The existing secondary chemical storage tanks will be utilized for ferric chloride. New chemical feed pumps will be provided . The existing truck unloading area will be modified, and monitoring instrumentation will be added, as necessary, to comply with current chemical unloading and bulk storage regulations . 10 . The new treatment facilities will not be interfaced with existing readouts or controls contained in the existing main control panel . 11 . The phosphorus removal technology will be selected through procurement (in accordance with Municipal Bidding Law) prior to completion of the final design. This additional step to select the technology is necessary as the two processes proposed are significantly different. Including both technologies in the Contract Documents would require the engineer to complete two designs . Our Scope of Services includes : 1 . Preparation of procurement documents to select the technology (ACTIFLO or DensaDeg) for purposes of final design and construction. Procurement includes : a. Preparation of bid documents ; b . Respond to comments and prepare addenda; C , Receive and review bids ; d. Review proposed design; and e . Make recommendation for selection of treatment technology . C:kodoraWtach\Fabbroni, Larry - Ithaca GC:H 071 .doc Mr. Lawrence Fabbroni, P. E . April 17, . 2001 City of Ithaca DPW Page 3 2 . Based on design details provided by the vendor of the selected technology, prepare plans and specifications (Contract Documents) suitable for bidding for phosphorus removal facilities including : a. New secondary effluent pumps ; b. Phosphorus treatment process; c . Modifications to existing chemical storage tanks ; d. New chemical feed pumps and pumping; e. Modify chemical truck unloading area; f. New effluent water system (plant non-potable water using HRFS effluent); g. New polymer feed system for phosphorus removal ; h. Connection to existing outfall ; i . Jib crane or monorail for removal of secondary effluent pumps; and j . Enclosure between existing stripper tanks for equipment. 3 . It is anticipated that the Contract Documents will include a General Contract and an Electrical Contract. Our Scope of Services does not include : • Bidding Phase Services • Constriction Phase Services • Startup Services. cash /)n to eKceed Stearns & Wheler proposes to complete the - above Scope of Services for a kanp--s� fee of $412 ,000 . We are available to begin work immediately and can prepare a project schedule at your request. Please note that we anticipate the Design Phase (allowing for procurement of the process technology) can be completed within six to seven months . CAeudorMattachWabbroni, Larry - Ithaca GCH 071 .doc T � Mr. Lawrence Fabbroni, P .E. April 17, 2001 City of Ithaca DPW Page 4 If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, Gerald C . Hook, P .E. President/CEO GCH/jlb =tom C:%eudora\attach\Fabbroni, Larry • Ithaca GCH 071 .doc Atrstemms &)Nheler, LLc BUDGET SUMMARY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS & SCIENTISTS September 18, 2000 REQUESTED BOND ACT FUNDING ADDITIONAL LOCAL BASE COMMITTED FUNDING SHARE IF PROJECT BOND ACT REQUIRED FOR FULLY TOTAL COST FUNDINGx� BASE PROJECT FUNDED TOWN OF LANSING A- Collector Sewers - 10 " and 12 " $ 1 , 880 ,000 $0 $ 1 , 360 ,000 $ 520 , 000 Mains , South Lansing Area ➢ Collector Sewers South F < < X3,200,000 ln211e{l i 3 S Y S S L" _ 5a• ,. L Transmission - South Lansing $550,000 $3707000 $0 $ 180 , 000 Area Collector and Lateral Sewers - $ 1 ,630 ,000 $ 1 ,0807000 $0 $550 ,000 Myers Road Area Pump Stations $ 1 ,360 ,000 $ 9003000 $0 $460 ,000 ➢ Transrrussion to Cayuga ' $2,350,000 $ 1 ,020 ,000 $680,000_ $6502000 ' rHez hts`tiVWTF . Diversion of from VCHWWTP to IAWWTP • Kline Road $ 100 ,000 $63 ,750 $0 $367250 • Remington Road $ 1409000 $ 89 ,250 $0 $50 , 750 VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS Wastewater Treatment Plant $ 11000 ,000 $ 569 ,000 $0 $431 ,000 Improvements VCHWTP Filtration $ 1 ,500,000 $0 $ 1 ,020,000 $4807000 ITHACA AREA OWNERS :> WWTP/Interceptor $ 1 ,660,000 $ 1 ,220,000 $0 $440 ,000 Improvements (Phase: 1 ) * WWTP Improvements - Plant $340 ,000 $2897000 $0 $51 ,000 Re-rating* ➢ WWTP Grit Removal . $ 1 ,000,000 $0 $612 ,000 $388 ,000 ➢ Effluent Filtration (P Removal) $3 ,750,000 $ 1 ,397 ,500 $ 19152,500 $ 11200,000 Interceptor and Collector Sewer Improvements • Phase 2 * $ 17090 ,000 $515 ,420 $0 $ 574, 580 Phase 3 $3 ,910,000 $0 $ 1 ,5605000 $2,350,000 TOTALS $25 ,460,000 $795135920 1 $6,384,500 $ 11 ,561 ,580 * Projects completed. 0 Funding-Dependent Component * * Sum of two previous Bond Act Applications . Critical Project Component September 18, 2000 �I � CAeudoraWttaeh\Kline Road Budget Sun¢ l.dcx 11 Stearn$ & VVlleler �._ Companies ATTACHMENT # 8 �i } f+Y C C q4111 ,Z A'P' xf �C'� y'L �� � ri'fxr� y., Y'• ��k {Cyy. y �l� +T(tl� yaj.p��` 1,�p,. �+.I[ rT C�� f•F - �. . ti 9` _ !•"-E`£� �G� �z- i' 375 - ��x4£'� t , '4 Fd"t kW ,fit s tp PIZ 1 t ': i y _..�. l CONNECTION y ' 11 , r 4 ■ f A y y Lo;,idice, TOWN OF ULYSSES FIGURE P. C. WATER DISTRICT NO , 3 1 Consulting Engineers Project No. 290 Elwood Davis Road I Box 3107, syracuse, New York, 13220 TOMPKINS COUNTY NEW YORK 586 . 006 °y4y I � tub d 4 } +a4� 8 r • 4 4 , A t r j Ail LL NL it 8 , t LZ Iz r N wbin ut NG n MALLY CLOSED ATTACHMENT # 9 Agenda # 17 TC>W14 CLERK ' S MC3MTHLY REPORT TOWN OF ITHACA , NEW YORK AUGUST , 2001 THE SUPERVISOR : PAGE 1 suant to Section 27 , Subd 1 of the Town Law , I hereby make the following statement of all fees a moneys received_ 'by me ` . t . in connection with my office during the month stated above , excepting only such fees and moneys the application and, payment , ' of which are otherwise provided for by law ; 2001 SPORTING LICENSES 2 . 00 2002 SPORTING LICENSES 28 . 00 10 MARRIAGE LICENSES N0 , 01049 TO 01058 87950 AGRICULTURE REPORT COPY AERIAL PHOTOS 8 MISC . COPIES 8 . 55 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 12900 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MARRIAGE TRANSCRIPT NOISE ORDINANCE RETURNED CHECK CLERK RETURNED CHECK — TAXES 1 RETURNED CHECK — W & S 15919 OPEN SPACE REPORT 1984 OPEN SPACE REPORT 1997 POSTAGE SIGN ORDINANCE SIX MILE CREEK REPORT SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS ! 49 TAX SEARCH 75 . 00 USE OF PARKS & BLDG WETLAND GUIDELINES WATER & SEWER SEARCH 1 ZONING MAP 3 . 50 4 ZONING ORDINANCE 34 . 00 A1255 TOTAL TOWN CLERK FEES 265 . 74 A1555 81 DOG ENUMERATION 81900 A1556 1 SPCA, CONTRACT 366 . 22 A1557 1 SPCA. IMPOUND FEES 30 . 00 A2389 VOTING MACHINE FEE A2530 ` ` GAMES OF CHANCE LICENSES BINGO LICENSES 1 BINGO FEES 6914 A2540 TOTAL A2540 6 . 14 A2544 81 DOG LICENSES 162 . 00 A2701 REFUND PRIOR YEAR EXPENS 14 BUILDING PERMIT 1 , 120 . 00 2 BUILDING PERMIT EXTENSIN 50 . 00 FOUNDATION PERMITS 4 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 200 . 00 3 TEMP . CERT . OF OCCUPANCY 775 . 00 excepting only such Fees the application and payment of which are otherwise providedofor by law . Subscribed and sworn to before me this TOWN CLERK ' S MO THLY REPORT Town CI AUGUST ,daQ001 9 q 20 I PAGE 2 Notary u b I c, .St a e o ew . No. 01 KE6025073 Qualified In Schuyler County2 Commission Expires MaV g$ 20 fi ITS OPERATING PERMITS FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS 2 SIGN PERMITS 103 . 23 2 ZBA AREA & USE VARIANCES 260 . 00 ZBA ADDITIONAL MTG . FEE 2 ZBA SPECIAL APPROVALS 200 . 00 ZONING SIGN APPROVALS B2110 TOTAL B2110 21708 . 23 SUBDV , REV . INITIAL APL . SUBDV . REV . PRELIM . PLAT 1 SUBDV . REV . FINAL PLAT 90600 SBDV . REV . PLAN REAFFIRM 1 SITE PLAN INIT . APL . FEE 75 . 00 SITE PLAN PRELIM . PLAN 3 SITE PLAN FINAL PLAN 300 . 00 ADD . MTG , FEE AGENDA PRO ASS . MTG . FEE P . H . PROCE B2115 TOTAL B2115 465 . 00 SUBDIV . REV , INSPECTION SITE PLAN REV . INSPECTIN 1 SUBDV . PRELM . REV , DEPOS 70 . 00 SUBDV . FIN . REV . FEE DEP SITE PLAN PREL . FEE DEPO SITE PLAN FIN . FEE DEPOS BP615 TOTAL BP615 70 . 00 Paid to Supervisor for General Fund - 911 . 16 Paid to Supervisor for Part Town 31243 . 23 Paid to NYS DEC for 2001 Sporting Licenses 32 . 00 - Paid to NYS DEC for 2002 Sporting Licenses 444 . 00✓ Paid to County Treasurer for Dog Licenses 112 . 28✓ Paid to Ag & Markets for Dog Licenses 18 . 00✓ Paid to NYS Health Department for Marriage Licenses 112 . 50 ✓ Paid to State Comptroller for Games of Chance Licenses Paid to State Comptroller for Bingo Licenses Total Disbursements 4 , 873 . 11 SEPTEMBER 4 , 2001 SUPERVISOR STATE OF NEW YORK , COUNTY OF TOM PKINS , TOWN OF ITHACA TER -ANN HUNTER , being duly sworn , says that she is the Clerk of the TOWN OF ITHACA that the foregoing is a full and true statement of all Fees and Honeys received by her during the month above stated , ATTACHMENT # 10 Agenda # 17 Town of Ithaca Town Board, September 10, 2001 Highway Department Report For August 2001 Lyme Disease The headlines have been filled with reports of Lyme Disease being on the rise . Tompkins County is no exception—one of our workers has contracted the disease . Along with the Human Resources Office, we have been looking into possible vaccinations . Parks and Trails Iacovelli Park: On August 22, 2001 , we participated in Cornell's sixth annual Pre- Orientation Service Trips (POST) program. Fourteen student volunteers worked under the direction of the Parks Manager doing a variety of projects at Iacovelli Park. Fifty shrubs were planted, fertilized, watered and mulched around the play structure . A new section of wood chip trail leading from new gazebo to the existing nature trail was developed . Also, topsoil was spread to re-seed an area used during construction of the park. This project: was a success and we hope to continue participating in the Cornell program in the future . The Town' s forces also worked at Iacovelli Park. The gazebo was completed . We will have the basketball court paved soon . Sandra Place Walkway: The Sandra Place walkway has been reworked and paved during August . Roads Surface Treating: In August the following roads surface treated : Poole Road, Stone Quarry Road, Glenside Road, Culver Road, Coy Glen Road, Townline Road, and Sand Bank Road . Due to the good weather this summer the Town' s scheduled work has been completed on schedule . We have started to do miscellaneous smaller projects such as hot patching roads, culvert pipe work, and catch basin work. Water and Sewer This month we worked on hot patching where water breaks had occurred and other miscellaneous minor' repairs . During this month we repaired a broken sewer line at Tareyton Drive in the Northeast . Projects for September 1 . Put shoulders down. 2 . West Haven Road storm water management. 3 . Park and Trail maintenance . 4 . Water and Sewer maintenance . 5 . Survey projects . 6 . Work at Iacovelli Park. 7. Ditching and culvert pipe replacements. 8 . Decommission the Glenside Road water line . 9 . Hanshaw Road back lot landscape restoration. Town Engineer 's Report for 9/10/01 ATTACHMENT # 11 Town Board Meeting Agenda 1 i GENERAL Staff The Engineering Technician I position has been tilled by Joseph Slater who started work on August 20. This position provides technical support to the Highway Department under the direction of Senior Technician Craig Ballard. Operations & Facility Management Repair of the Brick wall around the parking lot at the Town Hall has been completed, including resetting all of the capstones and replacement of damaged bricks. Records Management Engineering staff is continuing to work with existing record maps of the Towns water and sewer systems to develop an electronic GIS record map. All Town maps are being catalogued in the map database. Park and Open Space The Engineering staff is coordinating with the Highway Department and Planning Department on the Hanna Pew Trail project. T.G . Miller is finalizing the Boundary and Topographic Survey Work. As soon as the survey is completed, project plan development will proceed and design development will be initiated . Highway Contract administration for the Maple Avenue reconstruction project has been started with the Award of the contract and Notice to Proceed issued to Suitkote. Work is scheduled to start the week of September 17 . 911 /Emergency Operations Center Committee The Town Engineer is the Town of Ithaca representative on the building committee. Program development for the proposed 91 UEOC addition at Station 5 site is being finalized and the schematic design was presented to the Committee on August 15 . The project will be coming to the Town Board for approval to use the Town owned property, a Memorandum of Understanding is being prepared by the County. The project will also require a special approval by the Board of Appeals and Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board. The Town Engineer introduced the project to the Planning Board as a staff report at the August 20 Planning Board meeting. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT East Hill The Eastern Heights drainage improvement project includes the work completed on Park Lane and the stabilization of the drainage channel above Rte . 79 adjacent to the Ewing ' s property . This portion of the drainage channel will be stabilized with heavy rock RipRap and the final design is being completed to build the protection this fall . Additional work is being planned for this project to protect a NYSEG main gas supply line. NYSEG will be paying for the work for the gas line protection. EARTH FILL PERMITS The City of Ithaca application for the proposed demolition and construction spoil disposal site on the Landstrom lot was submitted by the Superintendent of Public Works on April 16, 2000. The Town Engineer reviewed the application and determined that it was incomplete and has responded by letter to the City with a list of additional information required to complete the application. No activity has occurred since the response to the City. TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 9/ 10/01 WATER PROJECTS Integrated Water System Final project planning and design work on improvements for the integrated water system is on hold until completion of the revised SCLIWC agreement. West Hill Water System The Town Engineer has been working with the City of Ithaca to finalize the site plan approval , which was granted on August 28 . The notice to proceed has been issued to Adhan Piping and work should be starting in September. The Engineering Staff is continuing to work on preliminary plans and an engineering report for the part of the West Hill Water System behind the Biggs complex and the Hospital . Sapsucker Woods Road Watermain The contractor for the Lab of Ornithology project has begun installation of the 12" watermain that will serve the new facility. SEWER PROJECTS Joint Sewer Agreement The SJS partners are continuing to work on the revised agreement for the Ithaca Area WasteWater Treatment Facility and jointly used interceptor sewers. Intermunicipal Sewer System The Intermunicipal sewer Committee has been continuing to work on the Draft Agreement for expanding the partnership in the sewer system. The Intermunicipal Sewer Group includes the three existing partners in the Joint Sewer Subcommittee of the City of Ithaca, The Town of Ithaca, and The Town of Dryden , plus the three potential partners which are the Village of Lansing, The Village of Cayuga Heights and the Town of Lansing. The group is also working on the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement required by NYSDEC . A public hearing for the SEQR review of the project is scheduled for September 6 . North East Sewer Improvements The Contractor has completed the Hanshaw Road sewer main contract. The Town Highway and Parks Department is completing the restoration of the site, which includes replanting trees and shrubs to plans developed with the individual property owners. West Hill Sewer System Survey Work for the replacement of the Trumansburg Road Hospital sewer line has been completed by the Engineering Interns. The Town Engineer is in the process of developing a design and construction plan for replacement of this sewer line in 2001 . WTHACA I \Engineering\reports\ER PTO109.doc Daniel R . Walker Page 2 09/05/01 " ATTACHMENT #Aienda # 1 7 Planning Director' s Report for September 10 , 2001 Town Board Meeting DEVELOPMENT REVIEW The following are actions that were considered by the Planning Board. August 7, 2001 Meeting : City of Ithaca Gateway Bridge over Route 13 : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and issued an affirmative recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposal to install a pre- fabricated steel bridge on the two existing bridge abutments on either sides of Route 13 , located along the: City and Town of Ithaca municipal boundary . The bridge will provide a future connection between the proposed Black Diamond Trail to Buttermilk Falls State Park. City of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 131 - 1 -3 and 103 -4-7 .2 and Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos . 