Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1990-09-18FWD TOWN OF ITHACA fiat TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Clerk SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, September 18, 1990, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7 :30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, William Lesser, Robert Miller, Eva Hoffmann, Robert Kenerson, Susan C. Beeners (Town Planner), George R. Frantz (Assistant Town Planner), Daniel R. Walker (Town Engineer), John C. Barney, Esq. (Town Attorney). ALSO PRESENT: Dooley Kiefer, Mohammed Idrees, Maria Pini, Kristin Hurley, Iva Wong, Dawn M. Berry, Emily Corrigan., Connie Fuess, Melissa Mandzak, Sorgi Mishalami, Cris Moore, Kristen Saacca, Catherine Murray -Rust, Paul P. Feeny, Christy Tyler, Alison Offerman, Matt Pacenza, Walter J. Tanner, Steve Lucente, David Nutter, D. Raj Raman, Mary Smith, Joseph M. Lalley, Sarah How, Dave C. Auble, John Stanik, Rich Dircks, Racquel Thomas, Elizabeth deProsse, Jaime Hecht, (name not legible), Audrey Geiselmann, Harrison Geiselmann, Oliver Noblitt, Sylvia G. Wahl, Robert B. Silver, Peter Capalongo, Sandra Capalongo, Rocco P. Lucente, Bill Phelan, Dan Sobol, Dan Presberg, Fran and Gary Bergstrom, Tom and Linda Clougherty, Eric Goldman, Allen Lambert, Michelle Buxton, Liz Manvell, Lawrence P. Fabbroni, P.E., Lawrence A. Jones, Susan Eisenfeld, John McGroarty, Candace Cornell, David Collum, T. Collum. Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly opened at 7:40 P.M. and accepted for the record the Clerk's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on September 10, 1990, and September 13, 1990, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon both the Clerk and the Building Commissioner of the City of Ithaca, upon the Clerk of the Town of Dryden, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on September 11, 19900 Chairperson Grigorov read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. At this point, Chairperson Grigorov announced that there was not yet a quorum present to conduct the Peter Capalongo public hearing scheduled for 7:30 p.m. Mr. Capalongo stated that he had no is objection to waiting until later. AGENDA ITEM: RESIDENTS' REQUEST TO SPEAK RE BRIARWOOD SUBDIVISION. I n U Planning Board Chairperson at 7:42 p.m. Grigorov Chairperson Grigorov September 18, 1990, from Board. -2- September 18, 1990 declared the above -noted matter duly opened read aloud the following memo, dated Town Planner Susan Beeners to the Planning "RE: Report from September 17, 1990 Codes and Ordinances Committee Meeting At its meeting of September 17, 1990, the Codes and Ordinances Committee unanimously approved the following Report to the Planning Board. The Codes and Ordinances Committee is presently studying potential modifications to the Zoning Ordinance, the Subdivision Regulations, and the Town of Ithaca Environmental Review Regulations. The study includes. a. the review of potential immediate and long -range modifications to such regulations with respect to environmental conservation and land use compatibility; b. the Codes and Ordinances Committee is expecting to receive, at their October meeting, a recommendation from the Conservation Advisory Council on a course of strategic improvements to environmental review and conservation methods, with the improvements proposed to be phased and coordinated with on -going drafting and completion of the Comprehensive Plan and the Open Space Index; co shortly after receipt of such recommendation, the Codes and Ordinances Committee is expecting to make a recommendation to the Planning Board on specific changes to regulations and procedures with respect to wetlands, especially those less than 12.4 acres in size, including potential Federal jurisdictional wetlands and other non - regulated wetlands. The recommendation is expected to include requirements related to the predetermination of potential Federal jurisdictional wetlands prior to approval of projects by the Planning Board." Chairperson Grigorov announced that Town Planner Susan Beeners would like to invite those who are interested in the matter of wetlands in general to contact either her or John Whitcomb, Chairman of the Conservation Advisory Committee, to review the information that the Town has collected and the detailed mapping of hydric- soils, New York wetlands, potential wetlands, and miscellaneous wetlands down to one acre in size, as they have been mapped by aerial photos. It was noted that the Long Environmental Assessment Form is being revised to include more information with respect to wetlands. 0 At this point, Chairperson Grigorov invited those from the public to speak if they wished. Planning Board -3- September 18, 1990 • Ms. Candace Cornell,.1456 Hanshaw Road, presented a Petition to the Board, which she stated bore the signatures of some 3,150 persons, and which read as follows. "PETITION to the Army Corps of Engineers, July, 1990. We, the undersigned, commend the Army Corps of Engineers for the prompt response and attention given concerning the development and subdivision of the "Briarwood Park" wetlands area in Ithaca, NY owned by Rocco Lucente. We hope and trust that the Army Corps of Engineers will continue to act promptly and effectively in evaluating this wetlands area. We greatly value and.strongly support the preservation of wetlands, especially those in the vicinity of the ecologically important and fragile Sapsucker Woods Preserve. We urge you not to grant any permits for development in this ecologically sensitive area." Jaime Hecht, of 1446 Hanshaw Road, spoke stated that most everyone knows this disc Briarwood Subdivision plan and the question of Hecht said that the original SEQR Form that 1987 was not correctly completed in terms of Mr. Hecht stated that he is asking the Planning from the floor and ussion is about the the wetland. Mr. was submitted in July wetland information. Board to take another • look at the SEQR Form and make its own independent investigation; then do the right thing. Mr. Hecht felt that the information was erroneous, but he was not trying to blame anybody, but it was wrong, and a fresh look should be taken based on good solid evidence. Mr. Hecht read from a proposed resolution from the concerned residents. Mr. Hecht said that the proposed resolution is, essentially, that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca will initiate an independent environmental survey of the wetland area in question with really two objectives; one to re- evaluate the 1987 SEQR of the Briarwood Park area, and, second, to provide an accurate assessment of the ecological status of the area, including hydric -soils and flora. This evaluation should include the active participation of a qualified environmental engineer, a hydric -soil specialist and an ecologist familiar with the natural habitats of our region. And, that no further development of Briarwood Park proceed until the results of these surveys can be subject to public review, and the Planning Board