The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutTB Minutes 2005-09-12 TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD SIGN - IN SHEET DATE : Monday , September 12 , 2005 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINT A DDRESS / A FFILIATION k1 eq oA i I /-1 i\� (v '4 D - Svc� � �/ �� l/ /3675 ✓ � �s 'Sa /AYD i l n 6 r5T". 146 5 Ann&+fe. March e ss o E? e ilvo L • A r TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I , Tee-Ann Hunter, being duly sworn , say that I am the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official newspaper, Ithaca Journal: ADVERTISEMENT : NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING for considering a proposed local law amending Zoning Chapters 270 and 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code to Provide a Planned Development Zone for the South Hill Business Campus on Danby Road Owned by South Hill Business Campus , LLC Location of Sign Board Used for Posting : Town Clerk' s Office 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca , NY 14850 Date of Posting : Tuesday, August 9 , 2005 Date of Publication : Monday, August 22 , 2005 tunQn Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk , Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 23rd of August, 2005 t✓ L1,7,44 Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Notary Public, State of New York No. 01 WH6052877 Tpire County /1,;,, j _ commission Expires December 261 TOWN Of ITHACA NOTICE Of PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN ' that a public hearing will be held before the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca at 215 North ' Tiogga Street, Ithaca, New York, on the 12th day of September 2005 at 6:30 p.m. local time for the purpose of con- sidering a proposed local law to amend Zoning Chap ters 270 and 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code to Pro- vide a Planned Development Zone for the South Hill Busi- ness Campus on Danby Road Owned by South Hill Business Campus; LIC. At that time the Town Board will hear any person interested in such local law: Copies of said local law are available for review at the Town Clerk's Office at the above address during nor- mal- business hours of the Town Clerk. Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or oth- er special needs will be pro- vided ' with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make a request to the Town Clerk not less than 48 hours prior` to the time of the public hearing. Date, August 9, 2005 Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk 8/22/05, A — s . .y Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2005 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, NEW YORK THOSE PRESENT : Supervisor Valentino ; Councilwoman Grigorov ; Councilman Lesser; Councilman Burbank ; Councilwoman Gittelman ; Councilman Engman ; Councilman Stein STAFF PRESENT : Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk ; Dan Walker, Town Engineer; Fred Noteboom , Highway Superintendent; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning ; Al Carvill , Budget Officer; Judy Drake , Human Resources Manager; Andy Frost, Director of Building and Zoning ; Lisa Carrier-Titti , Network Records Specialist OTHERS PRESENT : Patricia Leary , 216 Highland Rd , Ithaca ; Linda Luciano , South Hill Business Campus ; Andy Sciarabba , South Hill Business Campus ; Lorraine Moran ; Michael Valentino , 110 Eastern Heights Drive ; Mark A . Macera , Ithacare ; Brenda Smith , Cornell University ; Bill Stebbins , Cornell University ; Annette Marchesseault, Trowbridge & Wolfe L . A . CALL TO ORDER : The meeting was called to order at 5 : 30 p . m . and Supervisor Valentino led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance . Agenda Item No . 3 - Report of Tompkins County Legislature Tim Joseph was not present at the meeting . Agenda Item No . 4 - Report of Common Council Robin Korherr was not present at the meeting . Agenda Item No . 5 - Report of Fire Commissioners (Attachment #1 — Fire Commission Monthly Report) Mr. Romanowski appeared before the Board on behalf of the Fire Commission and read his monthly report . In light of Hurricane Katrina , Councilman Lesser asked Mr. Romanowski about the emergency response system in Tompkins County and whether we could be reasonably assured that all the involved groups would be able to coordinate and communicate with each other. Mr. Romanowski told him we do not have the same problems as the Gulf Coast states had . We don 't have levies holding back water and a city 12 feet below sea level . The first two days after the hurricane passed it was thought it was going to be a clean up job and when the levy burst, all hell broke loose . One of the biggest problems in emergency response is getting to the source of an emergency . Around here you have volunteer systems all over and mutual aide comes from the different fire companies in the area . The Town of Ithaca has support from Cayuga Heights . A mutual aide call goes out if a fire department can 't adequately respond to a situation . There are probably six or seven outlying districts within 10 to 15 minutes to help handle a situation . We do not, however, have enough law 1 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 enforcement on the County level , State Police manpower is d wn , and City police are somewhat hampered from going out into the surrounding districts . The Fire Department is working with Cornell in their environmental departments and their safety division as well as their other emergency response system a Cornell Mr. Romanowski told the Board that people have put in probably or 6 years on developing the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan . Mr. Romano v�ski felt the greatest worry is a truck going through with hazardous materials and something hllappening . In response to questions from Councilwoman Grigorov , Mr. Romanowski told her that trucks carrying hazardous materials are clearly marked . Supervisor Valentino felt there was a group of folks saying we nee to refresh our memories about our responsibilities regarding emergency response and thought there would be some meetings coming up . Supervisor Valentino reported that the City had approved the Tow ' s recommendation of Bill Gilligan as Fire Commissioner. Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission — Tentative Budget (Attachment #2) Supervisor Valentino distributed the Tentative Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission Budget to the Board . lie In reviewing the budget last Thursday the Commission substantial ) increased the amount of money that is going to be needed for fuel . There will be no increase in the water rate in the 2006 budget . Public Service Commission Supervisor Valentino distributed information regarding upcoming P I blic Service Commission hearings . Meeting Schedule Conflicts for Councilman Stein Councilman Stein ' s fall schedule conflicts with Public Works Cory mittee meetings and the Special Joint Committee ( Sewer) . They have rescheduled the ublic Works Committee meetings to accommodate Mr. Stein ' s schedule , but need to find a replacement for him on the Special Joint Committee , Supervisor Valentino asked if anyof a wanted to volunteer to serve on that committee through the end of the year. The meetings are once a month , on Wednesdays , from 12 : 30 to 2 : 00 p . m . Councilman Burbank stated he would be willing to be on call , but he could not commit . Supervisor Valentino was unsurE whether alternates were permissible . Councilman Lesser said he would check his schedu e . Supervisor Valentino asked the other Board members to please check their schedules . Agenda Item No 6 — Persons to Be Heard 2 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 171 2005 Sylvia Wahl , 1426 Hanshaw Road Ms . Wahl reported having a neighborhood meeting at her house to discuss the proposed reconstruction of Hanshaw Road . Approximately 25 people attended . Ms . Wahl reported the major concern among the neighbors is one of safety and the speed limit on the road . At the meeting they spoke of reducing the size of the project' s footprint and not including a sidewalk because that would go off the right-of-way and into people's property . Additionally it would mean that residents might have to maintain the sidewalk themselves , and it would mean the loss of a number of significant trees from Sapsucker all the way down to the Cayuga Heights border. There was interest in the possibility of a walkway on the south side of the road that would be on New York State land and the neighbors would like to pursue that as a possibility . Ms . Wahl thanked Jonathan Kanter for his help in understanding the project. Ms . Wahl shared with the Board that she was a little girl growing up in western Kansas during the Dust Bowl and the drought . There was a highway along the west side of her family' s farm and her father went all the way to the Capital to urge them to move the boundaries far enough away from her farm to miss the trees . They were not able or willing to do that and took out 90 cottonwood trees that were larger than two people could reach around and it completely ruined the farm because it removed the windbreak . Ms . Wahl stated she would be following the plans for Hanshaw Road with a lot of interest and thanked Councilman Engman and Dooley Kiefer for attending the meeting . Councilman Stein asked Ms . Wahl if putting the walkway on the south side of the street would remove trees ? Ms . Wahl told him it would not. Mr. Stein asked what the difference was between a walkway and a sidewalk? Councilman Engman responded stating a walkway, in the Town of Ithaca , is one that is maintained and built by the Town whereas a sidewalk would go in front of somebody' s house and be replaced and maintained by the owners of the houses by which the sidewalk passed . Mr. Kanter added that sidewalks are typically made of concrete blocks and most of the Town ' s walkways are asphalt . Mr. Stein asked whether a walkway would solve the problem for the section between Warren Road and the Cayuga Heights line where there is development on both sides of the street. Mr. Engman told him that there is a section behind the houses along the road that is owned by Cornell and melds into the Ithaca Golf Course so theoretically the Town might be able to work something out with Cornell and the golf course to take the walkway behind the houses rather than in front of them . Supervisor Valentino thanked Ms . Wahl . Councilman Burbank requested that the Board move discussion of the sidewalk policy in relation to the Hanshaw Road reconstruction project up on the agenda . Supervisor Valentino and the Board agreed to do so . Agenda Item No . 15 - Discussion of Sidewalk Policy as it relates to Hanshaw Road Reconstruction Proiect (Attachment #3 — memo from J . Kanter) Board members received a memo regarding Hanshaw Road from Mr. Kanter in their packets . 3 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 171 2005 Mr. Kanter reported that , at the request of the Public Works Committee , he had taken a look at the sidewalk policy criteria and determined that there should be a sidewalk in conjunction with the Hanshaw Road project. Every single one of the policies matches up with the current situation . The question of whether there is adequate right-of-way is probably one of the biggest questions . The Transportation Committee' s feeling is that the County should do everything in it' s power to not go outside the current right-of-way and that there are ways that elements within the design could be reconfigured to accommodate all of things they want to put in the plan and not go outside of the right-of-way. Councilman Lesser thought that even if the project did not exceed the right-of-way , most of the trees on t e north side of the road would be removed . The public hearing on the project is scheduled for Thursday , September 29th at 7 : 00 p . m . at the DeWitt School . Councilman Lesser stated that when one looks at the total footprint of what' s being proposed ( 11 foot lanes , 5 foot paved shoulders , and 6 foot swales) , it' s going to be one of the largest roadways in the County , equivalent to roads around the County that have much greater traffic volumes than are on Hanshaw Road . It has been well established that when you enlarge a road , the comfortable speed goes up , and people increase their driving speed . Mr. Lesser hoped that at the public hearing the Board , either as a group or as individuals , would appeal to the County and the State to reduce the overall scope of the roa . Mr. Lesser did not see the need for such a road stating it will forever change the character of the community if you put in a monster road . Councilman Lesser proposed requesting 10 foot lanes , 4 foot shoulders , and narrower swales . The community then would be dealing with a much smaller road and a reduced problem with speeding as well as preserving the community and lessening the impacts on historical houses . Mr. Lesser also supported moving the sidewalk/walkway away from the road . Not only would this reduce the direct impact of the project, it makes it far safer. Mr. Lesser hoped the Board would be able to look into all of this further and come to the public hearing with a detailed proposal . It is the upcoming public hearing where the critical decisions will be made . This hearing will determine the layout and the blueprint of the road and after this it will be primarily technicE I details . If the Board is going to do anything it needs to be done at that time . Councilman Burbank reminded the Board that , relative to the walk ay , Councilman Engman had called a meeting a while back to talk about the potential for a trail that would follow the route of the walkway under discussion . It would eventually connect up with a system that would go through Monkey Run and into Dryden . This is a chance to really connect with a much large thing . Whether or not any of this can be done within the context of the road project is a big question and the Board may have to decide that they want to expend some resources on developing that walkway . Mr. Burbank felt there was a lot of bike and pedestrian traffic that needs some facility because it is not currently a safe situation . Councilman Burbank stated he completely agreed with Mr . Lesset ' s sentiments in terms of the scope of the project and they needed to use whatever power they have as a Board to influence the County who , in turn , can hopefully have some sway with the State to scale the project back . 4 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilwoman Gittelman questioned why this road is being planned to be so big ? She wondered if there were plans for the road that they did not know about . Mr. Kanter told her the answer that he has gotten from the County is that any road in the County road system that is being paid for with federal and State funds , that's how it has to be . Councilman Engman reported that County Legislator Dooley Kiefer told him the State has asked the County to delay this project due to lack of money. Mr. Engman did not , however, think that the Board and public should slow their comment because of this . Councilman Stein asked what component of the project made the footprint too large? Mr. Lesser compared the proposed roadway to Route 79 at the intersection of Pine Tree , a heavily traveled intersection , where the lanes are 11 foot , the shoulders are 4 foot, and there is no sidewalk . Mr. Stein asked how the Town would respond to the argument that there will be no State or federal money if the project is not built to the proposed specifications . Mr. Kanter reported that what they t have heard is that if the Town Board has a strong position statement they might be able to sway the County . In response , Mr. Stein stated that in these times it is pretty hard to ask the County to take the whole financial load for the project . Mr. Kanter stated they wouldn 't do the project if they didn 't get the funding . Mr. Stein wanted to know what, then , was the answer? He was told that there have been instances where , with community support , plans have been changed . Councilwoman Grigorov reminded the Board that one of the Sidewalk Policy criteria was a positive vote from a majority of the neighbors . Mr. Kanter commented that where the policy is not clear is where the Town becomes responsible for basically building and/or maintaining a sidewalk or walkway and that is where the Board is being asked to look . Mr. Kanter felt the Board needed to further clarify the Sidewalk Policy as they are doing the Transportation Plan . Mr. Kanter stated that the policy does not contain good criteria for when the Town will become responsible for maintaining a sidewalk . Mr. Kanter felt that a sidewalk or walkway on Hanshaw Road was one of, if not the most , obvious choices for where the Town should be getting involved . It' s a key point in terms of interconnecting people , it' s serving both residents along it as well as people from outside the area , it' s linking up key points such as Community Corners and BOCES . It seems to Mr. Kanter that if the Town were ever going to build and maintain walkways , this would be one to do . Mr. Burbank asked that the Board consider a resolution expressing the Board 's concern about the magnitude of the project as proposed and calling upon the County to encourage the State to scale back the footprint . Supervisor Valentino thought the Board should consider two resolutions : one stating what Councilman Burbank just said , and the other giving direction that Hanshaw Road is a strong candidate for a walkway that should be the responsibility of the Town . Mr. Kanter stated another suggestion in his memo is to ask the Capital Projects Committee to look at the walkway aspect and whether it could be included in the County Project . The County consultants have told the Town they would be responsible for a 5 % local share to pay 5 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 for the cost of the sidewalk , but the Town does not yet know what that would be . Mr. Kanter hoped they would be able to find that out before Friday. Councilman Burbank thought the Board was hearing firm statements firmly from residents who did not want their property infringed upon by whatever facility is created . He thought part of what the Town Board is asking the Planning Board to consider is the possibility of creating the walkway in a way that would have the absolute minimal impact on people ' s frontages and trees . Councilman Lesser felt anytime the Town takes on an obligation in erpetuity it' s a good thing to know what it is the Town is taking on and he asked that Mr. Not boom give the Board and the Capital Projects Committee some estimate of what the maintenance costs are likely to be . Supervisor Valentino agreed and asked the Board if they were comfortable with the motion and ready to vote . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2005-122 : Support for the Concept of a Town -Owned and Maintained Walkway in Conjunction with Tompkins County's Reconstruction of Hanshaw Road WHEREAS , the County of Tompkins is proposing to rebuild a section of Hanshaw Road from the Cayuga Heights Village line easterly to the Town of Ithaca-Town of Dryden line ; and WHEREAS , the conceptual design for the roadway presently contemplates a sidewalk or walkway on one side of Hanshaw Road ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Town Board , at their meetinc on September 12 , 20051 discussed whether a sidewalk or walkway along Hanshaw Road would meet the criteria stated in the Town of Ithaca Sidewalk Policy (adopted by the Town Board on 10/23/03) to determine whether sidewalk(s) or a walkway would be appropriat for the Hanshaw Road area , and if so , whether the Town should be responsible for ow ling and maintaining the sidewalk/walkway ; and WHEREAS , the Town Board has received a petition from ressidents on Hanshaw Road east of Warren Road in support of a walkway in that area ; and WHEREAS , the County' s consultant for the Hanshaw Road project has indicated that if the Town were to take on the responsibility for the sidewalk element of the project , the Town would need to come up with a 5 % local share to pay for the sidewalk portion of the project; and WHEREAS , Town Board members have heard concerns voiced by some residents regarding the possible loss of trees and other affects of the Hanshaw Road project on the character of the neighborhood ; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby finds that the area along Hanshaw Road from the Cayuga Heights Village line 6 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 easterly to the Town of Ithaca-Town of Dryden line meets the criteria in the Town of Ithaca Sidewalk Policy referenced above to justify the need for a sidewalk or walkway that would be owned and maintained by the Town of Ithaca ; and it is further RESOLVED , that the Town Board refer to the Planning Board for a recommendation the question of whether a Town -owned and maintained walkway would be appropriate along Hanshaw Road , as described above ; and it is further RESOLVED , that the Town Board request information and recommendations from the Capital Projects Committee and Public Works Committee regarding the financial aspects associated with the estimated cost of construction and maintenance of the walkway ; and it is further RESOLVED , that it is the position of the Town Board that the Hanshaw Road reconstruction , including a walkway , be implemented in a way that will minimize the impact on property owners' frontages and trees . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilman Lesser VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye . Agenda Item No . 7 - Consider Supporting Tompkins County Area Development's Application for Designation of Certain Areas within Tompkins County as an Empire Zone Supervisor Valentino told the Board the resolution before them was the same resolution they had passed last year. It is her understanding in talking with the folks that are putting this motion forward that there is really no opportunity for this to get approved for this year but by approving the amendment tonight it keeps the door open if they want to apply for it next year. Next year it might stand a chance of actually getting approved . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2005- . SUPPORTING AND CONCURRING WITH TOMPKINS COUNTY AREA DEVELOPMENT' S APPLICATION FOR DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN AREAS WITHIN TOMPKINS COUNTY AS AN EMPIRE ZONE WHEREAS , Section 961 of Article 18-B of NYS General Municipal Law authorizes application by Tompkins County Area Development for designation of Tompkins County as an Empire Zone within the meaning of said statute ; and WHEREAS , such designation could greatly benefit Tompkins County in that new businesses would be encouraged to locate in the zone area , and existing businesses would be 7 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 encouraged to expand in the zone area and such new and exp nded businesses would generate new employment opportunities for Tompkins County residents ; and WHEREAS , Tompkins County intends to authorize submission of an application for designation of areas within Tompkins County as an Empire Zone ; and WHEREAS , Tompkins County Area Development, in consultation with the Town of Ithaca wishes to designate certain areas within the Town of Ithaca as part of the proposed Empire Zone ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca is desirous of working with Tompkins County Area Development through the Empire Zones Program to provide enhanced employment opportunities for its residents ; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED , by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca , hat it fully supports and concurs in the Tompkins County Area Development actions to uthorize and submit an application for an Empire Zone designation within the Town of It aca and other areas of Tompkins County . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilman Burbank VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Uouncilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye . Motion passed . Agenda Item No . 6 — Persons to be Heard and Board Comments Recreational Fires Councilman Lesser reported receiving a call from a neighbor concerned about the frequency of a another neighbor' s backyard camp fires . Mr. Lesser asked for confirmation that there were no restrictions on campfire type burning in suburban areas . Mr. Frost told him there were no regulations on recreational fires . Attorney Barney indicated that he would follow up on the issue of burn permits on recreational fires during periods ofd ought . Agenda Item No . 8 — Public Hearing regarding a Local Law to mend Zoning Chapters 270 and 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code to Provide a Planned Development Zone for the South Hill Business Campus on Danby Road Owned b y South Hill Business Campus , LLC (Attachment #4 — Memo from J . Kanter) Supervisor Valentino opened the public hearing at 6 : 30 p . m . The earing had been posted and published as required . Andy Sciarabba told the Board he was before them this evening to try to make it easier for them to go through the process of getting tenants in the building . The proposed local law before the Board expands the uses of the building . 8 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Linda Luciano briefly described the project stating the building is a two-story factory and a 4- story office tower built in 1957 . In 1975 there was a two-story addition added for office space . Mr. Scriarabba stated the building and the parking are in the Industrial Zone and the vacant land to the south is in the business office park zone . Mr. Sciarabba is asking to incorporate into the industrial use of the building the uses in the business office park zone . The second part of their request is to be allowed to put tenants in the building without going through the site plan review processes for every tenant , which current law requirement. Mr. Kanter added there is a trigger for any hazardous chemicals or substances to go through both an environmental and site plan review . There was no one present from the public to address the Board and Supervisor Valentino closed the public hearing at 6 : 37 p . m . Councilman Burbank asked if there had been comments from neighbors on the project . Mr. Kanter stated the Planning Board held public hearings and nobody from the public commented . Councilman Lesser asked if there were plans for the remaining portion of the property. Mr. Sciarabba told him the remaining portion already has the category of the business/office park zone . The existing structure is 170 , 000 square feet of space , which is about 35 % occupied right now . They have a long way to go filling the existing structure . Agenda Item No . 9 - Consider Adoption of a Local Law to Amend Zoning Chapters 270 and 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code to Provide a Planned Development Zone for the South Hill Business Campus on Danby Road Owned by South Hill Business Campus , LLC (Attachment #5 — Local Law No 8 of 2005) TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-124 : Resolution Adopting a Local Law Amending Chapters 270 and 271 the Town of Ithaca Code to Provide a Planned Development Zone for the South Hill Business Campus on Danby Road Owned by South Hill Business Campus , LLC 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 Board on September 12 , 2005 , at 6 : 30 p . m . to hear all interested parties on a proposed local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 270 AND 271 THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE TO PROVIDE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR THE SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS ON DANBY ROAD OWNED BY SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS , LLC " ; and WHEREAS , notice of said public hearing was duly advertised in the Ithaca Journal ; and 9 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 WHEREAS , said public hearing was duly held on said date ' nd time at the Town Hall of the Town of Ithaca and all parties in attendance were permitted n opportunity to speak on behalf of or in opposition to said proposed local law, or any part thereof; and WHEREAS , the adoption of this local law is , pursuant to Pa 617 of the Implementing Regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law (which law and regulations thereunder, including the Town ' s local law, are collectively referred to as "SEAR") a Type 1 Action , and WHEREAS , the Town Planning Board was designated Lead Agency for the review of the environmental impacts of the local law and the project to which tie local law relates ; and WHEREAS , it has been determined by the Town Planning Board that the proposed actions , including adoption of the proposed local law, will not have a significant environmental impact and could be processed without the preparation of a Drce ft Environmental Impact Statement; and WHEREAS , the Town Board finds it is in the best interests of the Town and its citizens to adopt the local law; NOW , THEREFORE , be it RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca her by adopts said local law entitled "A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTERS 270 AND 271 HE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE TO PROVIDE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR THE SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS ON DANBY ROAD OWNED BY SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS , LLC " a copy of which has been submitted to , and reviewed by the Town Board as provided by the Municipal Home Rule Law; and it is further RESOLVED , that the Town Clerk be and she hereby is directed to ( i ) enter said local law in the minutes of this . meeting and in the Local Law Book of the Town of Ithaca , ( ii) cause a copy or abstract of such local law to be published in the Ithaca Journal as required by law ( including Section 265 of the Town Law) , a d ( iii ) file a copy of said local law with the Secretary of State of the State of New York . MOVED : Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED : Supervisor Valentino VOTE Supervisor Valentino Voting aye Councilperson Grigorov Voting aye Councilperson Lesser Voting aye Councilperson Burbank Voting aye Councilperson Engman Voting aye Councilperson Gittelman *oting aye Councilperson Stein Absent 10 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Motion carried . Agenda Item No . 16= Consider Acceptance of a portion of Larisa Lane in the Westview Subdivision (Attachment #6 — Westview Subdivision Map) Supervisor Valentino asked if the Town had received all the escrow money. Mr. Walker told her they had not but receipt of the money could be a condition of the resolution . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2005125 : ACCEPTANCE OF A PORTION OF LARISA LANE AS A TOWN OF ITHACA ROADWAY AND ACCEPTANCE OF ASSOCIATED WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS AS TOWN OF ITHACA FACILITIES , WHEREAS , Igor Cheikhet, the owner, and Boris Simkin , the developer, of the Westview Subdivision located on Schickel Road is offering for dedication to the Town of Ithaca for highway and utility purposes approximately 400 lineal feet of property 60 feet wide shown as the section of Larisa Lane running South from the intersection with Schickel Road and then turning east and extending approximately 400 lineal feet, to the approximate mid point of lot 6 as shown on the Subdivision Map entitled " Final Subdivision Map of Westview Subdivision , Located on Danby Road and Schickel Road , Town of Ithaca , County of Tompkins , State of New York , prepared by T . G . Miller P . C . , dated 6/22/2004" ; and WHEREAS , the Developer has constructed the road , storm water facilities , water main , and sewer facilities to Town of Ithaca specifications with the exception of the final asphalt top which will be completed at a future date approved by the Highway Superintendent after major heavy construction traffic for the subdivision has ended , and WHEREAS , Boris Simkin has deposited with the Town of Ithaca a check in the amount of $ 52 , 720 to be held in escrow until completion of the pavement , sidewalks and site restoration is completed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and the Town Highway Superintendent , such amount being sufficient for the Town of Ithaca to complete the facilities in the event the developer fails to complete the work , and WHEREAS , the Town Superintendent of Highways has advised the Town Board that said road has been constructed in accordance with the Town of Ithaca Highway specifications , and WHEREAS , the Town Engineer has advised the Town Board that the water, sewer and stormwater facilities have been constructed in accordance with the Town of Ithaca specifications , and WHEREAS , the Town Superintendent of Highways and the Town Engineer have recommended the acceptance of said parcel for dedication for highway and utility purposes ; NOW, THEREFORE , be it 11 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby accepts as public roadway 800 lineal feet of property 60 feet wide of Larisa Lan subject to the followings conditions : (a) Receipt of a warranty deed for then parcel from the Owner. (b) Receipt of a easement from the Owner for the temporary hammerhead turn around on lot 6 . (c) Approval of title to said road by the Attorney for the Town . (d ) Approval of an agreement on the handling of the $ 52 , 720 delivered in escrow to the satisfaction of the Town Supervisor, Town Engineer, and Town Highway Superintendent upon the advice of the Attorney for the Town . MOVED , Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilman Burbank VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; I Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion Carried . Agenda Item No . 17 — Consider Authorization to Sign Agreement with County Sheriff's Department for Deputy Patrol at Boynton Middle School Attachment #7 — Letter from Sherrif Meskill and proposed contract) TB RESOLUTION NO. 2005-126 : Authorize Supervisor to enew Agreement with Sheriff's Deputy for Traffic Control at Boynton School RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorize the Town Supervisor to enter into an agreement with the Tompkins County ,sheriff ` s Department and Ithaca City School District providing a Deputy Sheriff at Boynton Middle School for morning traffic control during the discharge and pick-up of students at a total cost of $ 13 , 000 . 00 ; $ 5 , 200 . 00 to be paid by the Town and $ 7 , 800 . 00 to be paid by the School District , such agreement to contain such terms as the Town Supervisor may approve , her execution of such agreement to be due evidence of such approval . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . Agenda Item No . 18 — Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Consider a Local Law Amending the Code of the Town of Ithaca to grant the Town Board and discretion to reduce fees and extend the duration for temporary certificates of occupancy (Attachment #8 -- Letter from Lou Vecchio) 12 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 l Councilman Engman asked what amount of money would be involved stating that in Mr. Frost' s letter to the Medical Center it talked about $625 . 00 payments per quarter, but in the letter that was sent to the Supervisor from the Cayuga Medical Center it talked about $ 5 , 250 . Mr. Engman did not understand the magnitude of the money . Under the proposed reduced fee , Mr. Engman wanted to know what would be the total payments by the Medical Center. Mr. Frost told him it would normally be based upon the price of the building permit . The Temporary Certificate of Occupancy fee is usually half the cost of the building permit . With the hospital , because of the cost of some of the technology they' re using , the construction , and the equipment , their permit fees are usually quite high . There was inconclusive discussion regarding precisely how much money was involved . Councilman Stein wanted to know if the Town was required by law to set it' s fees to approximate costs or could the Town collect more in fees than they would spend in costs and think of permits as another source of revenue . Attorney Barney told him to charge more than needed to cover costs was illegal . The Town cannot use fees to tax, they need to bear a resemblance to cost of providing the service . Councilman Stein asked on what basis the Town would make decisions to waive or not to waive the fees and whether it was going to be an administrative decision or would it come back to the Board . Mr. Barney told him it would be the Town Board 's decision and that he had attempted to set some criteria . He was open to Board suggestion for additional criteria . Mr. Barney stated his criteria were basically to cover this kind of situation , where the fee is unconscionably high and it is known going in that the temporary occupancy period will probably be too short . Mr. Barney stated he ' s put in a maximum of three years , more than that is bordering on a permanent certificate of occupancy . Mr. Frost commented that the hospital is unique because they are always phasing through their projects to move in-patients and out-p [patients around to different locations so they can continue with their construction while still providing services . The hospital is the only place that runs into this kind of dilemma , where they are constantly seeking a temporary certificate to shift people from one location to another. Supervisor Valentino asked if the Board wanted to differ this for a month . Mr. Engman stated he did not feel the need to defer it, but felt it would be helpful to have some notion of the money involved . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-127 : Setting a Public Hearing regarding a Local Law Amendinq Chapters 125 and 153 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca to Grant the Town Board Discretion to Reduce the Fees and Increase the Duration of Temporary Certificates of Occupancy in Limited Circumstances RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hold a public hearing at the Town Hall , 215 North Tioga Street , Ithaca , New York , on the 17th day of October 2005 , at 6 : 30 p . m . for the purpose of considering a proposed local law to amend Chapters 125 and 153 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca to Grant the Town Board Discretion to Reduce the 13 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Fees and Increase the Duration of Temporary Certificates f Occupancy in Limited Circumstances ; and it is further t RESOLVED , that at such time and place all persons in erested in the proposed amendment may be heard concerning the same ; and it is further RESOLVED , that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca s hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing in the Ithaca Journal published in the City of Ithaca , Ithaca , New York , and to post a copy of same on the ignboard of the Town of Ithaca , said publication and posting to occur not less than ten days efore the day designated above for the public hearing . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Pouncilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . Agenda Item No . 