31 -2 -3 . 1 and 38-3 -20, Residence District R-30 , New York State (DOT and State Parks), Owners ; City of Ithaca, Applicant/Agent. Summerhill Apartments Phase II — Site Modifications, Summerhill Lance. The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed modifications to the Summerhill Apartments Phase II , located on Summerhill Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62-2- 1 . 127 , Multiple Residence District. Said modifications include reducing the number of total units from 84 to 73 units, with 35 of the units being townhouse apartments instead of the previously approved garden apartments . Other modifications for the townhouses include building patios instead of stair towers and decks, and replacing some parking with detached garages . Ivar Jonson, Owner; Lawrence Fabbroni , P . E . , L . S . , Applicant/Agent. EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and Amendment to SLUD regarding Future Development, Rachel Carson Way : The Planning Board adopted its Findings Statement regarding the proposed EcoVillage at Ithaca development, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, Part 617 , for the proposed Special Land Use District (SLUD) amendirtent to be applied to the overall EcoVillage property , and the proposed development of at Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units and a common house, located off of Mecklenburg Road at Rachel Carson Way (a private drive), on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . ' s 28- 1 -26 . 2 and 28- 1 -26 . 8 , consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres . EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner/Applicant; Rod Lambert, Agent. The Planning Board also issued an affirmative recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed Special Land Use District (SLUD) amendment to be applied to the overall EcoVillage property . August 21 , 2001 Meeting : Turback Subdivision for NYS Black Diamond Trail, NYS Routes 13/34/96 : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No ' s . 35 - 1 - 8 . 1 and 35 - 1 -8 . 2 located on NYS Route' s 13 , 34, and 96, Residence District R-30 . The subdivision will create a 6 . 976 +/- acre parcel which will be retained by Turback, and 20 . 116 +/- acres which will be acquired by NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation for the future Black Diamond Trial . Michael S . Turback, Owner; NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Applicant. Ithaca College Campus Safety/General Services Building, Campus Service Road (off Coddington Road) : The Planning Board granted Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed two-story building with a 13 , 365 +/- square foot footprint located on Campus Services Road, Ithaca College, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 41 - 1 - 11 , Residence District R- 15 . The proposed building will be sited where the old composting building currently is and will house offices for campus safety on the upper level and the college ' s mail , duplicating, and printing facilities on the lower level . The proposal also includes 54 +/- parking spaces and associated sidewalks and landscaping. Ithaca College, Owner/ Applicant; HOLT Architects, P . C . , Agent. Ithaca College 213 Space Parking Lot, Main Campus Road : The Planning Board granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval and issued an affirmative recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed 213 space gravel parking lot at Ithaca College, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 42- 1 -9 . 2 , Residence District R- 15 . The parking lot will be located off an existing parking lot on Main Campus Road and will contain site lighting . Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf Landscape Architects and Planners, Agent. Cornell University - Oxley Parking Lot, NYS Route 366 : The Planning Board considered a Sketch Plan for the proposed Oxley Parking lot at Cornell University, located on NYS Route 366, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 63 - 1 -8 . 2 and City of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 31 - 1 - 1 . 2 , Residence District R-30 . The proposal includes the removal of the existing barn, development of a seasonal pedestrian trail , construction of a permanent paved 149-space parking lot, landscaping, and site lighting . Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Kimberly Martinson and Kathryn Wolf, Agents . CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS The following are accomplishments or issues that have been dealt with over the past month. SEAR Reviews for Zoning Board -oard : Three SEQR reviews for the Zoning Board were done since the August report : ( 1 ) request for a height variance to construct an accessory building with a height of 16 +/- feet ( 15 foot limit), 119 Park Lane, R- 15 Residence District, Richard Hughes, Appellant ; (2) request for a variance to install a fence greater than six feet in height along the side property lines, 318 Siena Drive, Residence District R- 15 , James Cordes, Appellant; and (3 ) request for special approval to construct a 22 ,900 square foot Campus Safety and General Services Building (and variance to permit a height of 50 feet where 36 feet is the height limit), a 4 , 160 square foot building addition 2 to the Physical Plant Shops Building, and to site a temporary modular office building on the Ithaca College campus, Danby Road, Residence District R- 15 , Ithaca College, Appellant. Codes and Ordinances Committee : The Committee cancelled the regular meeting scheduled for August 15 , 2001 , and scheduled their next meeting for September 19, 2001 to complete the review of proposed Zoning map changes and to approve a revised Zoning Ordinance text for distribution to boards and committees for review and comment. (This revised schedule is intended to provide the Attorney for the Town with sufficient time to complete the revised draft Zoning text. ) Transportation Committee : The Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee met on August 16 , 2001 . The Committee discussed a synopsis of transportation plans from other communities that had been prepared by Planning staff, problem road areas and transportation issues in the Town, and the need for further traffic speed studies . The next Committee meeting is scheduled for September 27 , 2001 at 2 : 30 p.m. Ithaca College -- Proposed South Hill Conservation Zone : A consultant agreement was finalized and signed by Nancy Ostman and Robert Wesley , consultants, and Supervisor Valentino to assist with follow-up study of the South Hill conservation zone area. A follow-up field visit will be scheduled sometime in September to confirm findings of previous studies of rare and scarce plant communities . Planning, Engineering and Zoning(PEZ) Administration and Coordination : Planning , Engineering and Zoning staff met on August 3 , 2001 to review the development database and the status of projects. The next meeting is scheduled for Friday , September 7 , 2001 at 8 : 30 a. m . 2002 Budget : Budget worksheets have been completed and submitted to the Budget Officer. Regional Sewer ]Project : Planning staff assisted with the preparation of a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance that the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation ha;; issued for the Municipal Wastewater Collection System Improvements and Intermunicipal Agreements for the Ithaca Area. Potential growth inducing impacts have been identified as an environmental issue that will be addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) . A public scoping session to obtain comments on the scope and content of the EIS is scheduled for Thursday, September 6, 2001 at 7 : 00 p .m . at the Town of Lansing Town Hall . County Reapportionment Lawsuit : Planning staff continues to provide mapping and other assistance for the lawsuit regarding the County reapportionment of election districts . 3 ► ATTACHMENT # 13 Agenda # 17e. Agenda 7 TOWN OF ITHACA REPORT OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST 2001 MONTH YEAR TO DATE CIDENCES PERMIT YEAR # OF PERMITS AMOUNT # AMOUNT AMILY ATTACHED 2001 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED 2001 1 Replace existing 290,000 11 1 ,5889144 RESIDENCES 2000 2 267,000 14 212849000 2001 0 0 2 220,000 TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES 2000 0 0 2 220,000 2001 2 38,000 15 207,282 RENOVATIONS 2000 2 10,700 6 339527 2001 0 0 1 30,000 CONVERSIONS OF USE r2000 0 0 1 51600 0 0 12 332,757 ADDITIONS TO FOOTPRINT 5 143,350 15 388,850 0 0 3 444,800 MULTIPLE- RESIDENCES 2000 0 0 6 1 ,6271000 I Retail food store 709000 1 Ithaca Airline Limo storage building 449000 2001 2 114,000 14 2,501 ,401 BUSINESS 2000 1 105000 4 560,800 2001 0 0 0 0 VSTRIAL 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0 2001 1 IC demolish home 59000 12 14,8111230 EDUCATIONAL 2000 3 831 ,636 17 4,605,808 1 Replace windows 35000 1 Repair foundation wall 63000 2 Garages ( 1 attached and I detached) 22,000 1 Recreational structure 800 1 New exterior deck 700 1 Reinforce garage roof 21900 1 Inground pool 13,500 MISCELLANEOUS 2001 8 48,900 36 230,679 CONSTRUCTION r2001 3 129500 38 2,981 , 163 TOTAL NUMBER OF 14 495,900 106 202366,293 PERMITS ISSUED 16 11275, 186 103 121706,748 TOTAL FEES 14 11210 106 199135 RECEIVED 2000 16 21280 103 177205 Date Prepared: September 5, 2001 Dani L. Holford Building/Zoning Department Secretary f 2 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED THIS MONTH - 26 1 . 108 Briarwood Drive - new two-family dwelling. ' 2. 204 Pennsylvania Avenue - new kitchen floor (section) and main electrical service line. 3 . 112 Christopher Circle - 8' x 11 ' enclosed porch. 4. 491 1 /2 Five Mile Drive - building renovation. 5 . 122 Judd Falls Road - garage addition. 6. 229 Summerhill Drive - new 8 unit multiple dwelling. 7. 222 Forest Home Drive (Forest Home Chapel) - renovation of entry hall. 8. 337 Pine Tree Road - new University Human Resources Office. 9. 110 Park Lane - basement renovation. 10. 107 Rich Road - dining room, den, and mudroom addition. 11 . Garden Apartment #25 (IC) - building renovations. 12. 1559 Slaterville Road - existing two-family residence. 13 . 177 Seven Mile Drive - new single-family modular home with attached garage. 14. 381 Pennsylvania Avenue - new four bedroom home. 15. 383 Pennsylvania Avenue - new four bedroom home. 16. 668 Coddington Road - add second floor bathroom and remodel first floor kitchen and laundry. 17. 10 John Street - building addition of living space and garage. 18. 981 Taughannock Boulevard - existing single-family home. 19. 1010 Ellis Hollow Road - Burger King restaurant - final. 20. 111 Salem Drive - existing two-family home. 21 . 117 Clover Lane - 10' x 25' carport. 22. Danby Road (IC) - renovations to Gannett Library. 23 . 111 Sycamore Drive - existing single-family home. 24. 229 Stone Quarry Road - residential building addition - temporary. 25. Pleasant Grove Road (CU "North Campus") - four tennis courts - temporary. 26. Pleasant Grove Road (CU "North Campus") - new roadway and parking lot - temporary. TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 137 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 140 INQUIRIES/COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED THIS MONTH - 5 1 . 1517 Slaterville Road - property maintenance - pending. 2. 249 Coddington Road - property maintenance - abated. 3 . 125 Snyder Hill Road - property maintenance- abated. 4. 112 Sapsucker Woods Road - property maintenance - abated. 5. 222 Sapsucker Woods Road - property maintenance - pending. From July 2001 : 1 . 605 Elmira Road - junk car- pending. From March 2001 : 1 . 370 East King Road - building code - pending. From January 2000: 1 . 213 North Tioga Street (Post Office) - building code - pending. From December 2000: 1 . 172 Calkins Road - property maintenance - pending. 3 From Mav 1995 : 1152 Danby Road - zoning and building code - legal action pending. OTAL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE. 2001 - 105 OT.AL CO�'IPLAINT. INVESTIC.A1 ED YEAR TO DATE. 2000 - 35 TOTAL FIELD VISITS THIS MONTH - 90 Uniform Building Code - 74 Local Law and Zoning Inspections - 14 Fire Safety - 2 (2 apartments [6 units]) Fire Safety Reinspections - 0 Fire/Emergency Occurrences - 0 Fire Occurrence Reinspections - 0 TOTAL FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 636 TOTAL FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 773 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS THIS MONTH - (Crafter' s Boutique Inc.) - 2 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2001 - 8 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2000 - 5 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 MEETING, 3 CASES, AGENDA ATTACHED f i 6 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, AUGUST 20, 2001 7 : 00 P. M . By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Monday, August 20, 2001 , in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P.M. , on the following matters : APPEAL of Richard Hughes, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 13 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct an accessory building yra �� e� with a height of 16 ± feet ( 15 -foot limit) at 119 Park Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56-3 - 13 . 7, Residence District R- 15 . Said structure is to be used as a children ' s playhouse. APPEAL of James Cordes, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 , Subparagraph 6 and Article XIII, Section 65 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to erect a privacy fence greater than 6 feet in height to be located along side yard property lines at 318 gcav%Aec� Siena Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 - 1 - 11 . 3 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Ordinance permits fences less than 6 feet in height to be located along property lines. APPEAL of Ithaca College, Appellant, Robert O ' Brien, HOLT Architects, Agents, request Special Approvals under Article IV, Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a 22,900 square foot Campus Safety and General Services Building, a 4, 160 square foot building addition to the Physical Plant Shops Building, and to site a temporary modular office building ps�oc.� e� on the Ithaca College campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 4 1 - 1 - 11 and 41 - 1 -30.2, Residence District R- 15 . In addition, a variance is also requested from the requirements of Article IV, Section 11 to permit the proposed Campus Safety building to have a building height of 50 feet (36-foot limit). Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 : 00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs, as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Andrew S. Frost Director of Building and Zoning 273 - 1783 Dated : August 13 , 2001 Published : August 15 , 2001 AGENDA NCB . 17f ATTACHMENT # 14 i I Town Board Meeting 9/ 10/2001 Human Resources Report for August 2001 Personnel Committee : The May minutes are attached . In August the committee discussed exercise videos and equipment , benefits for part time employees and other optional benefits for the employees . It was decided to check our insurance before moving ahead with exercise equipment and to poll the staff to see if they would use the equipment if provided . Currently , only employees who work 18 . 