completes a re- evaluation of the region. This new accurate information should be the basis from which to proceed. Allen Lambert, 313 E. Falls St., approached the Board and stated that one of his concerns is about future generations and their future regarding the environment. Mr. Lambert said that he is concerned about a couple of larger issues; one is how a technical issue could be so easily overlooked when every single map by every government agency going back more than 40 years shows that spot as a wetland and • yet that could be ignored. Mr. Lambert said-that that is certainly something that needs to be paid more attention to. Mr. Lambert was also concerned about the issue with the behavior of the Planning Board -4- September 18, 1990 • developer when the cease and desist orders were essentially given and he continued to bulldoze and so on. Mr. Lambert felt that this kind of behavior cannot be allowed to go on. David Collum, 1456 Hanshaw Road, addressed the Board and stated that the concerned residents went before the Town Board and presented the same case to them and they referred the speakers .to the Planning Board. Mr. Collum stated that the concerned residents are resolved to leave the Planning Board meeting tonight with some sort of statement from the Board saying that the Board will at least look into this by such and such a date and give them a definitive answer, and say, here is the provision we can do now to guarantee that the development does not proceed. Town Attorney Barney, directing his comment to Jaime Hecht, noted that Mr. Hecht indicated there was some discrepancy or improper or incorrect information in the SEQR Form that was submitted in 1987. Attorney Barney asked Mr. Hecht to be specific. Mr. Hecht responded that question No. 16 which pertains to wetland was incorrectly answered with a "no ". Candace Cornell, 1456 Hanshaw Road, appeared before the Board and stated that the Army Corps of Engineers could either grant a nationwide permit, which is a blanket permit, and would enable the development to continue, or they can have it go for an individual permit, in which case it would have to be scrutinized more carefully • and go for public review to various agencies. Ms. Cornell said that the residents are worried about the fact that if it is decided to grant a nationwide permit, the day they grant that permit the bulldozers can start working on the wetland. The residents are asking the Board to do something, not make a decision, but at least put a moratorium on any decisions until the gaps can be filled between the Army Corps of Engineers and the Planning Board. Assistant Town Planner George Frantz stated that he was in touch with the Army Corps of Engineers this afternoon, 9/18/90. Mr. Frantz spoke with Dick Conan in Buffalo, NY, Mr. Conan recommended that the Town of Ithaca hold off on any action on this matter until the Corps has a chance to do what it is empowered to do and required to do, which is to actually determine exactly what is out there in terms of a wetland. Iva Wong, 115 Pinewood Place, approached the Board and stated that she lives directly behind the house that is being proposed in the area. Ms. Wong said that one of her concerns is that consideration of the changes that have taken place in the last four years as to drainage and the wildlife be taken into account. Ms. Cornell reiterated her concerns, described the process by which wetlands are protected and spoke of her problems with Mr. Lucente insofar as his suit against her. Planning Board -5- September 18, 1990 • Town Engineer Dan Walker stated that the Town Planning Board, in its planning within the Comprehensive Plan, takes into consideration certain guidelines and goals that the Town has as far as preservation of open space, and very often subdivision approvals and site plan approvals take into account site - specific conditions that are, from an environmental standpoint and from other standpoints within the Town, best either mitigated or preserved. Mr. Walker said that there is some discretionary ability that the Planning Board has to make decisions as far as design considerations within a development. Mr. Walker said that, at this point, the approval that was granted, other than the open space preservation which has been requested, and some different conditions that were placed on Mr. Lucente when he developed as far as nature trails, park lands set - asides, and some regulation of open space, includes those considerations. Mr. Walker said to keep in mind that the whole area in there has been developed and is a wet areas all the houses down through there have significant drainage problems. Mr. Walker noted that in the past there has been a lot of development pressure, and the Town has inherited some drainage problems because of developments in those areas, in fact, the Town is getting requests from residents in that area for drainage projects. Mr. Walker said that the Town is kind of put in a position of the people that have houses there already feel helpless in draining the land, but don't drain the other parts, and, if the Town does a drainage project to help some of the residents that are there, it will affect the water table three or four blocks away. Mr. Walker said that the Town is in the process, in the Comprehensive Plan, of developing an inventory of critical environmental areas and in developing tactics to preserve those areas. Ms. Cornell interjected that she was told those critical areas were based on endangered species. Mr. Walker responded that wetlands are a concern that the Town is also dealing with. Mr. Walker said that unique natural areas are but one aspect, but wetlands, watersheds and a number of other open space preservation concerns are being addressed within the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Walker said that the Comprehensive Plan is also a proper vehicle for public comment to let the Town Comprehensive Planning Committee know what the Town residents are concerned about. Mr. Walker said that the planning process is the legal process that the Town has to follow, and the protection of wetlands may require a significant outlay of capital for the Town to Protect that as far as land acquisition or other preservation measures. Mr. Walker said that all of the above- mentioned things have to be taken into account and put before the Town for approval; this is the purpose of a Comprehensive Plan, so that zoning and land use regulations can be developed to allow the Town to preserve the important environmental issues and also allow carefully controlled growth within the Town. David Collum addressed the Board and stated that Mr. Walker's comments make sense, but one can track through the Ithaca Journal since the 1960s battle surrounding this area, adding that they started with the Sapsucker Woods houses, and it is interesting to • know that ecological arguments have been made all the way through the Ithaca Journal for almost three decades now. Mr. Collum felt -that one of the frustrating things is that