10 — Youth Employment Recognition Marnie Kirchgessner appeared before the Board to announce an distribute certificates of completion to the young people who had participated in the Town ' sIstudent work initiative . It is a program that the Joint Youth Commission established a numk�er of years ago and , for Town of Ithaca residents , was run by Ms . Kirchgessner through he Town for 2005 . Ms . Kirchgessner told the Board that young people within the community , in part because of changes in laws , cannot find the kind of work that she and Board members might have had as children . The program gives young people who have not h6d paid employment an opportunity to work . There were 14 young people who completed the program by working 100 (or close to 100) hours . Evaluations from employers have been outstanding . Lorraine Moran appeared before the Board as both a representat ve from the Joint Youth Commission and parent of a young person who participated in the program . She read the following letter to the Board from her son Ben . Working at the Town Highway Department last summe was a very valuable experience for me. Every day we worked hard, but we had a goo time as well. I learned how to work hard and also how to enjoy it. Working with three other kids my age was really nice. It made the time a lot more enjoyable and I feel like I made so i e friends. The work we did was satisfying at the end of a day. Fixing up playgrounds is work you can feel proud of I feel like we did something that makes a difference in the community. The work environment was great and I 'd like to thank all the T wn employees for being nice to me and for making the job interesting. Overall I think th � job and the new work initiative program was a success and I'm grateful to have been a pa of it. 14 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 As a parent , Ms . Moran thanked the Board for providing this opportunity for her son . Vivian Sierra appeared before the Board on behalf of the Greater Ithaca Activity Center (GIAC ) . She reported that the Town of Ithaca youth she employed were eager to work and great kids . She appreciated their enthusiasm and willingness to work and thanked the Board for providing GIAC with great kids . Ms . Hunter thanked the Board for their support of the program stating her appreciated is two- fold , her daughter worked at the Sciencenter through the program and as Town Clerk she had the pleasure of employing two young people in the Town Clerk' s office . She felt the young people brought a great deal to the Town that it was an opportunity for them to learn about their Town and to view the Town as a body of approachable people . Mr. Noteboom told the Board the youth working for the Highway Department were an enthusiastic bunch and they did some real work for the Town . He thought it was an opportunity for people to get to know what the Highway Department does and help build rapport with the community . The following individuals were issued Certificates of Completion : Jordan Corn , GIAC Jena Lyons , GIAC Lee , Lifelong Elliot Lens , Museum of the Earth Charlotte Hunter, Sciencenter Rebecca Pollock , Sciencenter Tawanaday Farley , Village at Ithaca Aeisha Farley , Village at Ithaca Brian Dennis , Public Works Department Ben Klassinger, Public Works Department Peter Thompson , Public Works Department Dehlia Ny , Town Court Kathleen Valentino , Town Clerk's Office Casey Clausen , Town Clerk's Office Lee Ny told the Board the program has helped kids do something instead of sitting at home watching TV and playing video games . It was a great experience , he met a lot a great people and it' s definitely something that he would recommend to others and would want to do again . Fred Noteboom thanked the Board for funding Ms . Kirchgessner's position stating the Highway Department does not, by itself, have the time or resources to coordinate youth employment. There was a cake in the lobby for the young people and their families . Agenda Item No . 11 — Presentation on Municipal Finance and Budgeting (Attachment #9 — Power Point Presentation ) 15 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Supervisor Valentino introduced the item telling the Board the staff had worked to put together a presentation to help new and existing Board membe understand the Town ' s budget . Town of Ithaca Finances and Budget What is municipal budgeting ? Process whereby the Town Supervisor/Budget Officer and t e Town Board make its best estimates of program needs and available financing sources . The budget sets forth proposed expenditures (appropriati ns ) and the proposed means of financing (estimated revenue and appropriated fund alance . ) Budget Must be Balanced Different Budget Components ZOperating Funds Debt Service Special Districts Budget Neighborhood Operating Funds : A Fund ZAKA : General Town Wide Fund — Includes Village of Cayuga Heights (VCH ) Major Revenue . — Property Tax ($ 1 . 381$ 1 , 000) based on assessment of Town and Village , Sal Ls Tax & Mortgage Tax Appropriations . — Town Board , Court, Town Clerk, Tax Collection , Accounting , Personnel , Eng neering , Records Management, IT , Buildings and Grounds , Crossing Guards , Highway Admini3tration , Parks , Recreation , Youth Programs , and Community Services . Operating Funds : B Fund AKA : General Part Town Fund - Does Not include Village of Cayuga Heights Major Revenue . — Sales Tax , planning , zoning and building fees - No property tax revenue Appropriations : — Planning , Zoning and Building Operating Funds : DB Fund AKA : Highway Part Town Fund — Does Not include Village of Cayuga Heights 16 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Major Revenue : — Sales Tax - No Property Tax revenue Appropriations : — snow, brush & weed removal , equipment & equipment maintenance , general road repairs (last 10 years or less) and permanent road improvements (last 10 years or more . ) Operating Funds : F Fund AKA : Water Fund - Special Assessment Fund - Town wide Benefit Area (excludes VCH ) Major Revenue . — Water use charges (Quarterly bills $3 .44 per 1 ,000 gallons) Benefit Assessment charges to pay for debt and future capital expenses . (Tax Bill $65 per Appropriations : — production , supply, transmission - Pay Bolton Point $2 . 21 per 1 , 000 gallons — operation and maintenance of water distribution system Operating Funds : G Fund AKA : Sewer Fund - Special Assessment Fund - Town wide Benefit Area (excludes VCH ) Major Revenue . - Sewer use charges (Quarterly bills $2 . 20 per 1 , 000 gallons) Benefit Assessment charges to pay for debt and future capital expenses . (Tax Bill $65 per unit) Appropriations . — treatment of sewage - Pay IAWTP $ 1 . 20 per 1 ,000 gallons — operation and maintenance of sewage collection and transmission system Debt Service Fund : V Fund Payment of principal and interest on indebtedness ZAnnually budget for debt payments in A, F & G Funds . Funds are transferred to Debt Service Fund were the payments are issued from . Town 's Constitutional Debt Limit: — Excludes Water and Sewer debt — Maximum allowed is 7% of a 5 yr average of full valuation of taxable property. Town's maximum is $ 10U973732 . 732 . — Town's 2005 debt is $ 1 , 320 , 000 , which is 1 . 3% of our Constitutional Debt Limit. 17 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Special District Funds -SF :) Fire Protection Fund z Town wide Benefit District ( excludes VCH ) Revenue : Part-town tax of $3. 836 / $ 1 , 000 assessed value :z Appropriations ( 2 contracts ) Ithaca City Fire Department Pay % (based on assessed value) of actual monthly expenses plus 2 . 750 for City Hall administration Village of Cayuga Heights Volunteer Fire Department (to cover NE area of the Town — Forest Home area) — Pay % ( based on assessed value) of actual quarterly expenses Special District Funds = SL 1 — SL 9 :: 9 Lighting Districts — Benefit area — residents within district pays special tax for benefit received . Revenue — District tax rate (differs per district) Appropriations — Electric bills for the lights Fund Balance is the Accumulated excess or losses of prior years ' revenues over xpenses . ZAnticipated excess or loss of current year' s revenues over a penses . Composition of Fund Balance Reserved Fund Balance . Amount of money that is saved (set aside) for specific things : E .g . : Parks and Open Space Reserve , Highway Equipment :ZUn =Reserved Fund Balance — Amount of money that is available in case of major emergencies or other potential expenditures as deemed necessary by the Town Board . A Current Level of Fund Balance to Maintain Vt has been consistently recommended to the Town Board to aintain a minimum of 20% of current year's appropriations in the unreserved Fund B lance for A, B and DB Funds . Budget Process January-December — Committees make recommendations on future projects and expen itures through meetings throughout the year. 18 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 July = August — Department Heads , which take into consideration committee recommendations , work on budget worksheets that are submitted to Budget Officer and Town Supervisor. August — September — Budget Officer and Town Supervisor work on assembling worksheets into a draft tentative budget . Work includes meetings with the Department Heads and staff. September 30th — Town Supervisor must file Tentative Budget with Town Clerk ZBy October Stn : — Town Clerk submits Tentative Town Budget to Town Board . October 5th or by 2nd Town Board meeting in Oct. — Town Board discusses and modifies budget . — Town Board considers approving Tentative Budget as Preliminary Budget (as modified ) and files with Town Clerk , Once Preliminary Budget approved : — Board can hold meetings to discuss the budget. November : — Public Hearings on Town Budget must be held on or before Thursday following election day . — Public Hearings may be adjourned , but not beyond 11 / 15 . — Revisions may occur after public hearing , but before final adoption . — Town Budget must be adopted no later than 11 /20 . 19 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 172 2005 Adopted Budget Changes Department Heads work both individually and collectively within the adopted budget to meet day to day Town needs . ZBudget Amendments -Modifications require funds from the u -reserved fund balance must be approved by Board before expending . :) A, F & G Funds can advance monies to other funds . The a monies must be paid back. Budget Summary Has 3 Components Includes Decisions Regarding Fund Balance ZBudget Process with established time frames Adopted Budget can be amended during the year. To Sum it up . The Key Elements of Budgeting Are . . . Clear. Communication Process ZFormat - NYS Uniform Chart of Accounts Time Frame Reporting Monitoring Councilwoman Grigorov commended Ms . Drake on the presentation . Mr. Carvill commented on the " Constitutional Debt Limit" stating that while it' s nice to say that the Town has borrowed only 1 . 3 % of the 100 % the Town is allowed to borrow, there is a problem with the Constitutional Debit Limit. Many municipalities th oughout New York State and nationwide have gotten themselves into fiscal trouble because hey have borrowed near the maximum . It takes revenue to pay off the debt . We would nee J to have 100 billion 700 million dollars of assessed valuation in the Town of Ithaca to pay off the maximum amount of 100 million . Councilman Stein asked whether the decision not to use the real estate tax to fund the Part Town ( DB) fund was required by law? Supervisor Valentino stat d it was a decision the Town has made . The reasons that they have not used property to to fund Part Town and Highway is because it is a much smaller tax base . The Town tries to have the property tax come out of the largest tax base . Some municipalities do have a hig way tax and if the Town runs out of sales tax money they would have to do that . So far, the Mown has been fortunate that they collect enough sales tax money to not have to put a highway tax in place . Mr . Stein further asked if, without imposing a special highway tax on the ndn-village part , the Town would be forbidden from taking money from the property tax to fund the highway fund or the part town . Mr. Carvill stated his basic understanding that we have a general town wide tax base that includes the Village of Cayuga Heights . We would therefore have to extract the Village portion and assess a separate tax rate . 20 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilwoman Gittelman asked what portion of the Town 's revenue comes from sales tax . Mr. Carvill told her the Town has a budget of approximately 13 million dollars , 2 . 1 million dollars of that are sales tax . Approximately 70 % . It is because of the unreliable and unpredictable nature of sales tax revenues that the Town maintains a 20 % fund balance . Supervisor Valentino told the Board that when looking at the fund balance she asks herself whether, if we absolutely had to , we could run the Town for a year on the fund balance . Councilman Engman stated the 5-year information they had received was very helpful and very useful . Agenda Item No . 13 — Consider Referring Longview ( Ithacare) Zoning Modification Request to the Planning Board for Recommendation (Attachment #10 — Memo from J Kanter and Drawings from Schopfer Architects ) Mark Macera appeared before the Board on behalf of Longview . He told the Board that Longview had recently submitted a development review application contemplating implementation of the next phase of their strategic plan , which calls for providing a higher level of care for residents who are aging in place . At the present time these residents are outsourced , discharged , forced to leave . The Resident Councils for both independent living and the Adult Home have clearly made it known to the Board and to the administration that they need to do everything they can to try and provide an environment that will allow residents to age in place without asking them to leave and move into an alien and perhaps difficult environment . The application submitted to the Town entertains a zoning change . Longview is part of Special Land Use District Number 7 , provisions of which limit what can be built and what can be offered . Longview is proposing to add a level of care that could conceivably , down the road , include skilled nursing services . Under the current set of definitions that' s a role and a service that Ithacare is not defined as providing . Mr. Macera reported they had submitted a sketch plan to present their concept and define what , where , and for how many . Mr. Macera told the Board he was before them tonight to hopefully gain the Town Board 's support to move forward with their plan . Supervisor Valentino asked for questions from the Board . Councilman Lesser stated he understood the value of lifetime care . He asked whether the connector structures would be visible from a distance or is the terrain such that it won 't be very apparent . Mr. Macera told him it depended on what direction you were looking at the building from . Most people are concerned about looking west from Danby Road . The high roof elevation for the addition is well below the high roof elevation for the exiting structure so it will be completely invisible Mr. Macera thought if it were fall and one were traveling south on Danby Road for a fleeting second as you hit Longview' s Road cut and turned 90 degrees immediately west in what looks to be an expanse of lawn what one would see would be a one-story at that point . As it moves into an alcove , which basically is the crotch of the building , which is not visible to anyone from any direction unless you ' re on the site and in back , it connects the first level and the second level of the building to provide for accommodation of services , staffing . In looking at whether it should be attached or detached , the issue of building a detached building required them to replicate a certain infrastructure 21 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 that was too costly for them to operate moving forward so they are trying to piggyback onto the existing staffing and mechanicals and services and utilities that the current building would be able to provide at arguably a discount. Supervisor Valentino reminded the Board that the only thing th�y were really looking at tonight is should they refer this request to the Planning Board . The issue will come back to the Town Board for the actually rezoning . Councilman Stein asked to be reminded from what and to what the zoning was being modified . Mr. Kanter told him the project is in Special Land Use District Number 7 , which was adopted in 1993 . The district is very specific in terms of the uses end buildings allowed . Mr. Stein asked if there was a reason why it was made so restrictive Mr. Macera thought that the concerns at the time of initial adoption , whether they be environmental or had to do with the housing and services being provided , were such that the Board decided to fashion the language to be very close to exactly what the developer was doing o that any changes in the site plan going forward would require them to come back to the Ton . Mr. Stein wondered if it might not make sense to make some kind of a general restriction) of what could be done in the area so that people' s concerns could be on paper. Mr. Stein stated what disturbed him , and he did not know if this pertained to the project in front of them , I was incrementalism . He wondered if it might not make sense to make a broader definition of what could happen with the property . Mr. Kanter told Mr. Stein it was a good point and stated the Town board back in 1993 could have done that but he felt the Town Board at that point was not comfortable including uses and densities that were not well defined . Mr. Kanter thought Mr. Stein might be right and it may be better to look further ahead and tailor zoning to accommodate what could happen in the future . Councilman Stein asked how he might suggest this to he Planning Board . Mr. Kanter told him it could be included in the resolution they will be considering . Ms . Grigorov , who was on the Planning Board at the time , explaine that this kind of planned development zone gives the Planning Board control and the deve oper must go through a review process . It seemed to Ms . Grigorov that there was not the anger of incrementalism because of the process , issues could be addressed each time , an it does not have to be granted . It' s not as though you are granting a zone change and th n they can start adding . The Town Board will have complete control over what can be changed in a planned development zone . Mr. Barney asked that Mr. Stein keep in mind that this had been � n open field , there was nothing there , and there was a fair amount of community concern ag to what was going to go there . The way the Town Board reacted was to take what it was that at that time Ithacare wanted to do , the Town Board took a look at it and said that' s okay , but we really don 't know about expanding , we don 't know about adding in and skilled nursin care anything like that because we really don 't know how it' s going to play out . And so w� drafted a very narrow, very limited local law, which adopted provisions allowing just this activity for the reason that we knew we could come back later and take a look at it . 22 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Supervisor Valentino asked Mr. Stein if he was suggesting , if the Board decided to send this to the Planning Board , that the Town Board send along a memo asking the Planning Board to look at the broader view? Councilwoman Grigorov suggested the Board vote separately on that if Mr. Stein did . Mr. Stein answered yes but stated he was not in a position to draft it for adoption at the evening ' s meeting . Supervisor Valentino asked if the Board were ready to consider sending the issue to the planning Board ? Councilwoman Girigorov moved and Councilwoman Gittelman seconded the referral . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2005=128 : Referral of Longview ( lthacare) Zoning Modification Request to the Planning Board for Recommendation BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby refers the request by Longview ( Ithacare) for a Zoning Modification of Planned Development Zone No . 7 to the Planning Board . MOVED : Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED : Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye . Motion carried . Councilman Stein did not want to draft his resolution on the spot . He wanted to talk to somebody to see what was a sensible way to do it. He asked if he could do it at the next meeting ? Mr. Kanter stated the timing is really not set . The idea was , if this Board referred the issue to the Planning Board , to try to schedule a meeting at the Planning Board fairly soon , probably either October 4th or 18th would be possibilities for getting it to the Planning Board . Mr. Stein asked if it could be scheduled after the next Town Board meeting so that he could present a suitable motion to the Town Board . Ms . Grigorov felt it would interfere with the whole advantages of the Planned development zone . Mr. Stein told her this was not the time to debate that issue . Mr. Stein will work on putting the resolution together. Mr. Macera did not think the timing was critical . Consideration anytime this year would be fine . Supervisor Valentino stated the issue would be on the agenda for the Board ' s next meeting . 23 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Agenda Item No . 14 — Consider Lead Agency Deisqnation for Cornell University Transporatation Focused GEIS and 10-Year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy (Attachment #11 — 8/26/05 Transportation -focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement and Ten -Year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strate ies and Memos from J . Kanter Kathy Wolf from Trowbridge and Woolf appeared before the Board on behalf of Cornell University . She gave the following presentation regarding the trans ortation-focused GEIS . Transportation Focused GEIS Presentation INTRODUCTION Good evening . I ' m Kathryn Wolf of Trowbridge & Wolf Landscape A chitects . I am representing Cornell University and am the Principal-in-Charge of the proposed Transportation-Focused GEIS and Transportation Impact Mitigation (Strategies. My purpose in being here this evening is to brief you on this project. In addition t , myself, the Project Team for this project includes Andrew Eastlick , Transportation Plan er at Cornell University who will serve as Project Director for Cornell , and George Alexiou o 1 Martin Alexiou Bryson Transportation Planners of Raleigh , North Carolina . We are very excited to be working with George Alexiou and Martin Alexiou Bryson . George specializes in transportation planning for college campuses . and is familiar with all of the issues that campuses and their surrounding communities encounter His firm is at the forefront, nationally , of designing innovative strategies to mitigate transportation impacts of campus growth . His firm is very involved with the design of innovative Transportation Demand Management Strategies . I will show you some examples of the kinds of projects he has been working on in other communities to give you a flavor of the kinds of analysis he may conduct in Ithaca . am going to give you a little bit of background on the project to help you understand why Cornell has decided to undertake this project . I will then show you a few brief examples of work that our transportation planners have done in other college tow/ communities and how some of that work might be applied to Cornell and Ithaca . I will then onclude by touching a bit on public participation and schedule . So , what is this project about? Fundamentally , Cornell is proposing tc� take a broad look at potential growth at the university over the next decade and develop an understanding of what that will mean for transportation systems . This is a proactive project to understand what the potential transportation impacts of hypothetical population growth might be — in a broad sense — and then to identify possible mitigation strategies . As a result of this process , Planning Boards will better understand how individual projects , as they come forward , fit into the big picture . At the end of the day , the outcome we want is to have an improved transportation system . That is the real goal of the project — the best possible transportation system . Background and Historic Growth Trends 24 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 I ' m going to take a couple minutes to provide you with a little background and context on what led Cornell up to this point , and also a little more detail on the project itself. I 'd like to start off with Historic Growth . (SLIDE ) This is a map of Tompkins County (orient — County bounds , Lake , Town bounds , etc . ) , and the population data shown is from the 2000 Census . As you know, the County's population is just under 100 , 000 ; the Town ' s population is just under 20 , 000 ; and the City' s population is just under 30 , 000 . The remaining 8 Towns and 5 Villages that are outside of the Town of Ithaca have a cumulative population of approximately 45 , 000 . Over the last 30 years the County' s population has increased at about a rate of 1 % per year. Interestingly though , the US Census Bureau estimated a 1 . 7 % per year increase in Tompkins County for 2001 , 2002 , and 2003 , in their July 2003 estimate . That' s nearly double our trend over the last 30 years , and at a rate of about 5 times more than the State's average . If this estimate is indeed true , and you carry that rate until today , it means that the current County population is approximately 105 , 000 — an increase of nearly 10 , 000 in just five years . It would also mean that this decade' s population growth would be the biggest the County has experienced since the 1970 ' s . So , again , I stress that this is just an estimate from the US Census Bureau , but in any case , the County is steadily growing , and will continue to . (SLIDE ) And , as part of the County's growth , Cornell University is growing . While the University has set a recommended enrollment cap on Undergraduate Students of about 13 , 000 ; the University has seen a steady population increase in Faculty , Staff, and Graduate Students . Over the past 25 years the University population has increased at rate of a little over a Y2% per year. Over the last 5 years however, its population has increase at a rate of 1 % per year. The current University population is approximately 28 , 000 — about 19 , 000 students and about 9 , 000 employees . When faced with growth and development , a topic that many in the community are concerned with is . . . transportation and parking . For several years now, the Town of Ithaca and Cornell have participated in county-wide discussions about Cornell-related commuting , parking , and transit ridership . A transportation - focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement is the next logical step to understand ways in which our Transportation System , Cornell ' s and the Community' s , can be improved . 25 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 (SLIDE) All of this raises some logical questions that I ' d like to address . These questions , along with several others have been addressed in a Frequently Asked Questi9ns document that was included in your packet . You may want to refer to that document for further information . Why is the GEIS the next logical step? The Town of Ithaca 's boundaries include most of Cornell ' s main campus , encircle the City of Ithaca , and abut most of the county' s other municipalities . In additi 1 n , when you begin examining the home origins of Cornell employees , you see that approx . 25 % of Cornell employees live and commute from outside of Tompkins County . Approx . 40 % live within Tompkins County , outside of the Town of Ithaca . And about 15 % lie within the Town of Ithaca itself. What that means is that on an average workday , approx . 80 % of Cornell employees , either originate in , or travel through the Town of Ithaca bn their daily commute . In order to effectively capture and minimize Cornell bound traffic before it travel ' s through residential neighborhoods , and into the town and downtown areas , transportation impact mitigations (such as park and ride lots , improved transit system , etc ) need to be devised from this point out . In summary , the Town of Ithaca sits in a strategic location in the County' s overall transportation system and seems to offer the best chance of building a broad consensus among other municipalities about what transportation system improvements are desirable to minimize traffic and congestion due to potential Cornell growth . (SLIDE) What is a transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Sta ement? A Generic Environmental Impact Statement allows for the exploratio of Hypothetical Growth Scenarios according to the NYS Environmental Quality Review proc ss . A transportation -focused GEIS will identify , examine , and evaluate transportation related impacts and possible mitigations of potential Cornell University grov h over the next decade . (SLIDE) What is TIMS ? The proposed action is the development of Ten-year. Transportation mpact Mitigation Strategies — or "TIMS " . "TIMS" may include recommendations for transportation demand management , multi-modal transportation strategies including pedest Sian , bicycle , transit and parking , access and circulation modifications , and zoning changes . After its completion , "TIMS " will be updated in five-year cycles . These Impact Mitigations — "TIMS " — will be approved by the Planning Board . ( SLIDE) 26 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 How will the t-GEIS be used when it' s complete? First of all , there will be "TIMS " — the Mitigation Strategies — some of these may be implemented by Cornell , some by the Town or city or other municipality or private developer. The Planning Board will continue to use the t-GEIS to review transportation impacts of individual projects as they are brought before the board for Site Plan Review. Other municipalities , planning boards and agencies will be able to use the GEIS as it relates to projects they are reviewing for Site Plan Approval and make their own findings . That way , planning boards will have an understanding of how each individual Cornell building project' s transportation impacts fit into the larger picture of transportation impacts from Cornell growth as a whole . The intention is that the t-GEIS will be a widely used resource in the County . ( SLIDE ) What about Cornell projects that come before the t-GEIS is complete ? Cornell projects that are proposed before completion of the t-GEIS will be considered and reviewed as they are now. They may be able to utilize some of the data from the t-GEIS depending on when in the process they are brought forward . For instance , they may be able to use turning movement data and other traffic related information as part of the project' s analysis . George Alexiou Slides Now I want to give you a brief flavor of the kinds of things that have been done in other college towns by our transportation planner. This is a survey that was done in the University of Wisconsin , Madison . On of the things our transportation planner is telling us is that in the past we would build transit systems , bus systems , and people didn 't really use them that effectively. Largely because we never really understood our customer. We need to understand the customer. So they tend to conduct a lot of surveys to really understand what motivates people , or what incentives might get people to leave their cars at home and use alternative modes of transportation . That certainly will be one of the major goals of the project. We can envision that we might undertake surveys . We need to understand where people live . They do something called geo-coding and they map where every employee and staff member lives so that they can identify clusters . With the surveys and understanding where people live they begin to understand better what might be the direction of approach that would take to get to campus . That begins to inform other possible strategies such as how to locate new parking and ride lots . 27 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 There are certain areas where we will be taking traffic counts . We ill need to understand along the major corridors the impacts of growth so that we can plan for and begin to identify mitigation strategies . We will also be looking at alternative forms of transportation such a' bike routes , are there opportunities for making this a more viable alternative for people w o not currently biking to campus . Public Participation As I mentioned , we are in the process of forming a technical adviso committee that will be composed of engineers , planners , transportation planners , and oth I rs involved in transportation planning in the area . This committee will meet on a r�gular basis and will contribute technical knowledge , critiques , and input to the work of t1le team . This slide summarizes the groups that will be represented on the resource co T mittee . We have also identified a very broad list of stakeholders . We will use the stakeholder list to inform people of public meetings , and we will draw on different stakeholder groups at different times to contribute to the process . For example , stakeholders might be asked to participate in focus group discussions , surveys and answer questionnaires . Schedule Resource committee kick-off September 2005 We will be working with Resource Committee to get their input and f esh it out . Public Scoping November 2005 Adopt Final Scope December 2005 Prepare t-GEIS and TIMS 2006 1 hope this provides an overview of how the project will be proceeding . That concludes our presentation this evening . We appreciate your a ention and would like to open it up to questions at this point. END Supervisor Valentino thanked Ms . Wolf and asked if members of the Board had questions . Councilman Burbank asked for more information regarding the scoping process . Ms . Wolf told him the scoping process was outlined in SEAR . It' s intent is� to identify what will be studied ; what will be the topics and what kinds of analysis will be done . They have already developed an outline of categories that has been circulated to the Board . The categories include transit, bike systems , pedestrians , traffic circulation , etc . The next step is to meet with the Resource Committee and work with them to begin to flesh out the outline . The expanded outline will go to the Planning Board for their consideration . The scoping document is essentially a table of contents of what the GEIS will be . 28 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilman Lesser speaking on behalf of the Transportation Committee stated one of the major issues in planning transportation in the Town is what Cornell plans to do in the future . In the past , if Cornell had plans they weren 't generally revealed to the Town . As Mr. Lesser sees it , a lot of what' s being proposed here is exactly the matter that Mr. Stein raised regarding Longview. What's going to happen in the future , how can we begin to think about the consequence of one action on future actions? Mr. Lesser stated he looks forward to and appreciates this activity. With regard to Ithaca College , although they haven 't gone into scoping , they have given the Town indications on into the future of what their anticipated build out of campus is so that the Town can begin to make some projections . Cornell , of course , is much larger and this is our opportunity . Mr. Lesser asked what Ms . Wolf felt the Town was committing itself to if it does adopt this T- GEIS . If a project is put forward is there an expectation , a legal obligation , that the Planning Board or the Town Board approve the project or is this more of an informational tool ? Ms . Wolf told him there were two components . One is the "TIMS " , the transportation impact mitigations strategies . This is something they will be asking the Planning Board to approve . They are the mitigation strategies , basically concepts for things like park-and- ride , a whole menu of potential mitigations that they hope could be used by any area municipalities , private developers even . Once one of the strategies was actually going to be implemented , whoever was implementing them would still have to bring forward detailed plans and go through site plan review like any other project . Ms . Wolf continued stating any individual project that is proposed by Cornell , even after the completion of the GEIS , will come to the Planning Board as they do now. The hope is that for some of the projects , and in the early years many of those projects , the hope is that the Planning Board will be able to look at the GEIS and say , " Oh , the transportation impacts have been addressed . We understand the transportation impacts of this project. " Other impacts will still need to be handled as they are currently . If a project comes forward that has impacts that were not anticipated as part of the GEIS then an analysis of its transportation impacts would have to occur. The Planning Board would make its findings on the GEIS . Mr. Kanter added that other agencies , be they the Town Board or City Common Council , would make their own findings in regard to the GEIS and make their future judgments on the basis of their findings . Each agency is able to make their own independent findings , the Town Board doesn 't have to sign on to the Planning Board 's , the Common Council doesn 't have to sign on to the Town Boards . Supervisor Valentino told the Board the Planning Board unanimously voted to establish itself as the lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed transportation - focused GEIS and they are requesting Town Board concurrence in designating them as the lead agency . A copy of the letter sent to over 20 interested and involved agencies was on the table in front of Board members . Supervisor Valentino moved the resolution designating the Planning Board as lead agency for the transportation focused GEIS . Councilman Lesser seconded the motion . Supervisor Valentino asked for discussion from the Board . 