75 hours per week or more are eligible for paid time off, i . e . vacation , sick time , holidays . The committee discussed and agreed to recommend decreasing this minimum number to 15 hours per week . Optional employee benefits were quickly discussed and further evaluation of them will be done . Personnel — Civil Service : Joseph Slater started August 20th as the Engineering Technician I . Recruitment has begun for a part time typist to work in the Town Clerk' s office . Joy Daley , typist for Personnel Office , turned in her resignation for effective September 19 , 2001 . Security System : A test was done on the three panic buttons and indicated that only one was sending a signal . To correct this there is a need to add a second receiver closeir to the court clerk area . Doyle Security will be addressing this problem as soon as possible . Crossing Guards : Fred Noteboom and I met with the crossing guards for Warren Road to discuss scheduling and substituting for each other. Last year a highway crewman would substitute if someone could be there , but Fred explained that this is too disruptive to the workflow. There is continued concern about the speed of drivers in the school zone and drivers not stopping for the crossing guards . Dental Insurance : I was notified by our Univera representative that they plan to not carry dental insurance effective January 1 , 2002 , due to the many problems they have had with their current dental provider, NOVA Dental . I am in the process of researching other opportunities . Submitted By : Judith C . Drake , PHR Human Resources Specialist Final Final Final Town of Ithaca Personnel Committee Meeting May 23 , 2001 12 : 00 noon Members Present: Supervisor Catherine Valentino ; Councilman William Lesser; Dani Holford , Senior Typist ; Larry Salmi , Heavy Equipment Operator, Support Staff: Judith C . Drake , Human Resources Manager Others : Larry Parlett and Paul Tunison from SCLIWC . Kristie Rice , Assistant Zoning Officer and Building Inspector; Cindy Wasleff, Court Clerk ; Betty Poole , Court Clerk. Call to order: 12 : 12 p . m . Agenda Item #2 : Review of minutes of March 21 , 2001 meeting . Approved with grammatical changes by Mrs . Holford . Agenda Item #3 : Persons to be Heard Mrs . Holford stated that some employees asked about purchasing Town of Ithaca surplus equipment since it is illegal for them to use the state contract. Supervisor Valentino said that the Committee should ask Budget officer, Al Carvill about procedures for such a purchase . Mr. Carvill will be asked to attend the next meeting to discuss the suggestion . Agenda item #4 : Parking at Town Hall . Mrs . Holford raised the concern that there were circumstances when employees were blocked in when there were emergencies and the blocking employee was out of the building . She asked if a policy could be made that would give an employee access to keys of the vehicle parked behind them ? The situation arises only when the person leaves the building and does not make arrangements to leave keys . Mrs . Wasleff said that another problem is that some employees do not pull far enough forward when both spots are unoccupied and they pull in . She faces the problem when she has to come back for court . Mr. Tunison asked what the policy is for visitors when they come to Town Hall . The Committee discussed the problems of where one should park in various situations . Mr. Lesser stated that he leaves a note on his car. The Committee felt the suggestion for those visiting Town Hall to leave a note giving their name and their business here is a good one . Mrs . Drake said that she would review the parking arrangement and see if it is possible to leave spaces for persons not having an assigned parking space . 1 OF ITS ATTACHMENT # 15 agenda # 17 TOWN OF ITHACA i �ie� zi� 4 2145 NORTH TIOGA STREET , ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 HIGHWAY 273-1656 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 Network/Record Specialist Report for Town Board Meeting September 10, 2001 Web site: Scheduled to go live this week. The address will be the same, www. town . ithaca . ny . us One of the dynamic features of the site, the Feedback Form, will be sent directly to the Town Clerk's Microsoft Outlook email account where a log is automatically generated of these forms . Work on the Department pages and more pictures of the Town are slated for this month. We are currently dependent on the designer to update the site . As a part of the project' s next major steps will be installing the software at Town Hall to maintain and update the site and training staff from several departments to update sections of the site . Policy on how and what content is posted to the site is being discussed through the Records Management Advisor Board monthly meetings . �letwork: Surplus PC , printer and fax equipment has been disposed of Town employees bought 2 C and the remaining equipment was sent to the Tompkins County Auction. Respectfully submitted , Lisa B . Titti Network/ Record Specialist a �I i 1 1 ATTACHMENT # 2 Agenda # 12 : CITY OF ITHACA 310 West Green Street Ithaca, New York 14 850- 5497 4 OFFICE OF THE FIRE CHIEF Telephone : 60- 21 - 2 - 123 Fax: 60%;2 '2- 2 -93 Memorandum TO : City-Town Fire Contract Negotiations Teams Cathy Velentino Alan Cohen David Klein Joan Spielholtz Bob Romanowski Dominick Cafferillo Andy Frost I From : Brian Wilbur Date : 8/20/01 Re: Code Enforcement Relationship Description Attached please find the most recent version of the City-Town Code Enforcement Relationship Description document. This incorporates the 21 JUN 01 meeting changes . Still missing is the checklist form (page 3 . § 1I . 2) . As I will be on vacation the last week of August, I will get a fresh MOU prepared this week to extend the agreement until 31 OCT 01 . Hopefully this will be enough time to finalize negotiations and prepare final copies of the successor agreement and other pertinent materials . We are prepared to draft a new agreement as soon as proposed changes are made available to work with . If there is anything else we can do to facilitate this, please let me know. Thanks. 1 "An. Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification . " ►• CITY AND TOWN IOF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION Items Struclkout are deleted . Items underlined are new . Subscript Subscript dates indicate the date the change was made . I . Overview It is recognized and agreed that shared involvement in code enforcement is mutually beneficial to the residents of the Town of Ithaca , Ithaca Fire Department personnel , and the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department . More specifically, the safety of Ithaca fire fighters is directly affected by the level of compliance achieved through the combined efforts of the code enforcement system . The Ithaca Fire Department has specific and implied responsibilities for code enforcement within the City of Ithaca , and has an onIgoing relationship with the City of Ithaca Building Department to facilitate these responsibilities . It is desired to develop a similar series of relationships with the Town of Ithaca . However. the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Officer will be the authority having_jurisdiction in all matters relating to codes enforcement within the Town of Ithaca . I " JUN 07 I II . Site and Plot 07 cur, o, Plan Review I Fire Department Access Standards AIIthough the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code authorizes that fire lanes be established by the Code Enforcement Official , and that buildings subject to the code be accessible to local fire department apparatus , it does not stipulate what those lanes should be , nor how the access shall be provided . The Ithaca Fire Department has established a "Fire Department Access Standard" which stipulates various aspects relating to fire department access . The Town of Ithaca agrees to adopt a local regulation requiring compliance with the provisions of this standard , under the provisions of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code , and compliance with which shall serve as evidence of compliance with the state code regarding access . 8 / 20 / 01 page 1 CITY AND TOWN Of= ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Ithaca Fire Department shall submit for review and approval by the Town of Ithaca any changes proposed to the Fire Department Access Standard prior to such changes taking effect . Site and Pl (,Zt 07 JUN o, Plan Approvals 1 . For purposes of this part. "site Ip an approvals if refer to the pEocess used by the Planning Board to evaluate a project according to criteria administered by that Board . " Plot Plan Approvals" refer to reviews of plans submitted for compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Buildina Code by the Town Building and Zoning Inspector, 07 JUN 01 Thn r this review has Pot hQQA r ia_7ar_oorl th ;; t ;; ccrrrino oppQrt61nItV for timely rwrinw of nnr+nin Aitn nl •+ nc rm [; A of w 'W ' ' atinn fire rlonohmnn+ nnnnnrnc rti a in mr ll a hnnnfiniol for III ;; r+ inc 7 n rnr n4 shall be provid- ed to the Fire DepaAmeRt for review Thn TQ1AAA Qf Ith Ga agrees to stipulate that site plaps fgr the fQ 1QWiRq PFq r Thn DGPaF R9At-th .;; t—haye+ net -heen I Inln6o c n 'fi III rnvidQd fnr eunh rnyrnl nr rlic � rnrr-+ 1 hr, ll ho rntr rrnnrl to + hn Code f f Gnfnrnnmont (� ffinnr rerithin } on r♦ �+ of rnnni +U . 07 JUN 01 8 / 20 / 01 page 2 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION 2 .1 Site plans submitted as required ed by Town law or ordinance for review by the Town Planning Deaaat=Board 1 ,uN 01 . shall be evaluated according to the checklist form to be developed 1 , , , 01 and attached as addendum to this agreement If such evaluation indicates that the plans must be provided to the fire department for review of fire department issues . the Town shall cause a copy of such plans to be delivered to the fire department , - The Town agrees that no project meeting the above criteria shall receive final site Ian approval until after such referral has been made . 07 JUN 01 i Building Code Enforcement i I Building Permits the approval of p As of the pFOPGraed WQFk by the , i i 6 JUN 01 agrees to stipulate that applications for building permits for 1 Tl�he Town of Ithaca a p pp 9 P 9 the following activities shall be referred for fire department review : Commercial or institutional structures (C occupancies ) ; multiple family dwellings (B occupancies) ; permits which include fire protective systems , including , but not limited to , fire sprinklers , fire suppression , and fire detection systems . 2 The City of Ithaca agrees that plan 07 JUN 01 reviews will be conducted in a timely manner and approvals ^ ° r+ i4ir a4innc 06 JUN 01 07 JUN 01 will not be 8 / 20 / 01 page 3 r CITY AND TOWN Of= ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION unreasonably withheld . It is recognized that resource constraints may result in some reviews not being completed in a reasonable period by the fire department In those cases . the Town Building and Zoning Inspector may contact the fire department to determine whether or not the review is complete . If it is not . the Building Inspector may proceed without receiving comment . The fire department may still submit such comment after their review is complete . but the Building Inspector is not obligated to accommodate changes requested as a result . 07 JUN 01 The Town of Ithaca agrees that the Ithaca Fire Department shall be afforded the opportunity to observe and approve all acceptance testing of fire protective systems,., apd that All such systems 07 JUN o1approval r° i4 06 JUN 01 07 JUN 01 must be properly certified 07 JUN 01 ved prior to any Li 07 JUN 01certificate of occupancy or compliance being issued for the affected property . 4 . In all cases , final approval shall be by . and in the name of . the Town of Ithaca. 06 JUN 01 Variance and Appeal Petitions ThE! rules and regulations enacted for the administration and enforcement of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code include provisions for persons to petition for a variance from the strict interpretation of that code , or to appeal the decision of a local code enforcement official . At such time as the hearing on such petition is heard , the local agencies having jurisdiction or which would be affected by such a variance are provided the opportunity to comment on the petition . ThE! petition form includes the opportunity to indicate the local fire department affording protection , and the name of the local fire code enforcement officer . The Town of Ithaca agrees that any petition for a variance shall include the Ithaca Fire Department and its fire marshall as agencies/persons to be notified of the petition . 8 / 20 / 01 page 4 CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Town of Ithaca agrees that , upon request of the Fire Department , the Town Building and Zoning Department and the Ithaca Fire Department will confer on the matter at hand prior to the variance/appeals hearing . The purpose of the conference will be to achieve a common understanding of the issue (s) involved , and of the appropriate position to take with regard to the petition . It is agreed that there will be times when the parties diverge in their professional opinions and presentation of such differing opinions may occur. JaAa cases before the New York State Board of Review . the decision of the Board of Review is binding on all ap rties . os cur, o, IV . Fire Prevention Code Enforcement Fire Safely Inspections The Building and Zoning Department of the Town of Ithaca has Fg6itipely does by law conducted oe cur, o, fire safety inspections in certain occupancies in the Town of Ithaca . The department has provided the Ithaca Fire Department with copies of all fire safety inspections which have been done since 1 19 89a. l It is agreed that , whenever possible , joint inspections of high- risk occupancies shall be conducted by the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department and the Ithaca Fire Department . High risk occupancies are those with a high -hazard or risk classification (e & NYS FP&BC classification of 3 . 3 . 4 . 3 . 5 . 3 . and 6 . 2 . or 6 . 3 . os JUN o, i Evacuation Plan Approvals Chapter C of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code requires the management of any building or facility , other than one- or two -family dwellings , or B1 dwellings three stories or less in height , shall in writing develop evacuation procedures for each building in their management . It further requires review and approval of such plans by the code enforcement official . 8 / 20 / 01 page 5 CITY AND TOWN OF= ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION Evacuation plans should be coordinated with the actions the fire department would take in responding to a fire or emergency at that particular building or facility . To facilitate this , the Town of Ithaca agrees that evacuation plans must be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy or compliance. Outdoor Fires By state and local law , outdoor fires are generally prohibited within City limits , and within 1 /8 mile of City limits . A permit is required prior to any outdoor burning activity . Certain outdoor fires are currently permitted within the Town of Ithaca , provided that the code enforcement official and the fire department are notified in advance of such activity . Enforcement of state and local laws related to open burning in the Town has been performed by the Building and Zoning Department . The Town of Ithaca agrees that the Ithaca Fire Department will serve as the clearinghouse for open burning notifications in the Town of Ithaca. tOY)7 c1c ✓ The Town of Ithaca agrees to pursue a local law os JUN o, that would require a permit be received prior to any open burning in the Town of Ithaca . V . Local Laws The Gity ni "Pire ++ Q4dY a 11 }V'- a f4D;- k rr tl r aspr hnni' r 8 / 20 / 01 page 6 i CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION 13 its ; ill mmable or neml„ tetihle liquid 4 Permits ; netmr„+rt.,,v-rn �+ reaaav e,v+v ,rgv +a .ani, Installatlen er removal . iirn limi4c • I FRataFials , 69&t reneyer - 1i Q alarm and datQgtion systems , QPqFatiQA 07 JUN 01 I Coordination of Codes r, sw9gested that t The 06 JUN OICity and the Town of Ithaca agree to eegage-in Commit to 07 JUN 01a process to both revise the City fire prevention code , i o.4 an6adopt the revised code , in whole or in part , as Town law , thereby Cow making consistent the rules and regulations regarding fire safety in the I City and Town of Ithaca . 