Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2008-01-22FILEv� DATE o? ails X REGULAR MEETING TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2008 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Rod Howe, Chairman Board Members Eva Hoffmann, George Conneman, Larry Thayer, and Hollis Erb Absent: Fred Wilcox and Susan Riha STAFF Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Dan Walker, Town Engineer (7:08p.m.); Michael Smith, Environmental Planner; Christine Balestra, Planner; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Paulette Neilsen, Deputy Town Clerk, OTHERS Anthony Ingram, 368 Stone Quarry Road Dave Auble, 111 West King Road Tim Peer and Ed Wilson, Humphries Service Building, Cornell University David Herrick and Matt Hendren, TG Miller Engineers and Surveyors Chairperson Howe — Welcome to the public board meeting this evening, Tuesday, January 22 "d. We'll start with Persons to be Heard, who are here to address an issue not on the Agenda. Is there anyone who would like to address the Board on an issue not on the Agenda? Okay. The first Agenda item is a SEQR for a 24ot subdivision at 368 and 370 Stone Quarry Road. Would the applicants wish to make any statement? I think it's pretty straight forward. Just give your name and address if you would, for us. Anthony Ingram, 368 Stone Quarry Road This is, as I'm sure you've looked at this, this is just a...25 years ago, the owner and builder of my house and the adjacent property applied for a subdivision with the Town and the County and submitted a map and was accepted by the County and built my house, got a certificate of compliance, a building permit, a certificate of compliance... and that all went through and it's only through the process of seeking a building permit to turn my garage into two rooms so that my lovely wife can move in, and her daughter, through that, it was discovered that the Town never, Town Board, Town Planning Board, never happened to have signed -off on the subdivision. So we are coming back 25 years later, out of the blue to us, to ask you to clean up that paper work for us if you would. Chairperson Howe — Thank you. If you could have a seat. Christine's memo is pretty clear. Does anyone see any environmental issues or concerns? Would someone like to move the resolution... Board Member Thayer — I'll move the SEQR. Board Member Conneman — I'll second it. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 2 Mr. Ingram — I'd just like to mention that Fran Manzella, our neighbor, is also here. Chairperson Howe — All those in favor of the SEQR ... any oppositions? ... any abstentions ?... It's unanimous. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 004 SEQR Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval Ingraham 2 -Lot Subdivision 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road Tax Parcel No.'s 38 -3 -11.1 & 38 -3 -11.2 Town of Ithaca Planning Board January 22, 2008 Motion made by Larry Thayer, seconded by George Conneman. WHEREAS: 1. This is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to legalize an existing 2dot subdivision located at 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 38 -3 -11.1 and 38 -3 -11.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 3 acre property into two lots, both with existing residences. The property abuts Buttermilk Falls State Park. The northernmost lot has insufficient lot depth (200 feet required, 187 +/- feet provided). Both lots meet all of the other requirements of the LDR Zone. The deeds for the lots were recorded in the County Clerk's Office without receiving the necessary Town subdivision approval. Anthony Ingraham and Elizabeth L. Bauman, Frederick J. Manzella and Francine T. Spadafora Manzella, Owners /Applicants, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in this uncoordinated environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on January 22, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, a recent survey map entitled "Survey Map, No. 368 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York", prepared by Raymond Brashear, dated April 10, 2001 and amended April 20, 2001, and other application materials, and 4. The Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance for the reasons set forth in the Environmental Assessment Form Part 11 referenced above, in accordance with the New York State Environmental PB 1/22/08 Pg. 3 Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Chairperson Howe — We have to wait two minutes before we open the public hearing, at 7:05. This is for consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to legalize an existing 2 -lot subdivision located at 368 and 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca. The northern -most lot has insufficient lot depth, 200 feet is required and it has 187 ±. Both lots meet all of the other requirements of the LDR zone. The lots were recorded in the County Clerk's office without receiving the necessary Town subdivision approval. Any further discussion from this Board before we open the public hearing? Board Member Hoffmann — No, it seems pretty straightforward just to correct a situation that, where a mistake seems to have happened. Chairperson Howe — We were all curious as to how it could have been sold so many times and not have been caught. We don't really have any answers on how these things happen... Board Member Thayer — Somebody goofed. Chairperson Howe — Somebody goofed. Is it 7:05? It's 7:05, we'll open the public hearing. Is there anyone here who would like to address this issue? Dave Auble, 111 West King Road I live at 111 West King Road and I have had a little bit of concern through the years that I have been living on West King Road about the gorge behind the homes on the ... that would be the west side, I guess, of Stone Quarry Road, that the septic tanks. I'm not sure that there is any kind of regulation that requires people to certify each year that they've been pumped or how often they've been pumped, that sort of thing. I think there should be some regulations on those homes along King Road because of the steep grade and the outlets of these septic systems are all emptying into the gorge behind the homes, as far as I can tell. I don't know if that was brought up at all with the Planning Department, or if there is any concern about that at all. But it seems it's an environmental, a potential environmental problem... Chairperson Howe - -- Susan... Ms. Brock — These are on -site septic systems? PB 1/22/08 Pg. 4 Mr. Auble — Yeah. There are no sewer lines, municipal sewer, down Stone Quarry Road to my knowledge. Ms. Brock — So the Tompkins County Health Department would have jurisdiction over those. Mr. Auble — So the Town has no jurisdiction... Ms. Brock — The Town does not. If it is brought to our attention that there are systems that are failing or that people think might be failing, the Town refers that information on to the Health Department, but we do not have any jurisdiction over those systems. Chairperson Howe — Any other comments? I will close the public hearing at 7:08p.m. and bring the matter back to the Board. Would someone like to move the resolution... Hollis has made the motion, Eva has seconded it ... all those in favor... oppositions? ... anyone abstaining? ... it's unanimous. So, thank you very much. Board Member Erb — Simple two -lot subdivision.,. It's our one for 2008. Mr. Kanter — Or possibly for the decade... ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 005 Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval Ingraham 2 -Lot Subdivision 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road Tax Parcel No.'s 38 -3 -11.1 & 38 -3 -11.2 Town of Ithaca Planning Board January 22, 2008 MOTION made by Hollis Erb, seconded by Eva Hoffmann. WHEREAS. 1. This is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to legalize an existing 2dot subdivision located at 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 38 -3 -11.1 and 38-3 -11.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 3 acre property into two lots, both with existing residences. The property abuts Buttermilk Falls State Park. The northernmost lot has insufficient lot depth (200 feet required, 187 +/- feet provided). Both lots meet all of the other requirements of the LDR Zone. The deeds for the lots were recorded in the County Clerk's Office without receiving _the _necessary_T_own _ s.ubdivision approval. Anthony Ingraham and Elizabeth L. Bauman, Frederick J. Manzella and Francine T. Spadafora Manzella, Owners /Applicants, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has PB 1/22/08 Pg. 5 on January 22, 2008, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board on January 22, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled, "Survey Map, No, 368 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York", prepared by Raymond Brashear, dated April 10, 2001 and amended April 20, 2001, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 38 -3 -11.1 & 38 -3 -11.2, as shown on the map titled "Survey Map, No. 368 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York", prepared by Raymond Brashear, dated April 10, 2001 and amended April 20, 2001, subject to the following conditions: a. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the most current plat and three dark -lined prints prior to re- filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, and b, granting of any necessary variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to signing of the plat by the Planning Board Chairman. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Chairperson Howe — The next Agenda item is: Continuation of the Determination of the adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Ithaca College Athletic and Events Center located on the eastern side of the Ithaca College campus near the Coddington Road campus entrance. We received the updated material from the applicant in our packets in the mail. Do you want to make any statements? PB ]/22/08 Pg. 6 Rick Couture, Ithaca College and David Herrick, TG Miller Engineers & Surveyors Mr. Herrick — Yes, thank you. We do want to briefly describe how we concluded our process two weeks ago. What we walked away with and what we came back to the Town in the form of red- and blue -lined versions of edits that were made in response to those substantive questions that the Board and Staff generated two weeks ago. And I hope that it's clear in this blue and red version, what we added. I would point out that in the course of making those edits, we did include some typos and grammatical errors and we have since corrected those, and as was requested by Mr. Wilcox, we have come prepared tonight with a final, non - colored version which would represent the document that may find its way to the public after your endorsement this evening. So we will pass those out for you, if appropriate at this time, and we would be happy to answer any questions, take any additional comments or criticisms of the information that we have further supplied. Chairperson Howe — Okay, do you want to hand those out now ... while we are doing that, Jon or Mike, do you have any comments that you would like to make before we open it up to the public? Mr. Smith — I don't think I have anything additional. I've had a chance to go through it in more detail since we sent these out, really didn't come up with anything else. Looks like most things were addressed. You know, I talked with Susan this afternoon, and she had a couple of little items, but I really didn't come up with anything major. Mr. Kanter — I was just going to mention quickly that I went through the further revised addendum and thought that the additional information provided on the night lighting and the building materials was particularly helpful and I thought that that was very well done. Mr. Herrick — I will add that what you do have tonight includes, as the last three pages, a bit of information that you did mention and request that we failed to include in the blue /red version. And that was some explanation, quantified information pertaining to noise generated inside the Event Center and what would it do, what would it propagate beyond the fagade to the neighboring properties. We did have that information available to us and I apologize that we didn't include it with the blue /red version but it is here today. All other changes in the technical exhibits or appendices have previously been distributed and we expect that again, upon your acceptance of this document, we will create for the Town and for the public, a final version similar to the large 3 -ring binder that you have, with all of those additional exhibits, appendices labeled and included. Chairperson Howe — Susan, did you have any specific things you wanted to mention before I turn over here? Ms. Brock — Just one. When I went back and reviewed the comments I made last time, there was just one item that I didn't see addressed in here. It's possible that you did address it but you just didn't redline it. It was dealing with parking facilities. The Scope said "identify and assess parking demand and capacity needs for significant events, in addition to present residential, commuter and faculty staff needs and consider parking PB 1/22/08 Pg. 7 management and trip- reduction strategies." 