29 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilman Engman reiterated his belief that this was an exciting project with incredible potential . However, Mr. Engman also felt it had the potential for setting Town policy for the next decade . He felt there were things the Board needed to beft r understand before they could make a lot of the decisions that have to be made . Regarding a generic environmental impact statement, Mr. Engman read from an unspecified law, "When a final generic EIS has been filed no further SEQR compliance is required if a subsequent proposed action will be carried out in conformance with the conditions and thresholds established for such actions in the generic EIS or its findings statement . " Mr. Engman stated this T eans once the generic is done the Town cuts off a lot of the potential decision making on transportation issues in the Town of Ithaca if they are addressed in the generic EIS . These are very important concepts that the Town Board needs to understand before it makes majo � decisions regarding the project. Mr. Engman stated it' s only been the past couple of me tings that the Board has started to get some of the information that informs them . Mr. Engman then read what an unspecified law said concerning lead agency status . " Lead agency means an involved agency principally responsible fort undertaking funding or approving an action it' s the Town Board that funds and approves actions . It is the Town Board that is going to have to face the policy issues that are going to come from this project . Mr. Engman stated that he was very reluctant to automatically say that the Planning Board ought to be the lead agency . It seemed to Mr. Engman that because there is so much policy involved because some of the decisions made in the generic will be final , at least for ten years , they really needed to keep the policy component within the Town Board . Certainly the Planning Board interprets policy , it approves actions under policy , but it doesn 't approve funds , it doesn 't set the public policy . Mr. Engman felt there were a couple of possibilities . One is for the Town Board to be the lead agency with the Planning Board very actively involved . Another thing that is possible under SEQR is to have co lead agencies ; the Town Board and Planning Board would be co-lead agencies . That way the Planning Board can handle the more technical information , the Town Board can handle the policy component of the generic environmental impact statement . Mr. Engman felt this was one of the most important things the Town is going to be working on for a long time and the Town Board needed to be involved as one of the lead agencies . Mr. Kanter stated there are probably some cases , very few around tl I e State , where there are co-lead agencies . When there are co-lead agencies they are very complicated in terms of coordination . He felt that there needed to be very good reasons to � roceed that way . In the Town of Ithaca , the Planning Board has been particularly involved in overall planning documents , which the 10-year impact mitigation strategy will be . To Mr . Kanter the mitigation strategy is a plan and a planning process to identify how the long -term growth at Cornell is going to effect transportation systems . The other thing the Planning Board does regularly is review Cornell , Ithaca College , and many other large-scale and sr' all-scale projects . The Planning Board is very familiar with the kinds of projects that Cornell has been proposing over the years . The other way of looking at co-lead agencies is th9t obviously the Planning Board and Town Board have very good communications and working relationships , in addition there are opportunities on the Resource Committee where there could be some thought given to having both a Town Board member and a Plannin Board member on that 30 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 group . Mr. Kanter did not think lead agency status would preclude any of the things that Mr. Engman mentioned . Mr. Stein shared Mr. Engman ' s concern stating that this may very well shape the changes in the Town that will take place in the next ten or twenty years . He thought that the Town Board should be involved . He stated his experience that the Town Board is not , in general , involved in Planning Board decisions . Admitting that he did not know the particulars regarding a co- lead agency, Mr. Stein commented that if there were a co- lead agency it would have the same staff so it would not be a question of two staff interacting , it would be a question of two groups interacting . His experience with the Town Board is that it would certainly respect the sort of thing that the Planning Board does , the details that they have the expertise to discuss , but the bigger questions , and Mr. Stein stated he did not really know what the bigger questions are but was sure there were bigger questions , he thought that somehow they ought to be able to find a way to allow the Town Board to make more than just informal recommendations . He felt that the Town should have a determining voice in the kinds of general decisions that would be made . Ms . Gittelman asked what role the Town Board would play if the Planning Board were named the lead agency? Mr. Kanter told her that as an involved agency in the SEQR process the Town Board could be as involved as they wanted to be . That means ranging from attending Planning Board meetings and commenting throughout the process , it could mean participating in the Resource Committee , which will be meeting probably every 4 to 6 weeks during the process . Mr. Kanter added that another complication of co- lead agencies is that you then magnify, multiply, the number of meetings that both groups have to have because every decision has to be made by both boards throughout the process . The Town of Ithaca Town Board is the only one who is going to be making future decisions based on the GEIS . (Turn Tape) Councilman Lesser stated he has an enormously high regard for the professionalism of the Planning Board . In many cases they' re very exacting on what their expectations are . If Mr. Lesser were continuing on the Board , he would feel very comfortable with leaving the Planning responsibility for the ongoing development of the GEIS to the Planning Board and leaving to the Board the responsibility of general oversight. Ms . Grigorov concurred with Mr. Lesser, having been on the Planning Board . Ms . Grigorov stated she had been involved in the GEIS for Precinct 7 which took meetings every week for a couple of years . It was a very involved , long -studying process . She thought there would be a role for the Town Board . She thought the Planning Board would do a better job than the Town Board . Supervisor Valentino stated that when they did Precinct 7 there was a subcommittee of the Town Board that worked through some of the issues and then handed everything back over to the Planning Board . Supervisor Valentino agreed with Councilwoman Grigorov and Councilman Lesser that the Planning Board is the logical group to head up this GEIS . They' re the ones with the most experience . They are insulated from the political arena . For the Town Board to take on this project would mean more than doubling the amount of 31 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 meetings . Additionally , they are losing the only people on the Town Board that have had long-term experience with planning . For the Town Board to take o i this kind of responsibility and workload when there is a wonderful Planning Board did not make sense to Ms . Valentino . Mr. Stein , referring to Mr. Kanter' s indication that the Town Board can have as much input as they want, stated that what Mr. Kanter meant was input as individ6als not input as a Board . Mr. Kanter told him , no , he meant input as a Board . Mr. Kanter told him that what happens during an environmental review like this one is there should be ongoing communication amongst all the involved agencies . This particular review is go ng to have a number of intermediate points . The scoping is the first step . That' s going t take a couple of months and define what the EIS will look at . Those meetings are compIletely public and can get either individual or board input from not only this Board but also any other agency . Mr. Stein asked if by Board input Mr. Kanter meant a recommendation ? Mr. IKanter told him that if the Town Board had specific ideas on the scope and the Board agre d by majority to provide direction to the Planning Board for what this Board wanted to see that could be done as a Board action . Mr . Stein responded stating but the Planning Board ould be free to consider that suggestion just like they consider any other suggestion , isn 't t at right . Mr. . Kanter told him that was true to some degree . . . Mr. Stein interrupted stating it is true to a complete degree . Mr. Kanter asked to be allowed to finish stating this process is going to be a lot different from virtually any other Planning Board project review of la specific Cornell project because those are basically predefined entities , or projects . In tf_ is case you are going to have a whole cumulative area that is going to be looked at over a long term period of time so there is going to be a long process , a wide open process in term of defining what will be looked at in the study. It is really not that similar to anything othe than the Precinct 7 EIS . During that process there was very good communication between the Town Board and the Planning Board . To make sure what had been said , Mr. Stein stated that in fact it is the Planning Board that makes the final decision and the Planning Poard has to decide for themselves how they will incorporate whatever recommendations come from . . . Mr. Kanter interrupted stating , actually that' s not true . It will ultimately be the Planning Board ' s decision , with the help of all the other involved agencies , what the scope and content of the environmental impact statement is , but that will not be the decision ultimately , which is the findings that each involved agency makes . Each agency is free o make its own findings once the environmental impact statement is done based on the content of the EIS . What the Planning Board finds for their own actions , which are things like site plan reviews , special permits , may have no relation to what the town Board may find in terms of its actions which are things like funding projects , capital projects , policy decisions , zoning applications , which may be totally different from what the Common Council may find . Each involved agency acts solely based on its own realm . They rely on the information in thq EIS to do that , but that does not mean that this Board would make the same findings that the Planning Board makes . Councilwoman Gittelman asked for confirmation that the Town Bo rd would do what they often do ; the Planning Board some point in the process sends the town Board their findings and the Town Board can send that back to the Planning Board wit-, recommendations . Mr. Kanter told her that happens during the scoping period . Once the fi al scope is accepted by the lead agency then the scope is basically completed and defi es what will be in the environmental impact statement . Ms . Gittelman then asked if the Planning Board as lead 32 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 agent would be sending the Town Board reports in between getting the information and making the final decision . Mr. Kanter told her they would . Supervisor Valentino told her the Town Board would also make their own findings . Councilman Burbank stated he has enormous respect for the people on the Planning Board and the hard work they do and their expertise . However, Mr. Burbank stated he was struck by Supervisor Valentino' s statement that the Planning Board is insulated from the political aspect and are therefore best positioned to do this process . Mr. Burbank felt that ultimately the issue of how the Town ' s transportation systems develop is a political question . It will define the community and Mr. Burbank felt it was most appropriate that the Town Board be involved at the primary level . Mr. Burbank would be very interested in the concept of co-lead agency stating the fact that it is rarely done does not mean that it is unworkable or not appropriate . Councilman Engman stated that once the lead agency is established , and if it' s the Planning Board , it will have the final decision making authority . The Town Board can make all the suggestions they want , they can have input , but the Planning Board will make the final decisions . Mr. Engman ' s concern is that they will be making decisions on policy . By having the Town Board be the lead agency , if the Board does not like the co-lead agency idea , that does not mean the Planning Board can 't be asked to do exactly the same thing and the Planning Department will be doing the same amount of work no matter who the lead agency is and it retains the ability of the Town Board to deal with the public policy issues that are obviously going to come forward . Mr. Engman took exception to the comment regarding Town Board Planning Board experience . Mr. Engman stated he had reviewed hundreds of environmental impact statements over the years and is chair of the Tompkins County Planning Advisory Board . Mr. Engman stated he has quite a bit of experience in this realm and it's not rocket science and is not the overwhelming amount of work that has been portrayed . The Planning Board can still do a lot of the work that needs to be done and have all those meetings , but the Town Board can reserve to itself those issues that are policy related and should remain with the Town Board . Mr. Engman thought there needed to be some arrangement for the Town Board to have a more significant involvement either as the lead agency or as the co-lead agency . Councilman Stein stated it was too big a decision and he stated he was too confused about what is going on , hearing different things coming at different times , which he can 't quite put together. Mr. Stein moved to postpone the decision until the next meeting , not to delay it but to understand it better and to try to understand what the co-lead agency might be , and to try to understand if there was any way that the Town Board could participate in the process in a constructive way . Supervisor Valentino asked if there was a second . Councilman Burbank seconded the motion . The matter was opened for debate . 33 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilman Lesser asked if there were further discussion that Fred Wilcox as Chair of the Planning Board be invited to be present. It was puzzling to Mr. Lesser how the Town Board could be lead agency but the Planning Board would do most of tl� e work . It seemed to Mr. Lesser that the decision making body would have to be involved in all the details and activities . Supervisor Valentino asked Mr. Kanter to confirm her belief that Town Board policy decisions would be made in the context of their findings . Mr. Kanter told her t at was right . Ms . Valentino told the Board she was opposed to postponing this d Iwo cision . Mr. Stein stated he would be happy to postpone the matter for o weeks and would be happy to attend a special meeting . He would be happy to inYolve Fred Wilcox in the discussion . Mostly he wanted to understand the issue better. He did not quite get the flow of authority and was very uncomfortable voting for something as important as this issue without understanding what he was voting on . He understood Mr. Lesser' comment and wondered if there is some way of working together and parceling out different parts . He is certainly not proposing that the Planning Board do all the work while the Town Board is the lead agency . Mr. Kanter told the Board if there is a challenge to the Planning Bard ' s declaration of their intent to be lead agency then it goes to the Commissioner of DEC to arbitrate the matter. Mr. Stein objected to a procedure whereby something very important is brought to his attention that he does not understand in advance and he' s told that he must vote on it now because there is no choice . Supervisor Valentino and Councilwoman Grigorov told him he has h d the materials . Supervisor Valentino called the question . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-129 : Postponement of Decision on Transportation Focused GEIS BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithacr postpones the decision on the Transportation focused GEIS until the next meeting of the Tol vn Board . MOVED : Councilman Stein SECONDED : Councilman Burbank VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , nay ; Councilwoman Grigorov , nay ; ouncilman Lesser, nay ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , nay ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion defeated . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005=130 : CONCURRENCE WITH DESIG ATION OF TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY TO COORDINATE THE REVIEW OF 34 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 THE CORNELL UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION -FOCUSED GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (T-GEIS ) AND TEN -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT MITIGATION STRATEGY WHEREAS , Cornell University has submitted a report outlining a proposal for a "transportation -focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS ) and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) 11 , dated August 26 , 2005 , being undertaken by Cornell University in cooperation with the Town of Ithaca . The t-GEIS will address transportation impacts on the community surrounding the campus related to an increasing population traveling to Cornell . The TIMS will evolve in response to the feedback obtained from the t-GEIS process , and may include recommendations for transportation demand management , multi-modal transportation strategies , access and circulation modifications , and zoning changes . Cornell University , Applicant ; Kathryn Wolf, RLA , Principal- in -Charge (Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP) ; Martin , Alexiou , Bryson (Transportation Consultants) ; and WHEREAS , the proposed transportation -focused GEIS would be a generic environmental impact statement that will identify , examine and evaluate Cornell 's transportation-related impacts and potential mitigations for possible projects , plus hypothetical growth scenarios , over the next decade . The GEIS is a tool available under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, commonly referred to as SEAR . Unlike an Environmental _ Impact Statement, a GEIS is flexible enough to explore hypothetical or alternative scenarios ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca is the logical municipality to serve as lead agency in the t-GEIS initiative . Its boundaries encircle the City of Ithaca and abut most of the county's other municipalities . On an average workday, 80 percent of Cornell employees travel through the Town of Ithaca on their daily commute . The town has a key role in the county's overall transportation system , and is in the process of completing its own transportation plan ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Planning Board adopted a resolution on September 6 , 2005 proposing to establish itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed transportation-focused GEIS and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy , as described above ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is requesting the concurrence of all involved agencies on this proposed lead agency designation ; RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby finds that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board would be the most appropriate agency to serve as lead agency to coordinate the review of the t-GEIS because , among other reasons , the TIMS involves a planning process to identify alternate growth scenarios and alternate strategies to mitigate impacts of those scenarios , the Planning Board has experience in coordinating and reviewing other environmental impact statements ( including the Cornell Precinct 7 GEIS) , and the Planning Board is familiar with and deals on an ongoing basis with the review of Cornell University projects relating to transportation , parking , access and circulation issues ; and 35 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby concurs with the designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as Lead Agency to coordinate the review of the proposed transportation-focused GEIS and Ten -year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy , as described above . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : Councilman Lesser VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , nay ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , nay ; Councilman Engman , nay . Motion carried . Agenda item No . 19 — Consent Agenda TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-131 : 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 as presented . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005 -131a : Town Board Minutes of August 1 , 2005 WHEREAS , the Town Clerk has presented the minutes for Town Board Meeting held on August 1 , 2005 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 August 1 , 2005 as corrected at the September 12 , 2005 board meeting . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman 36 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-131 b : Town of Ithaca Abstract WHEREAS , the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for approval of payment; and WHEREAS , the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board ; now therefore be it RESOLVED , that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in total for the amounts indicated . VOUCHER NOS , 874- 1010 General Fund Townwide $ 1771275 . 93 General Fund Part Town $ 3 , 077 . 77 Highway Fund Part Town $ 198 , 027 . 78 Water Fund $ 24 , 043 . 50 Sewer Fund $ 1751979 . 91 William and Hannah Pew Bikeway $ 137837 . 53 Fire Protection Fund $243 , 298 . 93 Forest Home Lighting District $ 188 . 89 Glenside Lighting District $ 73 . 06 Renwick Heights Lighting District $ 101 . 36 Eastwood Commons Lighting District $ 198 . 65 Clover Lane Lighting District $ 23 . 07 Winner's Circle Lighting District $ 64 . 31 Burleigh Drive Lighting District $ 80 . 94 Westhaven Road Lighting District $ 272 . 20 Coddington Road Lighting District $ 160 . 46 Debt Service $ 39 , 82 TOTAL : $836 744 11 MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . 37 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 171 2005 TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005=131c : Bolton Point Abstract. 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 : 515-5951 597-600 Check Numbers : 8476-84867 8488-8557 , 8559-8562 Voucher Number 596 and Check Number 8558 were duplicate documents . Operating Fund $228 , 176 . 68 1998 SCADA Capital Project $ 167638 . 71 2000 Bolton Road Project $ 68 . 00 2002 Office Space Addition $ 23 , 021 . 21 2003 East Hill Water Tank Proiect $ 52 , 850 . 92 TOTAL $ 320 . 755 . 52 MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005 —131 d : Set Fall Yard Waste Collection Dates WHEREAS , the Highway Department provides yard refuse disposal services for the Town of Ithaca residents ; WHEREAS , twice annually the Highway Department collects yard waste from roadsides ; 38 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 WHEREAS , this year the Highway crews will use the leaf vacuums the first week and go around the Town once , thereafter, residents will be allowed to put biodegradable paper bags at curbside on the each Monday in November, now therefore be it; RESOLVED , that fall brush collection will start on October 17 , 2005 , until finished ; and RESOLVED , that the fall leaf and yard waste collection will commence on November 7 , 2005 , until finished . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005=131e : Approval for the Chair of the Planning Board to Attend the New York State Planning Federation 2005 Conference 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 2005 Annual Conference from October 9th through October 12th , 2005 , in Saratoga Springs , New York , which provides programs and workshops on a number of current planning and zoning topics , including basic training sessions , and recent court case decisions for planning board members and other local officials ; and WHEREAS , it will be beneficial to the Town to send a member of the Planning Board to this program ; and WHEREAS , the Planning Department budget includes sufficient funds for this purpose ; BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the attendance of Fred T . Wilcox III , Chair of the Town Planning Board , to the NYPF 2005 Annual Conference from October 9th through October 12th , 2005 at a cost not to exceed $800 .00 , which includes registration , accommodations , meals , and other travel expenses , charged to Account B8020 . 403 ($ 520 . 00) and Account B1460 . 425 ($280 . 00) . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman 39 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2005=131f: Regular Appointment of Code Enforcement Officer WHEREAS , Steven Williams has worked for the Town of Ithaca as a Code Enforcement Officer provisionally since his appointment on July 26 „ 2004 ; and WHEREAS , Steven Williams has successfully completed the competitive exam for Code Enforcement Officer and is second on the eligible list ; now therefore be it RESOLVED , the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the regular full time appointment of Steven Williams as Code Enforcement Officer, effective date of civil service certification , September 7 , 2005 ; and be it further RESOLVED , a twenty six (26) week probationary period applies and shall end effective March 8 , 2006 , with no further Town Board action required if there is successful completion of the probationary period as determined by the Director of Building and Zoning ; and be it further RESOLVED , this appointment does not change Steven Williams ' job classification , hourly wage or benefits . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . Agenda Item No . 20 — Report of Town Committees Pegasys Oversight Committee The Board received a letter from Tom Dohney in their packet of Board materials . Mr. Burbank encouraged Board members to read the letter and give him a call if they had questions . There is an important question in front of the Committee regarding continued access to the Public Access facilities by people who do not live in the three participating municipalities . Cornell Lake Source Cooling Data Sharing Mr . Engman reported that the group had met and the new report is out for 2004 and posted to their website . There isn 't much new in terms of data but Mr. Engman thought it would be very interesting next year when the phosphorous projects start to take hold . 40 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 Councilman Lesser asked if the DEC had specified the area over which the warm waters was supposed to disperse before the temperature impact was calculated ? Mr. Kanter told him they had not stating DEC is apparently still reviewing the Town 's letter, the Environmental Management Council ' s letter, and the Water Resources Council ' s comments . DEC has not acted on any of that yet. Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization Mr. Burbank reported that the 10 ' s next meeting would be held at Town Hall on September 28tH at 7 : 00 p . m . Ms . Hunter agreed to arrange for snacks . Transportation Committee Councilman Lesser reported on the Transportation Committee's look at the issue of residents only parking . The Committee was not able to come up with a strong justification or identify any situations where residents only parking would be a need and benefit to residents of the Town . Summarizing the issue Councilman Lesser stated the Committee couldn 't imagine that the Town could have a residents only system that designated parking in a place where they couldn 't legally park . Councilman Lesser asked that the Board consider the resolution Attorney Barney was drafting regarding the footprint for the Hanshaw Road reconstruction . r TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005-132 : Request for Reduction of the Overall Size of the Proposed Hanshaw Road Reconstruction Project WHEREAS , the County of Tompkins is proposing to rebuild a section of Hanshaw Road from the Cayuga Heights Village line easterly to the Town of Ithaca-Town of Dryden line , and WHEREAS , the proposal for the roadway presently contemplates 11 foot driving lanes , 5 foot paved shoulders , and 6 foot ditches and swales , which if constructed would require removal of a number of trees on the north side of Hanshaw Road and would substantially change the ambience and visual character of the roadway and would increase the speed of vehicles along said road ; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board hereby requests that the County reduce the width of the driving lanes and overall size of the proposed Hanshaw Road project to 10 foot driving lanes and 4 foot paved shoulders and evaluate the possibility of reducing the size of the swales so as to maintain its current configuration as a rural road , and it is further RESOLVED , that the Town Clerk forward a copy of this resolution to the County and to the New York State Department of Transportation . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Engman 41 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye . Transportation Plan Website (Attachment #12 — Memo from N . Tedesco) Mr. Kanter distributed information on the Transportation Plan Website . Agenda Item No . 12 = Discussion of Special Town Board Meetings Supervisor Valentino brought the Board ' s attention to a list of Town Board Meetings through end of year that was provided in their packet . Regarding the special meeting with CDRC , Ms . Valentino told the Board she had not been able to make contact with Camille Tischler. When she is able to speak with Ms . Tischler and arrive at possible dates for the meeting she will advise all Board members . Agenda Item No . 21 — Reports of Town Officials (Attachment #13 — Monthly Reports ) The Board received monthly reports in their packets . Town Clerk Ms . Hunter reminded the Board of the September 6th Primary and told them she was trying to , borrow two voting machines from the City of Ithaca for the November election . Director of Engineering Councilman Burbank felt it would be helpful for the Board to have an orientation about emergency planning and the Town ' s role . Director of Planning Regarding the Buttermilk Falls Gateway Bridge Trail , Mr. Engman stated there was the mention of a $ 544 , 000 grant that if received would go toward that trail . Mr. Engman asked if that was enough to complete the trail or would other monies be needed ? Mr. Kanter told him that the $ 544 , 000 plus a 25 % local match was in the Town 's Capital Projects Budget . The City is also participating in the project but to what extent , Mr. Kanter was unsure . Mr. Kanter did not think he could answer the question of whether the funds would be sufficient to finish the trail , but it is 'a lot more than they would have without it . Mr. Burbank reported that a big cost variable in the project is getting through or around Emerson . Supervisor Valentino thought she might hear about the money on September 19tH EXECUTIVE SESSION On motion by Councilman Lesser, seconded by Councilwoman Gittelman , the Board moved into executive session at 9 : 30 p . m . for discussion of real property acquisition and a personnel issue . 42 Regular Meeting of September 12 , 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 A motion was adopted in executive session authorizing the acquisition of real property ; a copy of this resolution will be attached to the minutes when the contract is signed . On motion by Councilman Burbank and seconded by Councilman Lesser, the Board returned to regular session at 9 : 50 p . m . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2005=134 : Approval Temporary Salary Adjustment — Court Clerk WHEREAS , there is presently a vacancy in the full time position of Court Clerk for Justice Klein ; and WHEREAS , Betty Poole , Court Clerk —Justice Burin , will be acting as Court Clerk for both Justices until the vacant position can be filled and trained ; and WHEREAS , the Human Resources Manager recommends increasing Ms . Poole' s salary $ 500 per week from August 28 , 2005 until the position is filled and trained , as determined by the Human Resources Manager and Justice Klein ; Now, therefore be it RESOLVED , the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the temporary salary adjustment of $500 per week for Betty Poole , Court Clerk ; and be it further RESOLVED , the said adjustment will be from August 28 , 2005 until the vacant position is filled and trained as determined by Human Resources Manager and Justice Klein . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2005 - 135 : Ratification of Removal of Town Justice Court Clerk WHEREAS , the Town Justice Court Clerks are appointed by the Town Board with the consent of the Town Justice pursuant to Town Law Section 21 1 (b ) ; and WHEREAS , such Clerks serve at the pleasure of the Town Board pursuant to Town Law Section 24 ; and WHEREAS , a Town Justice Court Clerk may not be removed without the advice and consent of the Town Justice ; and 43 Regular Meeting of September 12, 2005 Approved October 17, 2005 WHEREAS , the Town Supervisor received a request from the Honorable David Klein , Town Justice , that his clerk , Cindy Vicedomini , be removed from her position as a Town Justice Clerk ; and WHEREAS , for reasons discussed by the Town Board in executive session , Ms . Vicedomini was notified of her removal ; and WHEREAS , the Town Board , after hearing the reasons for such action in executive session concurs with such removal ; NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board hereby confirms and ratifies the removal of Cindy Vicedomini as a Town Justice Court Clerk and she is removed from such position effective as of August 25 , 2005 . MOVED : Councilman Stein SECONDED : Supervisor Valentino VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , absent; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye . Motion carried . ADJOURNMENT On motion by Councilman Lesser, the meeting was adjourned at 9 : 50 p . m . Respectfully submitted , �7L�t - n 1 `u Le Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk Next Meeting October 3, 2005 44 ATTACHMENT # 1 Lr/416 Rk/ow&r zVoRevs e AT G49,.! a y4,51Q (4Y64d6 -9J J Tie PXerw1ks T,5 Pv46 76 411"ar4tu'cy 6F rr�•us ®.r1Ti r/u,� r �sC vL�re . Dox4;z4F— 0406olAvG 40aA46 /.v &Wile �.�ie� �jis�o,�1cH.y�o.�e� — lc�i4lT�'6 .Co.� idr/ja.�l•�CS" �.v,dTy .4UT�'aci2.vfac� , ® /Re Ory ®F ZrWC4 (,6 /c'1/y0 oV CO UNCi 4. A DD1079� !> 7 4c 6AVa 4rWnUS1 L/jE AIW &4"&"7A041 4r 1`#414 406 , 3, 20005- ^J45X71s 5 , jke eACCVTUC Z'a"goy eA MZ ir/�a l.�.d?'irvc✓pe.r�r',�.as ,r3��.v �L 0,046,6.4 77416 A)A5 ZAVTO rO Al*yo,Q T�'.�sa c� eAJ AS . Z2.60, zeds, Co oy d,& T,Wfs -d7ORAl/5 .4 316.) 1) 5 AJo7 /S %Foce /h/C-**1kU514OX) OX 4 .�o.�k��4��r 0 �7r�t c%rt/ 7lfZ V4kA us ' P1V15jo vs',4S We44 .45 a� ,P� c��iSS/oaJE'�LS AAA D T�Zt� /✓ /S ,4 co /s/dam X70 vM�.uT �MfIPWIAlro .voi 64XY rAee BIA5a� /(i' Vf-IBIS '4400yT dvbdo irICO �,e1e�.�ks , XxyO.Go V4roV s 01-0 .PCgVZsTs .41v !) 1W.66 , EjAISA5 weJ444 AS 7W4C BUDcer oh b fl /fV4cr CoO W4 pe.o �onJS U Attachment # 2 +� O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000000000 o o 0 0 o o o o o o 0 o o o 0 0 o o o o 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 n Q o o O o a> N iT _ f0 a LO Cd 00000000000 000000000 C 00000000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 00006660000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w LL N m C) O � N Q) ,.Q CDOOOCOOOOMM OMO CMd 0000) X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Co h O 0 to � qCT M 0 0 1` > 1` 00000000 L` 4 OC'M � Co0 tO 00 V :- � L0000000u') Ww 0 L Ln 00 Nt LO 0 O (�6 N N O O M n M O N M O 0 � M M 00 00 O M C O) O) tO C4 NAM O) M 1` 004OON OM N LO (M LO N M O CD h M LO to 00 O (D Q) H V r� N LO N tO d' � N [�- C/] 0 N N (Ni O O N O O O o N 0) O M Ln D O o 0 0 h O N00000000 LOh 0 L MOON- OOO M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 wqqt O IT V LO 0 w O O h W w o o o o o o o m w O O O LO M N O O �oO NNO000 OOH V to tO N to 00 r Or O N C6 E O tO O O H t0 M OD 06 N CA to M � � O (D 0 +• - n LO M (O N 1` V 00 M N � O �- O 0 Z E M N N N O O rn CO W Co LO tO O W M (D O O N O O O o O CA 0 � O O 1` O Y2 W 0 t (O OOOMOO Lf) OOV 0 (N CNd CO 000 O r0 1� LO d' (O to T- O Co O O O) O �- co MNMOOM U' CO CD 0) O qt N M LO (O N O v (jo V g0 CY) ON LO to MN M N h0) h7NT 0 M C Q U c0 (O V- 00 W N I t to CC) M TM: M CN N N rn W m 5 O CO N N �" 00 N N N N O W z C7 Q >Q Q o U > Q a) V 0 0 0 O O O O O M M O � to m M (O o 0 CD qt Z J w OI ( 0 0 0 0 O O O O tO N O N M O O N O o r 0 _ Q� w m E 0 0 0 O O O O O M O O Co 4 O N o O O M a 0000000000 � O CO V 0) � 0) O N M 0 n 0 0 0 C) O O O o M O 0 qt Co (D Co n O N c>0 Q _ tt) 4 N N N Lo CD V- tO M 06 M V- O) O) 1` O) r� O N > Z (D C) d' LO M (O LO O O (O N LO � qt O d' O O 0Q to (M 0N (O aM nM U N N N N N C w 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O 0) CO O LO O M tO O O M 0 a) 000000000OtON ogtMO � NOON O 2 > CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O a0 O O d M In O O O 0000000000 0 0qCT LO 0 O (6 a 1` O O O O LO O O 0 M O O LO (D 1` CO 1` O O _ U) Q V N N LO to CO T- LO M 00 M T- 00 D) O0 n 1` O M 0 d' � LOCO CD LOO 0LON .- qT qtt CD C) to LO O) LO N LO qt M n O 0 f0 m N N N O C N rn O Q c M O 0000 MOnqt o OM 01� N � � 000 � O a � .0 D nONh000LOh C) 0000N SOD00N O UZ N U O O N O (D O) CD � CD O Cr) O M 00 h Lo 0 0 0 n M N O) r N V O) � OD LO (O LO M LO O M M O M E Q N CO M M q N N 1` N V' O 00 O Y O O 0 .- O V LO to O N M f` f` V CD 1\ O N_ (O j U LO N 1` O LO N LO M N M 00 N N �> M a) N 0 w C/) d cnw a� w U (n N O U) u) m a aCo v (`� m Q w X 0 c W a) C H LL a (nj o na)) � Q0O (AOz } �LL W � � o (n LO > = a W - Ci } Cn (o c o VOwwi- w � 00 w v) - � Z 0) V W = 0 w W a w � h z a O W U o C O 0) a) N QU � WHZ � U) ZOO Zz wp d N -0 01 rn w z OF- � OwO � O � w Z � � aOOCo m 0 C 'o c� pwH � WULLLL Q � 0 ? O � (nwWaa w >. L) > a� Q � U) wcna (nOwp � z � � � wQ — wC� J0 v E cw a wLYUw (n aw a _ U � � Z z m Co IL ? QQ � W � � J � L=L of az2D IL Z (L Q O) CO a) a) Q 2 W JUQ W a 0- 0005120 < m C ool- 2 WU) 3: U) a0 U) waJ Om < U) iL W UU -L = CO a) g > ovao � ovtno � Q � p� 00000000 � LLO c O) V f` O M t Co B O O �- N CO V O O) LO ~ z H N f- w M � M Mt 0 � CD r h M O a h M M M M O O) 0) O :) a) O U) W N N N N N N N N N Lo H Q O 00 00 M 00 (A � 0) H I LL . Z � N M � Z (n N N N N N N N N N N A ? ° O CD O J J 0 � T A W W m CD W O J O A (D O CO J A (D a w d D O Cn A O 0 M A c O � (n ,� --I .Z1 _K (� nT7_ ww ::EZ T j' n (D 1 CD F ( Q) i! C = CD V d 3 M. m a cn N s C m a " � a a m -i ? ° z CD CL o C) ° °• O. C 7 0 CD 0 0. 7 oJDSD o p ° m CD On CD n n• CD < N cU1ov = = moo o 0 G7m n) <' TI CD CD .. 7 O `< < O =r °- c am CD �' 3 CD con CD T1 (D U W CL X O Sll C N CD N rn (D 7 C N 7 7 co CD _ CD CD m cn cn ° D m w 3 7 C (D O O_ CD (O CCDD N CD O N N CL N Cn A (D O) O 7 :E w w (TOCnrnwwA � A TI CD OD A CD A N) (O Co N O w O O •--• O w O O O N O . . O J Cn O o O J J K) O pCj 7 N w O O A J O W OD W OD O 0 CD O O N CD O N N 0 3 CD< _ O Ln 7 0 L rnwACn D C w OD W Cn Cn Ut CT A N N V -�-� CD O w Cn O O In O O J O O V CD O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD OOD0000000 00 O N CTTO O O O O O O O) 00 CD COj ? W CD O O O o 0 0 0 A 0 0 d O CD Z 3 5 o m CD CD N N 0 m CL (D O (T CT W A cn O CD N 0 < W co W Ln O CT CT A N N O_ C OO C O O O O W Cn O O U7 O O J O O = 4 67 Z C 7 ' -� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = SCD OOD 0000000 " 00 °' O 'O NU) 00000006700 D m p W CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A 0 0 (n r Z � D ° (' D ZDD 7 0 0 ° p m C (D N aoo CT AN (D0) OODD � O � CnD CD N) W IV W U) CD 2n m O C O r 7' � (wDO OO .OND CD ((n0 v .06M Ut vO, ODD CD C 7 A000Cn 00WM000 .. m � � C OOOONOOO) CDCnwo O "� � m CL U) n�i + ^) N ° m o N fn A V N CT W OJ Ln n O Z D) J CO W M O O A W O -� W 3 3 CT A 0 0 Cn O O N O N C) 0 co w O O O O O O OD O O) (D 0 C A O O O O O o 0 O W 0 Ul N O 7 J U) 0 0 0 O O O O N O O OO O CO (D N O O O O O O O J O O U) N (n• O () 7 Cl) N O C O N N O CD J A -� CL O) W N Cn W O) � CD °• W CD W VI N CD) N A O o � 7 U) W N O U) Zn In O N O IV N OD m CT 0 0 0 0 0 " 0 Cn -^ A J O O O O O O O J O O < CO CO W O O O O O O O O O O O N CD O < 0 (D [3) 7 (CD (D zr 3 o =1 m O � N O O O O A D o a o J OR C) CD 0 0 0o ao OD OD OD (b m W W W W m ao ao W au oo OD 00 OD OD OD y -I CO (0 O (0 CD (0 O (O (D p 7. w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w W W W O O V v V V V V V V V 7 Ol . W W W W NNNNN (D O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 O O O o O 0 o O a O o O 3 m o o o o o o o o o o a a A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A 21m N N T N K) —+ a % V �I V O) O) CO) (D m m A W W w w w 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O p N O O O O W W W W W (p BOOw V min W (0w 0mCn A w mN � N O ,N,. � � � O � ON � O � O 7 w5K 00 > —IOmmOO > Oznnn C < m � D -u -Dy '. N NNNNNNNN � N O M I y Cn w C aN C .0 7. O C CD D) S -' CD -0 y CL CD ._� X17 0000000000 N OD n (D O0 C) C O7 CD < < (n C � (� N a Cn C ? 7- C 7 3 v', N O » n- O O O W W O O O A O O m 7 CD C O 90 (p 0 'O 7 =' O O 7 Ut Ul Cn Ul A Cn W o C 0 -1 CD CD O C 7 S � ,70.. O N N ? U O O M. • • 3 90 Z Z Z Z [A W W W (D 0 N. C Cn Q CD O 'O Cn �+ to (n C 7 7 N N j CD Z > > 7 D CD CD m 3 CD W _ 7 N U7 N N O V N N W V -� V A O A N A A W N V (A W W 0 V (O A N N (0A V 000N (0 N NCnOA NSA N N A U( W CD CO A OD N N 0 m O V Ul CO O V W CD � (D N O) N N D M V 00) V C) (D W W N V m W NOWAAO 0) (0m AOAO 00000000000 0.. m 6 m CO N A m OD Oo O m N CO A O V AO � (n 6 (D V O V o 666 0 0 0 0 6666 C V CJ) m (O W N -+ 4000 W Ut O OD w Cnm OD (D (D AOAO 00000000000 � N O Cn N _ _ _ _ N N 0 000 N N N CAn (D N A N O V N 0 Ul W O W " W W Ul m 0) O D Ul Ut V V UT CD 0 � " V (D A W A V O U7 CO N O w Cn A OD U( W O O O O ma O CD w OOO cn co Ul C) W U7 (O A00000 000 000 00 O O .O � W O O Cl O O O o 0 A O .A m O O O O O 000 V O V O O o O O o O o O O O O p A C70000000000m000000 000 W 0000 00000000000 � O O o O O O O o o O O O O O o O O O 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD a DN Z Cn N _ _ _ N N N 0 --I (mD W N N 0 CD N -+ w V N U7 UI W O O j co W UI m m O O U) C) W A V V N (0 O � -� V W O W A V O UI O N O O N A 00 (31 W O O O O O N � (n OD V (0 O0 0 U700 Cn 0 " U) (0 A00000 000 000 00 O O C- C- OCO M OD 0000000 U7 W OA Cn 00000 000 V 0 V 0 0000000 C- O N A00000000mOm000000 000 ODOCAO 00000000000 CD (O mzC A W 00000000 W 00000000 000 --� 0 � O 00000000000 C' � Q 0 = m S 0 D D Z O SAN W WmN WCnNO WAN (00 (0D W W W and — DD O V (D m o m A V 0 N m W W m 0 W O N U7 Cn V V V C^) z m { A 00 W (D N X (D 0 0 A V N O O cn W V W 0o U7 Cn CJI C) C CT( CT O (OOmm (b Cn V V W 0 C W 00031 m W V OOOO 00000000000 O � WX � O (OOA W mmOO Cn (D OD COO V mmCT V V CO 4 0AO 00000000000 CA C:) C (7D O N U) O A OD O AN O m O CO O O Cn W � � mmO 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U1 OQr Q1 om MKX CWD (0 N N A CO N W -' -' N A A CNO (NO 00 OD N A W C) = (n m m Ul m OD Ut m OD W Cn m m N N A V N w 3 (n N O V Cn (D OD � " CT( N O W O W UI O U) CO A O A W cn W U) Cn IV U1 O _� »1 Q CD CO O O O (0 U70000 " 000 OOOm 000 000 00 00 O A m O O O O O O O O W O O O O O O O N O O O V O V O 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO 0 Cl 0 0 N C z 6 V 000 W 6 OO6 O0000000O6 000 ODOOOO 00000000000 000 W N000000000 W OOOOOOO OOO O " O 00000000000 Cn N O O m U7 N _ _ w_ w N N -1 OD A N W O CO N Cn T Cn W W N N? A V A -. m m � V V A A CNTI UN7 (NTl V G7 U1 (n 7 nn -� U) V Cn NOAH V CO (0OW W V OOmU( (D In -A 0 Cn OONNOOOmOOO m CD CO O -� O O A Cn N m W 0 W 0 0 0 O CO coo Cn O N 0 0 U) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W V O O O O o 0 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO O O m O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CD (O 000000000000000000 000 CD O COO 00000000000 W cc C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 coo 000 O O O W O W O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O m mu CD 3 cc O O co D7) O O O O O O N O O A D a JCD o 0 o cc a O °o °o o° cc �l w w w w w w w 00 w (bCO) N N N N N N N - N � N N O a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � O � O o mj w v :06 p6 .A A :06 •P A N N NLmmL _. 0 O (nwm � mowN m ° TioOCD C O CD O C —{ � � � 0 m C m O -o ~' COD C1 N N .. 00 p lD U p CD C W n �+ CD Q° p aa) NO CD N O go --I W m (n ('a C) KN (n (3D 7 K (�D 90 C Cn 'a C a co O �• 7. CD CD () Cl) a O :E r. ? N cn C O_ (�!