21 This process will also include an effort to coordinate implementation of the new New York State Fire Prevention and Building Code ( e . a . International Code with NYS Enhancements) . 07 JUN 01 VI . Miscellaneous Items I Street numbers IIhe fire department has assumed responsibility for assigning street numbers within the City of Ithaca . The Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department has discharged this responsibility for the Town . Given the nature of the use of these numbers , emergency services perspective is useful and has been sought by the Town as various situation arise . • 8 / 20 / 01 page 7 CITY AND TOWN OF: ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT.. . DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION The Town agrees to continue to work with the fire department on the assignment and coordination of street numbers as has been the practice , 07 JUN 01 Go6 �A& 1 Inr1 320% Qt thQ fiFQ OXG9ptiORSs thQ It tho TF. o 6 D rnnncol Usingf nnv 8 / 20 / 01 page 8 i CITY AND TOWN OF ITHACA FIRE CONTRACT r DISCUSSIONS DRAFT CODE ENFORCEMENT RELATIONSHIP DESCRIPTION 07 JUN 01 : (material to be introduced for discussion into main agreement.) I I I l II I i I I page 9 8 / 20 / 01 I ATTACHMENT # 3 Eco-Village SLUD hearing — Talking Points History: When the first neighborhood of EVI was brought before the Town in 1994 , SEQR was segmented, and the development was approved without the benefit of a GEIS review . At that time the Town Board had a number of concerns about development of the site. These included: • the fragmentation of the open space (the creation of the "donut effect ') • distance to the school bus • distance to the transit stop (EVI confirms low ridership because of this distance) • distance to provide emergency services • extension of water and sewer infrastructure • concern that the Town might need to take over the private access road In response to these and other concerns , the Town Board voted to limit the length of the access road to 3 ,000 feet. The current EVI proposal chooses to ignore this limit. The proposed plan extends the existing 2, 800 foot access road "with a 585 foot spur road" plus an unspecified length of "internal loop road within the neighborhood." The length of the internal road to the pond hydrant is about 350 feet according to the scale on the map . Thus the road is extended about 735 feet beyond the 3 ,000 foot maximum set when the developer first applied for a SLUD to commence development. This is about a 25 % increase . These extensions to the road provide the primary access to the second neighborhood. (Source : page 6 of the GEIS version 7/20/02) The Planning Board stated at their August 2001 meeting they would defer to the Town Board on deciding whether it is acceptable to exceed the 3 ,000 foot limit as proposed. Some Consequences of the EVI proposal that affect the Town : • Town may need to take over the road, for reasons discussed by the Town in 1994 • Water for fire protection • According to the GEIS : the Fire Department suggests a pressurized hydrant system for the future development. To accomplish this on EVI property would require a tank elevated 110 feet and sized to supply 480,000 gallons over a 4 hour period (2 ,000 gallons per minute) . The alternative is a ground tank located on terrain that is 70 feet higher in elevation than available on Eco- Village land. According to the USGS topographic map , the closest land with the required 1 ,210 foot elevation is one mile west of EVI — across the upper reaches of Coy Glen , just 2,000 east of Sheffield Road. Running extensive piping from this suggested ground tank — assuming EVI could purchase the site for the ground tank -- would be expensive and problematic and have its own set of environmental impacts . The elevated tank seems more likely . This would have significant growth inducing impacts — providing land to the west of EVI with public water. It would also have visual impacts . Comments of Martha Armstrong, RA AICP, 766 Elm Street Extension, September 10, 2001 page 1 • Domestic water: • According to the GEIS : the current pump system will not be able to handle the full build out. The proposed solution is a 110 foot high tank with a 70,000 gallon capacity — or a land based tank. Comments above for the fire tank apply to this proposed tank as well . (Source for the water tower information : page 22 of the GEIS originally submitted May 7 , 2001 ) What are the Alternatives • My alternative E, shows building some of the clusters on the 40 acre field at the intersection of Mecklenberg and West Haven Roads . West Haven Road has public water and hydrants . Also the lower elevation could be served with a ground tank located on EVI land . • EVI ' s proposal locates the development near the highest point of the 170 acre site . Since almost the entire site is lower than their chosen development area, there may be a number of alternative development sites that could be served by a ground tank located on EVI land. In closing : I request: that the Town Board not renege on the road length limitation which affords some protection to the fiscal and planning interests of the Town . Comments of Martha Armstrong, RA AICP, 766 Elm Street Extension, September 10, 2001 page 2 a cm of .���� • TOWN tYX ITMCA - 771 4i ; e _ U s r.Z3 � -, a Y r$f,Y- -•b: A �..a__ .� - w...awz�--.-..��}4 r O i•' �� i� N nea -.....0 r.vr. a� .� ? w.i ; o. Q c -• _. .. . - w - 'I CJ Z 0 VU G) ft$ VJ CCS CI3 i R z e 4q� Z i i < < a x T c3 ❑ ct3 Lk d 3 ` Ga7 cd cC G� wo "L3 iii i CU tz iO • ` T r� 0 � y � • �! a (W O Y . id � r� � q`Ic r..1 con (L) cn Y Q i..l O _ OR ,�< yLLV cz cz COO . .may O � L • « /] a . C3 Q rr�-y�I a 0•1 I �. •f �R D ... ' ... ... Z.� - S cz O Fn -4 O y .? o x : N i.S 0 .S'.r c -p" ;y l }F7 '_< N Ri �" + ' F-+ _ " ? :YAK. - i1 a, 3 y: _ G3 -. a l .n•Y • '• 'Y..0 • .1-S , ,• • HY 'Q C ifill� Yf r o t7 ;a , a� a ? ' •� 9 M.29 P4 cl) 0 TDWV OF fTHAC% ° c •� wrma.^. mc; unn•x••. +:NC m TOWN OF [VRF1D _ 7 i OF ITHACA . -' ITHAr'A ) . TOWN N >• ; i e �d b r— N 0 T r 1r cpl U I W 'C} ' yi:,•1� Q) Yr+ ! t VC) F�-I , U . •j •� :ti s o c cn n o a o c o G r ' �, b.Q � V • O _E dN f/1 (V • 1 fi .`�:�'"tr a� tw- n' ' ...1 _ C, .. A' ° Rn Y? G .\ n n �- '` O O .p..t .•-1 W 7 v U 3 .� I .nV . .. . •J y L CS . .-. CS CZ O CV U vi _ cS N sc. Yrs . 1� " sue. .- I O C14 > P15 ,v : r, z 'r Fddd* i•-I .s,---y! �i •r�•� �. _ Q-I O •--' �' Z �s ' Q. V �F-1 ,y I{fl��'�-- x2R • � w�\ 3 � ars7 � _c` � didedddl vo nti p O FOX i .Y I — - I cs R a .. , . ._.- ._ ... ._ .. ... O O s T7 ' O . ,O.., �..,. 9 1 ' a x O a e .tfs ; ; re ^O Y+ Qn a i n111iii V h r x V X ; / dd- ^'YpC � " y E :r l = ! i A A G yY O � Y Q : . . , .. N Vi UZI- ddF ,� dN Y ;"- Nd : , cn cn UP) Y _ il O i /••� clin cn i..l b y . 7 rte—! CAS O _ 1 Y .{ x YP w4-� ,--' x .. 2Y �i - �- - X . �`% V] •i'ar Lam. iif �! �31 cpz � i : �• . �Y �= 01 cS dd N ; : n O too . ^•1 . ,dj + �' + Xi l ZY ^, ^9 • .'Y. - Jam! Y � f� �� Y [ jJl �I :. FdddF ,,.r dd, fit diddddi r•-i 1-1 . O • —, i 1 'F i, � ZY: jam_ ' � O V, u C/) I - x , .: Q : ' = x - x f—I rn � IF bq bA U ^ ' a x � = 4111 s S 1 1 TOWN OF ir: LON'� 7F EV'IIEI.0 E.. ^ i i 4 3 1 N P Gt31 � ''; I I � t I' ' GI 1 I G . • 6 -5-7--- I y , ._.._i �: , -_ -_ - ii=i Gao.t.1N ?r/ : 1� . A.Rr1 �j'Fohlta Ole LI 1 I f l l l 1i eLa •�/ILi.PlaO�CITE __ " . � I1 I r- - / ' f}J 1 Ir 3� I ' I I I I I I A, M eS. PS-Nl-t 6UP TCq, I-IIUER M.N bu PPUGD 1 an SA lip � TaHftJ OP IfHPC.A. ,,•i I � , / � � � I � � � � I I � I 1 I I 1 1 boa' l 11' I I j J $ :•,� I !. I � rl'�� 1 �� I i nz• \ ` _ I I I Iv , u a > - - - I VL _ NN ,i i III I 1 � __ .... Em e / � —' _ ` \ \ � _ / . �- ` � ' ^ -/\ \ _\ice coq° •fix i e ° I I I Il / I i i 1a z � i � 91 b a 4 I I IMF:. - - - _ _ _ �-���•-- � 1-� I r �lb'1 � �. leog J � to a / ( � ;tip, ' M4 �o7,/d — — -- ._ _ /" IQL !!! I / tos a ELM r i>� Id Yom N As al In I T ccc f M I I 1 l l I ill It { y �'' it 4A� eco .Jwe lL� CoITE I I I/ I I i UN-a.v,s esrlrwMo rlbrt I I / / /' L I rG• thlu,&R FLhri SuPPWGO I { y rr+ mi h ov rrH I I I 47 � r.i 130 - N tt RL ;-lW �±l ro jF - - , J trio 0/ trio CPP 107S, /060 � � z —, - -t--- Ov I��il l RO TE \; 9� I twow 20 Eco-Village Site Plan n � Alternative C N. � Drawn By Martha Armstrong June 1 , 2001 "" \ _ ® r6 a IIF 1 pl< < . . . 0 4 � cloo 1 I _�r L. v NNW FN N. Ci� I L i "N"o- Ex TIN s / \ Ex TIN > 1 ? FARM ; N D �I �-i"� == NNNN " � `NN D UPIPER - - � > �> I i NN n _III O 47 , \ NN IN u F, A I .4 ter p —� /J1 L � ..._ . I EXISTING 14ST ' ` � - ' NEIGHBORHOOD 1I b� NN 1 \ I ' i TERSHE�I WATERSHED C � . � R t , I � Q IN ,z 3 i . y }y ;; o s / E k1SlI ; i 1 EI ILLAGE FOND ? �-`% j _ ry � ,v ^r-•r L .rwv-..w-r-riv. !aY • M =-r0 �!• r/ KI Gam / • • • • T ti�-� 1 • f J . p . Fol FF FIN 4 v' \ r \� •. �/- / J J \'ti \ ^J ^-l..r' lam"'•-r / I !/ .+ r NN • r ,sJ - rl � Tom ) - - " f _ r f �`l . J N An NON A E/T NNE Y s Eco-Village Site Plan ; , Y , S . Alternative D r11 ♦ � ` �t. — '� � y �r� I u �Drawn By Martha Armstrong sj - JJ _ � June 1 , 20011 visa ( II `` d. P) 1 RECOMMENDED ACTION Approve up to 150 units with up to 110 in the center of the site and up to 70 in the northeast ! r `- corner near Route 79 and West Haven Road . I�� � ) uI ; � It 111 t 0III III. 1 ATERSHED' EX STING 500 (/� ? FARM # POND D ' UPID PE ' k III t EXISTING ^ 1SIT 1` , -t- � =� ~ ' NEIGHBORHOOD r ' WATERSHED 10 ' 1 TERSHE I , ♦ ; 3 I ► z � � 0/ EkiSTi } I / < EC IL E FOND J / 1 O I VJ `• Y/ ` r J I I • .. /} / U � ET I,E 70 Do ATTACHMENT # 4 FINDINGS STATEMENT TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD EcoVillage Second Neighborhood and Amendment of Special Land Use District September 10, 2001 Pursuant to Article 8 , the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617 , the Town of Ithaca Town Board, as an Involved Agency, makes the following Findings . Name of Action : EcoVillage at Ithaca Second Neighborhood Group and Amendment of Special Land Use District Project No . : 9802266 Description of Proposed Action : Amendment of Special Land Use District (SLUD) No . 8 to be applied to the overall EcoVillage property (except for the R- 15 portion along West Haven Road) for the proposed development of a Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units and a common house, as well as development of future neighborhoods , located off of Mecklenburg Road (State Route 79) at Rachel Carson Way (a private drive) , on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No ' s . 28 - 1 -26 . 2 and 28 - 1 -26 . 8 , consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres . EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner/Applicant ; Rod Lambert, Agent. Site plan approval and Subdivision approval are being considered by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the proposed Second Neighborhood Group . Location : 200 Rachel Carson Way (off Mecklenburg Road/Route 79) , Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, NY . Agency Jurisdiction : Town of Ithaca Town Board is an Involved Agency and is responsible for amendment of Special Land Use District (SLUD) No . 8 and rezoning of the EcoVillage property to the amended SLUD . Town of Ithaca Planning Board is Lead Agency and is responsible for Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval . Date Final EIS Filed : July 18 , 2001 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 I. INTRODUCTION A . Compliance with State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA ) This document is a Findings Statement prepared pursuant to and as required by 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 11 . It pertains to the proposed development of a Second Neighborhood Group consisting of 30 +/- dwelling units at the EcoVillage property, as well as future development on the remainder of that property. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is the Lead Agency and is responsible for Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval , The Town of Ithaca Town Board is an Involved Agency and is responsible for the enactment of art amendment of Special Land Use District No . 8 . This Findings Statement is based upon the facts and conclusions in the combined Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS ) for the Second Neighborhood Group and the Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS ) for EcoVillage at Ithaca (Submitted April 3 , 2001 ) , and the Errata and Additions Submitted May 7 , 2001 , all accepted as complete by the Town of Ithaca Planning, Board on May 15 , 2001 , the public hearing and comments received in connection with the above-referenced documents , and the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FELS — submitted July 3 , 2001 , and revised July 20, 2001 ) accepted by the Planning Board on July 17 , 2001 . This Findings Statement demonstrates that the Town of Ithaca Town Board, as an Involved Agency, has complied with all of the applicable procedural requirements of Part 617 in reviewing this matter. This Findings Statement also demonstrates that the Town Board has given due consideration to the above-referenced documents prepared in conjunction with this action . Further, this Findings Statement contains the facts and conclusions in the DEIS/GEIS and FEIS relied upon by the Town Board to support future decisions related to these documents . B. Potential Environmental Impacts Leading to Preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Potential site specific impacts were identified in the Final Scope document, accepted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on April 6 , 1999 , relating to the proposed Second Neighborhood Group, as well as cumulative impacts associated with the amendment of Special Land Use District No . 8 and future development potential of the overall EcoVillage property, including the following : • Traffic and Transportation : Size , capacity and condition ol� the existing transportation systems (i . e . , highway capacity, intersection level -of-service, safety, pedestrian access) ; demands on public transportation facilities and services . • Stormwa.ter Management : Increased downstream sediment deposition during construction ; degradation of surface water from roads and parking facilities ; increasing rates of runoff and erosive velocities in downstream channels ; 2 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 exceeding capacity or altering the function of existing stormwat:er management facilities ; watershed shifting resulting from landform changes . • Community Services : Capacity of municipal water and sewer systems ; greater demand on emergency services ; adequacy of school systems to accommodate anticipated school- age children . • Community Character: Compatibility with the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan and any specific plans , such as recreation and open space , that affect this area; compatibility with and relationship to existing development in this part of the urban area; nature and significance of the visual impact of the proposed development on the surrounding neighborhood , on West Hill and the community at large ; anticipated impact of the proposed development on future land use patterns in this part of the Ithaca Urban Area ; extent of loss of identified archeological or historic resources on the site . • Natural Resources : Nature and significance of the development impact on the Coy Glen Natural Area and other identified unique or sensitive areas in the vicinity; loss or modification of existing wetlands , if any ; nature and significance of the impact of the development on wildlife habitat and on endangered or threatened plant and wildlife species ; irretrievable loss of viable agricultural land in County Agricultural District No . 2 . The Town Board is considering the proposed amendment to Special Land Use District No . 8 and its application to the overall EcoVillage property (except for the remaining R- 15 Residence District portion along West Haven Road) . The Town Board is the agency responsible for approving the zoning amendment , and the EIS has considered the environmental aspects of the proposed zoning amendment . II. Environmental Impacts A . Traffic and Transportation 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The traffic evaluation studied traffic volumes projected from the full build-out of EcoVillage and the resulting impact on Route 79 and nearby intersections . Most of the intersections included in the study currently operate at acceptable Levels of Service (LOS "B " or better) . The study documented that no change in LOS is anticipated under background or :full development conditions for the following intersections : Mecklenburg Rd ./Rachel Carson Way ; Mecklenburg Rd ./West Haven Rd . ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Warren Place ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Oakwood Lane ; Mecklenburg Rd ./Campbell Drive (operates at LOS "C" at pre- and post-development conditions ) ; and West Haven Rd ./Elm St. The eastbound Hopkins Road approach to Route 96 currently operates at LOS `B" . In the background growth projection , this LOS degrades to "F" , with minor additional delays with the addition of projected full EcoVillage development traffic . Northbound traffic 3 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 exiting Floral Avenue to Hector Street currently experiences long delays and LOS "F" conditions during the AM peak hour. The proposed development will not add to this movement during the AM peak hour. The PM peak hour LOS declines from "C" to "D" with background and full development conditions — the increase in delay is 9 . 3 seconds per vehicle . This is not considered to be a significant additional delay. Signalization of the intersection would improve operations , however, the traffic study indicates that the intersection is riot likely to meet warrants for Signalization . Therefore, no mitigation is recommended for this intersection . The analysis of traffic impact on neighborhood streets indicates that the EcoVillage development is not expected to have a significant adverse impact on neighborhood roadways , including Campbell Avenue , Oakwood Lane , Warren Place, and West Haven Road . Full build-out of the EcoVillage development is not anticipated to have a significant adverse affect on traffic operations in the study area . Therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended or proposed. Capacity and ridership on the Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) buses is not considered to be an issue . TCAT indicates that the addition of more riders from EcoVillage may actually have a positive affect on this particular bus route . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to traffic or transportation are anticipated . B. Stormwater Management 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation A general drainage study, entitled Final Drainage Study for EcoVillage CoHousing Cooperative (6/ 16/95) was conducted for the overall EcoVillage property, and is included in the EIS . A. site specific stormwater management study examining the potential impacts of the Second Neighborhood development is included in the Errata and Additions Submitted May 7 , 2001 . Development of the Second Neighborhood will result in a net increase of approximately 1 . 5 acres of impervious surface . To mitigate the effects of increased runoff, the applicant proposes to modify the existing pond outlet structure and embankment height to increase the detention capacity of the pond . Runoff from the Second Neighborhood area will be channeled through dry swales and storm pipes into the pond . A concrete-lined sluice leading from the weir will convey flows over the pond embankment and into the downstream stone-lined ditch . The stormwater management facilities will provide on- site detention to maintain the peak rates of runoff equal to or less than the peak rates for 4 Findings Stateme nt — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 existing conditions during the 2 , 10 , and 100-year storm events . Controls on the pond outlet will reduce the rates of overland flow to the Elm Street Extension , and will result in minimal impacts on downstream properties , including Longhouse Cooperative and the Coy Glen natural area. Water quality control measures will be put in place during construction to minimize impacts of sedimentation and erosion . Temporary silt traps at the locations of the proposed dry swales will capture runoff from the construction site and help to filter silt . Silt fencing will also be installed along the perimeter of the site for areas not draining to the silt traps . Permanent water quality control measures are also incorporated in the Second Neighborhood plans . Runoff from the parking lots and the northern half of the Second Neighborhood will be channeled through a dry swale , which will treat the "first- flush" volume of runoff, and aid in removing sediment and common pollutants found in runoff from developed areas . The vegetated overland flow route downstream of the southern half of the Second Neighborhood is considered sufficient to treat the runoff from the rooftops of structures and from paths in that area. Runoff from this area will flow across lawn and existing meadow , where filtration , sedimentation and biological removal of sediment and pollutants will occur, before entering the pond . Based on the implementation of the above-described measures , no adverse impacts on water quality are anticipated. The Final Drainage Study for EcoVillage CoHousiug Cooperative (6/ 16/95 ) describes the overall drainage characteristics of the EcoVillage site and surrounding watersheds . The DEIS indicates that peak runoff flows from future neighborhoods can be controlled by additional viet ponds or constructed wetlands . However, no specific details for stormwater management for future development beyond the Second Neighborhood is described . The Planning Board , as Lead Agency, has indicated in their Findings Statement that such details will be required in conjunction with review and approval of any future development on the EcoVillage property . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts regarding downstream flooding , peak rates of runoff, or water quality are anticipated , with the incorporation of the stormwater management measures described above and in the EIS documents . C. Community Services 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Water: The EIS and supporting documentation indicates that supplying water to the Second Neighborhood Group will have no significant impact on the Town water system . Water will be delivered by the existing booster pump station and 4-inch transmission main . Additional pressure storage tanks will be provided in the Second Neighborhood 5 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 area. Water for fire protection will come from the pond . Dry hydrants installed along the perimeter of the pond will serve as connections for fire department pumper trucks . A new hydrant will be placed on the west side of the pond , and will be accessible to emergency vehicles from a stabilized walkway/emergency access way. A dedicated fire water supply main will be constructed connecting the new pond dry hydrant to additional fire hydrants in the core of the Second Neighborhood . The fire department can pressurize the fire water supply main and utilize the fire hydrants in a traditional manner. This approach has been recommended by the Ithaca Fire Department (IFD) . The EIS indicates that supplying water to future neighborhoods may present operational difficulties for the existing booster pump station . Several alternatives for future water supply are discussed in the EIS , including the possibility of altering the existing booster pump station , or providing either an elevated or ground tank, but no details are provided, and no proposals are being considered at this time . The Town of Ithaca is exploring alternate locations for a new West Hill water tank to improve flows and pressure in the existing West Hill water system, but this may not be at a sufficient elevation to serve the EcoVillage property. The EIS indicates that if a new water service area is not able to accommodate fire service needs at EcoVillage, future neighborhood plans will incorporate additional ponds and dry hydrant systems . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that any additional approvals of future neighborhood plans will have to consider the feasibility and adequacy of fire water service on the EcoVillage property. The Town Board concurs . Sewer: A new sanitary sewer main will be extended from the existing main that services the First Residents Group . The capacity of the main , downstream facilities , and the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant are sufficient to accommodate the waste loads that would be generated from all EcoVillage neighborhoods without expansion or modification . Emergency Medical and Police Services : The EIS adequately documents that full development of all of the potential EcoVillage neighborhoods will not have a significant impact on the provision of emergency medical or police services . Fire Services : In addition to water supply for fire service described above, the proposed site plan for the Second Neighborhood Group addresses additional IFD concerns . The plan includes a system of stabilized paths that can accommodate the weight and width of emergency vehicles . Turning radii have been designed to accommodate fire vehicles . The path system. will allow fire and other emergency vehicles to access the neighborhood, as well as provide a pedestrian walkway system . Schools : The EIS estimates that an additional 16 students from the Second Neighborhood Group could attend Ithaca City School District (ICSD) schools (based on an existing 16 students attending Ithaca schools from the First Residents Group) , and that up to an additional 48 students could attend ICSD schools if all future EcoVillage neighborhoods are built . Although some ICSD schools are experiencing shortages of space, the impact of additional school age children from the EcoVillage development is not considered 6 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 significant . The impacts will occur over time and over a number of different ICSD schools . Adequacy of classroom space is likely to be an issue regardless of whether or not the EcoVillage development occurs . In addition , the EIS estimates that up to one- third of the families moving to EcoVillage will come from the Ithaca area and would have been sending their children to ICSD schools anyway. No additional mitigation measures relating to community services are proposed. 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts on community services are anticipated . In particular, adequate; water and fire service can be provided for the Second Neighborhood Group . The Planning Board is requiring that the final site plan should be reviewed by the IFD prior to Planning Board approval to ensure that all details have been adequately addressed . The Planning Board is also requiring that further planning and documentation for these services for future neighborhoods will have to be provided prior to any further approvals by the Planning Board for future neighborhoods on the EcoVillage property. D. Community Character and Visual Resources 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation The EcoVillage development is consistent with many of the goals stated in the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan (Sept. 1993 ) , particularly as they relate to the provision of diverse and affordable places for people to live and the preservation of significant areas of open space . Although the Anticipated Land Use Patterns map in the Comprehensive Plan designates the EcoVillage site as "Agricultural " , the site is currently zoned R-30 Residence , and is on the edge of the area planned for "Suburban Residential" development on the Land Use Patterns map . The concept of clustering the developed neighborhoods on a relatively small portion of the site , and preserving the remaining portions of the site for agricultural use and as natural areas is entirely consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan . The proposed EcoVillage development, including the Second Neighborhood Group and future neighborhoods , is compatible with surrounding land uses and the character of the West Hill area, which contains a mix of low density residential development, agriculture and other open space . The proposed development is compatible with anticipated land use patterns in the area, and is not expected to have significant growth inducing impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed total number of dwelling units at EcoVillage (up to 150) is equivalent to what could be built under the current R - 30 zoning . Water and sewer mains have been extended from the Town ' s system through EcoVillage property and are not anticipated to serve other properties or to promote growth in the area. Based on the 7 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 above , and the information provided in the EIS , there are no significant impacts on existing or future land use anticipated . The EIS and related documents include a comprehensive visual impact assessment in regard to the Second Neighborhood Group . Key areas of potential visual impact that were evaluated in the assessment include views from Route 79 , Elm Street Extension , Longhouse Cooperative , and selected areas on East Hill and South Hill . The assessment demonstrates that the Second Neighborhood Group will not be visible from Route 79 and only minimally visible from Elm Street Extension with occasional glimpses through existing trees . The Second Neighborhood will be seasonably visible from some of the developed portion of Longhouse Cooperative . The Second Neighborhood Group will be visible from an area at the northeast edge of the Longhouse property along a trail that is used by both Longhouse and EcoVillage residents . This view will be impacted by the addition of the Second Neighborhood Group . To help reduce this impact, the Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that it will be important for the materials and colors of the buildings , including roofs , to be neutral in color (e . g . , earth tones) to help blend with the landscape . The assessment of distant views from East Hill and South Hill indicate that the First Residents Group buildings are visible from a number of viewing points because of the open character of the EcoVillage fields . The Second Neighborhood Group will similarly be visible from these viewing locations . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that the red color of the roofs in the First Residents Group creates a sharp contrast to the surrounding open space in this viewshed, especially during seasons when there is snow cover on the ground and no foliage on trees . The Town Board concurs . It is anticipated that the Second Neighborhood Group will have a similar impact on these distant views , and that to mitigate this impact, the buildings and roofs should be neutral in color (e . g . , earth tones) to help blend the buildings with the surrounding landscape . The Planning Board has indicated in their Findings Statement that they will include this requirement as a condition of site: plan approval . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives or existing and future land use on the West Hill area are anticipated . Visual impacts of the Second Neighborhood Group on the northeast edge of the Longhouse property and on views from East Hill and South Hill can be mitigated by ensuring that materials and colors of the buildings blend with the surrounding landscape as described above . E. Natural and Cultural Resources 1 . Facts and Proposed Mitigation 8 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 Unique Natural Areas : EcoVillage will be permanently setting aside approximately 30 acres as a natural buffer between its most westerly residential development (the Second Neighborhood) and the Coy Glen Unique Natural Area (UNA) . The proposed amendment to Special Land Use District No . 