when one says it is good to Planning Board -6- September 18, 1990 • bring the issue to the attention of the residents, when it has actually been brought to the attention of the Town Planning Board and Mr. Lucente repeatedly through the years. Attorney John Barney suggested that the Town try and balance the interests of not only people like Mr. Collum who have a legitimate reason, but also the interests of all the taxpayers of the Town in terms of what potential law suits can be brought and what the potential outcome of that law suit is. Mr. Barney is not convinced at this time whether Mr. Collum's information is sufficient to void that permit to take a very drastic step that as far as is known has never been taken in the past once a subdivision approval has been granted. Attorney Barney advised that once you take that action, any developer who asked for and acted in reliance on the granting of subdivision approval could clearly have a case against the Town and the Town had better be prepared to stand up and persuade a judge that there are substantial bases for taking that action. Before Mr. Barney would recommend to the Town that they file a law suit, he would want to be very, very certain of the grounds. Mr. Paul Feeny, 105 Sycamore Drive, Chairman of Cornell's Ecology Department, stated that this is a classic case of where Cornell's expertise could be used for public benefit because they have experts who, as far as Mr. Feeny knows, have never been asked for advice which would probably be free of charge. Mr. Feeny thought that Cornell may even be willing to advise the Army Corps of Engineers • should they be approached. At this point, Chairperson Grigorov announced that the Briarwood wetland issue will be discussed in Executive Session later this evening. Ms. Sarah How, 109 Birchwood Drive, asked how they would know what happened. Mr. Frantz stated that he would contact Ms. Cornell in the morning. Chairperson Grigorov concluded the discussion on the Briarwood wetland issue at 8:19 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF .76 +/- ACRES FROM TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0. 6- 46 -1 -8, 3.39 + /- ACRES TOTAL, LOCATED AT 365 EAST KING ROAD, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30. PETER CAPALONGO, OWNER /APPLICANT. Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly Notice of Public Hearings opened at as posted 8:21 and p.m. and published read aloud and as noted from the above. Mr. Capalongo addressed the Board and stated that he was seeking permission for the subdivision of a 0.76 acre lot from 3.39 acres, • leaving a remainder of 2.63 acres for the parent lot, adding that he wants to build a new house for his parents. Planning Board -7- September 18, 1990 Chairperson Grigorov, noting that this was a Public Hearing, • asked if anyone wished to speak to this subdivision request. No one spoke. Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing and returned the matter to the Board for discussion. • Attorney Barney asked Mr. Capalongo if he had made an application to the Tompkins County Health Department for a septic system for the lot. Mr. Capalongo answered that he had not made a formal application, but they have indicated that there is more than enough square footage than is required. Attorney.Barney wondered if there had been any percolation tests conducted on the land to see what kind of septic system would be acceptable. Mr. Capalongo responded that he had to inform the Health Department where the house would be located. Attorney Barney asked about the topo on the land. Mr. Capalongo replied that the lot is fairly flat but it does slope down about 8 feet. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she could see no problem with the request, really, but perhaps there should be some indication on the form as to the reason for the subdivision, and the impact of such on the future, such as, extra driveway, speed limits, sight distances, etc. Ms. Hoffmann reported that Dooley Kiefer, Chair of the Environmenal Review Committee, thought it would be a good idea to add a second point to the proposed resolution. Ms. Hoffmann stated that Ms. K'•fer thought it should be included that "no construction will occurA. Wer the land in question has been walked by an expert in local flora and fauna, and a report of no adverse impact by such expert has been given to the Town ". Ms. Hoffmann offered that it is true, in fact, that one cannot know exactly where there is going to be some special flora and fauna. Chairperson Grigorov wondered if she felt that that provision should be included in one -lot subdivisions. Chairperson Grigorov stated that until just a few years ago the Planning Board did not even look at one -lot subdivisions; they were just a matter of a building permit. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she would agree from what she hears that it does not seem to apply in this case, but she could imagine that there might be cases where it might apply. Mr. Lesser said that if there were reason to believe it was necessary then it would be considered, but in this instance he did not feel it necessary. Assistant Town Planner George Frantz commented that a question in his mind about such a requirement is that, if it is required for a simple one -lot subdivision such as this, then, as far as being fair, should the Town not also require it every time somebody applies for a building permit to construct a home? Chairperson Grigorov stated that she felt it might be a good requirement for a larger subdivision. Town Engineer Dan Walker mentioned the way this is being subdivided, the main parcel extends beyond the subdivided parcel. Mr. Walker said that there is almost a two -acre area that goes down to the creek that, basically, is isolated from the road and would not be developed. • There appearing to be no further discussion, Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion with respect to SEQR. Planning Board -8- September 18, 1990 MOTION by Mr. Robert Miller, seconded by Dr. William Lesser. • WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of .76+ acres from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6- 46 -1 -8, 3.39+ acres total, located at 365 East King Road, Residence District R -30. 2. This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review. 3. The Planning Board, at Public Hearing on September 18, 1990, has reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form and other application materials. 4. The Assistant Town Planner has made a recommendation that a negative determination of environmental significance be made for the proposed action. THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED: That the Planning Board make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance for this action as proposed. • There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Lesser, Miller, Hoffmann. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion with respect to approval. MOTION by Dr. William Lesser, seconded by Mr. Robert Kenerson: WHEREAS. 