1 did not see that added but perhaps it was already in here somewhere so perhaps you could show me where. Mr. Herrick — It was, and at the last meeting I didn't step up to the plate, if you will, and direct you to where that information was. A lot of that material is in the SRF Associates analysis in the Appendix, dealing with traffic and transportation issues. There they do present many different approaches to parking demand management. We did, however, add some information pertinent to how events held at the Center may have some demand on parking within the vicinity of the facility. So we did pick up on that comment. Ms. Brock — Do you know where that was added? Mr. Herrick — Yes, you'll want to look at page ... this would be in the section that you got tonight ... page 78 ... and it would be just about opposite Figure F6, there's a sentence that identifies how the net gain of 315 spaces to the parking lots which serve the campus core, and this will accommodate the majority of all trips generated in the peak event described in Section F II, Ms. Brock — Okay. That's fine. Chairperson Howe — So let's try to first identify the topics that we think need further discussion so we're making sure we're spending time on the ones that we think are most important. So instead of sort of taking one at a time, maybe we could just put on the table what our issues are. Hollis, do you have an issue that you saw needing further discussion? Board Member Erb — No. I was going to thank them for something. I was going to thank them for two items. One was the night pictures, which really clarified the tower illumination for me. The other was that when I read the Noise Impact Statement in finer detail, I finally learned what's been bothering me about vegetative buffers for several years, because in the Appendix, when your consultant began talking about vegetative buffers, it suddenly became clear to me that they were talking in terms of a depth of 120 feet or more of randomly placed trees, which really, finally clarified for me, how people could sometimes decline or deny that vegetative buffers could do any good and at other times claim some decibel reduction. So, having that statement in there finally helped me a lot. Chairperson Howe — Okay. Larry, is there a topic you want to address? Board Member Thayer — No, it appears that they have addressed our concerns very well. Board Member Conneman — My concerns were with noise and lights and I think they have been addressed well. Chairperson Howe — Eva? Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I guess I didn't quite understand some of the things you have in here and the one thing that I still am unclear about is whether the view PB 1/22/08 Pg. 8 picture from Pine Tree Road at Snyder Hill Road, which shows the roof of the building, whether that in fact shows the scenario with all the trees cut out for the field, east of that building as well, or if the trees in that view are still in the spot where the field is supposed to be. And on page 56, 1 see something written about that, this is in the red and blue highlighted version, it says the proposed building is most visible when observed from this spot that I am talking about. It says "the vegetative buffer that will remain east of the building will interrupt any other views of the building facade as shown in view number one. And first of all, it doesn't say anything about clearing the trees, and I also don't know where view number one is ... view number one earlier on in the document is the view from Coddington Road, so that must not be the correct one. Mr. Herrick — Okay.... Chairperson Howe — And Eva, are all your concerns with this issue of the view? Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, that's the most important one. I have some other little ones that, where I think things did not get clarified or, for instance, on Page 44, it talks about... Chairperson Howe — Well, let's keep with the view... Mr. Herrick — First of all, did we make an error in referring to a view? Is that what I'm understanding? That View 3 Board Member Hoffmann — Are you on Page 56? Mr. Herrick — I am. Board Member Hoffmann — It's the red area on the lower half of the page. Mr. Herrick — Yes. Chairperson Howe — I think it does point back to the wrong... Mr. Herrick — You are correct, it does. It points back to Coddington Road /Pine Tree Road as opposed to... Board Member Hoffmann -- Right, but that's also the only place where I found something about that vegetative buffer next to the building, and it still doesn't answer the concern that I had about the correct view picture from Snyder Hill Road /Pine Tree Road. Matt Hendren, TG Miller I don't believe it was a mistake to reference View 1 with respect to the vegetative buffer because the View 1 does illustrate the vegetative buffer that exists between residents and the proposed site. As we were photographing the area, it was impossible to see the balloons, which should be illustrated in View 1. And so the view is impacted by the vegetative buffer there. Specifically there, but not with respect to View 3, which I believe is maybe the substance of your comment. I think View 1 is... PB 1/22/08 Pg. 9 Board Member Hoffmann — (inaudible) ... about the View 3 from Pine Tree Road at Snyder Hill Road, and whether that view, the impacted view, as you call it, includes the effect of cutting down the trees for the field, the large field, east of the building, and that I couldn't find any reference to. Mr. Herrick — We did embellish how we developed the visual simulations with balloon launch and photographs taken from different perspectives... Board Member Hoffmann — yes, and that's very helpful... Mr. Herrick — Did any of the information in there help to understand the tree issue? Board Member Hoffmann — Nope. Not from this view, viewpoint, I should say. Board Member Erb — Perhaps if we knew how much slope was going to have trees taken off, that would help us, because if trees are only taken off from the flat up to the slope, I don't think that would affect the view nearly as much as if trees were taken off then from the slope also, which would drop the visible tree height. Mr. Herrick — Canopy, right, right. And that's why I wanted to take you to Page 51 when I suggested that... Board Member Erb — Old or new 51? Mr. Herrick — This would be the red 51, where we do embellish the process the process for the photo simulations and item eight does talk about how the tree loss was represented. But I think, getting back to your question specifically, from Pine Tree Road, did we include tree removal, yes we did. Board Member Hoffmann — So that picture, that photo, is correct ... with all the trees taken down, both for the building site and for the, of the actual Athletic Center building site and the field east of it. Mr. Herrick — To the best of our ability that's what we represented in that impacted image. Board Member Hoffmann — Because somehow, I would expect that there would be., .1 can't express this in words as well ... I wish you had the drawings and I would show you what I meant... Mr. Herrick — Would you like me to put the drawings up... Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, and I will show you... Chairperson Howe — But Eva, isn't the issue that it's here ... so people, when it comes to the public, I guess I am struggling a little bit with what you feel is not here. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I feel if it does not represent what's going to happen then the public will get an incorrect image of what it's going to look like afterwards, that's what I'm concerned about. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 10 Mr. Kanter — While they are pulling that out, more specifically, as David referenced, Page 51, #8, talks specifically about the representation of tree loss, so maybe you want to take a quick look at that. Chairperson Howe — I thought that they had addressed it...it sounds like Eva is the one that is most concerned right now. Board Member Hoffmann — You don't have the photos do you? The images of what it will look like from the Pine Tree Road site. Mr. Herrick — Oh, no. No, we haven't... those appear only within the other simulations and we did not have them.... Board Member Hoffmann — Well, anyway, it seems to me ... let's put this one up...it seems to me that when you cut out the trees here, this is all Libe Slope, I can see the lines here a little bit ... it slopes from the developed site of the campus down to Coddington Road, fairly evenly. So, it seems to me when you cut out the trees of this slope here, where the building is going to be and you cut down the trees that are here where the field is going to be, as well as the tennis courts, that when you see that from Pine Tree Road, there would be a little dip, because it's all on a slope. There would be a dip in the treeline and through that dip you would see the facade of the building. That's my concern. Mr. Herrick — Okay. I understand. Board Member Hoffmann — So that the image you have does not represent what it will really look like. Mr. Herrick — Well, the building does step down, there's a 12 -foot differential from what is existing grade at the west side to the lower elevation on the east side. So we are dropping down in elevation and there are still stands of vegetation that we are not going to move and the canopy for these trees, specifically these sites, are still going to be there, and because we are ... all the land is sloping off, we are dropping down with it too so it's not as though we were up creating a higher plateau than what's currently there. So, again, I think that the best that we can do with our available technology to create that simulation does and has physically removed tree - canopy from in front of the building. Chairperson Howe — I think the rest of us are feeling fairly comfortable with what's been presented so, Eva, do you want to, do you have another issue that you want ... how many issues do you have? Board Member Hoffmann — I have a number of things that are fairly small and I am _aware. that we are not supposed to take_ too much time with this, but at the same time I want it to be a document that is understandable and clear. Chairperson Howe — So why don't you go over your smaller items. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 11 Board Member Hoffmann — There's an additional item that you provided and it doesn't have a page number ... it's at the very end, it's the Moody Nolan reflectance study, I believe it's called, and since the pages aren't numbered, I will have to describe... there is a drawing of the building which shows the rays of the sun being reflected off the roof... and I can see for one, two, three of them, there are rays coming down and bouncing up. But then the longest line, there are two lines that come from the tower, the longest one of those that goes almost to the eastern edge of the building, is just that one line. It doesn't show the reflecting line. Is that missing? Or am I not understanding something there? Mr. Herrick — You know ... we don't have Moody Nolan here tonight to help us address that question... Board Member Hoffmann — Would you like to see the page that I have... Mr. Herrick — We're familiar with the page, that's fine. Board Member Hoffmann — So you know what I am talking about. Do you see what I mean ... right here ... this comes but there is no line coming off there... Mr. Hendren — Is your concern that... Board Member Conneman — David, there's no line going off to the left off the roof. Mr. Hendren — May I just clarify. Is your concern that the figure doesn't represent solar reflectivity of the roof correctly? Board Member Hoffmann — I don't' know that. But it looks curious to me that I see some lines coming in and reflecting, three of them, and then there's one which does not have a reflecting line coming off. Mr. Hendren — I would agree, it is a little ambiguous and unclear and I would have expected as well to see that radiating line reflecting from the lowest angle of incidence. Board Member Hoffmann— Right, so, what I'm saying is if there's something missing, fix it. Before the public sees it. If there's not something missing, explain why it's not there. Mr. Herrick — And I think that the point that we make is that there certainly can be the opportunity during sunrise - sunset conditions to have certain roof reflectance and that to me is the prime issue. So we're not suggesting that that's never going to occur, we're suggesting that it will. If the illustration needs to somehow enhance what we've already stated in the narrative, I can certainly do that. I can ask Moody Nolan to make that addition. Chairperson Howe — And I think Eva, you do have to look at the narrative and the picture together... Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah, I read the narrative. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 12 Chairperson Howe -- ...I think it does present a complete picture... Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I guess I didn't understand it when I read it. If everybody else understands it, you can explain it to me. Board Member Erb — I think that Eva's correct in that one of the rays is missing. However, I suspect strongly that it's essentially coincident with the lower limit that has been drawn in about the viewing angle from adjacent hills, when I try to anticipate what the angle would be. So it could be that it's almost a coincident line there. That's all. Board Member Hoffmann —Anyway, I am fairly used to looking at drawings and if I don't understand it, probably there will be a few people in the public who won't understand it either. So if you clarify it that would be good. Mr. Herrick — Okay. Board Member Hoffmann — On Page 91, there are some notations on some new photos that you've provided, and there's also a picture on Page 92, the numbers are in red on the photos and I find them very hard to read in some of the spots. Against the blue sky, I can read that the tower is 175 feet high, but on the building itself, I can't read. Board Member Thayer — On the new sheet you can see it better Eva. Do you have the new sheet they handed out tonight? Board Member Hoffmann — No, I didn't look there... Board Member Thayer — You can make out 61 and 55 pretty good. Board Member Hoffmann — Well good, that helps then. Great. I still have a little trouble with the other one on Page 93, where the numbers are on dark areas, they are hard to read. If you could come up with some other way to... Mr. Herrick — We can outline the numbers with white background so you'll have a white /red contrast. Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah, whatever way you come up with. I don't care how you do it, just make it readable. Mr. Herrick — All right. Board Member Erb — You are aware that the numbers in this paragraph are not the same as the red numbers in the picture, which might be an issue of which view it is. _ _ Mr.-Herrick — Which numbers now? Board Member Erb — Well, 61 versus 62, 35, if I am reading it correctly, versus 39, that sort of thing. It's only a few feet here or there. Mr. Herrick — They are referred to as roughly in the narrative. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 13 Board Member Erb — If they matched the picture, it would be easier for someone to look directly back and forth and see exactly, even with roughly written on them, to see which particular portion of the building is exactly being discussed at that few words. Location. Chairperson Howe — Eva, why don't you move on to the next... Board Member Hoffmann — On Page 58, there were two things I noticed. In the first blue part, it talks about the number of events that will be held at this new center. It says "it's anticipated that there will be between 4 and 5 events held at this increased lighting level", 1 think you need to specify per time period. Like, is it annually? If it is, write that in. And also, for the other events that there will be more of. I think you had 14 other non - broadcast events, and I think you need to say annually there too to make that clear. Above that, where you talk about the number of poles and how high they will be and how many luminaires there will be per pole, I wish I would be able to read there if those poles would be visible from across the valley. You know, I look at the drawing, which we just talked about, with the heights of the building and the tower, and I imagine how heigh those 100 -foot poles will be, you told us last time they'll be on a ground level that is 15 lower than the building, base of the building, but that just lowers it by 15 feet and think they'll still be quite high and I suspect that they'll be visible from distances further away... Mr. Herrick — They will be... Board Member Hoffmann — I would like to see some indication of how visible they are. A picture would be great. Mr. Herrick — Okay. Board Member Hoffmann — You know, if you could draw them into the photos, for instance, where it would be, where you know they would be visible, that would be a very helpful thing to see in judging how much interference there would be of those poles, especially when they are lit up. Chairperson Howe — Anything else? Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. On Page 55, the Image D15, which is the view from the Cornell University Libe Slope, as impacted. After looking very carefully, I can figure out where the tower and the building is, but it would be helpful if you put an arrow on that picture to indicate where it is, so people don't have to sit and agonize over what it is they're seeing. Mr. Herrick — Well I think that's to the benefit of the image that you have to agonize over where the building is ... (laughter),... Board Member Erb — That's the way I took it... Chairperson Howe — Good point... Mr. Herrick — I can certainly point it out... PB 1/22/08 Pg. 14 Board Member Hoffmann — I understand that, but since you are saying that it's impacted and somebody knows that it's supposed to be there ... and it also depends on how it's lit. If you know where it is by having an arrow indicating it, you don't have to sit there and waste a lot of time over finding it. Mr. Herrick — Okay. That's fine. Board Member Hoffmann — And making it easier good thing. And ... I have some trouble still witl added about the angle of viewing the roof and above the floor level at a distance of 2,500 — 4, minimized." Could you put it in simpler language a layperson. Mr. Herrick — Okay. both for us and the public is always a i the language on Page 52, that you the view studies and the 1,550 feet 000 feet, the visual impact should be that would be more understandable to Board Member Hoffmann — I think that would be helpful. Mr. Herrick — So the last paragraph has to be broken down... Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, it's the new text that you've added. The same thing, on Page 51 under Point 7, the language there needs to be clarified. It's, I think, very confusing. Mr. Herrick — Which language? Specifically? Board Member Hoffmann — It's Point 7 on Page 51. 1 can read it. "Architectural renderings were created of the building design from three views and inserted then according to view orientation, elevation, and surrounding buildings, and scaled then according to balloon locations rendered the building." Mr. Kanter — Grammatical correction please. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, it just needs to be clarified. Mr. Herrick — The then is not working as... Board Member Hoffmann — On Page 44 in the new text, that you have added there, and I should say, by the way, that all these added things are very helpful, but in them I found little things that I felt needed clarifying further, and correcting. Let's see, on the seventh line, actually, the sentence reads that 96 we have these opportunities for beautiful views and residents and visitors alike get unique glimpses of Cayuga Lake, the City of Ithaca or distant hills." And since we are in the Town, I think it would be very nice if after the City of- Ithaca, you would add the Town of Ithaca and distant hills which include other municipalities as well, but, please, don't leave the Town of Ithaca out. Mr. Herrick —We wouldn't do that... Board Member Hoffmann — I am sure you didn't do that intentionally... PB 1/22/08 Pg. 15 Board Member Erb — I thought that you were being sensitive to the fact that we told you before that you neglected to include the City, from one of those views looking down there, but then it was.... Board Member Hoffmann — On Page 9, at the top of the page, you have very nicely put in numbers instead of bullets, I find it very helpful, but you have switched Points 2 and 3, the text and the map don't jive. Mr. Hendren —That $ s correct and it has been updated in the... Board Member Hoffmann — Good, good wasn't as organized this time as last time. I think that takes care of most of them. I Chairperson Howe — So the question is, do we feel that this is ready for primetime? (all Board Members nod) This is not a public hearing but do you think we need to give the public an opportunity or since this is going to go before the public on this next round... Ms. Brock — Has the public seen this draft? I don't think so, right. Chairperson Howe — No, I'm just... sometimes we give the public a chance to comment but I don't know that it's necessary here since the whole point of this is to provide it... Ms. Brock — Correct. I would agree with that. Chairperson Howe — Okay. We have before us a draft resolution... Mr. Kanter — Rod, one thing that I wanted to point out, that I don't think was highlighted in red, but it was something that addressed, on Page 42, there was a requested clarification about public access, and I noticed that the wording in the last paragraph, under Institutions and Institutional Land Use, regarding public access, was changed a little bit to clarify the intent of the College regarding use of the facilities by the public. So, the last sentence there, "the College Administration hopes to provide free public access to the new walking trails and make provisions for clubs or organizations to rent College facilities consistent with their intended use." 1 believe is a different sentence than what was in the previous version you saw but it just wasn't highlighted with the change. So, just so the Board is aware of that. Chairperson Howe — Is there anyone