8 includes provisions to ensure the protection of this natural buffer area . There is expected to be a small but gradual increase in pedestrian traffic in the Coy Glen as EcoVillage and the surrounding residential community grows . The Coy Glen Critical Environmental Area is found in the steepest , most remote area of Coy Glen . Pedestrian traffic in the Critical Environmental Area is low now , and is not expected to grow significantly as a result of the EcoVillage development. `norm water from the EcoVillage site both during and after construction will be directed toward the existing pond and is not anticipated to impact the Coy Glen UNA . Visual impacts on the Coy Glen UNA are expected to be minimal as EcoVillage ' s residential areas, will not be visible from trails in Coy Glen . Vegetation : According to the EIS , no endangered , threatened or rare plant species are known to exist on the EcoVillage site . Removal of approximately one-half acre of brush and woodland, including seven large trees (common species) , can be considered a slight negative impact. No clearing of significant vegetation is proposed for the future neighborhoods . New plantings in and around the Second Neighborhood will more than compensate for the loss of existing vegetation . In addition , the natural buffer area described above will be allowed to return to woodland and will be permanently protected. No wetland areas were identified in the Second Neighborhood or future neighborhood development areas . Wildlife : According to the EIS , no rare or endangered animals are known to exist on the EcoVillage site . In addition , no critical wildlife habitat is known to exist on the site or is proposed to be disturbed . The natural area will be allowed to return to woodland. The existing fields will be maintained as open meadow . Therefore, except for the relatively small areas that will be disturbed for neighborhood development , much of the site will be left open and will be available as diverse wildlife habitat. Loss of Agricultural Land : No actively cultivated agricultural lands will be taken out of production to accommodate the proposed project . The construction of residential neighborhoods will result in the loss of potential agricultural land of the 15 to 20 acres that will be committed to residential development. The proposed amendment to the Special Land Use District includes an Agricultural area that will be preserved primarily for future agricultural use . In addition , a conservation easement has been established on the eastern portion of the EcoVillage property and held by the FingerLakes Land Trust, that will ensure the availability of this land for agricultural and related use . The loss of agricultural lands iri the proposed development areas is mitigated by EcoVillage ' s plans to devote approximately 25 acres , or 14 percent of the property to agricultural use . This includes the organic vegetable farm, a U-Pick berry farm, and orchards . Additionally, areas of open meadow will remain . Although the meadows will not be actively farmed, they will retain their rural , open space character. 9 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 Impacts to Surrounding Farm Operations from Growth Inducing Aspects : No infrastructure has been developed or is proposed by EcoVillage that would induce further conversion of farmland to other uses . There are no active farms directly adjacent to EcoVillage . The closest active farm is to the north across Route 79 . Based on the information provided in the EIS , there are no identified impacts to surrounding farm operations . Archeological nd Historic Resources : There are no identified prehistoric or historic sites or structures on or adjacent to the EcoVillage property . The site is not part: of any historic district . The proposed project will have no impact on any historic or cultural resources in or eligible for inclusion in the State or National Registers of Historic Places . 2 . Discussion and Findings The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to natural or cultural resources are anticipated . F. Zoning 1 . Impacts and Proposed Mitigation EcoVillage is proposing an amendment to Special Land Use District (SLUD) No . 8 and the rezoning of the entire site to the amended SLUD , with the exception of the R- 15 Residence portion along West Haven Road . The amended SLUD includes numerous provisions that would regulate development on the EcoVillage property . It includes three general land use: areas , each containing specific permitted uses : natural , agricultural and residential . The natural area will remain permanently preserved as open space. The agricultural area. will allow agricultural and related uses , as well as a future education center and a biological waste treatment plant . The residential area will permit up to 150 dwelling units in up to five neighborhoods . Also included are regulations regarding minimum size of neighborhoods , number of common houses , maximum number of dwelling units per neighborhood , neighborhood lot coverage , buffer areas (both around the overall SLUD and each neighborhood) , site plan and special approval requirements , subdivision requirements , among others . The EIS and related documents have adequately demonstrated that the amended Special Land Use District as applied to the overall EcoVillage property (except the West Haven Road frontage) provides appropriate controls to guide future development on the EcoVillage property, and that its impacts on surrounding areas are not significant . The amended SLUD and rezoning of the EcoVillage property are consistent with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan in that they will promote the reasonable development of the site by concentrating development on appropriate portions of the site, while preserving significant areas of natural and agricultural open space . 2 . Discussion and Findings 10 Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board and finds that : • No adverse impacts in relation to the proposed zoning are anticipated , and • Certain aspects of the development of future neighborhoods may require further environmental review , such as , but not necessarily limited to drainage and stormwater management , visual impacts , and water supply and fire service , as previously stated in this document. III. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES Several alternative site development plans were presented and evaluated in the EIS , including Alternative One, which would move the Second Neighborhood Group to the corner of Route 79 and West Haven Road ; Alternative Two, which would move the Second Neighborhood Group to the area of the berry farm ; and Alternative Three, which would include only three neighborhoods instead of five . In addition , the Final EIS includes descriptions of four additional alternatives ( A , B , C and D) that were submitted by Martha Armstrong and Lois Levitan in their letter dated June 5 , 2001 . The Town Board has considered each of these alternatives in reaching its determinations regarding the EcoVillage .proposal , and finds that the EIS contains adequate information regarding these alternatives to make an informed decision . The Town Board concurs with the Planning Board ' s finding that no significant adverse environmental impacts have been identified for the proposed siting of any of the residential neighborhoods that cannot be adequately mitigated as outlined in this and the Planning Board ' s Findings Statements . While any of the alternatives could be implemented and could be considered to be reasonable , the proposed neighborhood development plan presented by EcoVillage is a well formulated plan that demonstrates several years of collaborate planning on the part of EcoVillage and neighborhood constituents . The proposed Second Neighborhood Group and future neighborhoods represent a reasonable level of development in appropriate locations on the EcoVillage site, and are in keeping with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan and adhere to sound planning principles . The Town Board further finds that the EcoVillage proposal , in due consideration of the alternatives presented in the EIS , has minimal environmental impacts that can be mitigated as described herein . ll Findings Statement — Town of Ithaca Town Board - EcoVillage at Ithaca, 9/ 10/01 IV. CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS TO APPROVE Having considered the Draft and Final EIS and the relevant documents incorporated therein , and having considered the preceding written facts and conclusions relied upon to meet the requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Parts 617 . 9 through 617 . 12 , this Findings Statement certifies that: 1 . The requirements of 6 NYCRR Part 617 have been met ; 2 . Consistent with the social , economic , and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives thereto, the action to be approved i ;5 one which minimizes or avoids adverse environmental effects to the maximum extent practicable , including the effects disclosed in the environmental impact statement ; and 3 . Consistent with social , economic , and other essential considerations , to the maximum extent practicable , adverse environmental effects revealed in the environmental impact statement process will be minimized or avoided by incorporating as conditions to the decision those mitigative measures which were identified as practicable . oh t Cather ine Valentino Supervisor Da e Town of Ithaca Town Board Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 12 ATTACHMENT # 5 CERTIFICATE OF NECESSITY The undersigned, Town Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca, hereby certifies to the necessity for the immediate passage of the local law entitled " A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO . 1 OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO . 8 (LIMITED MIXED USE- ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT " . I Catherine Valentino Supervisor Dated : September 10, 2001 I t1 Local Law Filing NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE STREET, ALBANY, NY 12231 (Use this form to rile a local law with the Secretary of State.) Text of law should be given as amended . Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter. eatin! Ithaca Townof - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - --- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - IV ifF age - Local Law No. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of the year 20. 1_ _ A14ENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO , 1 OF A local law - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - -- - ---- - - -- -- - --- -- -- - - --- (1�n :ride) THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - --- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - -- - - - - -- --- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- -- --- - - ------- -- --- DISTRICT NO . 8 ( LIMITED MIXED USE - ECOVILLAGE ) AND TO AMEND THE - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- --- - - - --- ------- - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -- -------- -- - - - ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT -- - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- -- - - - - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - ---- - - - - --- - ------ - - --- - -- - - -- - --------- -- --- -- Town Board Be It enacted by the . . . . .. . .. . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .... . . . . . . . - -- of the - - - -- - - -- - - --- -- -- -- - - -- - (Nm.e a/Les:.tat v. Bodyl - Gounty Gky- - Ithaca _ _ _ __ _ _ _ Town __ __ _ as follows : Village ( Attached pages 1 through 12 ) (If additional space is needed , attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.) DOS-239 (Rev. 11/99) ( 1 ) Town Board Meeting 9/ 10/01 Agenda Item No . 10 LOCAL LAW NO . 4 OF THE YEAR 2001 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND LOCAL LAW NO. l I OF THE YEAR 1995 TO EXPAND THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO . 8 (LIMITED MIXED USE-ECOVILLAGE) AND TO AMEND THE ZONING PROVISIONS APPLICABLE TO SUCH SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT i Section 1 . Findings. A. The Town Board of the Town of Ithaca adopted Local Law No . 1 of the year 1995 to rezone certain lands as Special Land Use District No . 8 for the purposes stated in said local law which included the development of approximately 34 acres, then owned by Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . in an environmentally sensitive manner as set forth in said local law ; and B . In accordance with such local law, Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative, Inc . developed a number of residences and related facilities in furtherance of the goals and objectives of Ecovill age at Ithaca, Inc . and in accordance with the purposes of said local law ; and 3 . A Secolud Neighborhood Group is now being formed under the laws of the State of New York, to complement the Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative (also known as "First Residents Group") for the purposes of developing and constructing additional residences on other property owned by Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . ; and 4 . It is deemed desirable now, with the consent of the Second Neighborhood Group and upon the application of Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . to enlarge the area originally rezoned to encompass virtually all of the property owned by Ecovillage Co-housing Cooperative, Inc . and Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . except for a 200 foot deep strip along the west side of West Haven Road which is intended to remain zoned R- 15 ; and 5 . Such rezoning will , in accordance with the Town ' s Comprehensive Plan , foster: 1 . Conservation of up to 80% of the 176 acres of land originally owned by Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . for agriculture, open space, woods and wetlands . 2 . Development of approximately 150 residences using passive solar and other environmentally benign techniques , in up to 5 "cohousing" style neighborhoods with a village center providing village-wide services . 1 I i i 1 . Development of residential areas planned to: (a) contribute to the variety of housing styles and patterns of development available in the Town ; (b) develop and model neighborhood designs for pedestrians , with minimal traffic , attractive landscaping, and safe play areas for children ; (c) utilize clustering to create an aesthetic, quiet and safe neighborhood space to help foster a sense of community both within the neighborhood clusters and within the Village as a whole . (d) utilize interior acreage for housing, which will allow preservation of better agricultural soils, avoid strip-type residential development along roadways , create a safer environment, preserve existing rural character and existing views along roadways ; (e) demonstrate the manner in which housing may be developed to conserve energy and water, by utilizing passive solar designs , super-insulation, careful landscaping for wind protection and low-flow water devices ; (f) demonstrate how housing may be developed which conserves energy by building smaller individual dwellings and concentrating otherwise- duplicated, energy-consuming spaces into a community center or "common house" ; (g) demonstrate how meaningful open space may be preserved in conjunction with construction of new housing at ordinarily-permitted densities . 4 . Investigation of sustainable agricultural techniques through the development of orchards , gardens , aquaculture , and other projects . 5 . Incorporation of leading edge technologies to demonstrate wise use of diminishing resources , the reduction or elimination of wastes , and minimal use of expensive infrastructure systems . 6 . Significant reduction in vehicle numbers and travel by facilitating resident on-site self employment. 7 . Building an education and research facility which serves all ages , emphasizing sustainable development issues in its programs and continuing to welcome local , national and international access . 2 i Section 2 . Purpose. It is the purpose and intent of this local law to allow, by expansion of the Special Land Use District, increased opportunities for the implementation of the foregoing goals and objectives i n an environmentally and ecologically sound manner. Section 3 . Amendment of Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1995 . Local Law No . 1 for the year 1995 , is hereby amended as follows : 1 . Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , is amended by deleting the introductory paragraph and inserting the following : "B . Principal Use Regulations . In Special Land Use District No . 