1. This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of .76+ acres from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6- 46 -1 -8, 3.39+ acres total, located at 365 East King Road, Residence District R -30. 2. This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has, on September 18, 1990, made a negative determination of environmental significance. 3. The Planning Board, at Public Hearing on September 18, 1990, has reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form and other application materials. Planning Board -9- September 18, 1990 THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED. • 1. That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control 'nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, 2. That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final Subdivision Approval to the subdivision as shown on the map entitled "Sketch Map of Lands of Peter and Sandra Capalongo ", prepared by Alan T. Fulkerson, L.S., dated July 25, 1990, contingent upon the following condition. . No construction will occur on "Parcel All and no building permit for any building construction shall be issued until the Tompkins County,Health Department has issued a permit for construction of on -lot sewer facilities. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Lesser, Miller, Hoffmann. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. • Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the Capalongo 2 -lot subdivision approval duly closed at 8:37 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION OF THE SPECIAL APPROVAL GRANTED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ON JULY 30, 1985 FOR THE CORNELL UNIVERSITY MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE OPERATIONS' GARAGE, TO PERMIT THE INSTALLATION OF ABOVE - GROUND FUEL STORAGE TANKS FOR THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED FUEL ISLAND PORTION OF THE PROJECT. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE EXISTING CORNELL UNIVERSITY MAINTENANCE AND SERVICE OPERATIONS' COMPLEX, APPROXIMATELY 1,300 FEET SOUTH OF NYS ROUTE 366 AND 1,800 FEET WEST OF GAME FARM ROAD, ON TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6- 64 -1 -2, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30. CORNELL UNIVERSITY, OWNER; LAWRENCE P. FABBRONI, P.E., L.S., AGENT. Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly Notice of Public Hearings opened at as posted 8:38 p.m. and and published read aloud and as noted from the above. Lawrence P. Fabbroni, Cornell University, Facilities Engineering, addressed the Planning Board. Mr. Fabbroni said, as the Notice states, this was discussed prior to his time at Cornell, Ed Hartz came from the Facilities Engineering Department and presented a combined item that dealt with building this maintenance and service garage and the co- generation project, adding that in all the Town's • historical files you can find that that was approved and as part of that approval was mentioned the fuel island, and further adding, in Planning Board -10- September 18, 1990 fact, if it were just a fuel island he was not sure we would be here • tonight. Mr. Fabbroni stated that it was decided to install above - ground fuel storage tanks because of the concerns of contamination of the ground water. Mr. Fabbroni noted that Joe Lalley was here tonight, adding that he is head of the operation driving the need to install this and is well versed on why they want to have this facility. Review of the site plan and discussion of the location of the project as shown on the diagrams commenced amongst the meeting attendees. Mr. Lalley stated that at this location, between maintenance and service is where Cornell services all their service vehicles and is the reason for installing the fuel island in conjunction with that facility. Mr. Lalley described, for those that were not familiar with the area, Caldwell Road on the east end of campus, adding that this is what we have a problem with. The location of the island will be between the maintenance garage and storage buildings. Mr. Lalley stated that the island where people gas up would have a simple flat canopy with a center support system, adding that the above - ground tanks would sit to the rear of the site and are in a protective dike. Mr. Lalley noted that if something should happen to the tank, a rupture, the dike will capture the contents of a full tank plus 10% more, adding that there is underground piping, and there is a control of drainage off the site so that any petroleum that might spill on the surface would not escape. Mr. Lalley stated that the site is a gravel area and the change in landscape would be an addition of islands and control of circulation into the site. Mr. Lalley stated that the storm sewer • system connects into a storm sewer that is servicing the grounds facility that is currently under construction, adding that the dikes would have a simple pole barn structure over them to keep water out of the protective dike. Mr. Lalley noted that there is a fire protective system as part of the installation that is wired with an alarm system, adding that the alarm goes to Barton Hall, notifying life safety, which releases a vehicle to the site and the Ithaca Fire Department is simultaneously notified. If it is an active fire, Cornell personnel will be in immediate contact with the vehicle responding from the Ithaca Fire Department, via direct radio contact. Mr. Lalley stated that the dikes may be drained of snow or 'rain,, which has to be done manually. In the case of spillage, it can be disposed of as hazardous waste. The filling process is from a tanker, a normal filling process for an above - ground tank. Mr. Lalley stated the truck will connect to the top of the tank, but the real concern with above- ground installations is you have to have what is called positive pressure valves, so if someone ran over the pump island for example, the tank would not leak out. Chairperson Grigorov, noting that this was a Public Hearing, asked if anyone present wished to speak to this matter. No one spoke. Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing and returned the matter to the Board for discussion. Board member Robert Kenerson asked if there is an' anticipated odor from this installation. Mr. Lalley responded that there is • always odor when you fill a fuel tank, adding that consideration is Planning Board -11- September 18, 1990 being given to installing a vapor recovery system for that tank should a suitable design be found. Board Member William Lesser asked where the fueling is done at this time. Mr. Lalley stated that the vehicles are now fueled at the bus garage, adding that there is quite a bit of congestion at this location; there are two 6,000 gallon gasoline tanks there that are 20 years old. Mr. Lalley stated that it is the bus garage's intent to either retire the tanks or convert them to diesel since they only have a two -day supply, adding that they will be handling the gasoline fuel for the University, with the exception of the State Fleet garage which has a 5,000 gallon tank. Mr. Kenerson asked about the construction schedule planned. Mr. Lalley stated that, pending approval, they may have ground work done before winter if the weather holds. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they have to go for a special approval from the Board of Appeals on this because of the use. Mr. Kenerson asked if approval was needed from the State or the Army Corps of Engineers, with Mr. Lalley responding, none that they are aware of. Planning Board Member Eva Hoffmann, speaking as a member of the Environmental Review Committee, asked if there are odors at other times, other than when the tanks are being filled. Mr. Lalley replied there is nothing unusual. Ms. Hoffmann expressed concern that there is supposed to be a Boyce Thompson research project • somewhere there on that site, Route 366, where they do research about air pollution and that their facility could be affected by this. In response, Mr. Lalley stated that they have been talking with them almost since the beginning of this planning, and their biggest problem at the moment is the traffic from Route 366. Mr. Lalley stated that they are working together to determine what type, if any, vapor recovery system should be used. Ms. Hoffmann asked if theywere certain that a vapor recovery system would be installed. Mr. Lalley stated that they would like to put one in if they can get clarification on the DEC rules. Discussion followed with respect to the description and location of where the vapor recovery system would be installed. It was noted that the filling by tanker trucks, which is a one -time event, twice a month, is a minor concern; the main concern is Route 366 traffic. With Ms. Hoffmann leading the discussion, the Board reviewed all the comments of the ERC with respect to the project and SEAR, as juxtaposed with each question and response on the Long EAF, Parts I and II. A summary of same is as follows. Ms. Hoffmann asked if there were plans to install service lights at the storage tanks. Mr. Lalley stated there would be service lights installed because it will be a 24 -hour facility. Ms. Hoffmann stated that the forms are confusing and should state the largest proposed structure. George Frantz clarified that the largest • structure (281x281x181), is the canopy. Ms. Hoffmann- wondered about page 3 of the L /EAF as to public utilities, perhaps, asking if incorrect information had been given with respect to question B.l.i. Planning Board -12- September 18, 1990 Ms. Hoffmann asked for clarification of Point 24 on page 4, "Does the • project involve local, state or federal funding ?" Mr. Fabbroni responded no; this is endowed, private. Ms. Hoffmann stated that the Environmental Review Committee was a little bit troubled by the answer of "yes" to question #6 on page 5, "Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended and adopted local land use plans ?" Ms. Hoffmann noted that there is still some confusion because it is zoned R -30, yet there is a case -by -case permitting every time for uses that are definitely not permitted in R -30. Mr. Lalley stated that a school use is permitted in R -30 with special approval, that is what this is all about, and, therefore, the answer to that question is correct. Mr. Lalley stated that this facility has been approved; it has passed certain thresholds in terms of the amount of liquid they want to store above ground and is here because of the fact that they wanted to store it above ground. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they are not here to approve the use; the old fuel island was taken out when the co- generation project was approved and the maintenance garage was approved. Regarding Point 7, page 5, "What are the predominant land uses(s) and zoning classifications within a 1/4 mile radius of proposed action ? ", Ms. Hoffmann asked about the Orchard, which is within a 1/4 mile, wondering if they were not institutional buildings/ storage. Ms. Hoffmann said that she has problems with that for the same reason as with this as a school use, because one does not think • of classes and dorms. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she worried that things are not considered because this is the University making the request. Attorney Barney supported Ms. Hoffmann's question and thought that that is one of the questions that is being addressed in relation to Cornell's Master Plan and also the Town's comprehensive plan, from the standpoint that if this is an appropriate use, the Town should zone it as such to avoid other legal problems. It was noted that Town Engineer Dan Walker has been working with Campus Planning in regard to the G /EIS for this area. Point C.7. was revised to add "agriculture" to R -30 zoning. Discussion ensued among Messrs. Barney, Frantz, Lesser, and Walker with respect to the G /EIS. Mr. Fabbroni discussed the issue of land use, Cornell planning and the G /EIS. Eva Hoffmann asked if question "a" should be marked "yes" regarding point 11, "Will proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection) ?" Mr. Lalley responded that there certainly will have to be a response from these services if there ever were a spill or fire, and stated that it should be marked "yes ". Mr. Fabbroni stated that there is a service contract with the City Fire Department for fire protection, adding that what Mr. Lalley was trying to explain before is that Cornell's mode of response to alarms takes care of a lot of what the Fire Department would do to a similar • facility off Campus. Mr. Fabbroni stated that it is not putting a heavy additional burden on the fire department to service this Planning Board -13- September 18, 1990 • facility. Point C.11. was changed to "yes "; point C.11.a. was changed to "yes ". Town Attorney Barney asked about water service. Mr. Fabbroni responded that, presently, this area is served by the University system off the elevated tank, adding that Cornell is negotiating an agreement with the Town and Bolton Point whereby the lines would have Bolton Point water and the University would continue to maintain the lines that are on Campus. Mr. Fabbroni noted that, right now, it is off the elevated system and the fire protection is off the Bolton Point transmission main. Attorney Barney asked if that is a service demand. Mr. Fabbroni responded, yes, adding that at the time he filled out the form this was provided by Cornell, and further adding that, yes, it will be now; Cornell will continue to maintain lines on their own property. Chairman Carolyn Grigorov offered that these questions are getting at whether it is going to cost the community something. Assistant Town Planner George Frantz asked Mr. Fabbroni if the fuel tanks and pumps will be actually using public water in any way, with Mr. Fabbroni responding, no, except for fire. Ms. Hoffmann asked that, in Part 2, Impact on land, where marked with a "yes ", there be indication as to whether it would be small to