who would like to move... Board Member Thayer — Do I dare try again ... (laughter)... Chairperson Howe — the SEOR.1. Board Member Thayer — I will move the resolution. Board Member Erb — Second. Chairperson Howe — Second by Hollis ... all those in favor... PB 1/22/08 Pg. 16 Ms. Brock — Hold on ... we need to set the time for the public hearing. We need to insert the time because now there is a blank. It states that the public hearing will be scheduled for Tuesday, February 19th at (blank)p.m.it So we need to specify the time before you vote. Chairperson Howe — And I look to...l don't know what else might be on the agenda for, and maybe you don't either. Mr. Kanter — We don't know and I guess one discussion point the Board might want to consider, at this point the February 19th date would be the soonest, under the timeline, that you could hold the public hearing, because you have to leave at least, it has to be at least 15 days after this meeting to give proper notice and everything, so that's the soonest, under the SEQR timeframes that you could do it, but, whether you would want to consider a slightly later date of March just to give more time to the public to review the document is something you might want to consider. Again, we don't really have a preference or a recommendation but, this date that's in the resolution of February 19tH you know, by the time the documents are available to the public, there will be less than a month for review, basically. Chairperson Howe — Reactions to that? It is a lot of material for the public to review. So, if it wasn't February 19th the suggestion is that it would be March 4th Board Member Hoffmann — Are there other applications that have come in that we need to attend to fairly soon? Because it would seem to me that this project would almost take a whole meeting. Mr. Kanter — It could be a large portion of a meeting. We have a lot of other applications in, yes, for both meetings. So, yeah, right now, for February 19th there's a potential of about three other items. Not all that big, and then going to the March meeting, we don't know yet. Board Member Erb — I didn't understand what you were saying about 15 days. Is that 15 days from tonight or 15 days from the time that they guarantee it's posted and available? Mr. Kanter — The minimum, minimum, minimum time that you could set a public hearing would be 15 days from tonight because you need, that's assuming we could get the, which is impossible actually, to get the notice in the paper tomorrow, and we can't do that, because, so we're, I mean, it's a moot point to discuss the next meeting. That's not possible, but, the thing is, that I'm saying is by the time we do get the notice in the paper, do you want to give a little bit more time for the public to be able to review the EIS document. February 19th would give, you know, a fairly limited time. It's adequate under SEQR because SEQR doesn't really tell you a minimum time that the public should have to review, other. than the notification requirement, but,_this is totally at the discretion of the Board as to how long you think it's going to take somebody to go through the document and be able to understand it and then formulate comments on it. This, to me, seems like a pretty complicated document that we might want to think about a little bit more time. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 17 Chairperson Howe — David, did you want to add something for us... Mr. Herrick — Yes, if I could please. I would ask whether there is any harm in starting that process sooner rather than later. It would seem to be that we would want to come here and with the folks who helped prepare this document, go back and really define and get into the nuts and bolts of our process and how we came to the decisions that we've reached. I don't see how there's harm in starting that sooner. I think we all would agree that given the scale of the project, this is not going to be a one meeting issue and that there certainly would be continuation of public hearing and comment. So I guess I would ask that the Board consider starting the process sooner, allowing us to share with the public what we have done and continuation into March. Frankly, we certainly won't conclude anything in one meeting I believe. Mr. Kanter — A couple of points. One is, that process could begin without holding the public hearing because the public hearing, technically, is supposed to be just hearing public comments on the DEIS, not reacting to it, not hearing the presentation ... in fact often the way you'll see DEC or a State agency do a public hearing on EIS's is to actually have, say, an informational session preceding the hearing, getting that done with, you know, educating the public about it and that may be done the same night or some other night and then the public hearing is held. That basically is just to hear public comments, not even, really, for discussion within that hearing. That is the technical way that a public hearing on a DEIS should be held. The other thing that I was going to mention is, we still are awaiting more detailed site - plan materials and normally SEQR tells you to hold a public hearing in conjunction both with the SEQR action before you as well as the actual action before you, which is site - plan approval and special permit, and, so I guess we still don't know what the time frame of submission of those materials is because the EIS itself has slipped a little bit in terms of time so I don't know if you want to address that to the Board. Mr. Herrick — We would make a submission for preliminary site plan on or about the first of February, so it would be in expectation that you could look at those documents at your March meeting, first March meeting. Mr. Kanter — I think based on that I would probably suggest setting the public hearing for the March 4th meeting. If we can and think it would be helpful and appropriate, we might want to schedule a public - informational kind of presentation by the applicants preceding the hearing. We could do that, perhaps, on February 19th, we'll have to see how the schedule turns out. Chairperson Howe — And would that be almost a full -blown presentation Jon? Is that what you're suggesting? - -Mr..