8 (the "SLUD") the following areas , as shown on document "EcoVillage Site Usage Areas 1998 " on file with the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, are defined with their permitted uses : I. Natural Area: This area is a permanently preserved natural, open space with the following ,permitted uses : forest, natural succession , forest management including logging in accordance with good forest management practices , no more than one retreat cabin not exceeding 500 square feet in floor area (unless up to two additional cabins are authorized by the Planning Board) , outdoor areas for aquaculture, constructed wetland or other water cleansing demonstration projects , an auxiliary utility building, gardens , walking trails, and other similar non-intrusive types of uses. Structures other than related to the above are prohibited in the Natural area. For the purpose of this local law, aquaculture means use of ponds for agricultural production to demonstrate how natural ecosystems can produce edible plants, fish and other aquatic species for domestic non-commercial consumption . H. Agricultural area: Permitted uses shall include all principal and accessory agricultural uses (except residential uses) set forth below, except as the same may be limited by other restrictions placed upon the land by Ecovillage of Ithaca, Inc . or others. III. Residential Area: This area will be allowed to contain up to 150 dwelling units in up to five neighborhoods . Each neighborhood shall consist of a minimum parcel of five areas of land . Subdivisions of land (as defined in the Town ' s Subdivision Regulations) whether for sale, lease or other transfer shall be permitted only within the SLUD area designated as "Residential . " In the Residential Area no building shall be erected or extended and no land or building or part thereof shall be used for other than any of the following purposes : " 2 . Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations", is amended by adding a new subparagraph 3 reading as follows and renumbering former subparagraphs 3 through 11 to be subparagraphs 4 through 12 : I 3 i 463 . A multi-family dwelling . Each dwelling unit in a multiple residence shall be occupied by no more than (a) One family or (b) One family plus no more than two boarders , roomers , lodgers or other occupants ." 3 . Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , subparagraph 4 (formerly subparagraph 3 ) is amended to read as follows : 44. Up to 5 community centers , also known as "common houses" which may house recreation, meeting, and dining space, children ' s playrooms, kitchen facilities , common laundry facilities, and other accessory uses permitted in this Special Land Use District and/or other community space, compatible with its purpose of being an extension of residents homes provided, however, that the community center is to be used primarily by the residents of the dwellings located within this Special Land Use District. At least one, but no more than one, community center shall be constructed for each thirty residences , unless the Planning Board issues a waiver of this requirement or limitation in the process of site plan review for good cause shown." 3a. Section 3 , Paragraph B , entitled "Principal Use Regulations" , subparagraph 6 (formerly subparagraph 5) , opening paragraph, is amended to read as follows : "6. Garden , nursery, of farm, except there shall be no hog farm where the principal food is garbage and there shall be no commercial raising or sale of livestock or fish. Sale of other farm and nursery products shall be subject to the provisions of Section 18 , Subdivision 7 or the Ordinance . Usual farm buildings are permitted, provided that: . . . " 4. Section 3 , Paragraph C , entitled "Accessory Uses" , subparagraph 3 , subsubparagraph (g) is amended by changing the number "200 " to "300" . 5 . Section 3 , Paragraph C , entitled "Accessory Uses" , subparagraph 3 , subsubparagraph (h) is amended to read as follows : ( 1 ) "(h) The total number of offices or occupations set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 located anywhere in this Special Land Use District, whether in common houses or in residences , shall not in the aggregate exceed the number of dwelling units . (I.e . , there shall be no more home occupations or professional offices authorized within the Special land Use District than if the property were in a residence district R30) . " 4 i 6 . Section 3 , Paragraph D, entitled "Manner of Land Ownership", is amended by changing the period at the end of subparagraph 3 to a semi-colon and adding the word "and" , and by inserting two new subparagraphs to be numbered 4 and 5 reading as follows : I "4. Common land, facilities and infrastructure (roadways , water and sewer lines and I ther infrastructure) may be owned by a separate corporation controlled by the residents of all EcoVillage neighborhoods . 5 . Open land with or without building structures may be owned by the non-profit coVillage at Ithaca, Inc. " 7 . Section 3 , Paragraphs E, entitled "Density Limitations", and Paragraph F entitled "Yard Regulations" are amended to read as follows : "E. Density Limitations . There shall be no more than 150 dwelling units constructed within this Special Land Use District. There shall be a maximum of 30 dwelling units per neighborhood unless otherwise authorized by the Planning Board . For every 6 dwelling units, a minimum of one acre of land will be designated as part of the neighborhood footprint, as defined in the approved site plan . I F. Yard Regulations . The minimum distance between buildings shall be in compliance with the New York State Building Code, except in the case of multifamily dwellings in which case the distance between any two buildings shall be no less than the height of the two buildings when averagedl together, or twenty feet, whichever is greater. " 8 . Section 3 , Paragraph H, entitled "Lot Coverage" , is amended by adding at the end the phrase : "or more than 50% of each neighborhood footprint. " 9 . Section 3 , Paragraph I, entitled "Parking" , third line , is amended by deleting the word "two" and inserting the words "one and one-half" . I 10. Section 3 is amended by adding two new paragraphs as Paragraphs J and K reading as follows and relettering former Paragraphs J through U to be Paragraphs L through W : "J . SizIe Limitations . The maximum square footage for any dwelling unit shall not exceed 2000 souare feet. However, these units may be attached in a duplex or townhouse configuration or as stacked units. i K. Buffer Zones . No buildings or structures shall be located within 50 feet of the boundaries of the Special Land Use District. In addition , no buildings or structures shall be located within a 25 foot buffer zone surrounding each neighborhood footprint, except for structures that are established for the joint benefit of contiguous neighborhoods . " I 5 I I 11 . Section 3 , Paragraph L (formerly Paragraph J) , entitled `Building Permits and Site Plan Approval", subparagraph 1 , is amended by inserting a new second sentence reading as follows : "Each neighborhood' s site plan shall show exact locations and dimensions of proposed buildings ." 12 . Section 3 , Paragraph M (formerly Paragraph K) , entitled "Primary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District" , subparagraph 1 , the opening paragraph of subparagraph 2 and subsubparagraph (a) of subparagraph 2 are all amended to read as follows : "M . Primary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District. 1 . No building permits shall be issued for construction of any structures within the Special Land Use District unless the following exist at the time of the issuance of such permit to assure adequate ingress and egress to the property: (a) .A primary access road from Mecklenburg Road is legally available to all current and potential future residents , constructed, and maintained to the extent of providing, in the opinion of both the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent, a useable, serviceable roadway for ingress and egress of residential , emergency and service vehicles , to all dwellings and community buildings in the Special Land Use District as shown on the final site plan . (b) Suitable provisions to assure continuing legal access and continuing maintenance of the road to a standard which will allow unimpeded passage of emergency vehicles at all times and in all seasons . (c) A sign posted at the intersection of the private road and Route 79 indicating that the road is not a Town road . 2 . No certificates of occupancy shall be issued, and no permits for construction of more than ten dwelling units for any new neighborhood cluster within the Special Land Use District shall be issued, unless and until (a) The road referred to above, plus any additional road necessary to provide fire and emergency protection for the new neighborhood cluster, has been completed in accordance with the applicable Town of Ithaca highway specifications in effect at the time immediately prior to the issuance of the first building permit for any such structure , except that if the Town of Ithaca highway specifications require paving of the road, paving may be omitted, and except that as to spur roads serving individual neighborhood groups from the main road (Rachel Carson Way) the ]Planning Board may waive the application of any part of the Town Highway 6 i I i specifications i (i) If it determines that full compliance with such specifications is not necessary to provide adequate traffic circulation ; ( ii) If it determines that such waivers will not prevent the normal and reasonable access in all seasons of fire and medical emergency vehicles ; and (iii) The Town Highway Superintendent and the Town Engineer i recommend such waiver, and" 13 . Section 3 , Paragraph N (formerly Paragraph L) , entitled "Secondary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District" , is amended to read as follows : "L. Sec l ndary Ingress and Egress to the Special Land Use District. No building permits and no certificates of occupancy shall be issued for any buildings constructed in the Special Land Use District unless there is in existence at the time of such issuance 1 . I secondary ccess road from West Haven Road with a surface at least st 10 feet wide over a strip of land at least 30 feet wide legally available to emergency fire , rescue, and medical vehicles (in fee or by easement) , constructed, and maintained to the extent of providing, in the opinion of both the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent, a useable , serviceable emergency roadway for ingress and egress of residential , emergency and service vehicles , to a point where it joins the primary access road at a point no further than 1200 feet from any dwelling unit and community center proposed to be constructed as shown on the final site plan . The surface need not be asphalt provided that the surface constructed is , in the opinion of the Town Engineer and the Town Highway Superintendent, sufficient to provide year round access for emergency vehicles . i 2 . Suitable provisions to assure continuous rights of access and continous maintenance of the road to a standard which will allow unimpeded passage of emergency vehicles at all times and in all seasons . " 14 . Section 3 , Paragraph O (formerly Paragraph M) , entitled "Elimination of Cul-de- Sacs" , is amended by changing its title to "Limitation of Cul-de-Sacs" and by changing it to read as follows : "O. (Limitation of Cul-de-Sacs . No cul -de-sac of greater than 1200 feet from a point providing two means of access to and from public roads (Mecklenburg Road and/or West Haven Road) existing at the effective date of this local law shall be constructed in the Special Land Use District. " I i 15 . Section 3 , Paragraph Q (formerly Paragraph O) , entitled "Maintenance of Open Space", third line , is amended by adding after the words "housing corporation" the phrase "or the non-profit Ecovillage at Ithaca, Inc . , " 16 . Section 3 , Paragraph S (formerly Paragraph Q) , entitled "Ownership of Ingress and Egress Roads" , is amended by adding at the end thereof a new sentence reading as follows : "Lots subdivided within the Residential area do not have to have frontage or minimum lot width on a public street, so long as access and the necessary cross-easements for access to the primary EcoVillage road is guaranteed to the satisfaction of the Town . " 17 . Section 3 , Paragraph T (formerly Paragraph R), entitled "Provision of Sewer Facilities" , opening paragraph, second line, is amended by adding after the words "more than ten dwelling units" the phrase "per neighborhood cluster" . 18 . Section 3 , Paragraph U (formerly Paragraph S), entitled "Provision of Adequate Water Facilities" , is amended to read as follows : "U . Provision of Adequate Water Facilities . No certificates of occupancy will be issued, and no permits for construction of more than ten dwelling units per neighborhood cluster within the Special Land Use District shall be issued, unless the following exist at the time of the issuance of such permit or certificate to assure adequate water supply for the proposed development: 1 . Water lines built by the developer at the developer' s expense in accordance with the requirements of all applicable governing authorities and laws including the requirements of the Tompkins County Health Department, and applicable plumbing and building codes, as the same pertain to a private water system ; and 2 . A pump station owned and maintained by the owner(s) or residents of the Special Land Use District providing pumping capacity adequate , in the reasonable judgment of the Town Engineer, the Town Planning Board , and the Tompkins County Health Department, to provide sufficient flows of water at the dwelling sites for domestic household use and at the common houses for lavatory, kitchen, fire protection (unless other fire protection mechanisms have been approved by the appropriate officials of the Town) , and any other proposed use requiring water. 3 . A meter installed by the developer at the developer' s expense at the point on West Haven Road where said private line intersects the public main for purposes of metering consumption within the Special Land Use District in 8 i i accordance with the Town of Ithaca, Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission , and any other municipal agency' s requirements for water supply purposes . 4 . The developer may request a waiver from the requirements of one or more of the paragraphs above to the extent of obtaining additional building permits earlier than would otherwise be permitted by applying for such a waiver to the Planning Board. The Planning Board may, but is not required to, authorize the issuance of more than ten building permits if the i Planning Board finds : i (a) The plans for the water line have been approved by all applicable agencies ; (b) Work has been commenced on the construction of the line and station and is progressing with sufficient rapidity that it is reasonable to expect that it will be completed before any i certificates of occupancy for any dwelling units are issued ; (c) It would be a substantial hardship to one or more individuals to delay construction of more than 10 of dwelling units ; and (d) There is proof provided to the Town Engineer and Planning Board that there is adequate financial support available to the developer to complete the line and associated facilities , such proof being in the form of a dedicated escrow account, performance bond, letter of credit, or other proof satisfactory and acceptable to the Town Engineer, Attorney for the Town and the Planning Board; and I (e) The Town Engineer recommends granting the waiver. i If such a waiver is granted, the Planning Board may impose such reasonable conditions upon the grant as it may deem appropriate to assure completion of the water line and associated facilities in a timely and workmanlike manner. ' 19. Schedule A to such local law entitled "Description of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District 8 '1' is deleted and the attached Schedule A entitled "Description of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District No . 8 -- 2001 Amendment" is inserted in its place . Section 4 . Invalidity . If any provision of this law is found invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction , such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions of this local law which shall remain in full force and effect. i i 9 I i i Section 5 . Effective Date. This local law shall take effect 10 days after publication as required by law or upon filing with the Secretary of State of the State of New York, whichever is later. 