> U CD UI CD 0 O v CD CD 0 cn cn cn -. N O N � 0 OD �I 0 D V OHO N cn 0 N ? W W N m O OD OD O CA cn O N O � M A Cgn � 00 W - N D M (n (n O N Cn 0 � 0 CA m (A N .P 0 O W O W -• � O (fl V Cn Cn V 6) -• C N W O m W W Cn m N N �J ? W N N O N 0 N N C D --• V (D UJ co N CA O N N N O N D M 00) (D (0 V � V O OO (n -• ? •P V O O O Cn O Cn O 00 0) A N ph mCD (n 00000 OO (flv � p W 66666666 O O W cn O (<D CD (n 00000000 OO cyl0 m N � U) N O O (D (n OD N (J1 CD N N N) O N (n gg 0 O CA O CD gI -• V O 0 0 6 Q W m -Pl. V O A O CA O A O O O C -06 N •P (n0 m 00000 OO (O V W 00000000 OO LO oO CD (C N FU) Cn 00000000 OO (n0 Cn a (�D 0 ZCO MMMMMI D O n = -� 0 m -0 m 0 g%%4 CA W N O c m D X W � V N O NAZI 0) v rZ N n cnonwomow io aD w0000WCnWW 00 � o � o � Z DD b0 0 =• 6 o 6 is 66 iv o iv U' O O m C s � O 00 O (n M 00 �J N (n (r CO T G) C n D N -. n .y. G D CNTI N OD N CA W N O N W 3 � m Cn O W O CA �4 A V M O O ( N O N n CA U7 n O -• O (n ( CD cn � (nOCnOOOOO 00 (D V -� N W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bb w 6 w 06 0 O m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 m 0 M � Z N O O m N � W N OD � V CD w (D N cn (0 Cn O � O I gg W (D Cn W Cn V V O �. Cn CD N gg 0 0 0 V M O N O W O W -• M0000000 00 CAOCA CD CA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bb M " 6 O O O O O O O O O 00 (D (D O N O 0 O) CD _3 00 O O N O O O O N O 0 D a O go CD 0 0 O O CD (Z 00 0 0 � w0owwwwwwww 00 OD wwmu p w W w w w w w w w w W W w W = •+ w w w w w w W w w w w w w W fl1 � O o 0 o 0 0 o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 gnu a1 A :Ph, .06 -ph, -P :P6 .9h, 4A :P1, w O O o 0 C o w nW OwwCn W NOwN mJQ N - • • ! gggh � — ° CD—1W mr -i - 100m ;0m p � c �. chi v m �. Cr CD CD 0 � o co a' CD .0 0 < CD 3 m < m n n > cn c a a' m C) CD s " fp 0) m .. 0 a N S?o ((n CD -gyp CCDD S � C (n 0 C n Cn C\'O CD 0� (n ° �. sy E. no co p ? N 0 0 G v m C Cn m m' ° CD (D CD 0 (D cn Oo ° CD cn cn cn c � p N c N CD N 7 -' D 0 0 -P6wl�b � ld � / � �00 w w � ww 0 dd O V V O M w O N V w Cn CP Cn VI Cn NwCnww .A CO W NCO w W ON O D V N ? w W Cn Cn W w � O m w O w CA w V N N O w O W o W V A V 00 w 0 w W w Cn � V o W O O D W O W o V O W O W �? N O Cn N O j V W N V -� -+ N Cn w Cn V 4 Cn CO 0 O O w � Cn w D dd V Cn CO Cn CO O 4 U7 CO N N N N 0 w gla Cn N O N Cn V � Cn O O --�d O O O W w V "a nddl w Cn O w O w Cn O o 0 0 0 000 W N O p O O O O O O O O O O O O 060 O V W < 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 000 O W w CD z m D o M Cn w AsN V (nNN N to 0 NK (n V N V -ad Cn w � Cn (O � O Cn 4 Cn w Cn O C 0 O Cn O Cn w CO -ph, Cn w N N O O O O w 0 W 0 Z_ C o Cn O NCO V (S) 0 0 O w 0 w W w V fl o OOM -06m n00000 wow WNO =10- 0 0 00000000000 000 O � CA) am mDm c0 Ooo0o000000 000 (0w0) � ndn r Z -' D � � 0 N 0 a Z D > ( ] (n w w N O N V � W Cn � 0) 0) W 0) m G� m 06 oorn � 0000 —ad (oioN 4 V V ooti � w �ddddd WIC o wcn � � wcOwrnw V V V 000 0 � w W Cn W �I o A (O w W 0 0 ? O 4 O --' n D N N � W w N w V V � O V O O O 0 0 0 \ O N O � W Cn W O Cn N O w 0 0 0 V N Ul Ul m K > o� � m Cn PQ CD m cn 4�6 w A -• N V Cn N N N n W w w -ad W w N N --ad O (A 46 Cn w � O fl w Z w V (O w w C 0 O Cn W O O O V � Cn O o 0 0 w 0 w W A V N CD m 400 � CnCn00000 00 0 00 CA) N0 O O O 0 C. 0 C. 0 0 C. 0 C. C. 0 0 O V W 00 0 O 00000000000 000 O W w CJ7 N O O CA Cn N N N -� Cn (O � -+d W w W N CD W W Cn Cn Cn w V 7 W CO N) -N N V w V V V O W O O A O 0) OD -N O W Cn N O Cn V O (n O O O W P O CA) C O n O C O O (.71 O O O O <(D A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O o ? O � W 00000000000 O O O W W o m CD. N 9. 00 0 0 O o 00 O 0 0 0 o 0 N O 0 D CL 0 ma Irngtd 19101 0 o tD n 00 00 O -4 0o aD ao ao ao ao w ao 0o w au OD OD 00 —i p w w w w w w w w w w w W w W A A A A A A A A A A A A � A A d 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 O AAAAAAAAAAA �? N -I A W N N N -� -• -� O O O 0 003 f/! n m , 'o 3 K � K K K < � Q o Z m C m O W N �. < CD 7' 7' S O o c n C 7 0 0 N o viSO sp m c `a G) m CD m (D m 0o — cn < • S. .0 W v O :3 z — N N W 46 =r 0 U) cn C 'p 'p O to •"' 09 N U n O O O `< `G "6 (p O CD CD CD cr CD CD ;L 0 C Cn 3 cn 3 7 cn ((Dig p • • N C.0 N N M M N V A CO V A 0) (O O O V W 0 N W N W V W W O A W O (O O O 00 V CO Cn N OD CO 00 N A V W O A A (.4 O CD D Cn A M Cn CO A CD Cn O N W Cn (D O) N 0 V 00 W V (n (A CD W O O N O N O O V A C -� Cn M M O CO W OD U7 Co Co A V V CD w 0) N O O A OD N O -� A N Cn V 0 W N co co A V A -• N Cl OD OD N W (O D mo W A W (A A OD O (O CD (n Cfl O N A A s V Cn V (n W A M Cn O O o 0 W Cn OD mo (n (n0000000CD 00 00 rnA � o 000000000000 C) 00 N) N w 000o00000CD 0a OO W cn 00 O_ N A 1 D 0ZI 00 N N E O � � 4 N O O m (0 W W N (D O A V (n N O 00 00 N W (0 O Vw0A 'Cn 000 'Cn cnCOON AA ANN 0 W V " CT V Cn W W (A (n00 OO CA) (n00 CL N (n N O (n 0 O (000NO0 0 O C) C) a) D6 = a oC0 OD V 000 V 0000000 00 00 N3 aN CD W 000000000000 00 W (n OD -� On D mym _ _ _ r s O .n. Z v N A N w O O O A 60i N C (� A 000 " (D0 OO V Cn Am CD CD OCDCF) W > D .A w O N N Cn V OD V o (D N O O O 0 A O Z N O (A000 N W O W O O O W W ODAw cp G) m C A A (nOOOAU7 V V N CF) 0) NOO UO COXG) C) (nw � cnrno (n0w (.DOw rnrn (D (DO Cil C0D O G D A -� N N n Cl) -ml m O A N O A N V CA N (n V (n s N 0 00 00 N W (D co 3 (n WCO O NCAAN00N AA ANN -' M U) W 0000 000000 C) CD W Cn 00 Q Cn OOOO 000000 OO Cn4 NO O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 05% 0 Z 00000 000000 00 000 (n N O (D rn N N � 0 00 N 04) CO W V A w Cn V V A CA 7 00 (D W A N 0 �! (n V W 00 O O V 00 CD N A (O W (n N 0 0 0o 0o W O O O (n (n CD O O O UIOOOOOOCnOOOO C) C) U1AO < A 000000000000 0 C AO OD (D A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A A O N O O 0 (D 3 O O O O w N O O O O N O O A D n 0 mo 0 0 0 0 CD CL 00 O O O D 0 O 0 (n = 2n�i D) � � 0 0 0 0 000000000m Z -1 � m 3 +(� � a �''� N =r •• • • •-• (D .* W W m (n (n A A W 3 v D m ° 0 d °—' °' o d ocDO (no (n0oov 0 2 r x a n am0w Rio meoawaammmo y0D A y O o, v o 00000000oK v oC CD� � � o n � O0000000m d m y o n � * 20c7 * U) U) m 0 m D 0. - o n m C (D a 3 C m (U t/i CD O� 00 m C O � omo�i � u, E � � m = � � 5s63 � m' m � m CD CA X m 0 7 y O W vi o �' m rt 0 cn D N y C10p_ CCD y � W > m 0Xc 0 n0 y -'CD O o c Ro X °Co CD 0 a c'� v m _0 CD 00 Cl)Z 90 = o. � m °o m e CU 0 E (n Q x U) m to .0 .. Cn a CD 0 x CD CD m Cn O IV N M N D D c(] N N 00 (O (D (0 00 0o N O N O N N A NO O N COA OON A 00 O O O 00 m W (n �4 M W O W n co N A O O O W W Cn CD W O W -� O O O 0 O OAMW 0M000 N O O O N O N O CID A O (A (A O W A W O O O O O O O A 0 0 (0 o Cn O N N N O Cb J J J N 0 O O O O 000 A A W (A O N O O O WAN ) J (nA NOAO D _ o O O O O O O JCn OOA DOJO a Z -' O O O COs CD00000 0000 a CD O O O 000 O Cn 00000000 V 0 N O O O N O N O N O O O O o o O N 0 O< W O O O WO W O Cn000000000 CD NK (n O C O N oZC N N N O O n Cb A J J J � � � m O O O ? A W CAO OA O co W o O Cn A J Cn A N O A o L m > rZ] IV O O O IVOIV J40 b ;A DOJO Z N O O O No N (000000 Coco CD CC 00 O o 0 00000 O CnO0o00000J0 O- � � Cn J O O O C I O V O N O O O O c o O I V o m 0 O O O (AO CA O Cno000000 (no co Zu G) j > O o O N p a C) Q D A C N 00 N CD v W J N O N O W A 0) _ (n WVCn O NO COWOJ W � � m CD A CA co CA N) (n W A CA N C/) W O O O W O W O W O O (D 0 O (D CD m W O O O O O O O O O O O OCn (nO � W W O Cn0 J O O O J O J O JOOQOOOAO00O Cn O Z N N iv O W W(b m cn O o o OO co n o O O N co J Cn -Ph, NC7iA ? w3 O O O OO 000 NO O 00000N � CD %4 O O o V OJ O WooCAo00 " J W NCU CA O O O CA O W O �4 O O (D 0 0 0 W W O p 0 J O O O V O V O O O o W 0 0 0 0 00 0 U7 N N 0) O O O 0 0) (00 000 v co CA O CA W O O O W V CA N 0 Cn N o J (n U1 o 00 Cn O (n tb A O " 0) -+ 00 J b O O O O CD Cn O A O 00 AOA O Cn 000000 (n00 0) V O O O J O J O W O O O O O O W O o C CO O 00 (OO (D O 0000000000 CD N O O CA CD 3 O O O O O O O j N O O O O O O O N O O A D a 0 a 0 0 0 000 o m CL 0 00 0 O 0 00 O September 12 , 2005 Town . Board Mtg ATTACHMENT # 3 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD FROM :-- JON KANTER, DIRECTOR-OF PLANNING - ---- DATE . SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 RE : HANSHAW ROAD RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT — RELATION TO TOWN SIDEWALK POLICY A representative from Fisher Associates (the County' s consultant for the Hanshaw Road project) met with Town officials on August 24, 2005 to discuss the status of the County' s proposed Hanshaw Road project. After reviewing a summary of public input from the first public information meeting held by the county, project objectives were briefly discussed. The current preferred option for the conceptual design of the road r-o-w as described by Fisher includes 11 - foot wide travel lanes, 5 -foot wide shoulders, one sidewalk (on the north side of Hanshaw Road), and shallow swales (with underground storm sewers) . It appears that a fair amount of trees would have to be removed in this option, and about 1 - 1 /2 feet of additional right-of--way would have to be obtained from adjacent landowners on the north side of Hanshaw Road to accommodate the proposed design. A second public meeting had been tentatively scheduled, but was postponed due to the short notice, and is in the process of being re-scheduled by the County. The issue for discussion at the September 12th Town Board meeting is how the Town' s Sidewalk Policy relates to the proposed sidewalk in the Hanshaw Road project. The sidewalk issue appears to be important to address at this early stage in project design because we were informed by Fisher Associates that a Hanshaw Road resident who has been expressing his opposition to sidewalks is now distributing flyers to Hanshaw Road residents to stir up further opposition. Apparently, much of his opposition centers around having residents be responsible for maintaining the sidewalks. The Public Works Committee discussed this issue at their August 30th meeting, and indicated that the Town' s Sidewalk Policy (adopted by the Town Board on 10/23/03 ) should serve as a guide to determine whether sidewalk(s) or a walkway would be appropriate for the Hanshaw Road area, and if so, whether the Town should be responsible for the sidewalk/walkway. Fisher Associates indicates that if the Town were to take on the responsibility for the sidewalk element of the project, the Town would need to come up with a 5 % match for that portion of the project. The County would control the r-o-w, and the Town would need to obtain an easement for the sidewalk/walkway. Cost estimates for construction of the sidewalk/walkway have not been provided yet. The total length of the Hanshaw Road project area is less than 1 - 1 /2 miles. The Town' s Sidewalk Policy (a copy is attached) indicates that sidewalks/walkways are appropriate and should be built at the Town' s expense, upon recommendation of the Planning Board and approval of the Town Board, if at least three of the following conditions apply. Comments are annotated after each of the criteria indicating how the Hanshaw Road situation relates. 1 . Convenient walking distance to school, church, or other place of regular public use : Much of Hanshaw Road is within convenient walking distance of the commercial services in Community Corners and the Northeast Elementary School and DeWitt Middle School on Warren Road. St, Catherine of Siena Church is also within easy walking distance of many of the homes along Hanshaw Road. Hanshaw Road is surrounded by medium density residential development. This is evidenced by comments from many of the Hanshaw Road area residents who attended the first public meeting, who indicated that they often walk to the above-referenced locations. Both the schools and Community Corners are located about half a mile from the Hanshaw. Road/Warren Road intersection. 2 . Links existing or probable future sidewalks : A sidewalk on Hanshaw Road would connect Community Corners & sidewalks in Cayuga Heights with Dryden and the planned Monkey Run trail. 3. Existing/ planned road shoulders inadequate for bicycles and pedestrians : Existing shoulders on Hanshaw Road are inadequate for pedestrian traffic . 4. Proximate access to public transportation : Major transit routes serve Community Corners, and Bus Routes 31 , 37 ,40 ,41 , and 44 serve Hanshaw Road, 5. ROW sufficient, or easement can be reasonably obtained : Fisher Associates is in the process of redesigning the ROW . It is estimated that approximately 1 . 5 ' beyond the current right-of-way will need to be obtained from adjoining property owners. 6. No dead ends without reasonable expectation of extension/ connection : A sidewalk/walkway along Hanshaw Road would connect with the sidewalk in Cayuga Heights and into Dryden & the future Monkey Run Trail system. It would also connect with the enhanced pedestrian/bicycle shoulders that were built on Warren Road. 7. Peak hour traffic volume is at least moderate (350-500 vph) : Peak hour counts on Hanshaw Road west of Warren Road and just east of Warren are 550-600 vehicles per hour (vph) . Peak hour counts on Hanshaw east of Warren Road past Muriel Street and toward Sapsucker Woods Road are 350-400 vph. These counts meet the threshold stated in the Sidewalk Policy. 8. Shown as part of a Town-wide pedestrian circulation plan : The conceptual draft map of "Potential Non-motorized Transportation Corridors" in the draft Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan shows the Hanshaw Road corridor as one warranting new pedestrian/bicycle facilities. 2 4 Based upon an evaluation of the above criteria, it appears that all eight of the criteria in the Sidewalk Policy are met when applying those criteria to the Hanshaw Road situation. Hanshaw Road would therefore not only qualify for, but would be a prime candidate for, the inclusion of a sidewalk/walkway in the road reconstruction project and for consideration of Town responsibility for maintenance of the sidewalk/walkway. The Sidewalk Policy indicates that "maintenance will be the responsibility of the homeowners fronting on the sidewalks, unless other arrangements are made" . A walkway on Hanshaw Road would be comparable to the current Town-maintained walkways on Mitchell Street, Snyder Hill Road, Pleasant Grove Road, and Maple Avenue, and would warrant Town Board consideration of similar maintenance responsibilities. Since a recommendation of the Planning Board is called for in the Sidewalk Policy, the Town Board might want to consider referring this matter to the Planning Board for a recommendation regarding the question of Town responsibility for establishing and maintaining a sidewalk/walkway on Hanshaw Road in conjunction with the County reconstruction project. It might also be appropriate to request that the Capital Projects Committee look at the financial aspect of such a sidewalk/walkway. That Committee is scheduled to meet on September 16th (2 : 00 p.m.) to consider recommendations regarding 2006 and future year capital projects. Please feel free to call if you have any questions on the above . Enc. 3 6 SIDEWALK POLICY FOR THE TOWN OF ITHACA Adopted 10/23/03 I . NEWLY DEVELOPED AREAS --A-. - Subdivisions -with internal-roads - Considerations : • Children walk to school • Current or likely future presence of numerous children in an environment where, in the absence of a sidewalk, many children can be expected to be present on the road shoulder • Bus stop within convenient walking distance • Connected to other sidewalks • Provide access to trail system or public park • Safety for pedestrians If any item applies, then the Planning Board at its discretion may require the developer to include sidewalks with the development. Maintenance will be the responsibility of the homeowners, or the resident association unless other arrangements are made . B . On existing roads If a new sidewalk would result in a connection to existing sidewalks or sidewalk system planned by the Town of Ithaca, the Planning Board may require sidewalks as part of the development. Maintenance will be the responsibility of the homeowners fronting on the sidewalks unless other arrangements are made. II . PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED AREAS A. Petition for establishment of a sidewalk benefit district On a positive vote of the owners of at least one half of the assessed valuation of all the taxable real property in the proposed benefit district. Maintenance will be the responsibility of the homeowners fronting-on the sidewalks unless other arrangements are made . B . At Town expense On recommendation of the Planning Board and approval of the Town Board if at least three of the following conditions apply : • Within convenient walking distance to school, church or other place of regular public use, P • Links existing or probable future sidewalks, • Existing or planned road shoulders inadequate for bicycles and pedestrians, • Proximate access to public transportation, • Right of way is sufficient for existing/planned roadway plus sidewalk, or an easement can be reasonably obtained from adjacent landowner(s) . • Planned sidewalk does not dead end without reasonable expectation of extension/connection in foreseeable future, • Peak hour traffic volume is at least moderate, defined as 350- 500 vehicles per hour, and • Shown as part of a town wide pedestrian circulation system in Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan. Maintenance will be the responsibility of the homeowners fronting on the sidewalks, unless other arrangements are made. • Examples of Town and County roads with that volume of peak hour traffic includes Five Mile Drive, Ellis Hollow Rd. , Coddington Rd. (west of Juniper), Judd Falls Rd. , Pine Tree Rd. , and Forest Home Drive , III . CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS Unless other arrangements are approved by the Planning Department, standard sidewalk construction shall consist of concrete four (4) feet wide . Where conditions apply, and if supported by owners of at least half the assessed value of real property in the benefit district, a walkway may be substituted for a sidewalk. Compared with a sidewalk,, a walkway will typically be set further from the road edge and will be more curvy, often being constructed of asphalt. September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 4 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD FROM : JONATHAN KANTER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING RE : SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS , 950 DANBY ROAD — PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REZONING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE DATE : SEPTEMBER 1 , 2005 As the final stage in the process regarding the proposed rezoning of the South Hill Business Campus site, the Town Board is scheduled to hold a public hearing at the September 12`}' meeting regarding the proposed rezoning of a portion of the South Hill Business Campus property located at 950 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. ' s 39- 1 - 1 . 1 and 39- 14 .25 Industrial and Office Park Commercial Zones . The proposal involves rezoning the existing Industrial Zone portion of the site (41 . 3 +/- acres) to a new Planned Development Zone (PDZ), which would allow a mix of uses allowed in the Industrial, Light Industrial, and Office Park Commercial Zones . The property was recently acquired by South Hill Business Campus, LLC, with the intent of leasing space in the existing building to multiple tenants for office, industrial/ warehouse and related uses. Attached for the Board' s consideration is a copy of the draft Local Law (6/2/05), along with the Planning Board' s resolution recommending that the Town Board approve the rezoning proposal, the County Planning Department' s comments regarding the rezoning, and a copy of the Negative Declaration of environmental significance adopted by the Planning Board (acting as Lead Agency) . The creation of a new Planned Development Zone (PDZ) for the existing building and surrounding developed area would allow a mix of uses permitted in the Industrial, Light Industrial, and Office Park Commercial Zones, and would provide a more efficient approval process for interior changes in the existing building that do not have impacts on the exterior site. As discussed at previous meetings, the current Industrial zoning of the building (the entire building and developed site is in the Industrial zone, while undeveloped portions of the site are in the Office Park Commercial zone) has already presented several cases in which interpretations, and in one case, a use variance, had to be sought in order to renovate space in the building for prospective tenants (a use variance was granted for a catering business to locate in the existing cafeteria space in the building). In addition, educational/school uses are not permitted in the Industrial zone, and certain other uses permitted in the Office Park Commercial zone (e.g. , restaurant, arts and crafts studio, and medical clinic) are not permitted in the Industrial zone. Another issue that was raised that is also addressed in the proposed PDZ has to do with the site plan modification thresholds in the Zoning Code that require certain modifications to be submitted to the Planning Board for approval . Current provisions trigger formal approval by the Planning Board for any alterations or renovations of the interior of a building involving a change in occupancy or use. This means, for example, that any change of an existing manufacturing space to accommodate some other use (e . g. , office, lab, etc.) requires site plan approval by the Planning Board. Both the Town Board and Planning Board indicated that they would be comfortable with a provision in the PDZ that would exempt certain additional modifications (e. g., interior renovations involving a change of use or occupancy with no exterior or site changes) from having to go through the formal Board approval process . This has been incorporated into the draft Local Law establishing the PDZ. Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions regarding the above. Att. cc : Andy Sciarabba, Managing Partner Linda Luciano, Property Manager 2 September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 5 NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Local L aw Filing 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. City _ -of. . . .. . . - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - --- - -- - - --- - --- -- - - - - - --- - - - - -- - - Town Local Law No. . .. . . . - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - of the year 20. - Q5 TO AMEND ZONING HAPTERS 270 AND 271 OF THE _ TOWN O .. . . . . . Alocal law - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . - ff"ert Titre) ITHACA CODE TO PROVIDE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - ------- - -- - -- - -- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - -- - - --- - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - -- - - -- --- - - - - - - - THE SOUTH _ HILL_ _ BTJ E� IVE SCAM uSQ�I _ DA1�Z XR9AI?_ O.M.01-33.1 - - -SOUTH - HILL_ _ BUB 1 NEW.2_ _ .QAMPIIS j6. ..LLQx - -- - - --- - - -- - -- --- - - - - - -- - --- - ----- -- -- --- Be it enacted by the - - - -- - --- - -- TQ.M- - DQARD. . . . . . . -. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. ..-- - - -- ------ - - --- -- --- - - of the (Nmne n/Le;islattive Body) . `ebunty —: To` n o - - - -- - - -- - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - as follows : SEE ATTACHED (If additional space is needed , attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.) DOS-239 .(Rev. 11/99) l l / TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO. 8 OF THE YEAR 2005 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND ZONING CHAPTERS 270 AND 271 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA CODE TO PROVIDE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE FOR THE SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS ON DANBY ROAD OWNED BY SOUTH HILL BUSINESS CAMPUS, LLC Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows : Section 1 . Chapter 270 of the Town of Ithaca Code, Article IV, § 270-6 entitled "Enumeration of zones" is amended by adding at the end of subdivision A thereof the following : "Planned Development Zone No . 12 - In accordance with and pursuant to Local Law No . 8 - 2005 [South Hill Business Campus] " Section 2 . Chapter 271 of the Town of Ithaca Code is hereby amended by adding Section 271 - 12, entitled "Planned Development Zone No . 12", as follows : "A. Findings . ( 1 ) Many years ago, NCR Corporation built a large manufacturing facility at 950 Danby Road on South Hill in the Town of Ithaca which building, with additions since its construction, now consists of approximately 162 ,004 square feet of manufacturing space, approximately 95 , 802 square feet of office space, approximately 6, 768 square feet of cafeteria space, and approximately 12, 560 square feet of other miscellaneous space ; (2) There are adjacent to said building approximately 1 ,200 parking spaces; (3 ) Over the years, the ownership of the building and the surrounding property has changed, and they have recently been acquired by South Hill Business Campus, LLC (the "Owner") ; (4) Over the years, the occupancy of the building has gradually decreased to the point where today only approximately 87, 329 square feet of the building is being utilized, a significant underutilization of available space; (5 ) To accomplish increased occupancy, the Owner needs to be able to rent to a variety of tenants engaged in a variety of different businesses and activities, and accordingly will need to convert portions of the space from its past uses to other types of uses ; 1 (6) It is the intention of the Owner that such increased occupancies be accomplished in a cohesive manner and in . a manner that does not cause adverse environmental effects under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and the regulations and local laws adopted thereunder that would exceed the environmental effects that would occur if the building were fully occupied in the manner in which it would be permitted to be occupied under the zoning regulations presently applicable to it; (7) The building and a portion of the surrounding property (the "Premises") are currently zoned Industrial ; (8) Under the current zoning, any change in use in the area of the building requires a site plan modification approval from the Planning Board before any construction or change may occur, which normally takes a minimum of thirty days to process to a hearing and obtain a decision, and sometimes takes longer when more than one meeting is necessary to make a decision; (9) If a use requested by a tenant is not one presently permitted in the Industrial Zone, the process may also require an appearance before the Zoning Board of Appeals for a decision, which takes an additional two or more weeks, and since the request is often for a use variance, the criteria for which are difficult to meet, it is sometimes impossible to obtain the needed variance ; ( 10) The Owner has requested that the Premises be rezoned to a Planned Development Zone; ( 11 ) The requested rezoning would apply to the building and surrounding property that are currently zoned Industrial but would not apply to other adjacent property also owned by Owner that is zoned Office Park Commercial ; ( 12) The purpose of a Planned Development Zone is to permit, where appropriate, a degree of flexibility in conventional land use and design regulations that will encourage development in an imaginative and innovative way while insuring efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment and protection of community interest; ( 13 ) Given the nature of the building, its size, the amount of parking available, the access to a state highway, and other attributes and circumstances regarding the Premises, uses other than those permitted in an industrial zone would be compatible with the surrounding area and would provide spaces for uses that would be helpful to other facilities in the area, including Ithaca College and Ithacare ; ( 14) The Town ' s Comprehensive Plan encourages light industrial and office park development in appropriate areas to provide a variety of employment 2 opportunities and to increase the tax base ; ( 15) The Premises meet the Town' s guidelines for light industrial and office park development, including access to municipal sewer and water, sufficient site area, safe and efficient road access, access by public transit, and adequate distance from incompatible uses ; ( 16) The change of zoning from Industrial to Planned Development Zone is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan, will provide flexibility in the redevelopment of an important facility in the Town consistent with community needs and character, will increase the variety of employment opportunities, will increase the tax base, and furthers the health and welfare of the community; and ( 17) The Planning Board has recommended the adoption of this local law and has approved a site plan for Planned Development Zone No . 12, which approval will become effective upon the effective date of this law. B . Only the following uses are permitted of right in Planned Development Zone No . 12 : ( 1 ) Bank or other financial institution without a drive-through facility. (2) Business, administrative or professional offices . (3 ) Medical and dental clinics not involving any overnight occupancy. (4) Optician and related facilities . (5 ) Municipal or other governmental offices. (6) Industrial uses employing electric power or other motor power, or utilizing hand labor for fabrication or assembly. (7) Indoor warehousing and indoor storage including self-service storage facilities. (8) Printing, publishing and bookbinding. (9) Research and development facilities utilizing office spaces, indoor scientific laboratories, and other similar indoor spaces . ( 10) Conference and event center. ( 11 ) Off-premises catering. ( 12) Packaging/mailing service. 3 ( 13 ) Arts and crafts gallery or studio . ( 14) Educational uses, provided the nature of the use is otherwise authorized in this Planned Development Zone (e. g. an office used for educational purposes would be permitted, a dormitory used for educational purposes would not be permitted) . ( 15 ) Any lawful manufacturing activity, except for the uses expressly enumerated below: (a) Any of the following factories or works : . arsenal, blast furnace, boiler works, iron, steel, brass or copper foundry, metal ore, smelting, planing mill, rolling mill and stockyards or slaughter house . (b) The manufacturing or storage of explosives and gas, oil and other flammables or petroleum products . ( 16) Cafeteria providing dining services primarily for occupants of the building(s) in Planned Development Zone No . 12 . ( 17) Fitness center with related shower and ancillary facilities. ( 18) Recording studio . C . The following uses are permitted in Planned Development Zone No . 12 but only upon receipt of a special permit for same from the Planning Board in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 270 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca ("Chapter 270 ") : ( 1 ) Restaurant without a drive-through facility. (2) Club house, lodge, community center. (3 ) Hospital, medical or dental clinic that involves overnight occupancy. D . The following uses are specifically prohibited in Planned Development Zone No. 12 : ( 1 ) Dwelling units, except as an accessory use as set forth below. (2) Sales of any products at retail to the general public except as the same may be related to and an incidental by-product of a permitted principal use such as manufacturing, and except as may be authorized specifically by this local law, such as restaurant sales or sales related to an arts and crafts gallery or studio . (3 ) Motel . 4 (4) Hotel . (5 ) Adult entertainment business . (6) Restaurant, bank, or any other enterprise with a drive-through facility. E. The following accessory uses are permitted in Planned Development Zone No . 12 : ( 1 ) Automobile parking and off-street loading areas, subject to the further requirements of Chapter 270 . (2) Accessory storage buildings, but not to include outside storage. (3 ) Signs, as regulated by Chapter 221 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca entitled "Signs . " (4) The dwelling of a guard, caretaker or custodian but not more than one dwelling unit per building. (5 ) Guardhouse . (6) Common recreational areas including playfields, ballfields, tennis and volleyball courts, swimming pools, walkways, parks, community gardens, and other similar outdoor recreational facilities . (7) Incidental retail sales of candy, ice cream, baked goods, flowers, and other small items intended primarily for occupants and tenants of the Premises . F . The following accessory uses are permitted in Planned Development Zone No. 12 but only upon receipt of a special permit for same from the Planning Board in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 270 : ( 1 ) Child day care centers . (2) Any municipal or public utility structures necessary to the provision of utility services for the permitted facilities . (3 ) Fences up to 8 feet in height if approved by the Planning Board as appropriate and necessary for any use otherwise permitted by this local law. G. Any use and construction in Planned Development Zone No . 12 shall be governed by all of the requirements, including placement of structures, minimum area, height limitations, yard regulations, building area, minimum usable open space, lot sizes and areas, off-street loading, access and sidewalks, buffer areas and screening, displays, performance standards, and similar requirements, of an Industrial Zone, 5 except as the same may be specifically modified by the terms of this local law. H. ( 1 ) Except as set forth in subparagraph I below, no building permit shall be issued for a building or structure within Planned Development Zone No . 12 nor shall any existing building, structure, occupancy or use in such Zone be changed unless the proposed building, structure, occupancy and/or use is in accordance with a site plan approved by the Planning Board or with a modified site plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Article XXIII and other applicable provisions of Chapter 270 . (2) In addition to the actions listed in Section 270491 that require Planning Board approval of modified site plans, any change in occupancy or use of the Premises that involves the on-site transport, use, storage or disposal of hazardous substances shall require prior Planning Board approval of a modified site plan pursuant to the provisions of Article XXIII. I. Notwithstanding the immediately preceding subparagraph, no site plan approval shall be required for any change in occupancy that does not include a change in use, nor for any modification of use from a use permitted as of right to another use permitted as of right in Planned Development Zone No. 12, provided: ( 1 ) No new building, no construction on the exterior of any existing buildings, and no change in any of the facilities outside existing buildings (e .g. lighting, grading, parking, or other exterior physical feature) are required to effect such change in occupancy or use; and (2) All construction related to such change is in the interior of existing buildings; and (3 ) Any construction required in connection with such change complies in all respects with all applicable building codes and environmental regulations ; and (4) The party effecting such change has obtained, if required by any applicable building or environmental code : (a) A building permit; and (b) Before occupancy of the altered space, a certificate of occupancy; and (c) The proposed change in occupancy or use does not involve the on-site transport, use, storage or disposal of hazardous substances . J. All of the area rezoned pursuant to this local law shall be owned by the same party and there shall be no subdivision of the area contained in Planned Development Zone No . 12 . 6 K. The area encompassed and rezoned in accordance with this local law to Planned Development Zone No . 12 is described on Schedule A to this local law. The official zoning map of the Town of Ithaca is hereby amended by adding such zone at the location described. L. Any violations of the terms of this local law shall constitute a violation of Chapter 270 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca and shall be punishable as set forth in said Code and in Section 268 of the Town Law of the State of New York. Each week's continued violation shall constitute a separate offense . Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Town reserves for itself, its agencies and all other persons having an interest, all remedies and rights to enforce the provisions of this law, including, without limitation, actions for any injunction or other equitable remedy, or action and damages, in the event the owner of the parcel covered by this law fails to comply with any of the provisions hereof." Section 3 . In the event that any portion of this law is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Section 4 . This local law shall take effect upon publication of the local law or an abstract of same in the official newspaper of the Town, or upon its filing with the New York Secretary of State, whichever is the last to occur. 7 SCHEDULE A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TO BE REZONED TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE NO . 12 ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL LAND situate in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, being more particularly described as follows : COMMENCING at a point in the westerly highway line of Danby Road (N. Y. S . Route 96B) which point is in the southeasterly corner of premises reputedly owned by I.C . S . Development Partners, Inc. (734 Deeds 37) and which point is approximately 200 feet northerly from a north line of the driveway serving what is now known as the South Hill Business Campus at 950 Danby Road; running thence along the westerly line of Danby Road South 20E 51 ' 37 " West a distance of 168 . 81 feet; thence South 68E 32' 1 " East along a highway line of Danby Road a distance of 13 feet to a point; thence South 21E 37' 55 " West along the westerly line of Danby Road a distance of 953 . 16 feet to a point; thence South 22E 42' 32 " West along the westerly line of Danby Road a distance of 463 . 00 feet to a point; thence approximately North 66E West a distance of approximately 330 feet to a point immediately East of an asphalt parking area; thence approximately north 84E West a distance of approximately 1030 feet to an iron pipe; thence North 6E 49' 21 " East a distance of 832 . 60 feet to an iron pipe in a southerly line of premises reputedly of Bracewell (554 Deeds 964) ; thence South 85E 46' 36 " East 422 . 75 feet to a pin set at the intersection of two stone walls; thence North 7E 11 ' 20 " East a distance of 625 .43 feet to an iron pipe found at a southwesterly corner of premises reputedly of Emersub IV, Inc. (592 Deed 1080) ; thence South 83E 5 P 55 " East along the Emersub IV, Inc. property line a distance of 968 . 14 feet to a pipe in a southwest corner of premises reputedly of I. C . S . Development Partners, Inc . (734 Deeds 37) ; thence South 83E 03 ' 41 " East a distance of 414 . 30 feet to the point or place of beginning. The above described premises are more fully shown on a map entitled : "South Hill Business Campus, 950 Danby Road, Survey Map", a copy of which is on filed in the Town of Ithaca Planning Office. 8 (Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the fi ing 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. - --1 8 - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - of 20- 05 ITHACA of the T n�(Vtllage) 01 ---SE - - - - H12 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - was duly passed by the BA-RD - on _SEPT _ _ 12 _ - _ 20 _ _ 05in accordance ith the applicable provisions of law. - - - - - -- - - - -- -- - - - - - - -- - - - (Name of Legislative Body) 2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval , no disapproval or repas age 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)(City)(Town)(Village) of - -- - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - ---- - - - I - - - - - -- - - - - -- - - - was duly passed by the . . .. . . _ . ... . . . . ... . . .. . . .. . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . .. . .. on -- - - - - - - -- - -- - - - - - 20 - - - , and was (apprdved)(not approved)(repassed after (Name of Legislative Body) disapproval) by the - - - -: - - - --= - - - - - - -- - - - - - - --- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - and was deemed d ily adopted on - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - 20- - - - , (Elective Chief Executive Officer*) in 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 20 of the (County)(City )(Town)(Village) of - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - -� - -- - - - - - - -- -- - was duly passed b . . . . . . . . _ . .. . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .. . . . . . . . . _ _ _ on - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - 20- - - - , and was (a proved)(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 b id on - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 24 - -- , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid etition 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 ( pproved)(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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 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 cou wide basis or, if there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to a prove or veto local laws or ordinances . (2) . (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.) ereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ of 20_ _ _ _ _ _ f the City of - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of ction (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 . . .. , ecame 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. . . . . above. n Clerk of the County legislative body, City, Town or Village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body (Seal) Date : � r (Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF T(]MPKIDLS I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains the correct text and that all proper proceedings have been had- or taken for the enactment of the local law annexed hereto. Signature nn Title Town of ITHACA �'•11ago Date : 09 1 9 / 06 (3) September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 6 ✓n {/�� Y p Fa l � .S•1.'N � - t rg t s 008 ' I t� ® Val t1 a i _ n ►a . ry1�4 p rtP11Wt aMM p vti ° 10 rjg r�ie� L L G t L L _ k rarrr9 mr lA � v I • — � r , [ J —'iii-- yuy y"' z� �;� � o A 1�'� 6 r3 ��$Z asap aa� •g.aL .: jZ fLT XNAY !! ' . lie s� I :3 g1;[iI I �qq�1� E� a tag m. = a� I SO r MrIW t t1Nt' I y 5 ' 1 i ` SH �Pt I rwrr JJ•lor �`f" IQ � v I W Jill a s ap I a > -0 >— . -..—_. �� G� N !' Q OD X8,3 p ty N� ag � Iyyy I T2 ,,ttit nn c: I . f! September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 7 OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF OF TOMPKINS COUNTY 9 WARREN ROAD TEL: (607) 257- 1345 #THACA, NY 14850 FAX : ( ) 607 266-5436 PETER J . MESKILL JOSEPH B. VITALE SHERIFF UNDERSHERIFF AUG 2 5 2005 Catherine Valentino Supervisor , ATTEST _ Town of Ithaca L ITHACA TOWN CLERK 215 N . Tioga Street Ithaca , NY 14850 August 23 , 2005 Dear Cathy , Enclosed you will find the 2005 - 2006 contract for Deputy services at the intersection of North Cayuga and Lake Streets during the hours of 7 and 8 am daily . The Ithaca City School District Superintendent has already signed the contract . Please note that the contract amount has increased slightly . The hourly rates for Deputies have not increased due to contract negotiation issues ; however , retroactive adjustments should be made when resolution is reached . The contract price has not increased over the past few years , and I felt it appropriate to do so at this time . The adjustment was made with the existing 60 / 40 allocation to each party . If all terms meet with your approval , please sign all four copies and return . Once County Administration signs off , we will forward an original to you . Contact me if you have any questions or concerns . Sincerely , Peter Meskill Sheriff AGREEMENT AGREEMENT, made by and between the COUNTY OF TOMPKINS , a municipal corporation of the State of New York, having offices at 125 East Co rt Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereinafter referred to as the "COUNTY", and th SHERIFF OF TOMPKINS COUNTY with an office at 779 Warren Road, Ithaca, ew York 14850, hereinafter referred to as the "SHERIFF", the ITHACA CITY SC OOL DISTRICT with an office at 400 Lake Street, Ithaca, New York, 14850, hereina d er referred to as the "DISTRICT", and the TOWN OF ITHACA with an office at 215 orth Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York 14850, hereinafter referred to as the "TOWN" . WITNESSETH WHEREAS , the DISTRICT and TOWN have requested that the HERIFF provide a Deputy for traffic control at the Boynton Middle School ; and WHEREAS , the COUNTY has authorized the SHERIFF to suppl a Deputy as is stipulated in this contract to the DISTRICT and the TOWN ; and WHEREAS, the DISTRICT and TOWN are willing to share the. costs of such Deputy NOW, THEREFORE , in consideration of the promises, covenant , and agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows : 1 ) The term of this contract shall be from September 1 , 2005 thro Iugh June 30, 2006 , 2) The SHERIFF agrees to provide a Deputy Sheriff for traffic control at the Lake and Cayuga Streets intersection on all school days during the periolJ of 7 : 00 am to 8 : 00 am . 3 ) The DISTRICT will agree to pay the SHERIFF the sum of $ 7 , 800 and the TOWN will agree to pay the SHERIFF the sum of $ 5 ,200 making a t tal sum payable for such services of $ 13 , 000 . Said amount shall be payable in tw equal installments, the first payment of $ 3 ,900 from the DISTRICT and $ 2 ,600 fro the TOWN shall be payable within thirty (30) days of the execution of this agree I ent and the remaining $ 3 ,900 from the DISTRICT and $ 2 ,600 from the TOWN shall be due and payable 03c � ym June 15 , 200 Payment shall be submitted to the Tompkins County Sheriff, C: Attention : Sheriff, 779 Warren Road; Ithaca, NY 14850 F 4) Liability clauses : i) The DISTRICT shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the COUNTY, the SHERIFF, the TOWN, and their respective Officers, employees, agents and elected officials from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, causes of action, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorneys fees) to the extent arising from or relating to any omission of duty, negligence or wrongful act of the DISTRICT, its employees, subcontractors or agents . ii) The COUNTY shall indemnify, hold harmless and defend the DISTRICT, the SHERIFF, the TOWN, and their respective employees, agents, and elected officials from and against any and all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, causes of action, costs and expenses (including reasonable attorney' s fees) to the extent arising from or relating to any omission of duty, negligence or wrongful act of the COUNTY, the SHERIFF, either of their Deputies, employees, subcontractors or agents. iii) The provisions of this section 4 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 5) The relationship of the parties is that of independent contractors. No party nor any parties , employees and agents shall hold itself or themselves out as, nor claim to be, Officers or employees of the other party (except for the SHERIFF and his Deputies being Officers and/or employees of the COUNTY) and shall make no claim nor demand for, nor be entitled to , any right or privilege as an Officer or employee, including, but not limited to worker' s compensation coverage, medical and unemployment benefits, social security or retirement membership benefits from the other party. 6) Each party shall timely obtain, at its own expense, all licenses or permits for the work to be performed under this contract, if any are necessary. 7) No party shall assign, transfer, convey, subcontract or otherwise dispose of this contract or their respective responsibilities to perform under this contract or their right, title, interest in and/or to the same, nor any part thereof, without prior written consent of all of the other parties . r r 8) The compensation provided to the SHERIFF under this Agreement represents the total compensation that is due in connection with this matter. No tither claims for benefits, salaries, fees or other remuneration of any sort (other th In the indemnity set forth above g shall be due and owing to the SHERIFF or the CO 7NTY for the services set forth in this Agreement. -9) —T-his Agreement-represents -the entire -understanding between the parties and supercedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements either written or oral . This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement si ed by all parties . 10) The SHERIFF reserves the right to terminate this contract 30 days prior to the inability to provide services through the remaining term of the contract. 11 ) The provisions of this Agreement shall be construed under the 1 Iws of the State of New York. The parties ' consent to the Agreement is indicated by the signatures below. Date: � To7 7;, Date : 1e , To kin County Sheriff Date: l � 0 Ithaca City School Dis ict Date : Catherine Valentino, S pervisor, Town of Ithaca September 8 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 8 Cayuga Medical Center D at Ithaca AUG 12 2005 ATTEST _ _ ITHACA TOWN F1 August 2 , 2005 Town of Ithaca Town SU ervisor 215 N . Tioga Street Ithaca , NY 14850 Attention : Cathy Valentino Reference : Cayuga Medical Center Southwest Addition and Building Renovations Dear Cathy, We have recently begun construction of the subject project under a building permit. I am writing to discuss what we see as a unique situation creating a degree of hardship for the Cayuga Medical Center, and to start a discussion to see if we can find an equitable solution for both the town of Ithaca and the Center. This is a major, multi-phased construction project, with a minimum duration of three years . A large portion of the project will take place in the existing Center and the phasing will be required to keep all departments in full operation throughout construction . We will need to occupy the renovated spaces as soon as they are complete ; therefore a large number of temporary certificates of occupancy are required before the conclusion of the construction and the issuance of a final certificate of occupancy. The Town 's Building Department currently issues temporary certificates of occupancy for a maximum of six months . This project will require , at a minimum , six temporary certificates of occupancy at a cost of $5 , 250 each . The original building permit was based on a $21 million project and cost $ 10, 500 , for a projected total of $42 , 000 in building permit fees . I would propose that, in addition to the original building permit, Cayuga Medical Center apply for a single temporary certificate of occupancy for the duration of the construction project. We have done, and will continue doing , all of the things in our power to minimize the impact of our construction projects on the building department. We believe that this is an equitable solution in a unique situation . 101 Dates Drive Ithaca , New York 14850- 1383 607.274.4011 607.274. 4527 fax www.cayugamed.org Affiliated with Weill Medical College of Cornell University Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call me at your convenience so we can discuss this further. incer ly, s e Fitzgerald Vice President, ness Development Cc: Lou LoVecchio Paul Levesque Andy Frost Kristie Rice September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 9 F � y��f� R f 4�, a 63 i 4 � Y � u � �'fY �"• yY . Town of Ithaca Finances and Budget What is municipal budgetingln Process whereby the Town Supervisor/Budget Officer and the Town Board make its best estimates of program needs and available financing sources. The budget sets forth proposed expenditures (appropriations) and the proposed means of financing (estimated revenue and appropriated fund balance.) Budget Must be Balanced � � x l� Revenue Appropriations 1 C Different Budget Components z Operating Funds z Debt Service :ZSpeaa Budget Neighborhood M , ell A Fund B Fund DB Fund ell ell aHSr'll ■ F Fund G Fun d ."a Special Districts Debt Fire & Lighting Service 7Fund ��1 A Fund "t'�d `a e ee Debt 2 e, F Fund Service ^„ ell ell ell e ..' � G Fund Light Districts Firez District 2 Operating Funds: A Fund * AKA: General Town Wide Fund o Includes Village of Cayuga Heights (VCH) Major Revenue: aProperty Tax ($1 .381$1000) based on assessment of Town and Village, Sales Tax & Mortgage Tax Appropriations: oTovm Board, Court, Town Clerk, Tax Collection, Accounting, Personnel, Engineering, Records Management, IT, Buildings and Grounds, Crossing Guards, Highway Administration, Packs, Recreation, Youth Programs, and Community Services. Operating Funds: B Fund zAKA: General Part Town Fund — Does Not include Village of Cayuga Heights • Major Revenue: oSales Tax, planning, zoning and building fees — No property tax revenue • Appropriations: aPlanning, Zoning and Building Operating Funds: BB Fund a AKA: Highway Part Town Fund — Does Not include Village of Cayuga Heights Major Revenue: oSales Tax — No Property Tax revenue Appropriations: osnow, brush & weed removal, equipment & equipment maintenance, general road repairs (last 10 years or less) and permanent road improvements (last 10 years or more.) 3 , . Operating Funds: F Fund AKA: Water Fund - Special Assessment Fund - Town wide Benefit Area (excludes VCH) z Major Revenue: - Water use charges (Quarterly bills $3.44 per 1 ,000 gallons) - Benefit Assessment charges to pay for debt and future capital expenses. (Tax Bill $65 per unit) :) Appropriations: oproduction, supply, transmission — Pay Bolton Point $2.21 per 1 ,000 gallons ooperation and maintenance of water distribution system Operating Funds: G Fund AKA: Sewer Fund — Special Assessment Fund — Town wide Benefit Area (excludes VCH) Major Revenue: - Sewer use charges (Quarterly bills $2.20 per 1,000 gallons) - Benefit Assessment charges to pay for debt and future capital expenses. (Tax Bill $65 per unit) z Appropriations: a treatment of sewage — Pay IAWTP $1.20 per 1 ,000 gallons ooperation and maintenance of sewage collection and transmission system Debt Service Fund: V Fund z Payment of principal and interest on indebtedness :z Annually budget for debt payments in A, F & G Funds. Funds are transferred to Debt Service Fund were the payments are issued from . Town's Constitutional Debt Limit: t3 Excludes Water and Sewer debt o Maximum allowed is 7% of a 5 yr average of full valuation of taxable property. Town's maximum is $100,997,732. oTown's 2005 debt is $1 ,320,000, which is 1 .3% of our Constitutional Debt Limit. 4 Special District Funds-SF Fire Protection Fund Town wide Benefit District (excludes VCH) 5 Revenue: Part-town tax of $3.8961 $1,000 assessed value Appropriations (2 contracts) Ithaca City Fire Department v Pay % (based on assessed value) of actual monthly expenses plus 2.75°k for City Hall administration Village of Cayuga Heights Volunteer Fire Department (to cover NE area of the Town — Forest Home area) o Pay % (based on assessed value) of actual quay" expenses Special District Funds= SL 1 — SL 9 z 9 Lighting Districts o Benefit area — residents within district pays special tax for benefit received. Revenue o District tax rate (differs per district) * Appropriations oElectric bills for the lights Fund Balance is the Accumulated excess or losses of prior years' revenues over expenses. Anticipated excess or loss of current year's revenues over expenses. 5 Composition of Fund Balance :) Reserved Fund Balance — Amount of money that is saved (set aside) for specific things: E.g.: Parks and Open Space Reserve, Highway Equipment Un-Reserved Fund Balance — Amount of money that is available in case of major emergencies or other potential expenditures as deemed necessary by the Town Board. A Current Level of Fund Balance to Maintain It has been consistently recommended to the Town Board to maintain a minimum of 20% of current year's appropriations in the unreserved Fund Balance for A, B and DB Funds. Budget Process • January-December ci Committees make recommendations on future projects and expenditures through meetings throughout the year. • July - August oDepartment Heads, which take into consideration committee recommendations, work on budget worksheets that are submitted to Budget Officer and Town Supervisor. 6 Budget Process continued... :: August — September o Budget Officer and Town Supervisor work on assembling worksheets into a draft tentative budget. Work includes meetings with the Department Heads and staff. a September 30th o Town Supervisor must file Tentative Budget with Town Clerk Budget Process continued... z By October 5d': oTown Clerk submits Tentative Town Budget to Town Board. z October 51' or by 2nd Town Board meeting in Oct. oTown Board discusses and modifies budget. oTown Board considers approving Tentative Budget as Preliminary Budget (as modified) and files with Town Clerk. � 6Tffi�PA Budget Process continued... a Once Preliminary Budget approved: o Board can hold meetings to discuss the budget. :D November: oPublic Hearings on Town Budget must be held on or before Thursday following election day. o Public Hearings may be adjourned, but not beyond 11 /15. o Revisions may occur after public hearing, but before final adoption. oTown Budget must be adopted no later than 11 /20. 7 Adopted Budget Changes z Department Heads work both individually and collectively within the adopted budget to meet day to day Town needs. z Budget Amendments-Modifications require funds from the un-reserved fund balance must be approved by Board before expending. A, F & G Funds can advance monies to other funds. These monies must be paid back. Budget Summary Has 3 Components z Includes Decisions Regarding Fund Balance :) Budget Process with established time frames z Adopted Budget can be amended during the year. To Sum it up. The Key Elements of Budgeting Are... Clear: �D Communication :z Process z Format — NYS Uniform Chart of Accounts Time Frame z Reporting :z Monitoring 8 r i Questions or Comments 9 September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 10 IDA # .1 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD FROM: - JON KANTER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DATE : SEPTEMBER 1 , 2005 RE : LONGVIEW (AN ITHACARE COMMUNITY) — REQUESTED AMENDMENT OF SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT NO . 7 Enclosed please find materials relating to Longview' s request for an amendment to Special Land Use District No . 7 (now referred to as Planned Development Zone — PDZ No, 7) . The PDZ was enacted in 1994 in conjunction with Ithacare ' s proposal to construct their Senior Living Community at 1 Bella Vista Drive off of Danby Road. This request is in conjunction with their proposed 24,000 +/- square foot addition to serve up to 30 additional residents . The addition would primarily consist of a one-story building approximately 24 feet in height. There would also be a two and three-story addition to connect the new facility with the existing building. The height of this connecting building is not clear at this point. The addition would be designed as a skilled nursing facility. Until it receives the required licensing from New York State, it would operate as an expansion of the existing adult care facility at Longview. The proposal is described in the enclosed materials provided by Longview. This is on the September 12th Town Board agenda. A local law would need to be drafted to amend Section 271 -8 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Special Land Use District (or PDZ) No . 7 . Section 271 - 8(B)( 1 ) indicates that the primary use permitted in the PDZ is "one multiple-family dwelling consisting of at least 40 dwelling units and up to 160 dwelling units aggregated with central dining, kitchen, activity, administration, and maintenance areas, and other related community service space, such multiple-family dwelling being intended to provide assisted living accommodations . " (Note : This type of facility is now classified by the State as an Adult Care Facility .) This basically describes the existing Longview facility, so the proposed addition would exceed the number of units permitted. This section would need to be amended to permit the 30 additional units/beds proposed in the addition, alternatively as a skilled nursing facility and/or an Adult Care Facility. Section 271 - 8(D)(3 ) includes height requirements . It appears that the one-story portion of the addition would meet the height requirements (24 +/- feet proposed, 30/34 feet permitted, measured from lowest interior grade or lowest exterior grade, whichever is lower) . However, it is not clear what the height of the two and three-story connector addition would be . This may need to be addressed in the zoning amendment as well . The Town Board is being asked to refer the requested amendment of PDZ. No. 7 to the Planning Board for a recommendation, at which time the Planning Board would also review the sketch plan materials for the proposed building addition . Since these are Type I actions pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and the Chapter 148 o the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Environmental Quality Review, it is suggested that the Planning Board be designated as Lead Agency for purposes of conducting a coordinated environmental review for these actions . The Town Board could consider a resolution that would : (1) refer the above-described requested amendment of PDZ (SL D) No. 7 to the Planning Board for their recommendation ; and (2) recommend that the Planning Board serve as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the site plan and zoning amendment pursuant to SEQR and Section 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code. Materials enclosed for the board' s consideration include a cover letter fr in Longview (July 26, 2005 ), a narrative description of the proposed project prepared by Longview, Section 271 - 8 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, and schematic site plan and related drawings of the Longview Skilled/Adult Care Addition (dated 6/24/05 ) . Please feel free to call if you have any questions . Enc . cc : Mark Macera, Executive Director, Longview 2 Lou, ew an Ithacare community July 26, 2005 Mr. Jonathan Kanter r � Director of Planning t� Town of Ithaca 215 N . Tioga Street u JUL 2 6 Ithaca, N .Y. 14850 Re : Ithacare Rezoning and Sketch Plan Review application TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNI�JG , ZONING , ENGINEERING Dear Mr. Kanter: We are pleased to make application to the Town of Ithaca for consideration of a Longview building modification and building expansion (project) . In consultation with your office we understand that our current zoning designation, or planned development zone (SLUR 7), requires us to begin our application process with a petition to the Town of Ithaca Board for a change in the law/zoning that gave rise to Longview. Therefore, we submit the following documents in support of our application for the requisite change(s) in our special land use (district) that would make it possible for Ithacare to engage in our planned building modification and expansion project. uanti Document I Town of Ithaca Development Review Application 1 Narrative/Description of Ithacare' s proposed (special care) building modification and expansion/addition project 1 Ithacare Check #8437 / $ 175 Application Fee (with pertinent site plan fee(s) to be determined) 20 SEQR (full) Environmental Assessment Form 20 11 " x 17" Sketch Plan Review Set 2 24" x 36" Sketch Plan Review Set We look forward to working with the Town of Ithaca in the course of reviewing this very important and meaningful project that is designed to meet the long-term care needs of current Longview residents and many other older adults living throughout the community who will come to rely on Longview. Thank you for your consideration of our project. mcerely Mark Ma r Executive Director Enclosures 1 Bella Vista Dpi ve • Ithaca, NY14850 In partnership with Ithaca College phone: 607.375. 6300 fax." 607.375. 6301 topromoteintergenerationalliviag&learning website: www.ithaca. edu/longview/ , s I F5 F i fi ( ' r f i r 't-PY N OF ITHACA Description of proposed Longview (special care) building modificati on�and,>4, , l` F,; N E N � 1Nr: ERE G expansion/addition project A. Background Longview is an existing senior living community situated on a 28 .02 acre parcel of land on the west side of the highway approximately 1500 feet south of the Ithaca College main entrance on Route 96B . Longview' s senior programs currently consist of: 101 independent efficiency, one- and two-bed apartments 64-bed licensed adult care facility 10-slot licensed Social Adult Day Community Related services include: dining (3 meals/day), onsite/off-site activity programs, housekeeping, full-time personal care staff, assistance with medications, emergency call, limited nursing staff and more. Longview is accessed from Route 96B via a single curb-cut located in the northeast corner of the site. Taking advantage of a substantial site elevation variation (approx. 55 ' drop from southeast to northwest), Longview' s facility is construction on 4 levels : Area Finished Floor Elevation Building Area (SF) - Basement 9319208' 85700 SF - Lower Level 941 ,354 ' 369000 SF - First Floor (Main Entry Level) 951 . 5 ' 57,000 SF - Second Floor 9610646 ' 2800 SF Total --- 1299700 SF On-site parking is provided for 109 cars, plus a drop-off lane for 6 vehicles. B. Proposed Addition Currently, Longview services a "well" senior population with living opportunities provided for both the fully independent and those with limited physical and health restrictions. Once their needs increase and require 24-hour nursing services, they must transfer off campus to a facility providing a higher level of care. Longview' s residents have continually asked for an expanded level of service, allowing them to age in place and remain on the Longview Campus near friends and spouses. To provide this expanded continuum of care, Longview is proposing a 24,000 SF addition serving up to 30 additional residents. The addition will Iie designed to New York State Department of Health code requirements for a skilled nursing facility _(SNF) . Until licensing as an. SNF is_secured, it will operate as an Adult Care Facility (ACF). In that the addition will serve an increasingly frail senior populati n with increasing care needs including assistance with health and chronic condition and dementia, it will be designed as a freestanding, independent wing with its owr main entry and a back door connection providing a link to existing common servic s (dietary, housekeeping, social, administrative, and mechanical). The addition' s location on-site was selected for the following rew ons: 1 . Provide environments that promote quality of life and indepen ence for individuals experiencing increasing dependency and requirements for supe ision and care. 2 . Ease of connection and access to the existing building' s central common areas without requiring encroachment into or circulation through any existing residential neighborhood. 3 . Ability to physically and visually separate its main public entry from that of the existing independent living facility. 4. Visual isolation from Route 96B with no encroachment or impact on any existing scenic view available along Route 96B or from the adjacent sc nic overlook. With respect to on-site traffic, parking, and vehicle circulation, the hanges will be minimal. In that the population served by the addition will be aged non-drivers, eleven new parking spaces and a cul-de-sac drop-off it provided for staff, visitors, and emergency vehicles. Trash and deliveries will be serviced through the existing facility and, therefore, those areas remain unchanged. § 271 -7 ZONING : SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS § 271 -8 (4) No activities will be conducted in said Special Land Use District which will cause disturbing noise, odors, or glare to any adjacent landowners . G. The area encompassed and rezoned in accordance with this section to Special Land Use . District No. 5 is described on Schedule A to this section. " The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Ithaca is hereby amended by adding such district at the location described. H. In the event that any portion of this section is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Schedule A Description of Enlarged Special Land Use District No. 5 [Amended 441-1988 by L.L. No. 4-1988] ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York, bounded and described as follows : COMMENCING at a point in the center line of East Shore Drive, State Route 34, at or near the northeast corner of premises of the City of Ithaca (Liber 204 of Deeds at Page 274) which premises are known generally as the site of the Ithaca Youth Bureau; running thence northerly and along the center line of East Shore Drive 60 feet to the southeast corner of lands reputedly of Leo M. Wells (see 379 Deeds 410) ; continuing northerly along the center line of East Shore Drive a distance of 79.5 feet to the northeast corner of said Wells property and also the southeast corner of other premises reputedly owned by Wells (see Liber 466 of Deeds at Page 230) ; continuing northerly along the center line of East Shore Drive 117 .3 feet to the northeast corner of said second Wells parcel ; running thence southwesterly and along premises now or formerly reputedly of Signorelli (590 Deeds 1128) a distance of approximately 223 feet to the east line of premises now or formerly of the Lehigh Valley Railroad Company; thence southwesterly along the easterly line of said railroad company a distance of approximately 141 feet to a point; thence southerly running along the westerly line of the second Wells parcel described above; the first Wells parcel described above and the premises now or formerly of Bowman (see Book 585 of Deeds at Page 594) a total distance of 82 .8 feet to a point, which point is the southwest corner of said Bowman parcel ; running thence easterly and in part along the City of Ithaca Youth Bureau site and in total along the southerly line of said Bowman parcel a total distance of 264 feet to the east line of East Shore Drive ; continuing thence in the same direction a distance of approximately 33 feet to the center line of East Shore Drive at the point or place of beginning. § 271 -8. Special Land Use District No. 7 (Limited Mixed Use, Ithacare). 18 [Adopted 1- 13-1994 by L.L. No. 1-1994] 17. Editor's Note: Said Schedule A is included at the end of § 271 -71 18. Editor's Note: Special Land Use District No. 6 (Indian Creek Retirement Community), adopted 3-13-1989 by L.L. No. 2-1989, was repealed in 1995. 271 : 19 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ITHACA CODE § 271 -8 A. Article 2, Section 1 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance1 ' be and hereby is amended or by adding to the permissible districts itemized in said section a district designated as " Special Land Use District No . 7 . " B . The uses permitted in Special Land Use District No . 7 are: ( 1 ) One multiple-family dwelling consisting of at least 40 dwelling units and up to 160 dwelling units aggregated with central dining, kitchen, activity, administration, and maintenance areas, and other related community service space, such multiple-family dwelling being intended to provide assisted living accommodations . Each dwelling unit in said multiple-family dwelling may be occupied by no more than two persons, related or otherwise. (2) Subject to special approval and site plan approval by the Planning Board the following accessory uses are permitted : [Amended 11-7-2002 by L.L. No. 7-20021 (a) Off-street garage or parking spaces for the residents of, e ployees working at, and visitors to the permitted facilities . (b) One pavilion not exceeding 3 ,000 square feet in size. (c) Accessory buildings such as storage sheds, pavilions [iri addition to the pavilion authorized in Subsection B (2)(b) above] , gazebos and other similar small buildings provided that no single building [other than the pavilion permitted by Subsection B(2)(b) above] exceeds more than 200 square feet in size and provided further that the size and location of ea c' such building is approved by the Planning Board. (d) Common recreational areas including walkways, parks , community gardens, and other similar outdoor recreational facilities . (e) Any municipal or public utility structures necessary to the rovision of utility services for the permitted facilities . (f) Signs, as regulated by Chapter 221 , Signs , of the Code of the Town of Ithaca. C. Any use in this district shall be governed by all of the requirements , inllcluding side yards , setbacks , building coverage , building height, and similar requirements , of a Residence District R- 15 , except as the same may be specifically modified by the terms of this section. D. In addition to the requirements and restrictions imposed by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the area being rezoned to Special Land Use District No . 7 shall be subject to the following conditions: ( 1 ) The exterior design, specifications, and plans for all bu Lldings and other improvements to be constructed on the premises and the development of the grounds and construction of all outside facilities including light ng and signs shall 19. Editor's Note: Numbering refers to the Zoning Ordinance as it e)dsted in 1994, when this section was adopted. See now § 270-6. 271 : 20 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ZONING : SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS § 271 -8 have been shown on a final site plan and design drawings approved by the Planning Board, and any construction thereafter shall be in accordance with said site plan and drawings as finally approved. In determining whether or not to approve the site plan, the Planning Board shall employ the same considerations it would employ in approving the site plan pursuant to Article IX and Section 78 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance 20 (2) Building permits shall be required for any construction, including construction of signs and outdoor lighting facilities . Such permits shall not be issued until the Planning Board has approved the design and specifications for such proposed construction. (3) Notwithstanding any provision of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance to the contrary, in Special Land Use District No. 7, no building shall be erected, altered, or extended to exceed 34 feet in height from the lowest interior grade or 30 feet in height from the lowest exterior grade, whichever is lower, except, however, that the one multifamily dwelling permitted pursuant to Subsection , B ( 1 ) above: may exceed said height limitations provided such building is constructed substantially in accordance with the elevations and plans numbered SK-L1J (Preliminary Site Plan - Alternative B .3) , L-4 (Planting & Materials Plan), L-5 (Trail Plan), L-6 and L-7 . (Details) , and A-6R (Elevations), prepared by L. Robert Kimball & Associates and dated January 30, 1996, (hereinafter collectively referred to as the "January 30, 1996, Site Plan") copies of which are on file with the Town of Ithaca Planning Department. The heights shown on said plans shall constitute the maximum heights lot permitted for such building. Notwithstanding the foregoing, under no circumstances shall the highest point on the building exceed an elevation of 607 feet above City of Ithaca datum. No structure other than a building shall be erected, altered, or extended to exceed 30 feet in height. [Amended 3- 11- 1996 by L.L. No. 2 49961 (4) Except as specifically provided for herein any construction for which a permit is granted shall comply with all applicable laws , codes , ordinances, rules and regulations . (5 ) The dwelling units in this Special Land Use District No. 7 shall be occupied by persons over the age of 54 years requiring assisted living accommodations, except that adult persons under 55 years of age may reside in the units if because of disabling conditions said adult persons require the services provided by the owner, provided that no more than 10% of the occupants of the facility are under the age of 55 . (6) All of the area rezoned pursuant to this section shall be owned by the same party and there shall be no subdivision of the area contained in Special Land Use District No. 71 (7) There shall be provided at least two parking spaces for every three dwelling units , except that the Planning Board may reduce the required number of spaces by no 20. Editor's Note: Numbering refers to the Zoning Ordinance as it existed in 1994, when this section was adopted. 27 1 : 21 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ITHACA CODE § 271 -8 more than 20% in accordance with the criteria set forth in . Section 38; subparagraph 1 of the Zoning Ordinance as amended by Local Law No . 10 for the year 1993 ," except that there need not be a finding that the DCcupancy of the building or buildings is intended to be a multiple use. If the Planning Board permits such a reduction, the Planning Board may impose such reasonable conditions, including the conditions set forth with respect to red ctions of parking spaces in business districts, as may, in the judgment of the Planning Board, be necessary to assure that such reduction will not cause congestion, create undesirable traffic flows or hazards, or otherwise be adverse tote general welfare of the community. In any event, unless expressly waived by th Planning Board, such reduction shall be subject to the same mandatory conditions as are set forth with respect to business district parking area reductions . E. In accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, a final site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board befog e issuance of any building permits . A site plan that has received final site plan approval ay be modified upon the application of the owner to the Planning Board for such modification. Such application shall be in accordance with the provisions of this section nd the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the procedures applicable to such application shall be the same as are applicable to an initial application for site plan approval gas set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. [Amended 3- 11 - 1996 by L.L. No. 2- 1996; 11-7- 002 by L.L. No. 7-2002] ( 1 ) Notwithstanding the foregoing, Planning Board approval of a modification shall not be required: (a) If the modification does not involve : [ 1 ] Construction of an addition of more than 1 ,000 square feet of enclosed space attached to a residential building whether on e or more stories (provided such construction is in accordance with the height limitations and other requirements of this section and the Zoning Ordinance) ; nor [2] Construction or relocation of more than three p rking spaces nor construction or relocation of any parking spaces to tn area that is not adjacent to the original planned parking area; nor [3] Construction, alterations, or renovations affecting the exterior of a building or the site anticipated to cost more than $20 ,000; nor [4] Construction, alteration, or renovation of the interior of a building involving a change in occupancy or use; nor [5] Enlargement of an existing or previously appro� ed building that involves an increase of square footage of more than 15 % of the existing square footage of the existing or previously approved building; nor 21 . Editor's Note: Numbering refers to the Zoning Ordinance as it e)usted in 1994, when this sec on was adopted. 271 : 22 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ZONING : SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS § 271 -8 [6] Reduction of an existing or previously approved building that involves a decrease of square footage of more than 15 % of the existing or previously approved building; nor [7] Alteration of traffic flows and access nor a significant increase in the . volume of traffic ; nor [8] A significant (in the judgment of the Director of Planning) change in the aesthetic appearance of any structure or site plan element including landscape and lighting details from that presented at the time of the prior approval; nor [9] A change in the impacts of the project on surrounding properties, such as an increase in noise, water runoff, light illumination, or obstructions to views ; nor [ 10] Violation of any express conditions (including, without limitation, buffer zones , setbacks , and similar restrictions) imposed by the Planning Board in granting prior site plan approval, or (b) If the modification does not involve a movement or shift of a location of one or more buildings more than two feet laterally or six inches vertically from the location or elevation shown on the final site plan where: [ 1 ] Such shift does not alter proposed traffic flows or access ; and lot [2] Such shift does not directly violate any express conditions (including, without limitation, buffer zones, setbacks , etc. ) imposed by the Planning Board in granting prior site plan approval . (2) The numerical criteria for the exceptions from the requirement of obtaining Planning Board approval are an aggregate maximum [i .e. , if a 700 square foot addition is constructed without obtaining Planning Board approval pursuant to Subsection E( 1 )(a) [I] above, construction of a second addition larger than 300 square feet would require Planning Board approval of a modified site plan] . (3 ) This waiver of the requirement of Planning Board approval is not intended to permit construction in violation of any other provision of this section nor of the Zoning Ordinance including height, setback, side yard, and similar regulations , nor the requirement to obtain a building permit in those circumstances when otherwise required by the terms of this section, the Zoning Ordinance or the Building Code. (4) A demolition, or a proposed demolition, of an existing building, or of a previously approved building on a previously approved site plan, is a modification of a site plan subject to the terms of this section. F. The area encompassed and rezoned in accordance with this section to Special Land Use District No. 7 is described on Schedule A to this section . z= The Official Zoning Map of the Town of Ithaca is hereby amended by adding such district at the location described . 