moderate, potential large impact, or other. Mr. Frantz stated that he had to mark the question "yes" because there will be a physical change at this which explanation on the project site, however, point, he saw no impact on impact should be marked. would be added. given the character land. Discussion It appeared that of the site, followed Mr. Frantz's on In regard to Page 7, Impact on Water, Point 5, "Will proposed action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity ? ", Ms. Hoffmann felt that under other impacts, one might also write spills. Attorney Barney stated that a spill is implicit in the storage of petroleum greater than 1,100 gallons which is a trigger for a test. Mr. Lalley said that every five years they have to certify the integrity of the tank per DEC rules, therefore it cannot be mitigated because you have taken all the reasonable precautions. Ms. Hoffmann said it was a suggestion of the Environmental Review Committee that perhaps one might add it to the form and consider it because that is the reason for the form - -that there might be other spills and in this case there are some mitigating factors. No change was made to this item. Ms. Hoffmann brought up on Page 8, Impact on Air, that the Committee felt the fuel vapors should be indicated. Board Member Lesser responded that the thing is there is no net addition; they are just changing location; there is no reason to believe that the amount of fueling that they are going to do is going to change. Mr. Lalley . commented that within the University there will be a net gain of zero; there will be no change in the Town of Ithaca, site specific, yes. Planning Board -14- September 18, 1990 • George Frantz asked if there was an excessive amount of travel to and from the bus garage. Mr. Fabbroni responded that these are secondary effects which are more fuel efficient. Board Member Kenerson asked how many years it is anticipated that this will last without adding more tanks, and, if it is necessary to add more tanks, is there capacity here to handle that. Mr. Lalley responded that their old facility was about 40,000 gallons, carrying multi - grades of fuel, and; now they intend to carry just one grade of fuel and the 10,000 was chosen because they could handle a 7,000 or 8,000 gallon tanker without having a buffer, if they do not have a requirement for another grade of gasoline. Mr. Lalley stated that they do not have plans to make a strategic reserve facility, and, yes, there is space to add if they needed to. Regarding Page 8, #10, Impact on Agricultural Land Resources, Ms.Hoffmann asked if it should be marked "yes ". Chairperson Grigorov agreed that this question is not clear as to whether it applies to the immediate area or the project. George Frantz stated that he interpreted it as being impact on any agricultural resources, adding that the Orchards are fairly close. Mr. Lalley stated that they are 800 feet away, so he did not see how the activity on the site is going to affect any pomology, adding that the easternmost limit of that activity is shown on the drawing. No change was made to this item. • Ms. Hoffmann inquired about item #16 on page 10, Noise and Odor Impacts, wondering if it should be indicated that odors will occur. Ms. Hoffmann noted that #17, "Will proposed action affect public health and safety ?" had been marked "yes ", and, as it has been marked "yes ", it should be marked, in column 2, potential large impact, because if that were to happen it certainly would be a potential large impact. Ms. Hoffmann suggested that it should be handled like the previous question so that there would be discusssion of it and then there could be an explanation like Mr. Frantz has on the last part. On Page 11, #18, Impact on growth and character of community or neighborhood, Ms. Hoffmann stated that the Environmental Review Committee felt it should have been marked "yes" because the proposed action will set an important precedent for future projects. Ms. Kiefer had a question with respect to drainage. Chairperson Grigorov inquired if the Planning Board attendees of the meeting had any other questions regarding review for the installation of above - ground fuel storage the previously approved fuel island portion of the project. or other the SEQR tanks for Kiefer stated that the Environmental Review Committee was glad above ground tanks. There appearing to be no further discussion, anyone were prepared to offer a motion • recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals. MOTION by Mr. Robert Miller and seconded by Mr. Dooley to see the Chair asked if with respect to a Robert Kenerson: Planning Board -15- September 18, 1990 • WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Zoning Board of modification of the of Appeals on Maintenance and S installation of previously approved Consideration of a Recommendation to the Appeals with respect to a request for Special Approval granted by the Zoning Board July 30, 1985 for the Cornell University ervice Operations' Garage, to permit the above - ground fuel storage tanks for the fuel island portion of the project. 2. The proposed project is located within the existing Cornell University Maintenance and Service Operations' Complex, approximately 1,300 feet south of NYS Route 366 and 1,800 feet west of Game Farm Road, on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6- 64 -1 -2, Residence District R -30. 3. This is a Type I action for which the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in coordinated review. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is an involved agency in coordinated review. 4. The Planning Board, at Public Hearing on September 18, 1990, has reviewed the proposed site plan, environmental assessment form and review, and other submissions related to this proposal. 5. The Town Planning Department has recommended that a negative • determination of environmental significance be made for this action. THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That the the Zoning Planning Board of Board recommend Appeals that a and hereby does recommend to negative determination of environmental significance be made for this action. 2. That the Board of following: Planning Appeals, Board, in determine making and hereby recommendation to the Zoning does determine the a. There is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location. b. The existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected. c. The proposed use is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town. 3. That the P1 Zoning Board modification of Appeals Maintenance installation anning 'Board report and hereby does report to the of Appeals it s recommendation that the request for of the Special Approval granted by the Zoning Board on July 30, 1985 for the Cornell University and Service Operations' Garage, to permit the of above - ground fuel storage tanks for the Planning Board -16- September 18, 1990 • previously approved fuel island portion of the project, be approved subject to the following condition. i. Approval of final site construction plan details by the Town Engineer. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Lesser, Miller, Hoffmann. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Grigorov declared the Cornell Maintenance and Service garage matter duly closed at 9:38 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS. 1. CONSIDER PROPOSED REVISIONS TO SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM. The Board members had before them a proposed revised S /EAF. Regarding Part II, Item C2, Dooley Kiefer thought it would be better said: Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, or other . natural or cultural resources? Community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly. Ms. Kiefer, noting that Part III, Determination of Significance, is the lead agency's section and the first two boxes under that are the lead agency's determination choices, stated that the third box that has been added, was added to try to respond to something that we had asked to be added. Ms. Kiefer stated that what we asked to be added was a check -box where you would be alerted to the fact that you were getting recommendations from both staff and recommendations from the CAC. Ms. Kiefer offered that, upon reflection today, it seems wrong to have that in Part III, and so we thought it might make more sense to insert a one -line "Part III" that is just called "recommendations" and the staff and the CAC would have a check -off box and you would know what you were getting in the way of attachments, and then retitle the present Part III, Part IV. Ms. Kiefer asked Mr. Frantz if that sounded like what had been talked about. Mr. Frantz responded, yes, adding that his idea was to keep Part II, ABCD, and add "E ", with boxes, comments from staff attached, and then comments from CAC attached. Attorney Barney suggested there should also be a box for OTHER. Chairperson Grigorov stated that there might be cases where something would happen at the committee level and you would not get something, adding that it should be noted on the form that they did not make a recommendation. In response to Chairperson Grigorov, Attorney Barney stated that the Planning Board will always have staff that will know whether the CAC or the ERC have had an opportunity for review. Ms. Hoffmann responded, that may be, • but you would only find that out when you came to the meeting. If there were a box to check it, you would know whether the Committee has reviewed it ahead of time. Discussion continued by the Planning Planning Board -17- September 18, 1990 • Board of the SEAF check boxes for CAC or ERC. Attorney Barney suggested that the Board recommend that the changes be adopted with the recommendation that a modification on Part IIB by a parenthetical expression following the "no" be included in and added at end, i.e., "(If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any.)" Attorney Barney also suggested that at the end of Part II "E" "(Check applicable boxes)" be added. There appearing to be no further discussion, Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion on revisions to the S /EAF. MOTION by Dr. William Lesser, seconded by Mr. Robert Miller. WHEREAS, The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has, on September 18, 1990, reviewed and made certain amendments to the proposed revised Town of Ithaca Short Environmental Asssessment Form; NOW, recommend THEREFORE, and hereby BE IT RESOLVED, does recommend to that said Planning the Town Board Board of the Town of Ithaca the approval of such Town of Ithaca Short Environmental Assessment attachment Form, as is attached the same is attached hereto. (The hereto as Exhibit #1.) referenced There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. • Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Lesser, Miller, Hoffmann. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Grigorov declared the discussion of the S /EAF revisions duly closed at 10:14 p.m. 2. CONSIDER EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS CAYUGA CLIFFS AND MCDONALD'S LITIGATION, POSSIBLE LITIGATION REGARDING SOUTH HILL RECREATION WAY, AND A ROAD RIGHT OF WAY ISSUE. At 10:15 p.m., upon MOTION by Mr. Robert Kenerson, seconded by Mr. Robert Miller, with a unanimous vote, the Planning Board retired into Executive Session for discussion of the Briarwood wetland issue. At 11 :20 p.m., upon MOTION, Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting back in open session. MOTION by Dr. William Lesser, seconded by Mr. Robert Miller. RESOLVED, that pending the final determination of the Army Corps of Engineers as to whether there is a regulated wetland area in the Briarwood Park Subdivision and /or whether a permit is necessary or should be issued with reference to any such wetland, the Planning Board requests the Planning staff, the Town Engineer, and the . • • Planning Board -18- September 18, 1990 Attorney for the Town to review the concerns expressed by some of the residents of the area relating to the original issuance of the subdivision approval, and that any such persons explore the options, if any, available to the Planning Board and report their recommendations on same to this Board upon completion of their review and investigation, and in any event by the first meeting of this Board in November 1990, and it is further RESOLVED, that the Planning Board recommends to the Codes and Ordinances Committee and the Conservation Advisory Council that these committees, coordinated with the Comprehensive Planning Committee, proceed with the drafting of conservation and protection mechanisms for further report to the Planning Board. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Lesser, Miller, Hoffmann. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the Consideration of Executive Session duly closed and noted that Cayuga Cliffs and McDonald's litigation, possible litigation regarding South Hill Recreation Way, and a road right of way issue were briefly discussed. No other action was taken. 3. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPORT, Susan Beeners, Town Planner, stated that she would like the Board to see the East Hill Parking lot drawings so as to better understand the context of how that plan might relate to Andree or to McDonald's. Ms. Beeners stated that she believed Andree is up for public hearing at the next meeting. Mr. Frantz confirmed that and stated that he is also to review the East Hill Plaza parking lot paving plans and touch base with John Majeroni to find out exactly how they intend to stripe it so we know the relationship of the islands and parking spaces in East Hill Plaza parking lot relative to his entrance onto the Plaza. Mr. Kenerson asked if it any changes whatsoever in the was known if Mr. Andree traffic pattern through intends to make his business. Mr. Frantz responded that one thing that and he agreed to do, was to illustrate with much space would be taken up by the cars, would help show how much space is there. he suggested 20" x 6" adding that to Mr. Andree, rectangles, how he thought that Ms. Hoffmann asked if they were doing something lighting there because the orignal light posts have had taken away and flood lights added and when driving from Road at night those flood lights really glare in your Hoffmann stated that she has called Cornell about that and they were going to adjust them but nothing has been done, about the the lights Pine Tree eyes. Ms. they said Planning Board -19- September 18, 1990 • Chairperson Grigorov brought to the attention of the Board that Bill Lesser has resigned from the Codes and Ordinances Committee and if anyone is interested in taking his place, please talk to her after the meeting. ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion, Chairman Grigorov declared the September 18, 1990 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 11:25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Teresa Manheim, Temporary Secretary Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary Town of Ithaca Planning Board • ri U 7--] Town Assigned Projeot ID Number New York State and Town of Ithaca Environmental Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM • For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County ONLY PART I - Project Information (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) Rev. 9/90 1. Applicant /Sponsor ; 2. Project Name: 3. Precise Location (Street Address and Road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map): Tax Parcel Number: 4. is Proposed Action: NEW EXPANSION MODIFICATION/ ALTER AT ION 5. Describe Project Briefly (include project purpose, present land use, current and future construction plans, and other relevant items) : (Attach separate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project.) Amount of land Affected: Initially (0 -5 y rs) Acres (6 -10 y rs) Acres (>I 0 y rs) Acres How is the Land Zoned Presently ? 8. Will proposed action comply •with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? YES F NO f�] if no, describe conflict bri�zfly : g. Will proposed action lead to a request for new: Public Road? YES NO Public Water? YES NO Public Sewer ? YES NO 10. What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project? Gl Residential Commercial [Industrial [] Agriculture Park /Forest /Open Space Other Please describe: 11 Does proposed action involve a permit, approval, or funding, now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, State, Local)? YES F] NO f�] If yes, list agency name and permit /approval /funding: 12. Does anu aspect of the proposed action have a ourrentlu valid permit or approval? YES NO If yes, list agency name and permit /approval. Also, state whether that permit /approval will require modification. 1 CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant /Sponsor Name (Print or Type): Signature: Date "PART i 1 ' - E MY I RD N M E NTA L ASSESS ME NT (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca; Use attachments as necessary) A. Goes proposed action exceed any Type I Threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12 or Town Environmental Law? YES ❑ NO ❑ If yes, coordinate the review process and use the Full EAF, ill proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6? YES ❑ NO ❑ (If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any.) C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources ? Community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly : C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural areas, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly C4. The Town's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly �6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1- C5? Explain briefly : C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly : D. is there, or is there likely to be, controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? YES ❑ NO ❑ if yes, explain briefly E. Comments of staff ❑, CAC ❑, Other ❑ attached. (Check applicable boxes) PART III — DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by the Town of Ithaca) Instructions: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (ie, urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and /or prepare a positive declaration. ❑Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting dooumentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attach- ments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination. Name of Lead Agency Preparer's ignature (I different from esponsible f icer) Name & Title of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Date: Signature of Contributing Preparer Pod= / U AFFIDAVIT OF PUB LIC'ATION. State of New York, Tompkins County, ss.: Gail Sullins being duly sworn, deposes and says, that she /he resides in Ithaca, county and state aforesaid and that she /he is Clerk of The Ithaca Journal a public newspaper printed and published in Ithaca aforesaid, and that a notice, of which the annexed is a true copy, was published in said paper and that the first publication of said notice was on the 3 day of T cll-c V-Y Ls 1- 19 _ Subsc 'bed and sworn to before me, this day of S4�� 1�19 (:To Notary Public. JEAN FORD Notary Public, State of New York-. No. 404410 Qualified in Tompkins County C (Nmmission expires May 31,19. • FL TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING I BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC . HEARINGS TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 . By direction of the Chairman ' of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that Public " Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, September'. 18, 1990, in Town Hall, 126' East Seneca Street, IthocciAl N.Y., at the following times'; and on the following matters:'' 7:30 P.M. Consideration . of,; Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of .76 plus /minus acres from Town i of Ithaca Tax- .Parcel No. 6 -46 -" 1 -8, 3.39 plus /minus acres to = ': tol, located at 365 East King Road, Resident District R -30. • Peter Capalongo, Owner /Ap- plicant. 7:45 P.M. Consideration of a i Recommmendaton to the Zon ing Board of Appeals with re- i spect to a request for modifi- cation of the Special Approval granted by the Zoning Board I Of Appeals on July 30, 1985 for the Cornell University Maintenance and Service Op- erations' Garage, to permit the installation of above- ground fuel storage tonks'for •' the previously approved .fuel island portion of the project.. The proposed project is lo- cated within the existing Cor -.,l hell University Maintenance ,I and Service Operations' Com plex, approximately 1,300 , feet south of NYS Route 366 and 1,800 feet west of Game Farm Road, on Town of Ithaca ' Tax Parcel No. 6- 64 -1 -2, Resi- dence District R -30. Cornell University, Owner; Lawrence P. Fabbroni, P.E., L.S.; Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear: all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. ; Persons may appear by agent ,or in person. Jean H. Swartwood Town Clerk 273 -1721 September 13, 1990 j