10 i I SCHEDULE A Descripltion of Area Rezoned Special Land Use District No. 8 -- 2001 Amendment All that tract or parcel of land situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins , State of New York, bounded and described as follows : Beginning at a point in the centerline of Mecklenburg Road which point is approximately 225 feet westerly from the intersection of such centerline with the centerline extended of West Haven Road ; thence southerly on a line parallel with and 225 feet westerly from the centerline of West Haven Road a total distance of approximately 1282 . 15 feet to the northwesterly corner of lands now or formerly of Robert A. and Elizabeth Hesson (L. 603 , P. 564) ; thence S 1 ° 48 ' 31 E along the westerly line of said lands of Hesson , passing through a point at the southwesterly corner of said lands of Hesson and continuing a total distance of 482 . 53 feet to a point located in the centerline of a creek; thence along the centerline of said creek, being also the northerly line of lands now or formerly of Frank & Rose V . Flacco (L. 548 , P . 9) , the following six (6) courses and distances : ( 1 ) N 76 ° 25 ' 16 " W, a distance of 76 .65 feet to a point ; (2) thence S 83 ° 51 ' 07 " W , a distance of 185 . 05 feet to a point ; (3 ) thence S 87 ° 57 ' 22 " W, a distance of 106 . 21 feet to a point; (4) thence N 40° 30 ' 59 " W, a distance of 117 . 33 feet to a point; (5) thence N 8 ° 36 ' 54" W, a distance of 47 .43 feet to a point; (6) thence N 52° 59 ' 10" W, a distance of 119 . 59 feet to a point being a northerly corner in said Flacco premises ; thence S 3 ° 49 ' 6 " W along the westerly line of said lands of Flacco a total distance of 716 . 89 feet to an iron pin located at the southwesterly corner of said lands of Flacco ; thence S 86° 57 ' 2 1 " W, along a northerly line of lands now or formerly of Donald F. & Genievieve W. Henry (L. 737 , P. 141 ) , a distance of 84. 76 feet to an iron pin located at a northwesterly corner of said lands of Henry; thence S 6° 49 ' 6 " E, along a westerly line of premises of Helen DeGraff (L. 310, P. 15 & L. 448 , P. 1027) , a distance of 1066 .73 feet to an iron pin ; thence S 87 ° 37 ' 09 " W , along a northerly line of lands of DeGraff, and continuing along the northerly line of lands now or formerly of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . (L. 546, P. 742) , a total distance of 2072 .73 feet to an iron pin located at a corner of lands now or formerly of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . (L. 635 , P 482 7 L 635 , P. 492) ; thence N 03 ° 114' 12 " W , along the easterly line of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . ," a distance of 400. 29 feet to an iron pin located at a northeasterly corner of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . ; thence N 86 ° 45 ' 49 " W along a northerly line of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative , Inc . a distance of 1047 . 69 feet to an iron pin located at a northwesterly corner of said lands of Longhouse Cooperative, Inc . being also an easterly line of lands reputedly owned by Cornell University; thence N 1 ' 1737 " W, along an easterly line of said lands of Cornell , a distance of 700. 38 feet to an iron pin located at a northeasterly corner of said lands of Cornell , being also a southerly line of lands now or formerly of YMCA of Ithaca and Tompkins County (L. 606 , P. 172) ; thence N 88 ° 01 ' 30" E , along a southerly line of said lands of YMCA , a distance of 421 . 59 feet to an iron pin located at a southeasterly corner of said lands of YMCA ; thence N 2° 23 ' 46 " W , along an easterly line of said lands of YMCA, a distance of 965 .44 feet to an iron pipe ; thence N 87° 36' 14 " E along a southerly line of said lands of YMCA, and 11 I continuing along the southerly line of lands now or formerly of Robin Bottie and David Warden (L. 633 , P. 728) a total distance of 1725 .73 feet to an iron pin located at the southeasterly corner of said lands of Bottie and Warden ; thence N 01 ° 49 ' 46 " W , along the easterly line of said lands of Bottle and Warden and continuing along the easterly line of the lands now or formerly of Joseph and Daisy Schimmenti (L. 557 , P. 454) and the easterly line of the lands now or formerly of Sadegn Deljoo and Ngern Puang (L. 656 , P. 235 ) a total distance of 1281 . 8 feet to a point in the said center line of Mecklenburg Road ; thence N 87 ° 50 ' 16 " E , along the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road a total distance of 563 . 93 feet to a point; thence S 01 ° 48 ' 31 " E, along the westerly line of lands now or formerly of Michael Carroll (L. 732 , P. 330) a total distance of 721 . 5 feet to an iron pin ; thence N 87 ° 50 ' 16 " E, along the southerly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 404. 0 feet to an iron pin ; thence N 01 ' 48 ' 3 1 " W, along an easterly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 139 .74 feet to a point ; thence N 88' 1 F 29 " E, along a southerly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 125 . 00 feet to a point; thence N 01 ° 48 ' 31 " W, along an easterly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 300 . 00 feet to a point; thence S 88 ° 11 ' 29 " W, along a northerly line of the said lands of Carroll a distance of 125 .00 feet to a point; thence N 01 ° 48 ' 3 1 " W , along an easterly line of said lands of Carroll a distance of 281 .76 feet to a point in the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road ; thence N 88 ° 05 ' 53 " E, along the said centerline of Mecklenburg Road, a distance of approximately 522 . 14 feet to the point or place of beginning , being net 165 . 72 acres more or less. The above description is in accordance with a map entitled "SUBDIVISION MAP ECOVILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE MECKLENBURG ROAD - N. Y. S . RTE, 79 TOWN OF ITHACA, TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK" with a sheet title of "SUBDIVISION PLAN MAP" Sheet 1 , dated June 11 , 2001 , made by T .G . Miller P. C . , a copy of which is on file with the Town of Ithaca Planning Office. 12 i (Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and strike out that which is not applicable.) 1 . (Final adoption by local legislative body only.) I hereby certify than the local law .annexed hereto, designated as local law No. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ 4 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of 20 01 of the (Fex )(Town)( i*agej of - -- -- - - _ _ Ithaca was duly passed by the tsoa d - - - - Town r J 10- - - - - --- - - - ��- - - - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - -- - - - - - - Y P -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on - - - _ 20 in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. (Name of Legislative Body) i 2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or re assa e PP p g after disapproval by the Elective Chief Executive Officer*.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. .. . . . . . . . . .. _ _ __ __ _ of 20___ _ _ _ of the (County)(Ciiy)(Town)(Village) of . . .. . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . . . . ... . . . . .. . _. . ... .. . . .. _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ -- - - - - was duly passed by the - - - - - - - -- - ---- - - -- -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 _ _ _ , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after (Name of Legislative Body) disapproval) by the I - - -- - - - - - - _ _ . . . . . . . _. . . . . . _ _ _ - - -- - - - . . . . . . ( and was deemed duly adopted on Elective Chief Executive Officer*) accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 3. (Final adoption by referendum .) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. ___ _ __ _ _ __ __ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ - - - - - - - of 2 of the - - - - y)(- - - Iy)(Town)(Village) of - - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - -- - --- ---- - - - --- - -- -- -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - ---- was duly passed b of the Count Cit - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - - - on - -- - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - 20- - - - , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed (Name of LegWalive Body) disapproval) by the - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - on- _ -_ _ _- - - 20_ Such local law was sub Elective Chief Executive Officer') muted to the people by reason of a (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the (genera l)(special)(annual) election held on _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ _ _ 20L __ _ , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. I i 4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting referendum .) I hereby certify that y y the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ of 20_ _ _ _ _ _ of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ was duly passed by the - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20_ _ _ _ , and was (approved) (not approved)(repassed after (Name gLegidative Body) disapproval) by the _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ on - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 _ _ _ , Such local law was subject to (I leclive Chief Executive Officer*) permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 20L _ _ _ , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. * Elective Chief Executive Officer means or includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a coon wide basis or, if there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, o the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances . (2) . i 5. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. ___ . . . . . . . . _- - - - - - - -- - - - - _ _ _ of 20- _ _ _ _ _ of the City of - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of such city voting thereon at the (specia ])(general) election held on __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 20_ _ __ , became operative . 6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20_ _ __ __ of the County of . . . _ _ _ - - -- - - - - - -- - _ .. . . . .. . . . . _- - - -- -_ - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ State of New York, having been submitted to the electors at the General Election of November _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 20. ... , pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of the cit- ies of said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said general election, became operative. (If any other authorized) form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.) I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner in- dicated in paragraph- -- _ 1: __ _ _ _ _ , above. 0, _ Cleric of the County legislative body, City, Town or Village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body (Seal) Date : September 13 , 2001 (Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK Tompkins COUNTY OF I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law ontains the correct text and that all proper proceedings have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law a e ereto. Iffl Signature John Barney Title Attornev for the Town e- of Ithaca Town Willage Date : � f�n 1 � 3 �l (1i�J (3) Agenda # 13 , OPTION # 1 ATTACHMENT # 6 2002 BUDGET lity Consumption 130 , 341 , 600 Town of Ithaca Con,:gumption 71 , 4901444 Town of Dryden Consumption 3 , 616 , 912 Total City 130 , 341 , 600 63 . 443 Total Town of Ithaca 711490 , 444 34 . 797 Total Town of Dryden 31616 , 912 1 . 760 TOTAL ALL 205 , 448 , 956 100 . 00 % 2002 Budget Required $ 2 , 253 , 041 Less : Estimated Revenue 300 , 000 Appropriated Fund Balance 511 , 000 Net Required $ 1 , 442 , 041 ity Share $ 914 , 874 own of Ithaca Share 501 , 787 Town of Dryden Share 25 , 380 TOTAL $ 1 , 442 , 041 City of Ithaca $ 914 , 874 Share O &M Budget 130 , 341 , 600 CF = . 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Town of Ithaca $ 501 , 787 Share O &M Budget 71 , 490 , 444 CF = . 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Town of Dryden $ 25 , 380 Share O &M Budget 3 , 616 , 912 CF = 702 O &M Recovery Rate per 100 CF Uniform Joint Recovery Rate = . 702 per 100 cf Rate Differential Projected = + 10 . 03 % Revised 8 / 28 / 2001 i i Expended/ Budget Departmental Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 SCHEDULE OF JOINT ACTIVITY FUND ESTIMATED REVENUES DEPARTMENTAL INCOME J2373 SEPTAGE SERVICE OTHER GOVERNMENTS $260, 256 $200,000 $2001000 J2374 SEWER SERVICE OTHER GOVERNMENTS $ 1 ,325, 974 $ 1 , 309,446 $ 11442,041 J2375 SERVICES - OTHER G.OVTS. $0 $0 $0 I TOTALS I $ 1 ,586, 230 $ 195091446 $ 11642,041 I USE OF MONEY AND PROPERTY J2401 INTEREST AND EARNINGS $ 114, 704 $150, 000 $ 100,000 I � TOTALS I $114 , 704 $ 150, 000 $ 100,000 I MISCELLANEOUS J2701 REFUND PRIOR YEAR EXPENSE $39, 877 $0 $0 J2770 UNCLASSIFIED REVENUE $0 $0 $0 TOTALS I $39, 877 $0 $0 INTERFUND REVENUES J2808 TRANSFER FROM DEBT SERVICE FUND $0 $0 $0 I TOTALS I $0 $0 $0 STATE AID J3901 SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT $0 $0 $0 I TOTALS I $0 $0 $0 I GRAND TOTAL - ESTIMATED REVENUES -. JOINT ACTIVITY FUND $197409811 $1 , 659,446 $19742904 I I I i I I I I I I Revised 8 / 28 / 2001 I i CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 2 Expended/ l Budget Departmental Received I As Amended Request 20001 2001 2002 SCHEDULE OF JOINT ACTIVITY FUND APPROPRIATIONS ENERAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT SPECIAL ITEMS J1920 MUN . ASSN . DUES $1 ,000 $11000 $1 , 000 J1990 CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT $0 $50,000 $30, 000 TOTALS $ 1 , 000 $51 , 000 $31 ,000 TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT SUPPORT 000 51000 31000 Revised 8 / 21 / 2001 CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 3 i I I Expended/ Budget Departmental j Received As Amended Request 2000 2001 2002 HOME AND COMMUNITY SERVICES SEWAGE TREATMENT & DISPOSAL J8150 SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT 5105 SALARIES - ADMIN. 1 $57 , 959 $58, 803 $61 ,489 5110 SALARIES - STAFF $400, 889 $420,853 $450, 171 5115 HOURLY - FULL TIME $19960 $0 $0 5120 HOURLY - PIT & SEAS $282876 $30,750 $29,075 5125 OVERTIME 1 $46,733 $41 ,000 $40,000 5205 FURNITURE & FIXTURES $0 $0 $0 5210 OFFICE EQUIPMENT $0 $0 $0 5215 MOTOR VEHICLES I $0 $0 $0 5225 OTHER EQUIPMENT $35,040 $75, 500 $0 5405 TELEPHONE $4 ,456 $51000 $5,000 5410 UTILITIES $299, 034 $350,000 $350,000 5415 CLOTHING $5,481 $8,000 $8,000 5420 GAS AND OIL $3, 902 $3,000 $3,000 5425 OFFICE EXPENSE 1 $2, 885 $3,500 $3, 500 5430 FEES FOR PROF. SERVICES $65, 059 $70,425 $70,425 5435 CONTRACTUAL SERVICES $283,711 $336,332 $3559400 5440 STAFF DEVELOPMENT $14,385 $ 15,000 $15,000 5445 TRAVEL & MILEAGE $0 $0 $0 5450 ADVERTISING $0 $300 $300 5455 INSURANCE 1 $73, 133 $75, 000 $75,000 5475 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE $50383 $14, 300 $ 147300 5476 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE $210535 $20,400 $28,800 5477 EQUIP. PARTS & SOPP. $55,291 $573600 $29,200 5479 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE $81892 $11 ,000 $11 ,000 5480 BLDG. MAINT. SUPPLIES $40589 $32, 100 $32, 100 5494 SAFETY MAT & SUPPLIES $5, 379 $7,500 $79500 5495 TREATMENT SUPPLIES $117, 764 $137, 780 $1370780 5496 LABORATORY SUPPLIES $23, 784 $23, 520 $250000 5499 SLUDGE DISPOSAL $ 186,488 $231 ,000 $214 ,000 5700 PR. YR. ENC. I $14,256 $0 $0 5720 PR. YR. EQUIP. $6,432 $0 $0 SUB-TOTAL $1 ,773,296 $2,0289663 $ 1 ,966,040 9010 STATE RETIREMENT $ 10,061 $8, 593 $12,500 9030 SOCIAL SECURITY $41 , 256 $42, 300 $43, 800 9040 WORKERS' COMPENSATION $26,298 $36, 620 $36,620 9060 HOSPITAL & MEDICAL INSURANCE $118, 543 $124,233 $ 143,437 9070 DENTAL INSURANCE $ 10812 $3,000 $39000 9080 DAY CARE ASSISTANCE $3,060 $33000 $3, 500 9710 SERIAL BONDS 1 $8,635 $9,420 $ 10,205 9711 INTEREST ON SERIAL BONDS $4, 320 $3,617 $2, 939 9731 INTEREST ON BANS $0 $0 $0 9795 PAYING AGENT FEES $0 $0 $0 TOTALS I $ 1 , 987,281 $2 ,259,446 $2, 222,041 TOTAL HOME AND COMMUNITY SERVICE 1 987 281 $2, 259,4416 2 222 041 . I i Revised 8 / 21 / 20011 I I CITY OF ITHACA PAGE 4