22. Editor's Note: Said Schedule A is included at the end of § 271-81 271 : 23 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ITHACA CODE § .271 -8 G. Any violations of the terms of this section shall constitute a violation of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance and shall be punishable as set forth in said ordinance and in § 268 of the Town Law of the State of New York. Each week' s continued violation shall constitute a separate offense. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Town reserves for itself, its agencies and all other persons having an interest, all remedies an rights to enforce the provisions of this section, including, without limitation, actions fo any injunction or other equitable remedy, or action and damages, in the event the o ner of the parcel covered by this section fails to comply with any of the provisions hereof, H. In the event that any portion of this section is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portions shall not be affected by such declaration of invalidity. Schedule A Description of Property To Be Rezoned To Special Land Use District No. 7 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 an iron pin set at the intersection of the westerly hiDrhway line of the State of New York as appropriated for the Ithaca-Danby State Highway No. 5043 and delineated on Map 15 Parcel 22 and recorded in the Tompkins Cou ty Clerk' s Office with the northerly line of lands reputedly of John M . Kelly as described in Liber 693 of Deeds at Page 255 , said pin being located a perpendicular distance from the present center line of the Danby Road, State Highway Route No . 96B of 110. 0 feet and is located 7 .7 feet northerly from a granite highway monument found; Running thence westerly an average bearing of north 83 degrees 26 ' nutes 05 seconds west along the northerly line of lands reputedly of Kelly, reputedly of Payne as described in Liber 340 of Deeds at Page 365 and Liber 368 of Deed at Page 371 , and continuing along the lands reputedly of Cofer as described in Libei 611 of Deeds at Page 160, for a distance of 1 ,434 .92 feet to an iron pipe found, said ion pipe marks the northeasterly corner of lands reputedly of Turk as described in Liber 458 of Deeds at Page 522; Running thence north an average bearing of north 04 degrees 26 minutes 55 seconds east along the easterly line of lands reputedly of Berggren as described in Liber 624 of Deeds at Page 79 and continuing along lands reputedly of Puerta as escribed in Liber 577 of Deeds at Page 613 and continuing along the lands reputed y of Goodloe as described in Liber 656 of Deeds at Page 590, for a distance of 714.42 feet to an existing iron pipe, said iron pipe marks the northeasterly corner of lands of Go dloe; Running thence north 89 degrees 57 minutes 24 seconds east along a proposed new division line through the lands of Ithaca College for a distance of 1375 ,48 feet to an iron pin set; Running thence south 78 degrees 28 minutes 05 seconds east and continuing through the lands of Ithaca College for a distance of 230.0 feet to an iron pin et in the westerly highway line of New York State Route 96B , Danby Road ; 271 : 24 06 - 01 - 2004 § 271 -8 ZONING : SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS § 271 -9 Running thence south 11 degrees 31 minutes 55 seconds west along the westerly highway line of New York State Route 9613 , the Danby Road for a distance of 525 .0 feet to an iron pin set, said iron pin marks the northeasterly corner of the scenic overview area as appropriated by the State of New York; Running thence north 78 degrees 33 minutes 31 seconds west along the northerly line of the scenic overview area for a distance of 60.0 feet to an iron pin set; Running thence south 11 degrees 30 minutes 40 seconds west along the westerly line of the scenic overview area for a distance of 335 .64 feet to an iron pin set, the point and place of beginning. Said parcel contains 28 .010 acres of land to the highway line. § 271-9. Special Land Use District No. 8 (Limited Mixed Use, EcoVillage). [Adopted 1-30 4995 by L.L. No. 1 -1995] A. Findings. ( 1 ) The Town of Ithaca' s Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of environmentally sound housing communities ; and (2) A group, now known as First Residents Group, is in the process of forming a Cooperative Housing Corporation under the laws of the State of New York to be named EcoVillage Co-Housing Cooperative for the purpose of developing and owning such housing; and (3) EcoVillage at Ithaca, another entity, has agreed to sell approximately 33 acres to the First Residents Group or its successor cooperative, contingent upon the rezoning provided by this section and receipt of all other requisite approvals by the Town of Ithaca and Tompkins County; and (4) The proposed project will : (a) Contribute to the variety of housing styles and patterns of development available in the Town; (b) Develop and model a neighborhood design 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 ; (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 ; 271 : 25 06 - 01 - 2004 �r Y�' tf �a-...,,. �; . .. �'� � � �' t. . �L� • � u y yN �o . m _NY / w c yr E.�I � c �\ 3 u ar " 1 q . �1 i. �,�4t 5.+• � EI N •-\ o `a,�Fi.�. r 'am -0�,�1f _ 3 0 cD e ' _� crrN to 1 i� '.x '�' . � l�f s ` '_ O p } �.C► r11 rw v C i.�i .gip `. A p `W r_y 'p� 1 '� NR / { V 1� 0 ! t �v G S� F / vi.Y •. . •..fit } iv .j�>x} ni '4 3" 'Y 53 .1 4 ! L }Y ! \� f l }�• 5 1, `? b' �\..-.�.. .. '" �'L iy k+ve �t 1u F 11 ..VI +�, - � " LLR 1.. + %v t irr �� s., �W y-,, wQ r 16 3 �C lsl Io ION Ill A ; M1' +.,� K'2 r,u, , ii `\, .4 •,....�. -- m I' �. f L� r'+ � '°C V r ' • IF c , "z Mfr J .( + I • A� a : Oa' r � `i ' /- Lac � ff ! ..'A.3r=n^L--.-��1,: ,,,. n .,� �.�r y m e � i � � ,i . =-�.��-•e.1'�� :,� � Q w - 1 @ice j CT 3 m y' n fr t 4 4 i � .� C� �•y Wo In In 60 ID IV • (\ 1l E /1 L (D (p Eli 011 Er , + PdRoii ya °°' _ °w \s� F a j s3 s o O r� 00 (VIA O (D T m r p 0 3 r X m m r � mB 0 F Z O i Z Z y _ $ > n C I O ° Z o z � 0 m p Fn z it Z n D v � , ;U m m m rn m m C Ulf fn N ° ° Er b � S S 25 S � c 0 _ o D X ° QQ Q o a gig � rS �+ Z m —� ° A O V • rl V r/L O/ W Utli !�/J rtl n t� " omm � O —� vo ° O m m S O (a z � Z Z Z ci ° o CIO a NN . . J 0 Z CII �� Rpgps �— 112 Axe � ',ate: M a O �7 �a4 4oyA`^ momm6mimmor Vn Q7 9' iN 0 O 0 DDDD 3 __ m g — ° = O g In 0 THE AUTHOB Or SHALL BE EEENED Longview o THE UTORY N 1NEY DONNENIS Al 9ULL KIM ALL CPIYCN LAM N STATUTORY AND INCLUDING OTHER THE flEYFKD FILNTi ME CCPYNIWIi. .Ai o an Ithacare community ° ' °""""` "" "" Skilled / Adult Care Addition N k Il IS A NCIAMkI Ci LAN EtF ANY GEFSM. All ACIING IMLfF THE `p g DIRECTION OF THE ARMIIECT. TO 1 Bella Vista Drive TO O 1111 JAMES ST. 315- 474- 5501 ALTER ANY IIEN ON THIS DOIDAINT SYRACUSE. NY 13203 FAX 315- 474- 1922 1 IN ANY WAY Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 05801 'AN 'UD"I AVAw N1 ZZ6t — VLb —SL £ xvi £OZ£ L AN '35novax5 0 ,xlMJ9J SDa xD qy ury a„m L059 -4L9 —SL £ 15 531NVr ILLL w anuQ BISIA 811x8 1 NL Lun nJ N ¢mm�x�,tla g N z 1. 114m mu a reD 11nPd / Palms Pag trZ m a�, rn�r v a — - � � o .Slmnmmm Q mmpl 88 emI ma t � uo aaupJ �, Jagmxa S XJp Z p3W3s9tl a3x10 Oxv .apLOlr6 _ rn xoxxJJ m x" ojn Uxr m g H surn,nJJJ aJx, .a aoxlm m o \ o ° (n w Z aN3la ITHS lJ3LNJW 341 c 0 a .m x a a a a ' x F- Q uTUw 5 e � 8 � �'y E WV1C E w U Q v CV W Q.' Q H U w O of CL - � � / / 111 / / // / /�_ _ _9_5 _% � _' / � /_ �_'/ J / / / JIII / / llll/ r =�= Rpm 935-/ \✓J / / / / \ I / _ / / �q / /� / / / / / / / / / IL _ VV/ h, q J / // NP/ _ 950 `- / /�/ 945 c l ,7- N ^- / a l/l////jUlllllll��/l/ I .T y _ , 11///ll/llllllillll L �N y �� 2 / // ///////rV/ - / SRI `Y f3 � Q / # did IT / N X 04 " pr 71 � c A. zi Id El z J, CO P ./ a a� l 3jo,w cJ' Pill 4b a 0 0 0 0 dd-1 j 0 O IT Z Cj m IT rdd* -13 9D `C o Z n , 1 did I D T l 1 X1 4 .di it y Il�lfi ij I� I�� I II r 40 1 r .� IIIII III� �I, ( IIII II� I � III II IIII r "ill II L. It 'I+ I l !il l liilllll Ir II I 14 111 /0 f IIIII II IIIII I, I� i� � llijIn IIII ilk ��I II IIII IIII IIIII II r IIIII i, 'I O I ' I lid ` 6 if,2 2 � i I / II III III;',; Il llldll Ill lb'•' II' — 2 PIIIII I ;�:I I' I I!' ' , A Ili II� III• Ip 9rl I� IR IIII O ' ll III ' r II O III z IIII ll III lil II II r K r I�I II IIII II I ZOr ' �' � �� 9 O It / / ICI r" 1�n llll p I f Cl 0 pl O 'k I. � dD� IIIIIIII PI II aII IIII rl it I „n"III p O O Qr' I Jd II I'I rll III' it Cl dIt- .i. � O It I rl Ily.b I O ". r b O O O 1p 0 00 � Q IT / 0 # Q , o # k . R r o # o pert a5 and Driveway 4 # _m l A g » o a d� Q z z -0 Z pr � - (8 m � °pertY Line Q m .Z1 T m ddn vdddd... $ Inc 8 � � v m mm m m � y < m g - o 0 0 z � F m 0 R z 4 DDDD . • � � e 3 � Z m L THE urc xn _HI BE OE )N Y AUTINOR Rc cR SIAIRITORI! w° p1M RESERI POINTS. INCLUDING THE tovmcN l . Longview an Iftcare community "F 1,MW F Skilled / Adult Care Addition n D rR If IS /. NOUIKN Of IAw FOR hW g PERSON. UN-ESS RcmR: ORDER rm O % ON¢von Or THE wlTENRIL TO I Bella Vista Drive 1 1 1-1 JAMES ST. 31 5- 474- 5501 IN wRr� ON ms OOt m Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 ANN a SYRACUSE . NY 1 .3203 FAX 315- 474 - 1922 If m l�ll�////Ill /N 1 . / I ItA fillll/llllllll l / / � h \ a / 1 IT ell I if Ili T 11Ri ! i N C � IIlIII nI �, IIIII'! , / °° // �/ �. / //�✓/ j / ,drill I 'IIIIIIII il , ' III I' / �s°6\ I� (nJ l lit, Yill Mali I' , ✓� // z / I ! li��,� �; 1; MID > `c / /// I / // / ,° ✓ PIIIIIIlIViI �!' ;�II, II Il ' " I o 1 v / //I 11 ///�// _ ��ll�li lI IIIII ,IRiilll;lllVlill�l, II \ / IT / ✓ ,; III IJ 'll nllli 411 \ / / / I / 096 _ 'ill Ili �I � I up ullll , � 'II III ipll ��A '� — / �R�I IT / IIII IIII III l- // p / I / ,.,Il��i IIII III I II PII ! I I 'l I llglil III �I ' I I ,� ..Inll ill i' 11111 IIII! i 11 I II � !�il�� t IIII l _ I illl A. �� / I — ili�llt,( u�i . l �li �I��iiliil V ! �III� II �I;t-;.Q III �III� Ili�i lull i. 11i,lfll �i Ih 111 I II IP ,'ll' I " I / l II ,.� I I II L. I; I,I, I Ili 11 is I ! ' tl i it 'j'�I III tlll� l l� l li';I ,illlgll � Ily IIII) Ilyi IT Ilii: III-n IIIr!Iitliil �II�II ,RI' iI IIf�rI" • IlIIIIIjm W II pI �IIIIIII i �I lli � I { NI ul �l� n ills l.; illl i II �� Iliit Ili',I II � � � � ;.. i I // .1�. � 8 cl) � I� ri I � II II �� i,Ill�I� Iri��ll12, '='IgI111 i l I hIii Il �ili �lil iII� 1111 I ��i 0 5 11i 1 IJ� jI lil l l rv'l ��l I111 111 jl III 'Iii ill, ////// / �� I 0 0 !IT 1 Z. , II ii IIII �� li III III III II VIII 1 �, �I; 111 I I// // �i 1 / I I II II Ili Id J I11 III .� I t P II h „l . nh II !'I1^ / .71 y / //01 0. Q l II I ' III;,I illl III iI SIII pL Ili II IIII III II t it Ti d. l� / /� /C '< O I I / / � . � St6� {II 1�1:�rc: Itll I ��IIi �. it it unl lfla u1 III . tell ii Ill 'illli �.�I III, IIII I��IIIII �/ / / D T Go V / 6 / ✓ // / VIII (I�. ilPb / VIII iI� �OdI� ,I 1 III i IIII li IIU Il LII ll Li III _ - O O �II y( '�,II IIII'lllu I14d161 I'dI jU i!! !IIII IIIIII J ZI 1 r .. I ' .III III l lIQiCll < -r "Ihi I lnI ll -i //''-- \ �_ i IIII Iq ill ' I it 1114. 0 - / /� � � / f , �D �IIIIiI t I II I l h'lli . /— ' Z W III I/ IIII I U (IIII If , ul III ll IIII I ,I I I II !�I �I11� // A(I 1 ��•r l/ / �7l ( % a>6 It _ rllih IPII Ir d I I , IIII IIII III � � ,� / �/ I1 \ �/ / / I dll lI �� IIII IIJIIIII'II� � II(i ,�ll6ll 1 �I11�I It �� / p I I U,IIII t l l it III IIII IIII ,, q i / I I IIII III I� iII III III III VIII' II , III VIII Il Ili l , � \ I I 1 f Ill ills IT �,« 1 I I / I I I f1111111I �I�I II IIII �II I '�I II'i111 i�� . IIII �iI III jIII i �1111I -P I II . Ih61A IIlul,rllll�i IIII / i' 1 � ri�I!t�I��Illl� pIIIII u111!I A/' / / III o — I „ lJ Ell — �� — J l I ICIitu II��li l �l / / / �E n r �/ / / I m -it I q TO �stb C, g �; GET d CH RL f ' \ ",0'► s m m GrS � G) m s $ G) m r m 9w F m � 0 ° - William iiiiiii Z U THE AiTHON 1 THESE 5E o¢NTS Longview 1MC Ill A 1MESE COCWEMS INN TRNL LUM ESE E CONWHIN CORr yy 51ATWONY µ0 OTHER RESERI fl1GM15. WRUpNG THE [OTAIGM. o O DRAM ALTERATION as IthacaEe community ° ° rs . MIXA1� uW FOR V Skilled / Adult Care JAMES ST. fER50N, uwss A DICER nc Addition ° SYRACUSE. NY 13203 315- 474 - 6501 DIRECTION OF` THE .RCNrtEM To FAX 3 t 5- 474 - , 922 ER Y TER ON 11IS OocuxExr I Bella Vista Drive IN Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 z ' . Xm11 mm Z - _ (7 2 y � W .. W `n Szc' z a rt1 _I n, m w � m . o m ° = TGO y rm -qa CD Z . - - . . 8 10 it � o � ° Ifn . _ 0) - - W = 2 0 M ° Z m mm m p v z mm COD H a i �(C /}O IGO , ca c: \ , Am m � c c N A a / EN rs m � — p y � W 1 / L - - - '� 8 m mr O � Z N �E p y� µ 0 yt _ m ca I- O Z m N C i t0 m V m U A E J N p . m . m . . W N ma 1z Q ? v¢ f 3 �j o 'OP .� ° O m' 4 ° 2 " ' m `� U � i G) m � m COPYRIGHT U ME MCHREO $IEEE BE UMEYED Longview MEUTORYA Ei 1125E WCSERWS Z (n MW SHILL 121N1 KL CMM31 4W (T� fl S. NCLUNK OTHER HE CORtR�DT, n ° an Iftcare Community i oR W „G IL TERNTgN Skilled / A ° N IS A ERAiN1N Of vW FOR M dult Care Addition 11 11 JAMES ST. RERSM n, Mtn TING UNDER ME m0 315 - 474 - 6501 O CTUN w THE MC REV, TO FAX 31 5- 474 — 1 922 N Mr WAY SYRACUSE. NY 13203 NTEN Mr RON ON THIS cx6mENT I Bella Vista Drive It11aca, N.Y. 14850 J C2D OX z &-) < Z m0 m k TF 1 , i I^ 2i ry u � :. �n � A � ICI t& A C { A '' 1 Q t " ., 1,>, - il�.µ, i �`a ! Z .t}tL Y �d�t't' r� �I +1 IY ,�! 1�.. • I T 1 1 1 � ly •'T,a z t tp Ff ,Ys[y "T S� p .vI rl� e fil t, try �r a d .« Z x' r. h. ca"� �; •. _ y, 8 h c . D d. r A 0 � -' r• q, ,ys 1. ti rn '�; !` y E n O rx �ry��'��••••'',�r y gam; c�+k t16.C1 1 I F A r,t. • .•*i j •r" `Y • i' l'- Y T v d.. .y.1 1 tf O tr,Ay <m< TeF? . dYE�fd"13 ryw�• I� E k < r y 8'?�, m # }M��t}i .rr't � ,.. .1 Id d ice" to t•V' T i J r, .Lt'l xaYrS X O AT 1w Sf3 'L. dW ZVed D .YTS '.L', }; . a 'I t t •s.. itq�� { 1 V 1 t�:.#y o � xY «df 4i s 1 m 4 'ak ��ik K 'r7r 4f I'�' r re uk A,, �1.+ -1' f lir ' � ,ST.} * X '4• 1 ' �t5. li: ILf SD .`4'� 7f }. 4 al a r ? v. �. ,t MITI 1 v y a p O h.. l � � C•Z > � A Z c {{�� 1• .� sll e a.1 a�1 `' F� y[,l as J aax FI T1 kkid, did E - ti, k. - + ,1 V ••T'�• _ "b r ° •� r « n1rT i 3, a 5dr+iT! � ,� s m nh1Y ».' t} ,N ro J trni i c t ° y _d!• '` "SH-`°�, ^ . j ` a, C t ' E r +++a yq i � 11 ( T rld 1 « . ' ! t v O Y� "b ' ^`'�Y� �v +:. 1. N � _ T' r 1<+' < C N� ""S� Ifiell,.. ®b 1 t - t, +. FYY! ✓ e n ° '� r L , 1 , s •5, r ? '>" N*�.. :SKr • + ` O it a � •' N v u o' a a 7` 3w'1• �pp .� 1 s i O 'tII N' • 5. , t d N br° om c5 1 1 1 TI I4. n a fn j{ 6 i i a 7C 3r1a ` s °y a; r r �qry L �n , r w « - '� . I t 11r �' '!£p,{TP '>""m, n �r " jjllt �„�; ' I tt a • +o o:' 10 T �s x } " 1 T ,r y rJ �PMd,R, 4 i t 1 `+ 1.`L ARE. �" .. ..e+ J .. ii T ✓` P r ::.E• '$ ". c:x�;}' G) "yJ=seJ+ •i T Fh 7I j e t� +.v 1' .�1 `#i .1rM_Py'' �,f t� e + �` w'1 t "� 1 [ I R•^ r +k a " ' a�"> r I. D :NeiFT `Z e'n ' t ' :' . r ,r. a. { .. " ik4' "' ✓y �1! 1 d e r O h " 1+r✓J7 � aRif �Ve 7F A IT 4 100 ars Y �r {T, '1 y T '1y��' £'�°ja"' ,��1 � ' .`.. Sr^ � , ...sY 0 `Nt'S°,J14Jy'KS ' w D TI n c m D � Wi z G) Q D � v m n O X Z Fn�Z m O 1 G) v z I,b m G) l 5 z D m X OZFn � z v c 0 111 0 vo g _< m Dm mtn 0 v � m Z � OD ZO G) mZ0 m X n m v -j r- o ZmZ OWU) m m I z v r I 1 L 1 N V"•1 m } 1rt u ^ a I k'1r .(v ue 1° 1 A o x `k'F f e l t rn 2 Hit ♦ (1 t O O i5 ' 1 xF' + ISt ' xl, 5 y 1 m O a .S'- �1 J. p r .�. < - . • ':if 3f�l1 r � 'Ytrnrkj�ie� 1" c Z 1 t`r"tC�.`yti., •1`TS«+ 1 1 '" .�^ ' EI-b If a l Ufa i1y 1 V. fvTl r '.i 5 t5.,t'• T st.h x 0 - IE✓IID F t _ ,L r \s J d �. ."Iv1 ,dry o ,,+ t _ N c c « u Av , t c . 'tM1'c'Sd' 4s 1 } Z v p +n T u�S } G P `? C v � m (A _ a , i .::FAFE 1. L ,,,� 1 4 M s o A �, \ G7 —(nl Z "° s m r. A OAT >rg(T )n. lr . . ,.... a Gz O IF m Thy "; r 'a ♦. O ��+gt,1,�'g�,.�$fL"1"e" .y., $ x a3n , 1 F IT 2 . 4h `4 1ta f O W`^ wN 1 uz' v IF in 4 qV $. , m h n ( + "fl m 3 .� Z ° d , 1,• " I m F A III r 8` sa W C ,r n Rn FL A,- <7 NA, m w B r • - "M C m O R G) '� 'a - 'v " _ -y. ',..1 . m �d, tr,, ,I`� ' D r - t ✓ 1 .J '1 ° a : 1 ,Ii. iY mmn0DOX0 �_ -U cznWWD � M _.jzm 0 _< Zmzm 0x00 zOV _� v ch AAO O 0 �i Z G) 0 Longvaew AT THE ARCHITECT THESE BE U DEEMED TS V N \ n s ML SHARI Of ,H t OMMONEM$ f'l AND swu RETAIN 4L cauucN uY p O - S1P,UIp IN LUAND OTHER RE4iM0 ,a N fnLH15. INCLUDING THE COPYRILb. an Ithacare community DRAWING ALTERATION Skilled / Adult Care Addition E-E1 N IS A 0WINON OF LAW FOR MW O — > o o d - - - — RERSOY, NANKEss THE URGER THE 1 Bella Vista Drive aRE MY Dr mE THIS s . EN Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 N ^ FIT q ALTER µY RCN W THIS COLUMENt 315- 474 - 6501 AN 1111 JAMES ST. FAX 315- 474 - 1922 o SYRACUSE . Nv 13203 • r_ I L Notated n M \ CID \ N � N 253 a \ M \ n /\ M \/ O \ U) r U) m O M m ti ' n -I Cp r-n \ v / z O z_ µ n \\i / C) + My \ � oZ 1 M Q \\ /.\ 9 zN a z \ m Z m Z O { G] \' T { r0 \ Z Z < m / X / r \\ M -4 -4 O \ ED 1+ \, rr _ vmz O � . IT \ '9 Z ° m / 0 IT I { \ ' 'a m T z m 0 C < / /\ O ' ` (< p y / I O / I O m ; . 0 r /\ 0 o ' z '. / / . . OS 0 0 Co co O y n O U) r m � 0 -< z n Z M o �n m m A� \ice n v_ o D \` m z z 0 0 M (D CCYI V C 00 C + V' � w rm- p m � a) in K µ -1 88 Do � T � 1+ �* c � { � „ 8 � o / In 0M T 2 `2 0118 m 01 . Z O �! V C co II CCpp Z µ �p C A T O + CA CJI ? O 2 Z µ µ µ Z IN m � DDDD x P RI 1 HE SHALL MT ILL DE TEEMED W Longview AND n O ITT \ - THE AUTHOR M THESE DOCOUENTS(n O SIAIWOM WDNO HER RESERTED O N RIGHTS. VKLUDINC HE COPYRICHT. an I1laL- czEre community Z Dwmrlc µrERRrroH Skilled / Adult Care Addition IT q N NCUryM OY OF FOR NF N '• KR . UNLESS KIINL UNDER THE DTFI a THE hiCHRECT. TO 1 Bella Vista Drive O HTER MY REM ON THIS UCUHEHT ITT 111 1 JAMES ST . 315- 474 - 5501 IN AMY WAY Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 SYRACUSE. IJY 13203 FAX 315- 474 - 1922 • September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 11 . • • • • • V Cornell University ®p o • transportation =focused Generic • Environmental Impact Statement ( t = GEIS ) • • and • • Ten - ear Transportation Impact Mitigation • , Strategies ( TIMS ) • Ithaca , New York • • • • Prepared by: • 0 TROWBRIDGE & WOLF, LLP • © Landscape rem.#1 1 Planners 1001 Wes Beneca. N101 Ithao, New York 14090 607-777-1400 Fax 607-777-6092 • MARTIN, ALEXIOU, BRYSON, PLLC • 2414 Onalf R Planning Traffic Engineering 2414 81-1 i 4Road, Sale 101 Raleigh,x: 9NC 77607 � 919-981-1243 Fax: 919438!-0081 • • of • August 26 , 2005 • • • • TROWBRIDGE & WOLF , LLP L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s P l a n n e r s • L • AUG 2 6 2 • August 26, 2005 T OWN OF ITHACA • Mr. Jonathan Kanter PLANIN, wr, , zn, ' 1R "C . ENGINEERING • Director of Planning _ -�� • Town of Ithaca 215 North Tioga Street • Ithaca, NY 14850 • RE : Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies • • Dear Jonathan: • This transmits to you the LEAF and Development Review Application for a Ten-year • Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) and associated transportation-focused • Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) being jointly undertaken by Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca. We are requesting your consideration of a Positive • Declaration on the LEAF to allow the public scoping phase of the project to move forward. • An increase in the population that travels to Cornell (primarily staff, faculty and graduate • students) affects transportation in the community surrounding the campus . The purpose of the • t-GEIS is to study that effect on the surrounding community. TIMS will not be written before the t-GEIS . Rather, TIMS will evolve in response to the data and the public feedback obtained from • the t-GEIS process. The mitigations and alternatives sections of the t-GEIS, in particular, will • inform and shape TIMS, which may include recommendations for transportation demand • management, multi-modal transportation strategies including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and parking, access and circulation modifications, and zoning changes . • • This t-GEIS will address transportation impacts. While the t-GEIS is in process, all building and/or site development projects proposed by Cornell will continue to undergo Site Development • Plan Review and SEQR on a project-by-project basis . • This application includes: • 1 . Application Form • 2 . LEAF • 3 . Preliminary Outline for Proposed Draft Scope • Since we are requesting a positive declaration, filling out the LEAF is a formality. Questions on • the LEAF are geared towards specific development projects while the t-GEIS will study a range of hypothetical growth scenarios on the Cornell campus over the next decade to develop TIMS . • Since much of the LEAF is not applicable to this type of study or action, only Question 25 on page 8 of the LEAF has been completed. Information related to other issues and questions will be • described during the course of the t-GEIS . • Because of the nature of this project, and based on conversations with your office, we are • proposing to form a Resource Committee to provide technical expertise for this project. Enclosed is a joint letter from Cornell Director of Transportation Services Bill Wendt and Town Supervisor • Cathy Valentino inviting decision makers in the community to appoint representatives to the • • 1 +1 ;01 West 5eueca Street , Suite 101 . Ithaca , New Fork 14850 607a277 * 1 .100 11AX 60 '7 * 2 ? ' • 6092 • • • t� Resource Committee. A draft list of anticipated members of the Resource Committee also is • enclosed. We look forward to introducing this project to you and members of the Planning Board at th September 6, 2005 Town Planning Board meeting. Please do not hesitate to call should you ave questions or require additional information. Sincerel , • Kathryn Wo f, RLA Principal-in-Charge • 1 ! 1 ! i �G' 4 t tiei; cc :+ ) str -, et ; Suitt: 1U4 . 1. ': ita " a , veti�• Fork 1 =48 ; ,) _ I + J r Y 6l 6 • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS • Development Review Application LEAF Preliminary Outline for Proposed Draft Scope • Resource Committee Invitation Letter Draft Resource Committee List ' TOWN OF ITHACA DEVELOPMENT FOR OFFICE ,USE ONLY' • 215 North Tioga Street REVIEW Date ReceYVed Hit Ithaca, NY 14850 Protect No q4 APPLICATION (607) 273 - 1747 LL APPLICATIONS, Type of Application: Subdivision _ Site Plan _ Rezoning _ Special Permit _ Other X Stage of Review: Sketch Preliminary Final Add'1 Meeting •• Pro J ect Name if any): Ten- ear Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS ) Street Address/Location of Project: Cornell University Tax Parcel No. : Various • Owner: Cornell University tit • Owner' s Address : 200 Humphreys Service Building, attn . Brenda Smith Phone No. : 607.255. 6616 Applicant or Agent (if different from Owner) : Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP Landscape Architects & Planners 1001 W. Seneca St. , #101 • Applicant/Agent's Address: Ithaca, NY 14850 Phone No. : 607027751400 Engineer: Martin , Alexiou , Bryson Phone No. : 919.881 . 1243 • tBD dscape Architect: Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP Phone No. : 607.277. 1400 mey: Phone No. I VISION APPLICATIONS. Total number of lots proposed (existing + new): Are new roads or public utilities proposed? • Estimated site improvement cost (exclude cost of land acquisition & prof. fees) : SITE PLAN APPLICA TIONS: Project is (circle one): Residential Non-Residential • Lot Area: Total Bldg. Floor Area: No. of Dwelling Units: Estimated project cost (exclude cost of land acquisition & prof. fees) : REZONING APPLICATIONS: Existing Zoning: Proposed Zoning: is ALL APPLICATl:QNS:• • The information on this apphcat�on form is submitted Sri addition to other :formation, plats, and plags required by the Town of Ithaca I attest tha all information so submitted is complete and accurate to the best::of my knowledge Also, by filing flits application, pernussion isgran ted to member • f the vanous Town Boards' Planning and Eng neenng Staff; and Councils, and/or any other persons designated by the Town that mayb • olved m the review o.f this application; to enter the property specified above to inspect in connection with the review of this application • Owner's Signature Date Apphcant/A t Signatu;e.(if di . t); : Date , • 05/30/04 • TOWN OF ITHACA DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE _ . FOR �OFFICE USE ONLY O TYPE OF REVIEW APPLICATION FEE (non-refundable) 0 Town Fee Schedule Due Subdivision Review: Initial Application (Sketch) : 1 710 new lots * $ 100.00 (without new roads or public utilities) All Others * $ 100.00 plus $2 / lot Preliminary Plat: 140 new lots * $ 100.00 plus $20 / lot (without new roads or public utilities) All Others * $ 100.00 plus $40 / lot Final Plat: 50% of Preliminary Plat Fee Plats / Replats whose sole purpose is to dedicate land for public use --------- no charge Plat Reaffirmations $ 100.00 plus $5 / lot Site Plan Review: Initial Application (Sketch) $ 100.00 Preliminary Plan Estimated Project Cost $ 1 - $ 10,000.99 $200.00 • $ 105001 - $25,000.99 $250.00 $25,001 - $50,000.99 $300.00 $505001 - $ 100,000.99 $350.00 $ 100,001 - $2509000.99 $400.00 . $250,001 - $500,000.99 $500.00 $5005001 - $ 1 ,0005000.99 $750.00 $ 1 ,000,001 - $23500,000.99 $ 19000.00 $25500,001 - $590005000.99 $ 15500.00 • $570009001 - $ 10,0003000.99 $2,000.00 $ 1000,001 - $20,000,000.99 $2,500.00 Over $20,000,000.99 $3 ,000.00 Projects With Interior Work Only. $250.00 • Final Plan 50% of Preliminary Site Plan Fee Rezoning/Zoning Amendment: $ 175 .00 - plus pertinent site plan fees Special Permit: $ 100.00 (if not with site plan application) Additional Meeting Fees : Agenda Processing $30.00 • Public Hearing Processing $50.00 Please consult Local Law No. S, of the Fees Paid : year 2004, for a complete explanation Receipt # : of application fees. Check # : • NOTES : * Number of new lots is the number that would exist after subdivision Received by Date • 05/30/04 617.20 Appendix A . State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM • flose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmental analysis . In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance . The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process • has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action . • Full EAF Components : The full EAF is comprised of three parts : Part 1 : Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site . By identifying basic project data, it assists • a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3 . • Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action . It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced . • Part 3 : If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. THIS AREA FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE -- Type 1 and Unlisted Actions • ify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: Part 1 11 Part 2 El Part 3 • review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate) , and any other supporting information , and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: • A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared . • B . Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore • a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared, * • LJ C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the . environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared . . * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions • Name of Action • Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer ture of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) �ebsite Date • Page 1 of 21 • PART 1 --PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor • NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the • environment. Please complete the entire form , Parts A through E . Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the • application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believ will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3 . It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies , research or investigation . If information requiring such additional work is unavailable , so indicate and specify each instance . i Name of Action Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS ) Location of Action (include Street Address , Municipality and County) Cornell University Name of Agent: Trowbridae & Wolf. LLP Landscaoe Architects & Planners I AOL Address 1001 West Seneca Street. #101 City / PO Ithaca State NY Zip Code 14850 Business Telephone 607.277. 1400 • • Name of Owner (if different) Cornell University Address 200 Humphreys Service Building , attn . Brenda Smith City / PO Ithaca State NY Zip Code 14853 Business Telephone 607.255. 6616 Description of Action : See Attached • • • 0 • 0 i • 0 Page 2 of 21 • • s • : • Proposed Action • Action: Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies • Description: The Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (hereafter "TIMS ") will • outline ways to reduce adverse transportation impacts of potential Cornell University growth. An • increase in the population that travels to Cornell (primarily staff, faculty, and graduate students) affects transportation in the community surrounding the campus. TIMS may include recommendations for transportation demand management, multi-modal transportation strategies • including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and parking, access and circulation modifications, and zoning changes. After its completion, TIMS will be updated in five-year cycles. • Environmental Review : A transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (hereafter the "t-GEIS ") pursuant to the NYS and Town of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review • laws will be written about the transportation effects of campus growth on the surrounding • community. During the preparation of the t-GEIS the public and municipal agencies will have • full opportunity to review the draft t-GEIS and provide comments about the transportation impacts of a range of hypothetical Cornell growth scenarios, their possible mitigations, and alternatives. The t-GEIS will provide a context for a comprehensive evaluation of the • transportation impacts of potential Cornell campus growth over the next decade. TIM S will not be written before the t-GEIS . Rather, TIMS will evolve in response to the data and • the public feedback obtained from the t-GEIS process . The mitigations and alternatives sections • of the t-GE IS, in particular, will inform and shape TIMS . Finally, by providing a forward-thinking, comprehensive review, the t-GEIS will also assist the • lead and involved agencies in environmental reviews of the transportation-related impacts of individual Cornell projects in the future. • • • • • • s • • • • Please Complete Each Question--Indicate N . A . if not applicable • ITE DESCRIPTION NA • ical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas . Present Land Use : 0 Urban Industrial Commercial Residential (suburban) Rural (non-farm) LJ Forest rl Agriculture Other 2 , Total acreage of project area : acres. • APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION • Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) acres acres . Forested acres acres Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland , pasture, etc .) acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24 , 25 of ECL) acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres • Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres oads, buildings and other paved surfaces acres acres then (Indicate type) acres acres • 3 . What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? a , Soil drainage : Well drained .% of site El Moderately well drained % of site. ElPoorly drained . % of site • b , If any agricultural land is involved , how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classification System? acres (see 1 NYCRR 370) , • 4 . Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? Yes No . a , What is depth to bedrock (in feet) S 5 , Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: Ell 0- 10% % 010- 15% % LJ 15% or greater % 6 , Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places? Yes LJ No • 7 . Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? Yes _ No hat is the depth of the water table? (in feet) i site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? El Yes LJ1 No 10 . Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? El Yes 0 No • Page 3 of 21 11 . Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? UYes No According to : • Identify each s ecies: • _ .. _ _.. ... _. . . . .. . . . _ . . ._. . _ . . .. _ . .. _. ._. _ _ . . _ . .. . _ . _ _ . . _ .._ . _ .. _ . 12 . Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i . e. , cliffs, dunes, other geological formati ' n s? Yes E] No Describe: 13 . Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? Yes No If yes, explain : • 14 . Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? E] Yes I E] No 15 . Streams within or contiguous to project area . a . Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16 . Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area : b. Size (in acres) : • _. .... . . W . _ _ __ . _ .... _._ _ _ . Page 4 of 21 • . 17 . Is the site served by existing public utilities? Li Yes U. No a . If YES, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? 11; Yes El No b . If YES , will improvements be necessary to allow connection? LJ Yes No • 18 . Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? UYes ® No 19 . Is the site located in or substantiall contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? 0 Yes No 20 . Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? El Yes r77 No • Be Project Description : NA . 1 . Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) . a . Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor: acres. • b. Project acreage to be developed : acres initially; acres ultimately. • C. Project acreage to remain undeveloped : acres. d . Length of project, in miles : (if appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed . % a Number of off-street parking spaces existing : proposed : • g . Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour: (upon completion of project)? h . If residential : Number and type of housing units : One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium • Initially Ultimately i . Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: height; width; length . j . Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? ft. 2 . How much natural material (Le, rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? tons/cubic yards . . 3 . Will disturbed areas be reclaimed U Yes i No N/A • a . If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? ....... . _ - .... _ . 1 4Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Yes No Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Yes No . ow many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? acres . . Page 5 of 21 • 5 . Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this proJec ? Yes LJ No 6 . If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction : months, (including demolition) 7 . If multi-phased : a . Total number of phases anticipated (number) b . Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 : month year, (including demolition) c. Approximate completion date of final phase : month year. • d . Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? LJ Yes No 8 . Will blasting occur during construction? Yes No • 91 Number of jobs generated : during construction ; after project is complete 10 . Number of jobs eliminated by this project • 11 . Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? El Yes El No • If yes, explain : _...__._........_._. ._. 12 . Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes LJNo a . If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial , etc) and amount . b . Name -of water body into which effluent will be discharged I • 13 .. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes No Type 14 . Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Yes No • If yes,. explain : • ....._. _ ... _. .............. ......... _.... ._ _. _ . ...... . .. _ . . .. .. ... 15 . Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? Yes LJNo 16 . Will the project generate solid waste? Yes LJ No • a . If yes, what is the amount per month? tons b . If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? El Yes No • c. If yes , give name location • d . Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Yes N Page 6 of 21 • • • , e. If yes, explain : • • • • • • 17 . Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? LJ Yes UNo • a . If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month . b . If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18 . Will project use herbicides or pesticides? OYes LJ No • 19 . Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? Yes El No • 20 . Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? OYes El No • 21 . Will project result in an increase in energy use? Yes No • • If yes, indicate type(s) • i • • • 22 . If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity gallons/minute . • • 23 . Total anticipated water usage per day . gallons/day. • 24 . Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? Yes No • If yes, explain : • • • • Page 7 of 21 25 . Approvals Required : (and/or Involved Agencies Regarding Future Actions That May Rely on the t-GEIS for Review of • Transportation-Related Impacts.) Type Submittal Date City, Town , Village Board Yes Lj No • City of Ithaca Common Council Town of Ithaca Board S Town of Dryden Board Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees 10-Year Transportation 8/26/05 S City, Town , Village Planning Board Yes No Impact Mitigation Strategies City of Ithaca Planning Board Town of Ithaca Planning Board • Town of Dryden Planning Board Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board w City, Town Zoning Board ®� Yes No City of Ithca Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Dryden Zoning Board Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board City, County Health Department uYes !i No Other Local Agencies Yes No Tompkins County Other Regional Agencies Yes No TCAT Board • ITCTC State Agencies ®� Yes El No Dormitory Authority • NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation NYS Dept. of Transportation State University Construction Fund (SUCF) • State University of New York (SUNY) Federal Agencies F1 Yes El No • Federal Highway Administration • Federal Transportation Administration • C. Zoning and Planning Information : NA • 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? Yes Lj No . If Yes , indicate decision required : ElZoning variance =._ . _' New/revision of master Ian Lj Subdivisi • Zoning amendment � g � P • Site plan � Special use permit Resource management plan Other i Page 8 of 21 • 2 What is the zoning classification(s) of the site? i 3 r e maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? i I • 4 . What is the proposed zoning of the site? 5 . What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? i 3 6 . Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? Yes No 3 3 7 . What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a 1/a mile radius of proposed action? • 1 1 • 3 1 I • I • 1 i i i i i i k i 1 i • s the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses with a A mile? 11 Yes El No the proposed action is the subdivision of land , how many lots are proposed? a . What is the minimum lot size proposed? • Page 9 of 21 1 J . Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? Yes No 11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, poli e, fire protection? Yes No a . If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? LJ Yes LJ No • 12 . Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? LJY sO No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic . OYes El No D . Informational Details Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal , please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them . • E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. • Applicant/Sponsor Name Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Landscape Architects & Planners Date August , 69 2005 . Signature Title If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this • assessment. Page 10 of 21 • Preliminary Outline for Proposed Draft Scope • Transportation-related Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) For Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) August 26, 2005 • Executive Summary I. Description of The Proposed Action • 1 . 1 Background and History 1 .2 Public Need for the Proposed Action 1 . 3 Objectives 1 .4 Benefits 1 . 5 Study Area 1 . 6 Hypothetical Cornell Growth Scenarios Over the Next Decade H. Existing Transportation-related Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation • 2 . F Transportation Systems • 2 . 1 . 1 Relationship to Other Current Long-Range Transportation Planning Efforts 2 . 1 .2 Transportation Demand Management Programs (TDMP) 2 . 1 . 3 Pedestrian Circulation • 2 . 1 .4 Bicycle Circulation 2 . 1 . 5 Vehicular Circulation 2 . 1 . 6 Traffic Capacity & Operations • 2 . 1 .7 Transit Service 2 . 1 . 8 Parking 2 . 1 .9 Relationship to Land Use and Zoning r • III. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts IV. Alternatives to the Action 4. 1 No Action / Evaluate Transportation Impacts on a Case-by-Case Basis • V. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources • • • • • • • Date • ' Name Address Address • • RE : Invitation to Appoint Resource Committee Members for • Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) and transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) • • Dear: • • As part of a pro-active initiative, Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca are jointly • undertaking a transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) which will result in the development of a Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) . • An increase in the population that travels to Cornell (primarily staff, faculty and graduate • students) affects transportation in the community surrounding the campus . The t-GEIS will *study that effect on the surrounding community, and outline ways to reduce adverse transportation !, impacts of potential Cornell growth. Potential growth will be derived from a range of • hypothetical Cornell campus growth scenarios over the next decade. • TIMS will not be written before the t-GEIS . Rather, TIMS will evolve in response to the data and • the public feedback obtained from the t-GEIS process . The mitigations and alternatives sections of the t-GEIS , in particular, will inform and shape TIMS, which may include recommendations • for transportation demand management improvements, multi-modal transportation strategies • including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and parking, access and circulation modifications, and zoning changes. We recognize that to be successful in this endeavor we need to draw on local expertise. We are • asking you to help us assemble a Resource Committee for this important transportation-focused project. The purpose of the Resource Committee is to provide technical assistance through the t- • GEIS process towards the development of TIMS . To that end, the Resource Committee will be composed of individuals from potentially involved agencies who are able to contribute technical knowledge about transportation issues because of their training and position. • Members of the Resource Committee will be expected to contribute technical input, share . knowledge, information and resources, provide critiques to the planning team and contribute a range of professional opinions on transportation planning. • • Committee members should expect to review and comment on reading materials provided in advance of meetings, contribute to technical discussions, and occasionally provide a brief presentation related to their area of expertise . Regular attendance at meetings is expected. • • • Frequency of meetings is estimated to be once every six to eight weeks for the duration of the project, which is expected to take up to two years . Please provide us recommendations for Resource Committee members relevant to your jurisdiction using the attached draft list as a guide. Please consider appointing Committee • members who are able to commit to attending meetings on a regular basis for the duration of the project. We would like to receive your recommendations no later than September 13 , 2005 . IWe expect the first Resource Committee meeting to occur during the last week of September, and we anticipate that the Committee will meet three or four times during the scoping phase of the t�- GEIS, which should be completed by mid-December 2005 . The Committee will continue to meet regularly during the completion of the t-GEIS . Thank you in advance for helping to make this transportation-focused project successful for the entire community. Sincerely, 40 Bill Wendt, Director Cathy Valentino, Supervisor Transportation Services Town of Ithaca • Cornell University S • • • •� transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) • DRAFT Resource Committee • August 26, 2005 • The members of the Resource Committee shall be composed of individuals from potentially involved agencies who are able to contribute technical knowledge about transportation issues because of their training and position. • 1 . City of Ithaca • • Department of Public Works (Bill Gray, Superintendent of DPW?) • (Tim Logue, Transportation Engineer?) 108 East Green Street 2nd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850 • City Planning Department (Thys VanCort, Director of Planning?) • (JoAnn Cornish, Deputy Director of Planning?) 108 East Green Street 3rd Floor • Ithaca, NY 14850 2. Cornell University • • Campus Planning Office Transportation Planning and Campus Planning Services (Andrew Eastlick, Transportation Planner) • 102 Humphreys Service Building Ithaca, NY 14853 -3701 • • 3. ITCTC • • Fernando de Aragon, Executive Director Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council 121 E. Court Street • Ithaca, NY 14850 S • 4. TCAT • . Joe Turcotte, General Manager 737 Willow Avenue Ithaca, NY 14850 • • • • s 5. ' NYSDOT TBD S 6. Tompkins County Tompkins County Planning Department (Ed Marx, Commissioner of Planning?) 121 East Court Street Ithaca, NY 14850 7. Town of Dryden TBD • Town of Dryden 65 East Main Street Dryden, NY 13053 8. Town of Ithaca • Planning Department (Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning) , 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 • TBD , Town Transportation Committee • 9. Village of Cayuga Heights Supt. of Public Works, Engineer, Zoning Officer, Building Commissioner (Brent Cross) Marcham Hall • 836 Hanshaw Road Ithaca, NY 14850- 1548 1 Board, and other involved agencies with critical information that will provide a better basis for long-range and coordinated decisions relating to Cornell ' s growth and development, how the regional transportation system will be impacted, and mitigation strategies that can be considered to address these issues . Meanwhile, please feel free to let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter. Att. cc : Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge & Wolf Brenda Smith, Civil Engineer, Cornell University William Wendt, Director of Transportation & Mail Services, Cornell University Andrew Eastlick, Transportation Planner, Cornell University John Gutenberger, Director of Community Relations, Cornell University Shirley Egan, Associate University Counsel, Cornell University Minakshi Amundsen, University Planner, Cornell University George Alexiou, Martin, Alexiou, Bryson Fred Wilcox, Chair, Town of Ithaca Planning Board 3 ti REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 12 , 2005 RESOLUTION NO . 2005- = CONCURRENCE WITH DESIGNATION OF TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD AS LEAD AGENCY TO COORDINATE THE REVIEW OF THE CORNELL UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION -FOCUSED GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (T-GETS) AND TEN -YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT MITIGATION STRATEGY WHEREAS , Cornell University has submitted a report outlining a proposal for a "transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) and Ten- year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS)" , dated August 26 , 2005 , being undertaken by Cornell University in cooperation with the Town of Ithaca . The t-GEIS will address transportation impacts on the community surrounding the campus related to an increasing population traveling to Cornell . The TIMS will evolve in response to the feedback obtained from the t-GEIS process , and ma J clude recommendations for transportation demand management, multi-modal tran , _ ' rtation strategies , access and circulation modifications , and zoning changes . C -el ' : iversity, Applicant; Kathryn Wolf, RLA , Principal-in-Charge (Trowbridge & , oIf, LL Martin , Alexiou , Bryson (Transportation Consultants) ; and ' WHEREAS , the proposed transp -fo '0 ed GEIS would be a generic environmental impact statement that will examine and evaluate Cornell ' s transportation-related impacts and x tia mitigations for possible projects , plus hypothetical growth scenarios , ov u ` a ' ade . The GEIS is a tool available under the New York State Environmental y iew Act, commonly referred to as SEQR . Unlike an Environmental I a ent , a GEIS is flexible enough to explore hypothetical or alternative s anos , ' , r, n WHEREAS , the Town of a is the logical municipality to serve as lead agency in the t-GEIS initiative . Its boundaries encircle the City of Ithaca and abut most of the county's other municipalities . On an average workday, 80 percent of Cornell employees travel through the Town of Ithaca on their daily commute . The town has a key role in the county's overall transportation system , and is in the process of completing its own transportation plan ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca. Planning Board adopted a resolution on September 6 , 2005 proposing to establish itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed transportation-focused GEIS and Ten -year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy , as described above ; and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is requesting the concurrence of all involved agencies on this proposed lead agency designation ; RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby finds that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board would be the most appropriate agency to serve as lead agency to coordinate the review of the . t-GEIS because , among other reasons , the TIMS involves a planning process to identify alternate growth scenarios and alternate strategies to mitigate impacts of those scenarios , the Planning Board has experience in coordinating and reviewing other environmental impact statements (incl ding the Cornell Precinct 7 GEIS ) , and the Planning Board is familiar with and deals on an ongoing basis with the review of Cornell University projects relating to trans portation , parking , access and circulation issues ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby concurs with the designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as Lead gency to coordinate the review of the proposed transportation-focused GEIS and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy , as described above . MOVED : SECONDED : VOTE : jE. L ly. psi„ 5 It. sa —4 vt r €a i Frequently-asked questions (FAQs) on a transportation4ocused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (T-GEIS) What is a transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (T-GEIS)? . A transportation-focused GEIS is a generic environmental impact statement that will --- - - identify, examine and evaluate Cornell' s transportation-related impacts and possible mitigations for planned projects, plus hypothetical growth scenarios, over the next decade . The GEIS is a tool available under the New York's State Environmental Quality Review Act, commonly referred to as SEQR. Unlike an Environmental Impact Statement, a GEIS is flexible enough to explore hypothetical or alternative scenarios. Why do this study now? In recent years, there has been considerable interest about Cornell-related parking, commuting and bus ridership. For several years, the Town of Ithaca and Cornell have participated in countywide discussions on these issues; while the town, simultaneously, has worked proactively to develop its own transportation plan. For the past several months, the Town and Cornell have discussed transportation-related challenges and opportunities and agree the T-GEIS is the next logical step. How will the community have a say in this process? The Town of Ithaca, as the T-GEIS 's "lead agency," will involve additional governmental agencies, as appropriate, including Tompkins County, City of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, Village of Cayuga Heights, New York State Department of Transportation and others. There will be several opportunities for public input throughout this process, including regular updates for the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council. Why is the Town of Ithaca lead agency? The Town of Ithaca is the logical municipality to serve as lead agency in the T-GEIS initiative. Its boundaries encircle the City of Ithaca and abut most of the county's other municipalities . On an average workday, 80 percent of Cornell employees travel through the Town of Ithaca on their daily commute. The town has a key role in the county's overall transportation system, and is in the process of completing its own transportation plan. Why use SEQR and not another process? State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) is a comprehensive, well-established process that is widely recognized as a tool for publicly examining environmental impacts and identifying mitigation measures . It incorporates public participation and review by all involved agencies. Each Involved Agency will be responsible for its own findings upon completion of the T-GEIS . Will the T-GEIS address student parking on campus? The T-GEIS looks at the pros and cons of a wide range of transportation-related issues 0 Page 2/Frequently-asked questions on a transportation-focused GEIS and potential mitigations, and on-campus parking is a part of that mix. Other topics at will likely be addressed are current and potential parking inventories, alternative fo s of transportation (walking, bicycling; etc.), and transportation. demand management programs (carpooling, park-and-ride, transit use, etc.) Will the T-GEIS give blanket approvals to Cornell projects for the foreseeable future? No . Individual project approvals would continue to occur in the usual manner. A G IS is not an approval, but rather an assessment of the environmental impacts of potential courses of action. It will allow the Town, City and other Involved Agencies to review individual projects in a larger context, and to plan proactively to address anticipated cumulative impacts of campus growth and development. What about new Cornell projects that come up before the T-GEIS is complete ? Projects that are proposed before completion of the T-GEIS will be considered and reviewed as they are now. Traffic-related information developed during this time could be used as part of the analysis of the project. How does it pertain to surrounding communities ? The T-GEIS will evaluate transportation-related impacts of campus growth on a reE ional basis and will provide useful insights to surrounding communities. Background growth of the surrounding communities as it pertains to transportation impacts will also be included in the study. It is anticipated that a working group of technical experts wi 1 be set up to participate in and provide feedback during the study. In addition to representatives from the Town, City and Cornell (and Cornell's consultants), the w rking group could include representatives from the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council, TCAT, County Planning, Town of Dryden, Village of Cayuga Heights an others . I o ly OF IT TOWN OF ITHACA a ie zt 215 N . Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 w X04 www.town. ithaca. ny.us 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 TO : Involved/Interested Agencies : Erin M. Crotty, Commissioner, NYS Dept. of Environmental Conservation Robert Derico, Dormitory Authority of the State of New York Janis M. Gross, Associate Transportation Analyst, NYS Dept. of Transportation James Biggane, Assistant General Manager, State University Construction Fund Betty Capaldi, State University of New York Chancellor' s Office Robert Griffith, Federal Highway Administration Nina Chung, Federal Transit Administration Tim Joseph, Chair, Tompkins County Legislature John M . Andersson, Tompkins County Department of Health Edward C . Marx, Commissioner, Tompkins County Departments of Planning and Public Works Bill Sczesny, Tompkins County Highway Manager Catherine Valentino, Supervisor, Town of Ithaca Town Board Kirk Sigel, Chair, Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Lenore Durkee, Chair, Town of Ithaca Conservation Board Brent Cross, Village of Cayuga Heights Board of Trustees/Planning Board Robin Cisne, Chair, Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals Carolyn K. Peterson, Mayor, City of Ithaca Julie Conley Holcomb, City Clerk, City of Ithaca (for Common Council) H . Matthys Van Cort, City of Ithaca Dept. of Planning & Development Robert Boothroyd, Chair, City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board William Olney, Chair, City of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Steven Trumbell , Supervisor, Town of Dryden Town Board Barbara Caldwell , Chair, Town of Dryden Planning Board Oers Keleman, Chair, Town of Dryden Zoning Board of Appeals Don Hartill, Mayor, Village of Lansing Fernando DeAragon, Director, Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council Joe Turcotte, General Manager, Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit FROM : Jonathan Kanter, AICP, Director of Planning — DATE : September 12 , 2005 RE : Request for Concurrence in Lead Agency Designation : Cornell University Transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy (TIMS ) . The Town of Ithaca has received a report outlining a proposal for a "transportatio -focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS ) and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS)", dated August 26 , 2005 , being undertaken by Cornell t Jniversity in cooperation with the Town of Ithaca. Description : The t-GEIS will address transportation impacts on the community surrounding the campus related to an increasing population traveling to Cornell . The TIMS will evolve in -response to -the-feedback -obtained from -the t-GEIS process, and -may-include recommendations for transportation demand management, multi-modal transportation strategies, access * and circulation modifications, and zoning changes . Cornell University, Applicant; Kathwyn Wolf, RLA, Principal-in-Charge (Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP) ; Martin, Alexiou, Bryson (Tran portation Consultants) . The proposed transportation-focused GEIS would be a generic environmental impact statement that will identify, examine and evaluate Cornell ' s transportation-related impacts and potential mitigations for possible projects, plus hypothetical growth scenarios, over the next decade . The GEIS is a tool available under the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, commonly referred to as SEQR. Unlike an Environmental Impact Statement, a GEIS s flexible enough to explore hypothetical or alternative scenarios. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board adopted a resolution on September 6 , 2005 proposing to establish itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed transportation-focused GEIS anc . Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategy. Cornell University proposes to repare a transportation-focused Generic EIS and is requesting a positive declaration of envi onmental significance . Tentative Date for Planning Board Meeting (Lead Agency Designation and Positive Declaration) : October 18 , 2005 Concurrence with the designation of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as lead agency and preliminary comments or concerns related to the proposal should be sent prior to October 12, 2005 , The Town of Ithaca Planning Board intends to hold a Public Scoping Session to det rmine the scope and content of the t-GEIS . The Public Scoping Session is tentatively sch�duled for November 1 , 2005 . The draft Scope outline will be circulated for review and commerit upon its submission. A copy of the report referenced above is attached, which includes a Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part 1 , a description of the proposed action, a preliminary outline for the proposed draft scope , and a cover letter (August 26 , 2005). If you have any question regarding the above matter, please contact me at (607) 273 - 1747 , or by email at jkanter @town.it aca.ny.us . Att. cc : Kenneth Lynch, Director, Region 7 , N . Y . S . Department of Environmental Con ervation Stan Birchenough, Resident Engineer, NYS Department of Transportation, Region 3 Brian Wilbur, Fire Chief, City of Ithaca Fire Department 2 William Gray, City of Ithaca Department of Public Works William Wendt, Director of Transportation Services, Cornell University Andrew Eastlick, Transportation Planner, Cornell University Shirley Egan, Associate Unversity Counsel, Cornell University John Gutenberger, Director of Community Relations, Cornell University Minakshi Amundsen, University Planner, Cornell University Brenda Smith, Civil Engineer, Cornell University Kathryn-Wolf, Principal, Trowbridge & Wolf George Alexiou, Principal, Martin, Alexiou, Bryson 3 September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT x` 12 MEMO To : Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee members ; Fisher Associates consultants From : Nicole Tedesco0 Date: September 9 , 2005 RE : Website Featuring the Town 's Transportation Plan Anticipating the need for public outreach as the transportation planning process draws to a close , I have drafted a website featuring the Town 's transportation plan . The website can be accessed at http ://www .town . ithaca . ny. us/trans/ index. htm . The goal of the website is to facilitate interactions between the staff, committee , and the public by acting as a public clearinghouse of information relating to the transportation plan and transportation in the town . For example , a resident may hear of a public meeting, but may be unable to attend . The week of the meeting, the resident may peruse the presentation and send comments and questions at their leisure . The resident benefits by staying involved and informed of the process, while staff benefits from reducing the number of simple queries coming into the office . There are five subject headings in the table of contents at the top and left of the home page . They are : • The Plan : This section covers all of the main chapters and. text of the plan . • The Facts : This section includes the appendices at the end of the plan , as well as related maps and tables . Pages within The Plan and The Facts refer to each other; hence , they open into new windows that can remain open for cross-reference . • Get Involved: This section outlines the public outreach to date , including the PowerPoint presentations from the first and second public meetings and the results of the Town 's transportation survey of 2003 . Information on the date , time , and location of the final public meeting(s ) , as well as the presentation (s ) and materials for distribution , will be posted in this section . • Tell Us : This is a form that allows residents to submit their comments on the Plan , or on transportation issues in general , to staff members . As of September 8, this page is " live " and all comments submitted via the form will be sent via email to me . • Learn More : This section contains links relating to the Town and to transportation in the region . A pop-up window alerts the user that s/ he is leaving the Town 's site, and that material found on other sites does not represent Town policy. Your comments and input on the design and content of the site are greatly appreciated . I hope to take the site " live " in the next week. The Town 's homepage will contain a link to the web portal , and the site will announced in the local media . Nicole Tedesco C N 0 0 G1 N O d N in c cn d N c O •a ti c Lw U + U m mN ` Q O x (n N V E o 3 v o y o 0 C` ' o N milli c cn U OU • ac ` U> ° L fA V w L (D W ■ cn E C a m N a un c c o a� o _ c c c.. o ° � 4M,P ca r I c0 N � > O c� } a) � � � Q) Qa ~ — > N � I I I can CL � � m O U _ v N L c L. : a 4-1 i LIJ . ................: L cl p o cn ■O^ o Q (p a Rf � (D 0 '0 Q d c •N U d Z o <) Q) _ A O Ma E O •O "o I � 0 C w Q a 'tL0 c > C N O O O N O (0 7 N U > J)CL ?� U. �° 1 1 1 1 1 1 �° I I I I •o `O a) d. r ~ Q m F- N N00 Q C ~ > O O M U M Ma O CL o a @ u, M N m a�i O O c O O O .� U CL O N N C >, 0 N O 1.N V cis U O (6 U O U) f0 C C� m Q Q a E m I I I I I I I I TOWN CLERK' S MONTHLY REPORT AgngI 20 September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting AT A NT # 13 TOWN OF ITHACA, NEW YORK AUGUST, 2005 HE SUPERVISOR: PAGE 1 ant to Section 27, Subd 1 of the Town Law, I hereby make the following statement of all fees and moneys received - e in connection with my office during the month stated above, excepting only such fees and moneys the application payment of which are otherwise provided for by Law : A1255 22 MARRIAGE LICENSES NO . 05075 TO 05096 367 . 50 6 MISC. COPIES 31 . 55 2 ZONING ORDINANCE 25 . 60 3 TAX SEARCH 15 .00 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 12 .00 1 ZONING MAP 1 . 00 13 MARRIAGE TRANSCRIPT 130 .00 4 COPY OF TAX BILL 0 . 80 TOTAL TOWN CLERK FEES 58145 A1557 1 SPCA IMPOUND FEES 40 . 00 TOTAL A1557 40.00 A2544 DOG LICENSES 687 . 78 TOTAL A2544 687. 78 1� 115 BUILDING PERMIT 2,255 .00 2 BUILDING PERMIT EXTENSIN 125 .00 3 FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS 155 .00 3 ZONING BOARD MTG 300.00 5 TEMP CERTIFICATE OCCUP 11260. 00 4 OPERATING PERMIT 3 ,500 .00 TOTAL B2110 79595.00 B2115 1 SUBDV. REV. PRELIM. PLAT 860.00 1 SUBDV. REV. FINAL PLAT 120 .00 1 SITE PLAN INIT. APL. FEE 100 . 00 3 SITE PLAN FINAL PLAN 900.00 2 ADD. MTG. FEE AGENDA PRO 60 . 00 1 SPECIAL PERMITS 100.00 TOTAL B2115 29140900 f " •t . LA 4 . . .�.... ..• , .2 i ..t :se • . :r.., � V y: , .. .. TOWN CLERK' S MONTHLY REPORT AUGUST, 2005 page 2 DISBURSEMENTS PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR GENERAL FUND 1 ,311 .23 PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR PART TOWN FUND 9,735 .00 PAID TO COUNTY TREASURER FOR DOG LICENSES 131 . 72 PAID TO AG & MARKETS FOR DOG LICENSES 24 .00 PAID TO NYS HEALTH DEPT FOR MARRIAGE LICENSES 472 . 50 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 119674. 45 SEPTEMBER 1 , 2005 / � < , ;R —�J� SUPERVISOR STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF TOMPKINS, TOWN OF ITHACA I, TEE-ANN HUNTER, being duly sworn, says that I am the Clerk of the TOWN OF ITHACA that the foregoing is a full and true statement of all Fees and moneys received by me during the month above state i, excepting only such Fees the application and payment of which are otherwise provided for by law. Subscribed and sworn to before me this CC Town Clerk E day of `,CeZ f-C Wt �J£'i/ 20 0� cw ji Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Notary Public, State of New York No . 01 WH6052877 Tioga County obu Commission Expires December 26, TOWN OF ITHACA Public Works Department' s Monthly Board Report June 2005 for the July 11 , 2005 Meeting The heat was still on! ! And no rain in sight! ! ! But the Public Works Department staff has gotten a lot of work done in August. We surface treated about seven miles of road in August and put shoulders down on those roads; along with the two roads (Salem Drive and Seven Mile Drive) we paved this year. In order to put down shoulders we had to mix oil with grindings . This was done at the Public Works Facility before putting the shoulders down. Crosswalk and stop bar painting was completed in August. We also contracted with M&S Striping to paint centerline striping on several Town roads. Along with this, roadside mowing and sign work continued this month. Other road projects included ditching, hydroseeding, hot patching, replacing culvert pipes, checking catch basins, preparing the salt/ majic -0 mixer for use, and disposing of dead animals from the rights-of-way. The Town' s crews also assisted the New York State Department of Transportation, Town of Danby, Tompkins County, Cayuga Heights, Town of Ulysses, and the Town of Caroline on several of their construction projects . We continued to work on the William and Hannah Pew Trail by hauling in material to lay down for the walking trail . We continued at Tutelo Park — mainly the plumbing and roof on the comfort station. We started clearing brush at the future Woolf Lane Park site . Along with the continued maintenance of the Towri s parks, we made repairs to the Eastern Heights play structure and put down wood chips there. The Town received a grant for a beautification project at the Town Hall site . In August, the Public Works staff took out some hedges and replaced them with plantings as part of that beautification project. The Cornell Post Program cleaned up at the Mitchell Street cemetery . The Town' s Public Works Department staff coordinated this . Water related work included cleaning the inlet, installing the Oakwood access road, painting fire hydrants, conducting PRV tours, and making as-builts for water lines recently put in. Water and sewer main inspections at Overlook and Larisa Lane projects continued. There was one water break in August and that was at 148 Ridgecrest Road . Repairs to a sewer pump station at Burns Way were conducted, along with weekly irispections of sewer pump stations . Projects to be worked on in September: 1 . Finish up Tutelo Park construction for 2005 2. Finish up William and Hannah Pew Trail construction for 2005 3 . Water and Sewer maintenance and DSNY mark outs 4 . Continue ditching and hydroseeding 5 . Grounds maintenance at Town Hall 6 . Prepare for winter/ snow operations 7. Hot patching ghk Town Engineer' s Report for 9/12/2005 Town Board Meeting GENERAL Pre-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan We still have not received comments from FEMA on our multi- jurisdictional hazard mitigation plan, though our SEMO representative has indicated that FEMA anticipates the review of our plan to be complete in the next few months . Kate Hackett, at Tompkins County Planning, has been trying to work with SEMO and FEMA to ensure that the plan is complete by year-end. She also wanted to let us know that SEMO has been sending out sections of our plan as a model for other communities to use when developing their plans, so we clearly have the support of SEMO when it comes to final approval of the plan. EARTH FILL PERMITS No fill permits were issued in August. One incident of fill ordinance violation was investigated on Troy Road at the intersection with East King Road. Upon notification, the owner took measures to stop filling and submitted a mitigation plan which is under review. WATER PROJECTS SCLIWC Office Addition The Phase II renovation of the existing office space is almost complete and has been issued a Certificate of Occupancy by the Village of Lansing. There are still a number of punch list items remaining to be completed before the contracts can be closed. . East Hill Transmission Main and Storage Tank The transmission main project awarded to Chicago Construction and pipe installation has been completed. Natgun Corporation has been issued a Notice to Proceed on the Water Tank construction and site preparation work is scheduled for the fall with actual tank construction in the spring. The project is a SCLIWC funded and contracted project and the Town Engineering Staff is providing Construction Inspection and project management services with reimbursement from the Commission. Kings Way Water Improvement Construction is complete and the line has been put in service . Trumansburg Road Water Tank Inspection Report - September 1 , 2005 The Trumansburg Road Water Tank was constructed in the mid 1930 ' s by New York State to provide a water supply to the new tuberculosis hospital, which is now known as the Biggs complex . The water supply also included construction of the Cliff street pump station and several thousand feet of six-inch water main along Trumansburg Road . The Water tank is a 36-foot high riveted steel tank with a 0 . 5 million-gallon storage capacity. This water tank serves the northern portion of the Town of Ithaca West Hill service area, which extends from the City line at Cliff street north to the Town of Ulysses . This Tank also provides the water to City of Ithaca Customers in the Oakwood Lane and Warren Place areas and to the Town of TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 9/ 12/2005 Ulysses water districts 3 and 4 . Prior to the construction of the West Hill Water Tank at Eco-Village the Trumansburg Road tank was the only storage located on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca. Because the Tank had been the sole storage on West Hill serving the area with an approximate 300,000 gallon per day demand, and including the Cayuga Medical Center and Lakeside nursing home, taking the tank out of service with only a pump station for supply was not feasible for an extended period of time . Not that the new West Hill tank is in service it is possible to schedule an extended period of time to empty the tank for maintenance. On August the Trumansburg Road water tank was emptied to allow inspection of the tank interior. Allowing system demand to lower the tank to a depth of approximately 5 feet and then removing the remainder of the water through the tank drain emptied the tank. The West Hill water tank at Eco-village provided the water supply to the tank service area, and the Oakwood Control Valve controlled pressure, while the tank was out of service . The Town engineer and Town Water and Sewer Maintenance Supervisor visually inspected the interior surfaces of the tank from the access port at the base of the tank. The interior coating was intact on about 75 % of the tank wall surface. Approximately 5 feet from the top of the tank wall, a band of failed paint approximately 10 feet wide had failed . This paint failure is in the tank zone that would experience a moving ice cap during the winter months, which would abrade the paint. There were also several large patches of failed paint at other spots on the tank wall . These failures were typical paint bond failures . There was no evidence of deep pitting or structural problems with the tank walls or roof. The exterior of the tank walls and roof were also inspected visually and there were many small paint blister failures, which are typical of coatings at the end of their service life. The cathodes for the cathodic protection system hang from the roof and appeared to be in good condition. This system has been maintained regularly, with an annual test and repairs as needed. The cathodes are accessed from ports in the roof . The conclusion of the tank inspection is that it is structurally sound and needs to be cleaned and painted. This work will be scheduled for 2006 . SEWER PROJECTS South woods Subdivision Force Main The Developer has completed the installation of the sewer system for phase II of the development and the pump station and force main are operational . Final transfer of the property to the Town is pending. Danby Road Sewer Extension to Schickel Road To provide sewer service to the Westview Subdivision the developer has completed construction of the sanitary sewer on the east side of Danby Road to Schickel Road and then up Schickel road to the new subdivision. Town Engineer's Report September 12, 2005 Daniel R. Walker Page 2 9/6/2005 r TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD FROM : JONATHAN KANTER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING RE : CORNELL UNIVERSITY t-GEIS AND TEN-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPACT MITIGATION STRATEGY DATE : SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 The Town of Ithaca has received the attached submission for Cornell University' s proposal for a "transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) and Ten-year Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS)", dated August 26, 2005 , being undertaken by Cornell University in cooperation with the Town of Ithaca. . The t-GEIS will address transportation impacts on the community surrounding the campus related to an increasing population traveling to Cornell. The TIMS will evolve in response to the feedback obtained from the t-GEIS process, and may include recommendations for transportation demand management, multi-modal transportation strategies, access and circulation modifications, and zoning changes. This is scheduled for consideration at the September 12th Town Board meeting. The Planning Board discussed this at their September 6th meeting. Attached for the Board's consideration is the report referenced above, which includes a Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part 1 , a description of the proposed action, and a cover letter (August 26, 2005 ) indicating that the applicant proposes to prepare a transportation-focused Generic EIS and is requesting a positive declaration of environmental significance. The Planning board is proposing to act as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of this proposal, and adopted a resolution at their September 6th meeting indicating their intent. A copy of that resolution is attached. Also attached is a draft resolution for the Town Board ' s consideration concurring with the Planning Board ' s proposal to serve as lead agency to coordinate the review of the t-GEIS , along with and a copy of "Frequently-asked questions (FAQ ' s) on a transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (T-GEIS)" as additional background on the proposal. Town representatives have been meeting with representatives from Cornell University (CU) over the past several months to discuss plans for this large-scale study of CU transportation planning and potential impacts on area traffic flows, parking and related topics. Cornell has agreed to prepare the above-described transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t- GEIS), working cooperatively with the Town of Ithaca, which in turn will involve additional governmental agencies, as appropriate, including Tompkins County, City of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, Village of Cayuga Heights, New York State Department of Transportation and others . a Plans for this cooperative project were announced at the joint meeting of the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council on June 21 , 2005 . In addition to a presentation and discussion by Cornell officials and members of their consultant team at the September 12th meeting, the Town Board will be asked to consider the dr resolution concurring with the Planning Board ' s proposal to serve as lead agency to c ordinate the review of the t-GEIS . (A lead agency concurrence letter is also being distributed too potential involved and interested agencies indicating that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board p oposes to be lead' agency.) The Town of Ithaca is the logical municipality to serve as lead agency in the t-GEIS illitiative. Its boundaries encircle the City of Ithaca and abut most of the county's other municipalities . On an average workday, 80 percent of Cornell employees travel through the Town of Ithaca bn their daily commute . The town has a key role in the county' s overall transportation system, hand is in the process of completing its own transportation plan. The Town of Ithaca Planning oard has indicated its intent to serve as lead agency to coordinate the review of the t-GEIS beca� se the TIMS involves a planning process to identify alternate growth scenarios and alternate strategies to mitigate impacts of those scenarios, the Planning Board has experience in coordina ing and reviewing other environmental impact statements (including the Cornell Precinct 7 G IS), and the Planning Board is familiar with and deals on an ongoing basis with the review of ornell University projects relating to transportation, parking, access and circulation issues. If other involved agencies agree that the Planning Board should serve as lead agency, en a subsequent meeting would be scheduled at which the Planning Board would confirm i s role as lead agency and adopt a positive declaration of environmental significance (Pos. Dec.) indicating that a t-GEIS would be prepared by Cornell . Immediately following the Poi . Dec. , a detailed draft scoping outline would be prepared and submitted by Cornell providing specifics on the content, organization and methodologies to be included in the t-GEIS . A public scoping session would then be scheduled at a later meeting, after which a revised scoping outli e would be prepared and submitted, and a second public scoping session would be scheduled (t ntatively in December) . This estimated timeframe has been discussed among Town and Cornel officials to reflect the SEQR guidelines for public scoping, as well as to reflect the realities of eparing a detailed outline and accommodating the optimal amount of public participation in this early phase of the t-GEIS process . Upon acceptance of the final scoping outline by the PI ing Board, Cornell would begin the preparation of the t-GEIS . Meanwhile, Cornell and the Town propose to establish a Resource Committee cons isti g of technical advisors from other municipalities and organizations to help guide the direction and content of the t-GEIS . As indicated in the draft letter found in the report submitted, in mbers of the Resource Committee would be expected to contribute technical input, share knowl dge, information and resources, provide critiques to the t-GEIS team, and contribute a rang of 1. EIS , opinions on transportation planning issues that will be addressed in the EIS . The development of this cooperative study has been an evolving process, and this is no the first step in the formal SEQR process to initiate the t-GEIS . This will be a learning process for all involved in the study, and will hopefully provide Cornell University, the Planning Bo d, Town 2 TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 9/ 12/2005 IAWWTF Phosphorus Removal Project Concrete work is proceeding with final construction of the building. Installation of the process equipment is also continuing. Joint Interceptor Sewer Projects The First Street Interceptor construction is proceeding with City of Ithaca forces doing the work. Town Staff is monitoring the construction process, which has been proceeding smoothly. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT The Town Engineers office is continuing to work on the watershed plan and model for the Town. Data that was collected by the engineering interns will be processed and developed into a stormwater model for the Town. Northeast Development of the drainage plan is continuing with an initial concentration of the Salem Drive area and the Hanshaw Road drainage system. Drainage improvements will be coordinated with the County plan for reconstruction of Hanshaw Road. The Town Engineer' s staff is preparing a design to relieve drainage problems in the Uptown Road and Lexington Road area. The problem area is located on the boundaries between the Town of Ithaca, the Village of Cayuga Heights and the Village of Lansing, and will require a cooperative effort. The staff has developed a construction schedule for early fall. Storm Water Working Group The Town of Ithaca is a participant in the Tompkins County Stormwater Working Group (SWG), which was formed to meet the needs of municipalities that must comply with the NYSDEC Phase II stormwater regulations. These municipalities are owners of municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) and are required to meet the "minimum measures" of the law. Failure to comply with these regulations (e . g. failure to submit an annual report, failure to adopt required local laws, failure to enforce regulations) may result in fines (up to $37, 500 per day) . A second component of these regulations is a state-wide requirement for all land disturbance activities (such as construction) that exceed one-acre in size to apply for a stormwater permit. The Tompkins County Stormwater Working Group was established in October 2003 and is comprised of representatives from Tompkins County; City of Ithaca; Towns of Caroline, Dryden, Ithaca, Lansing, Newfield and Ulysses ; and Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC), New York State Department of Transportation, Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District (TCSWCD), Tompkins County Cooperative Extension (CCE), Cornell University, Ithaca City School District, BOCES , T. G. Miller, Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Town Engineer's Report September 12, 2005 Daniel R. Walker Page 3 9/6/2005 TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 9/ 12/2005 Organization (IO), and Cayuga Lake Watershed Network (Network) also participate in and contribute to the group. The purpose of the SWG is to facilitate cooperation among the municipalities in their efforts to comply with the Phase 11 Stormwater Regulations and thus maximize resources and save money. The SWG meets on a monthly basis with meeting facilitation and minute recording shared among participants . Past participation in the SWG was free and voluntary. No formal agreement exists to be a member; however, starting in 2006, a municipality must sign an intermunicipal agreement and pay an annual fee to be a member and receive benefits of the SWG. The SWG is proposing that the MS4 municipalities (County, City, 6 Towns, and 2 Villages) would each pay a membership fee of $ 1500 . The Town Engineer has recommended that this fee be included in the 2006 Town Budget and is working with the SWG along with the assistant Director of Planning to develop the memo of understanding of participation in the SWG which will be brought to the Town Board for approval before the end of the year. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW LINDERMAN CREEK PHASE THREE Linderman Creek Phase Three is substantially complete . The emergency access has been abandoned and minor landscaping work is being completed . CAYUGA MEDICAL CENTER Engineering staff is monitoring the sediment and erosion control practices . WEIDERMEIR SUBDIVISION Sediment and erosion controls are being monitored. The common driveway and utilities are in place and the area has being landscaped and stabilized. One of the lots has been sold and a house built. The NYS stormwater monitoring regulations require a subdivision developer to maintain the sediment and erosion control components of the entire site until all construction is completed on all lots in the subdivision. SOUTHWOODS Construction of phase 11 improvements is substantially complete . The developer is working on final stabilization and restoration of the road cuts and drainage system. The Town is working with the developer to complete aspects of the stormwater management system, which protects properties down stream of the development. Legal responsibility for maintenance of the permanent storm water management measures is in the process of being finalized. WESTVIEW SUBDIVISION Construction of Phase I of the roads and utilities has been substantially completed, and the Town Board is being asked to consider dedication of that portion of the project to Town ownership . The Town Engineer and Highway Superintendent are prepared to recommend dedication with agreement with the developer to complete the road and sidewalks after home construction, and appropriate financial security to ensure this Town Engineer's Report September 12, 2005 Daniel R. Walker Page 4 9/6/2005 TOWN ENGINEERS REPORT 9/ 12/2005 work. Sanitary sewer construction on the Danby Road extension and sewer on Schickel Road has been completed . The Engineering staff is monitoring the sediment and erosion control program for the site, which is currently in compliance with the sediment and erosion control plan and general permit from DEC . OVERLOOK ON THE WEST HILL Site work is underway with the mass grading for Phase 1 substantially complete . Both onsite and off site water and sewer improvements are substantially complete. Dedication of the portions to be owned by the Town will occur after all tests and certifications are complete and record drawings are received. The roadway which will be come a Town road has been started with construction of the base. The road is being used as the primary construction access to the site . Final details of the intersection design with Rte 96 including the new traffic signal have received approval from NYSDOT. The Engineering staff is monitoring the site sediment and erosion control measures . Town Engineer's Report September 12, 2005 Daniel R. Walker Page 5 9/6/2005 1 } � OF I T� • > TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 18 z�- - ,� 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, N .Y . 14850 Jonathan Kanter, A.LC.P. (607) 273-1747 Director of Planning FAX (607) 273-1704 Planning Director' s Report for September 12 , 2005 Town Board Meeting DEVELOPMENT REVIEW August 2, 2005 Meeting: Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Cayuga Lake Waterfront Plan : The Planning Board issued an affirmative recommendation to the Town Board regarding adoption of the Cayuga Lake Waterfront Plan, pursuant to the NYS Local Waterfront Revitalization Program, Spitsberg 4-Lot Subdivision, Wildflower Drive : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 4-lot subdivision located on Wildflower Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . ' s 60- 1 -25 .2 and 60- 1 -21 , Medium Density Residential Zone . The proposal involves subdividing the 3 . 05 +/- acre parcel into three residential building lots with a single common driveway and one 0 . 069 +/- acre parcel to be consolidated with the adjacent Tax Parcel No . 60- 1 -21 . PJTM Corporation Owner; Theodor Spitsberg, Applicant. Cleveland 2-Lot Subdivision, 1032.5 Danby Road : The Planning Board postponed a decision regarding Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision located at 1032 . 5 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 39- 1 -9, High Density Residential Zone, pending possible revisions in the proposed subdivision . The proposal involves subdividing off a +/- 0 . 733 -acre parcel from the +/- 2 . 6-acre parcel for the construction of a new residence . Travis & Kathy Cleveland, Owners/Applicants . Hilker 4-Lot Subdivision , 255 & 277 Burns Road : The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 4-lot subdivision located at 255 and 277 Burns Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . ' s 48 - 1 - 14 . 312 and 48 - 1 - 14 . 311 , Conservation and Low Density Residential Zones. The proposal involves subdividing +/- 8 . 05 acres from Tax Parcel 48 - 1 - 14 . 312 and +/- 0 .42 acres from the northeastern edge of Tax Parcel No . 48 - 1 - 14 . 311 , which will be consolidated to create a new +/- 8 .47-acre lot. Willis S . & Shirley S . Hilker and James & Elizabeth Hilker, Owners ; James Hilker, Applicant. Review of Revised Sketch Plan for the Redevelopment of Judd Falls Plaza and the Proposed Rite Aid Development, 322-250 Pine Tree Road : The Planning Board considered a revised Sketch Plan for the proposed redevelopment of the Judd Falls Plaza properties located at 322-350 Pine Tree Road and 930 and 946 Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . ' s 62- 1 -3 .2 , 62- 1 - 2 .2, and 62- 1 - 1 , Community Commercial Zone. The proposal includes removing the existing plaza to construct approximately 45 ,464 square feet of retail, office and other related commercial uses in several new buildings, including a +/- 14 , 564 square foot Rite Aid Pharmacy store in the first phase of development. The project will also include new stormwater facilities, parking, landscaping, and p1Vt1�Q��1LfGCf �gfff {r�C1Q�S�EjI©Yl: 5ep�erntr,E>��, �03 =Z �wn�oarr��eetfng .;a lighting . Susan Hamilton, Owner; Ellicott Development Company for 1093 roup, LLC , Applicant. August 16, 2005 Meeting : Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding a Sign Variance a Courtside Racquet & Fitness Club, 380 Pine Tree Road : The Planning Board issued an affirmative recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a sign variance to allow a 7 +/- square foot illuminated freestanding sign with a copy-change section for the Courtside Racqu t & Fitness Club located at 380 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62- 1 -5 , Community Commercial Zone . Courtside Racquet & Fitness Club, Owner; Tom Murray, Applicant. Review of Revised Sketch Plan — Heritage Park Townhouses, Troy Road and East King Road : The Planning Board reviewed a revised Sketch Plan for the proposed cluster subdivision located on the northeast corner of Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tai Parcel No . 49- 1 -26 . 3 , Low Density Residential Zone . The proposal includes subdividing the /- 6 .4-acre parcel for 14 single-family dwellings along Troy Road in two five-unit buildings and o e four-unit building. Heritage Park Townhouses, Inc . , Owner/Applicant; George R. Frantz, AICP, gent. CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS/FUNCTIONS The following have been accomplished over the past month. SEQR Reviews for Zoning Board : One SEQR review for the Zoning Board was doe since the August report : request for variance to construct an Arthropod Research Facility ithout the installation of the required sprinkler system (Chapter 225 of the Town of Ithaca Code), located off of Game Farm Road, Planned Development Zone No . 9 , Cornell University, Appellant. Codes and Ordinances Committee (COQ : The Committee met on August 17 , 2005 0 continue review of the draft Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, review a revised draft of the Stream S aback Law, and discuss a possible Conservation Zone for the Indian Creek Gorge and Lake Slo es Unique Natural Area. The next COC meeting is scheduled for September 21 , 2005 , which will tentatively include continuation of the above discussions . Transportation Committee : The Committee met with representatives of Fisher Associate to discuss possible tasks and associated costs of consultant assistance related to certain elem nts of the Transportation Plan . We are awaiting a memo outlining task descriptions and cost esti ates from Fisher. A draft agreement for consulting services has also been provided by Fisher a d is being reviewed by the Committee and Supervisor. The Committee is scheduled to mee again on Thursday, September 8 , 2005 to discuss other elements of the Transportation Plan on which staff can continue working. Cornell Transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement T-GEI Recent meetings with Cornell have focused on describing the proposed action that will be the if cus of the T-GEIS and formally initiating the process for the T-GEIS . The September 12`" Town Board 2 ,r eft r Sep emb� I�2Of1 T wn Board l e , meeting agenda includes a discussion and presentation on the T-GEIS with Cornell representatives attending. Conservation Board : The Board met on August 4th and September 1St, 2005 . Discussion items included sub-committee reports, consideration of the Indian Creek Gorge and Lake Slopes Unique Natural Area, and attendance at NYSACC Conference on the Environment. The next Board meeting is scheduled for October 6, 2005 , Storm Water Group : Town representatives have attended meetings of the Storm Water Group that is coordinating work by the County and municipalities to address the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation' s Phase 11 Storm Water Management Regulations . At the latest meeting, it was announced that the Group will submit a request for funding to each participating municipality to cover some of the costs of coordinating these activities . This will be discussed more fully in conjunction with the 2006 Budget proposal . Capital Projects Committee : The next meeting of the Capital Projects & Fiscal Planning Committee is scheduled for Friday, September 16, 2005 at 2 : 00 p .m. The Committee will consider finalizing its recommendations to the Town Board regarding 2006 capital projects and the 2006-2010 Capital Program. Hanshaw Road Reconstruction Project : A representative from Fisher Associates met with Town officials on August 24, 2005 to discuss the status of the County' s proposed Hanshaw Road project. After reviewing a summary of public input from the first public information meeting held by the county, project objectives were briefly discussed. The current preferred option for the conceptual design of the road r-o-w as described by Fisher includes 11 -foot wide travel lanes, 5 -foot wide shoulders, one sidewalk (on the north side of Hanshaw Road), and shallow swales (with underground storm sewers) . It appears that a fair amount of trees would have to be removed in this option, and about 1 - 1 /2 feet of additional right-of-way would have to be obtained from adjacent landowners to accommodate the proposed design. A second public meeting had been tentatively scheduled, but was postponed due to the short notice, and is in the process of being re-scheduled by the County. The issue of how the Town' s Sidewalk Policy relates to the proposed sidewalk in the Hanshaw Road project is scheduled for discussion at the September 12th Town Board meeting . Quality Communities Grant Application : We received the official letter from the NYS Department of State indicating that the Town of Ithaca did not receive the funding under the Quality Communities Grant program for the design elements of the Gateway Bridge Trail . The State indicated that "Requests for funding exceeded the amount available fourteen-fold . . . ". We are still awaiting official notification regarding the commitment of Federal funds for the Buttermilk Falls- Gateway Bridge Trail ($ 544,000 was previously announced by Congressman Hinchey as being approved for the trail project, pending re-authorization of the T-21 Bill in Congress) . 2006 Budget : Department heads have continued working with the Supervisor on the proposed 2006 Budget. Possible savings in the approved 2005 Budget have been identified. Staff Performance Reviews : Performance reviews of Planning Department staff have been completed and filed in the Personnel office . 3 .T�iwn �fli�aca�f'lan,�efr2g�trector ' R�poii" � � ' "S`ep�embenl�? ' 21I05 Towxe�B�` x' Vieet ng " `� " Fall Newsletter: The deadline for Fall Newsletter articles was September 91" . The Newsletter is scheduled to be printed and mailed by the first week in October. 4 I TOWN OF ITHACA REPORT OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF JULY 2005 MONTFI YEAR TO DATE PERMIT' YEAR # OF PERMI'T'S AMOUNT # AMOUNT S FAMILY 2005 3 7542000 31 67405, 130 RESIDENCES 2004 3 5132679 27 5 , 1935179 2005 0 0 2 2775000 TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES 2004 0 0 1 149,700 2005 1 87000 11 88, 192 RENOVATIONS 2004 0 0 10 179,500 2005 0 0 0 0 CONVERSIONS OF USE 2004 0 0 5 200,800 2005 3 2395300 12 6612514 ADDITIONS TO FOOTPRINT 2004 1 1353000 12 914, 192 2005 0 0 28 52675,650 MULTIPLE RESIDENCES 2004 0 0 0 0 1 La Tourelle cafe construction and lounge addition 752000 1 CMC renovations and addition 217000,000 I PRI repair cooling system 195900 1 Wonderland Motel add dwelling unit - existing space 10,000 2005 4 21 , 104,900 11 235485,244 BUS E S S 2004 0 0 8 3,0735700 2005 0 0 0 0 A LTURAI.: 2004 0 0 2 39,000 2005 0 0 0 0 INDUSTRIAL 2004 0 0 0 0 1 CU Maplewood Apartments tear off and reroof 2542050 1 CU East Campus Research Facility 26,0007000 1 CU Hasbrouck Apartments upgrade fire alarms 320,000 1 IC Egbert Union food court renovations 150,000 1 IC Job Hall first floor renovations 100,000 1 CU 2 athletic fields 450,000 1 CU athletic facility 390,000 2005 7 27,664,050 42 462469,429 EDUCATIONAL. 2004 13 42,000 18 35843,802 1 Replace section of roof 45703 2 Reroof house 202316 1 10 x 23 deck 700 1 24 x 24 attached garage 22,600 1 Convert shed into sauna 11000 MISCELLANEOUS 2005 6 49,319 30 2465635 CONSTRUCTION 2004 l 62340 18 1875186 TO NUMBER OF 2005 24 49,819,569 167 8353082794 PE S ISSUED 2004 8 697,019 101 1357812059 fC FEES 2005 24 30,410 167 845519 RL ED 2004 8 15635 101 23,250 Date Prepared: August 24, 2005 Dani L. Holford 1 July 2005, Page 2 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED THIS bION'TH - 22 1 . 120 Honness Lane - installation of in-ground pool. 2. 121 Harwick Road - installation of solar electric system. 3 . 3 Amber Lane - new 2 bedroom modular with attached 2 car garage. 4. 3 Amber Lane - two bedroom addition on second floor. 5 . 100 Wildflower Drive - 14' x 20' deck. 6. 121 Harwick Road - new 2 bedroom home with attached 2 car garage. 7. 125 Snyder Hill Road - addition of fire rated sheetrock. 8. 1036 East Shore Drive - add second story over portion of single-family home. 9. 102 Westhaven Road - extend rear deck. 10. 246 Renwick Drive - building addition and creation of a code compliant apartment - temporary. 11 . 691 Five Mile Drive - 18' x 52" above ground pool. 12. 920 Coddington Road (CRCC) - 24' x 50' pavilion - temporary. 13 . 1223 Trumansburg Road - constructed roof recovering on existing roof. 14. Pleasant Grove Road (CU) - Hasbrouck Apartments bathroom renovations. 15 . 543 Elm Street Extension - renovate existing residence. 16. 206 Dubois Road - new single-family residence. 17. 122 Eastern Heights Drive - repair fire damage. 18. 157 Bundy Road - create family room in basement. 19. 101 Harris B. Dates Drive (CMC) - mobile tech unit. 20. 214 Eastern Heights Drive - remodel kitchen. 21 . 1031 Taughannock Boulevard - addition to and reconstruction of single-family home. 22. 809 Five Mile Drive - add second floor apartment. TOTAL. CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2005 - 101 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 106 INQUIRIES/COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED THIS MONTH - 0 From May 2005 : 1 . 182 Calkins Road - building code - pending. From April 2005 : 1 . 823 and 825 Danby Road - signage - pending. From February 2005 : 1 . 301 Old Gorge Road - zoning - abated. 2 . 726 Five Mile Drive - property maintenance - abated. From December 2004 : 1 . 324 Blackstone Avenue - building code - pending. From October 2004: 1 . 118 Pine Tree Road - occupancy - abated. From August 2004: 1 . 312 Salem Drive - building code - pending state variance. f July 2005, Page 3 A I May 1995 : 1152 Danby Road - zoning and building code - Building Permit applied for corrections - sprinklers installed - partial abatement. T:AL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE, 2005 - 14 TOTAL COMPLAINTS INVEST'IGAT'ED YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 21 TOTAL FIELD VISITS THIS MONTH - 129 Uniform Building Code - 108 Local Law and Zoning Inspections - 8 Fire Safety - 13 ( 13 apartment complex [35 buildings and 63 units]) Fire Safety Reinspections - 0 Fire/Emergency Occurrences - 0 Fire Occurrence Reinspections - 0 TOTAL. FIELD VISIT'S YEAR TO DATE, 2005 - 661 TOTAL FIELD VISIT'S YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 589 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS THIS MON'T'H - 0 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2005 - 2 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 4 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 1 MEETING, 2 CASES, AGENDA ATTACHED TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, JULY 18, 2005 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 own of Ithaca on Monday, July 18 , 2005 , in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tio a Street Entrance, Ithaca, NY, COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P . M . on the following matters : APPEAL of Stephen Lucente, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Granted Article IX, Section 270-73 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to allow an existing tw6-family home to be maintained with a front yard building setback of 24 feet 3 inches 125 feet required) and a west side yard building setback of 9 feet 6 inches ( 15 feet required located at 12 Sanctuary Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 73 - 1 -9 . 7, Medium Density Residential Zone . APPEAL of Peter Massicci, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270- 70 of the Town of Ithaca Code, to permit the construction of a Granted single-family residence with a building height of 41 + feet (36 foot height limitation) located at 18 Saunders Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 44 .2-2-9, Medium Density Residential Zone . Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 :00 p .m ., and said place, hear all persons in upport of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals withl 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 607-273 - 1783 Dated : July 8 , 2005 Published : July 11 , 2005 1 Regular Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board , September 12 , 2005 Human Resources Report for August 2005 Personnel Committee : Committee met and discussed the current "Attendance at Employer Sponsored Functions policy ' and the information provided by Excellus regarding the Town 's experience in the first 6 months of 2005 . Attached are draft minutes . Changes to the policy will be presented to the Town Board in October. Safety Committee :Does-not_meet in _July_ and. -August .--- .Board Policy and Protocol Committee : The committee sent out drafts of Chapter 3 and Chapter 5 for comments from the Board . The committees completed the review of the comments on Chapter 3 and are making changes . Personnel — Civil Service : Worked with Justice Klein regarding his Court Clerk and have advertised the position . Interviews will be held in September. Held meetings with Court Clerk Poole regarding the work needs of the office and contract with Kelly Temporary Service for assistance . Provisional employee Steve Williams , Code Enforcement Officer, took his civil service exam . Most of the seasonal staff at the Public Works Facility have completed their time and projects . Time was dedicated to working on the budget and assembling a power point presentation for the Board . Training and Development: Work was done on the Fall Brainteaser Series . The series will have 2 sessions offered in September, 2 in October and 1 in November. Commercial Insurance ( Ithaca Agency — Selective Insurance Company) : One of the Town ' s building and zoning vehicles was involved in an accident on Buffalo Street. Our employee was bruised but not seriously injured , nor was the driver of the other vehicle . Our vehicle was totaled and the town will be receiving a check for the actual cash value of the vehicle . Workers' Compensation ( Public Employers Risk Management Assoc — PERMA) : No new claims to report . Disability Insurance : One employee went out for scheduled surgery and has returned to work . Submitted By: Judith C . Drake , PHR , Human Resources Manager Draft Draft Draft t Town of Ithaca Personnel Committee Meeting August 18 , 2005 , Town Hall 1 : 30pm Members Present: Supervisor Catherine Valentino ; Councilman Peter Stein ; Don TenKate , Working Supervisor; Larry Salmi , Heavy Equipment Operator, Sue Ritter, Asst. Dir of Planning ; Dani Holford , Senior Typist Excused : Councilman Bill Lesser Support Staff: Judith Drake , Human Resources Manager Others Attending : Paul Tunison , SCLIWC ; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning ; Fred Noteboom , Highway Superintendent ; Connie Clark , Principal Account Clerk ; Creig Hebdon , Asst Director of Engineering Call to order: 1 : 35 p . m . Agenda Item #2 : Review Minutes of June 16 , 2005 Meeting : Approved . Agenda Item #3 : Persons to be Heard : None . Agenda Item #4 • Discuss "Attendance at Employer Sponsored Functions " Polic Judy explained the policy as it is written in the Personnel Manual . For example , if you go to the picnic then you are paid for the rest of the day , however, if you don 't go then you are suppose to work or use benefit time . Over the years there has not any consistency in recording time for this day on the time sheets — some departments allow employees to be paid as if they attended the events , but the employees go home — the rule isn 't followed . Judy wanted to have some discussion on whether it is a good policy or does it need some changes . She asked Fred to attend this meeting because his (the highway) is one of the largest departments . Cathy added that when this was initiated it was in the hope of encouraging more socialization because people' s interest in participating had dwindled . � f we close down because we are having a social event then we are closed . If people choose not to participate and would rather go home we should let them go home without suffering the consequences of having to use benefit time . 1 e Draft Draft Draft Fred agrees — if we have an " Employee Appreciation " Picnic and punish people for not attending — it reminds him of the military — where you are forced to do "voluntarily" things . In addition , the highway works in crews and it's difficult to give people meaningful work . Peter doesn 't believe that it is such a good idea to close the office and have a picnic if such a paltry number of people are going to attend . He was there and there weren 't many people . He believes that the picnic should be cancelled if there isn 't any interest or have it during a time when people aren 't working and pay the people who come . Judy responded that there were a good number of people who attended . About 5 people from Highway didn 't attend , there were a couple of people from Town Hall not scheduled to work that day (vacation & disability) that attended , more than half of Bolton Point attended . The last 2 or 3 years the percentage of people attending has been quite high . 93 people attended this year. Susan feels different about the end of year luncheon and the holiday party than she does about the picnic . The picnic is more about camaraderie amongst Town staff. She ' s concerned that when times aren 't so good and camaraderie is low there may not be a good turn out . This defeats the purpose of an employee picnic. There is no charge for the employees to attend . There is a charge for the year-end luncheon . The year-end luncheon , where more of the Town Board and Planning Board members attend , it' s a different kind of event. Maybe we shouldn 't change the rules about the picnic. The turnout may significantly change . She feels differently about the year-end luncheon . This isn 't just an employee event. It cost money to go . Many people don 't want to go - they don 't know Board members — it' s a different function . Susan feels that people should be able to go home if they want . Judy added that the year-end luncheon is more difficult for Highway because of the time of year - SNOW . Creig suggested that if attendance falls way down for the picnic then do as Peter suggested — just cancel it for the future years . Cathy summarized the consensus — for the holiday party we close for the half-day and those that want to participate can — all get paid . The same will be true for the year-end luncheon . For the picnic we will suspend the rule that people would have to work or take benefit time if they don 't attend the picnic for next year. We ' ll see what people ' s reactions are - talk and interact with people about participating . If people are out sick or on vacation during these events their benefit time used should only be until the time the Town closes - the rest of their hours will be paid without using benefit time . Agenda Item #5 : Review Loss Data from Excellus Blue Cross Blue Shield : There was a handout distributed to all the committee members as part of their packet . Judy explained that our claims manager at BCBS , Beth Miller, provided this information from BCBS . Judy walked the committee through the various sheets of information . The information shows where Excellus BCBS of Central NY claims by % ( physician , pharmacy , etc. ) and also broke it down 2 Draft Draft Draft further to show just the Town of Ithaca ' s claims . There was discussion on where the Town falls in using various services versus BCBS of Central NY and the national averages . This information helps the Town know what costs need to be controlled . Judy explained that this information would help her when she starts looking at plan design . She will be looking at co-pays and where we want I o cost share , if we decide to , we' re going to cost share on where there will be a net effect to the Town ' s premiums . By looking at the % ' s the cost share is going to fall_mor_e_towar_d-p.r_escr_iption-and _office _co-pay because-that -is where -the volume use is . Peter warned about using the information this way. If you increase the co- pay for prescriptions because it has a high utilization rate it can in fact educe utilization of the drugs and then the reduced utilization of the drugs can adversely affect hospitalization costs . Cathy stated that we are not drawing any conclusions — we are just reviewing the information . The - committee continued to review the information and discuss hat it means and how the Town can use it to theirs and the employees advantage . Judy doesn 't expect any information on premiums for 2006 until after the Town Board sets the tentative budget in October so she put in a 20 % increase . Once Judy does receive the information she will bring to the Personnel Committee to review options and make a recommendation to the Town Board . Agenda Item #6 : Others : None . Adjourned : 2 : 35 p . m . The next - meeting scheduled for Thursday , September 8th is canceled . The meeting scheduled for Thursday , October 13th will be rescheduled (Judy's on vacation ) . 3 y �y OF I T,� _ q9 TO " OF ITHACA 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 www.town. ithaca.ny.us 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 To : Cathy Valentino, Supervisor Town Of Ithaca Sandy Gittelman, Chair Recreation & Human Services Committee Will Burbank, Councilperson Peter Stein, Councilperson Carolyn Grigorov, Councilperson William Lesser, Councilperson Herb Engman, Councilperson From : Mamie Kirchgessner, Recreation and Youth Coordinator August 2005 Youth Employment Twelve youth have worked in the program at various sites within the Town with three additional youth participating in the Youth Corps at public works. Three youth are still pending and will be contacted about possible positions working as student researchers for the records management grant. One new youth contacted me this month and was interviewed and referred to the joblink program. A "graduation"/ recognition program is being planned for those youth who have participated to date . A comprehensive evaluation of the program will be completed at year' s end . I plan to conduct a round table discussion with participants to determine improvements to program. Evaluations received from sites and participants have been resoundingly positive . For a small investment youth are able to make an effective contribution, of their skills while experiencing the world of work and dealing with the public . The Youth Corps accomplished three times the work originally outlined for completion. Potential placements for "graduates" are being sought and coordination with the city' s YES (Youth Employment Service) will occur. In addition to youth in town employment, youth who were financially eligible were referred and hired through other programs . These participants were the most economically needy because of the administration of these federal funds and the lack of sophistication of the youth these participants often required the most effort in terms of advocacy. This concern will be dealt with in detail in my evaluation of the overall program. Joint Youth Commission In August the JYC met to review and make recommendations on requests for proposals for the 2006 budget process . The chairperson had a family emergency so although proposals were reviewed recommendations did not occur but are scheduled for a September 19 meeting. Two new organizations submitted proposals and based on input from commission members in attendance Karen Coleman of County Youth Services provided me numbers that the Commission will consider in the budget process. I gave 7 this information to the Town Supervisor and budget officer for consideration in the budget process. Recreation Partnership A special meeting of the Recreation Partnership was held July 12 , 2005 to review equest for proposals including a number of activities "bundled" by the City Youth Burea Although there was no quorum present the consensus of the group was there was sufficient value to the community that all City programming should be included as well as Fencing from a private non-profit. To limit increase costs to town partners the County will be approached to increase funding back to the level of the Town and City of It aca. The plan is to present the formal breakdown at a meeting of the Board scheduled J1ly 26 . As the information becomes available I will make available to all of the Town Bow d as well as the Recreation and Human Service Committee. Recreation and Human Service Committee The committee continues to have a very active agenda. This month Bill Hawley of LifeLong presented information on his agency' s activities over the past year. Bill provided extensive information about their programs, which continue to expand to meet the needs of seniors a population that is increasing within the Town. The Town is now affiliated with the Department of Therapeutic Recreation and Leisure Services at Ithaca College. The committee will be considering priority use for students as it commits o a recreation program. With committee input Nicole Tedesco developed an informatio al map guide of recreational opportunities within town which is now available at the Town' s website. In an effort to save on cost of mailing it was sent to the Ithaca Jou al for publication but that has not occurred. Publicity has been an ongoing concern of he committee as it is goal to raise community awareness on the investments that are be4ng made by the Town to enhance the quality of life here . The Town did have articles published this last month in local media on the youth program and senior softball that are posted in the Town Hall foyer Related Activity Rich Schoch and I met with George Frantz at Tutelo Park to discuss the annual cere Pony held there by Tutelo descendents and other Native Americans. George had concerns about access and the Town had concerns about aspects of his proposal . A plan was agreed upon and the event, which is scheduled for Saturday, September 24 , will be open to he public . As the planning group hopes to have a Native American dance group perfo a time has not been confirmed. The Town was awarded a beautification grant that resulted in the change of appear ce to Town Hall . Parks Manager Rich Schoch completed the design, which opens up the pace making it more inviting and will add seasonal color. The Youth Corps completed th landscaping. I coordinate with public works staff on the potential and probable imp is of increased programming and park and trail expansion. The Public Works department F continues to be responsive and considered as the Town moves forward with park and trail development. After attendance at several public meeting on Tourism grants it was decided to pursue a celebrations grant with SHARE (Save Haudenosaunee — American Relations through Education) with George Frantz as their representative for funding of the Tutelo Park opening event in Spring of 2006 . As with most grants the application time was limited . A solid outline was provided as part of the grant process for a day event at Tutelo recognizing the contributions of the native peoples and familiarizing the Town with its first community park. I also attended a youth committee meeting of The Village at Ithaca project. Two of the SWI youth worked for the project this summer and were involved in chairing the meeting. The youth are trying to determine how to have input in to processes to provide constructive activity for their "leisure" time as well as other issues including a sense of place . This committee is youth lead and what the children have to say is relevant. Part of the discussion was about divisions and limited resources. This group demonstrates a lot of potential . �i r` I$°""71 ... '..,," "y ' WEI w<.e , ^,r 3 - ,aw , r �P 3 y. `D : LF o `'�i� h ' r a ?r - fl�'�f x•Y. i�t3 M+" �?6e a` 'e. ,'.e+ } d' :. r'a.U'jry kfl ,5 ''.: i +a*v�'ti Ft' ? lrY _ ........ ,.;«;.,y,..^s�.�,.vm;-:m+,"5!..^ ..5sn . :T•'^reee�..•;v°.. '°"�'nS�:?ztx!^. ,�. . ..^r,:.• .. H b3 »3 x OWN • � , e. 4 �< h «.0 it ' 3r �' a "� � c rwa az hs4 'a' �a75 e `a• > " ,5 , '� -x „. A •• ..a. __ . fie\.,. yj*�,� , x ,. ._ '. . .. - ^� rya «'� �,wf { . � _ , '- rs L . .,. y. r,. ,• Network/Record Specialist Report September 12 , 2005 Website • Site of the Month page . . . This month : Visit Ithaca.com • Did You Know link This month : IRS tax forms info • New pages : Fall Brush & Leaf Collection, Public Notices, IRS tax form distribution information. N ork • The 2006 Information Technology budget has been submitted and reviewed by all Dept Heads. • In 2006, eight computers at Town Hall need to be replaced. Instead of purchasing new computers, I will be building computers from those that have become obsolete. This is a cost savings to the Town of approximately $ 12,000 . Additional : The Town Clerk and I are working together to revise the Records Management Policy and Procedure Manual . This manual has not been updated in 12 years. -- r "tY.r ""'" �"'� •s a,.—^,.-= s *% ' ._ 4f �"^_„S Sae ”""" :y'F�°"" a �- Stmt ..._. C.a� iem..a..«n...u„«w i«u,.......... & ..."..i..r.,�..�...._K..»+M........r.o..F'• o v. �a l.«o '�f r:u wI twh�aca� .w MWi,.eM.r fm,�- t3 tr�.r s „` i /� •ru.�,.r<,......,::�i aja,rrr.7 5:. 4 e � E,GNP, L. ] �;f