- Herrick —Well, we have entertained the notion of sketch plan part 2, if you will, given where we're at with the... Chairperson Howe — I think if this is broken across a couple of meetings the more that ... I mean, if something could happen on February 19th just to start sharing some PB 1/22/08 Pg. 18 information, even though the public hearing wouldn't happen until the first part of March. It seems like that would be beneficial. Board Member Hoffmann — I think so too and I just wanted to comment, I have been on the Planning Board for many years and I think this is probably the biggest project, with the most potential for major impact that I have dealt with, that I can remember any way. So, I think it's important to allow as much time as possible for comments by the public and for information to the public. I think probably that something like a sketch plan informational meeting, whatever you call it, would be very useful because it's hard to go through a document like this, with all the papers and it's often very helpful for people to hear a presentation and see the larger maps and maybe even be able to ask questions if things aren't clear to them. Chairperson Howe — If we did that, at the February 19th meeting, how much of that would actually have to be repeated when you actually have the formal public hearing? Board Member Thayer —Zero. Mr. Herrick — Right. Mr. Kanter — Again, the public hearing is simply to open the hearing and ask the public for comments and then, it's up to the public to have either attended or read the EIS or whatever they're going to do. Chairperson Howe — So is that, I see heads shaking, so it seems like we are in favor of having an informational presentation at the February 19th meeting and then for this resolution, putting March 4th down. And do we have to specify a time as well Susan? So would we... Ms. Brock — Yes, because the public notice needs to specify the time. Board Member Conneman — And the public would be informed of that information session? Because someone might want to hear that and then come back.... Mr. Kanter — Yes, both the information session and the hearing itself, yup. Chairperson Howe — Since you don't know what else would be on for March 4th, would we just say 7:00? Or 7:05? Mr. Kanter — Yes, I think that being that it would be singly a public hearing, I think it would be good to put it at the beginning of the meeting... Board Member Erb — We're changing the date and inserting 7:05? Ms. Brock — Correct. Chairperson Howe — And there's probably going to be other changes but I think that ... other changes to the resolution? Board Member Thayer — How about the Should that be included in the resolution? PB 1/22/08 Pg. 19 corrections that were suggested tonight? Chairperson Howe — And I think last time we were reluctant just to say the Staff could check that, but I think the level of what we talked about tonight, we would be comfortable with... Board Member Thayer— Comfortable with the Staff... Board Member Hoffmann — If you, Jon and Susan, are comfortable with it... Mr. Kanter — Tonight I think I am comfortable with it. Board Member Hoffmann — You know, these meetings, it would be very helpful if we could get coverage in local newspapers and by local radio stations, so if there are any reporters in the audience, it would be nice if we could have some articles or some mention of it in the news media so people would find out about the hearings. Board Member Thayer — They'll pick that up from our agenda probably. Chairperson Howe — I think Susan is working on... Board Member Erb — May I ask how quickly you expect the DEIS to be available to the public? Mr. Herrick — Well, I believe that the... Board Member Erb — If it were deemed acceptable tonight to pass it forward. Mr. Herrick — Yes, I believe that the Town's next step is to issue a notice of adequacy. Mr. Kanter — notice of acceptance of the DEIS. Mr. Herrick — Right, and I would suggest that after that happens, that's when the College would be able to post the entirety of the document on their website. Mr. Kanter — So we would issue the notice as soon as we receive and review the corrections and revisions which... Mr. Herrick — Which are very minor at this point. Chairperson Howe — I forgot to suggest that people turn off their cell phones at the beginning of the meeting.... Mr. Kanter — Also, this will be going on the Ithaca College website probably as soon as we give you word that the notice of acceptance has been circulated, we'll probably try to link it to our website. I don't think we will want to put the whole document on ours, but we will have a link on our site to the Ithaca College's site. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 20 Chairperson Howe — And will the public notice point to, so people can get to the... Mr. Kanter —Yes. Mr. Herrick — And that's actually included in the document itself. There's reference made to website hosting. Board Member Erb — Yes, but if you have to have the document to find the website address, it doesn't work well. Mr. Herrick — Yeah, that's true. Mr. Kanter — We will also have probably at least two public- review copies here at Town Hall and we'll probably send one over to the County Library will all the corrected pages and everything. Ms. Brock — Page 2 of the resolution, paragraph 7, we need to insert the amendments handed to us tonight. So we have dates showing that the DEIS is dated November 27, 2007 and amended January 8, 2008; delete the and, leave the date January 15, 2008 and add "and January 22, 2008." The same change should be made under the first resolved paragraph. Actually there they didn't have the January 15th date, so that should be inserted. So it should read "and amended Janua,7 8, 2008, January 15, 2008 and January 22, 2008 and then add, after the January 22 date "with further changes as discussed at the January 22, 2008 Planning Board meeting." And then in paragraph two, we've already discussed the change in date from February 19tH to March 4t and the hearing time set at 7:05 p.m. Mr. Smith — I think at the end of that paragraph, also the February 19th date needs to be changed to March 14tH Ms. Brock — Oh, thank you. Missed that. Let's see...until March 14th ... ten days after the close of the public hearing... comments will be received and considered no late than 10 calendar days following a public hearing. Chairperson Howe — Those changes acceptable to Larry and Hollis? Board Member Erb — Yes Board Member Thayer —Yes. Chairperson Howe — All those in favor, say aye ... anyone opposed... it's unanimous. So, congratulations. The work begins now. Mr. Herrick — We look forward to the February meeting and we will bring our friends and help folks understand how we came about all this. Chairperson Howe — Thanks, thanks very much. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 21 ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 006 SEQR - Acceptance of Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) as Complete for Public Review and Comment & Scheduling a Public Hearing Regarding Said DEIS Ithaca College Athletics & Events Center Ithaca College Campus Near Coddington Road Tax Parcel No.'s 41 -1 -30.2, 41 -1 -11, 41 -1 -12.2, 41- 1 -24, and 42 -1 -9.2 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, January 22, 2008 Motion made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS: 1. This project is the proposed Ithaca College Athletic and Events Center located on the eastern side of the Ithaca College campus near the Coddington Road campus entrance, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 41 -1 -30.2, 41 -1 -11, 41 -1- 12.2, 41 -1 -24, and 42- 1 -9.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of +/- 300,000 square feet of indoor athletic facilities including an indoor 200M track with practice /game field, Olympic size pool and diving well, tennis courts, rowing center, gymnasium, strength and conditioning center, and floor space for large indoor events. Outdoor facilities include a lighted artificial turf field, a 400M track with open space for field events, and lighted tennis courts. The project is proposed in several phases and will also include the construction of +/- 1,002 parking spaces (687 displaced spaces and 315 new spaces), relocating overhead power lines, constructing a new loop road, walkways, access drives, stormwater management facilities, lighting and landscaping. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Agent; and 2. The proposed project, which requires site plan approval and special permit by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board and variance(s) by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, is a Type I action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Chapter 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Environmental Quality Review; and 3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, on February 6, 2007, declared its intent to serve as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review for the proposed Ithaca College Athletics and Events Center project; and 4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, having reviewed the Full Environmental assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, prepared by Ithaca College, and Parts 2 and 3 of the Full EAF, prepared by the Planning staff, established itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed Ithaca College athletics and Events Center, as described above, and issued a positive determination of environmental significance at its meeting on March 6, 2007, in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, also known as the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, for the above referenced action as PB 1/22/08 Pg. 22 proposed, and, confirmed that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) will be prepared; and 5. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board held a Public Scoping Meeting on May 1, 2007 to hear comments from the public and interested and involved agencies regarding the scope and content of the DEIS for the Ithaca College Athletics and Events Center, after distributing the Draft Scoping Document to potentially involved and interested agencies and the public; and 6. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, on May 15, 2007, accepted the revised Final Scoping Document (dated May 9, 2007) and amended by the Planning Board at its meeting on May 15, 2007, as being adequate to define the scope and content of the DEIS for the Ithaca College Athletics and Events Center; and 7. The applicants have prepared a DEIS, dated November 27, 2007 and amended January 8, 2008, January 15, 2008, and January 22, 2008 regarding the proposed Ithaca College Athletics and Events Center, and submitted said DEIS to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for consideration of acceptance as complete; and 8. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed said DEIS and amendments at its meetings on December 18, 2007, January 8, 2008 and January 22, 2008; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby finds that the DEIS, dated November 27, 2007 and amended January 8, 2008, January 15, 2008 and January 22, 2008, with further changes as discussed at the January 22, 2008 Town Planning Board meeting, for the Ithaca College Athletics and Events Center is satisfactory with respect to its scope, content, and adequacy for the purpose of commencing public review, and hereby accepts said DEIS as complete, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.9; and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board will be scheduled for Tuesday, March 4, from the public on potential environm College Athletics and Events Center as comments from the public regarding the Board until March 14, 2008; and hereby determines that a public hearing 2008 at 7:05 p.m. to obtain comments ental impacts of the proposed Ithaca evaluated in the DEIS, and that written DEIS will be accepted by the Planning 3. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby directs the Town of Ithaca Planning Staff to take those steps, including filing a Notice of Completion of the DEIS and Notice of SEQR Hearing, as required under 6 NYCRR Parts 617.9 and - 617.12, distributing the DEIS to involved and interested agencies and the public, as may be necessary or appropriate to commence the public review of the DEIS, and to publish a notice of the public hearing at least 14 days in advance of the hearing date, in a newspaper of general circulation in the area of the potential impacts of the action. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 23 A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Next agenda item is announced at 8:26 p.m. Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Proposed Cornell University Combined Hear and Power Plant Project located to the south of the Central Heating Plant on Dryden Road. Chairperson Howe — And if you will recall, I forget the last meeting, it was after 10:00 and they made kind of a 15- minute presentation to us, I think in December, and just a reminder why there's not a SEQR determination because you know that there has been a SEQR determination already by the Lead Agency, the New York State of Environmental Conservation acted as the Lead Agency and issued a negative declaration of environmental significance for the project in November of 2007. 1 am assuming you want to do a brief presentation for us? Ed Wilson and Tim Peer, Cornell University, Humphries Service Building Mr. Wilson — Thank you. Again, we would like to give a little overview of this project first. We mentioned this to you before, but, it basically involves the renewal of our central heating plant which is off Route 366 and at the corner of Coy Road and Route 366. The building addition is approximately 15,000 square feet right to the south side of our building, kind of tucked in between a hill and the back of our plant. We plan on adding two combustion turbines along with associated heat recovery steam generators. What that does is they will generate each about 15 megawatts of electricity. Generates seam which is a waste heat exhausted through the combustion turbine and overall create our energy, both steam and electric and overall a greater efficiency than what we totally do now in total. Right now we have a co- generation system, but we will be generating more of our own electrical power in the future than we do now. Part of that too will be adding two emergency diesel generators that will be able to start the plant if the electrical system were to be down, serving Cornell. In addition, there's some environmental controls that will require an aqueous ammonia tank. We will actually use ammonia to reduce some of our emissions. Overall the benefit to Cornell is it provides our continued steam needs' to our campus, even though we have -an aggressive energy conservation program, our steam needs for heating purposes primarily continues to grow and we need to keep pace with building growth on campus. It also provides emergency backup power for our campus and that is adequate in size that if we had another northeast grid outage as we did several years ago, Cornell could PB 1/22/08 Pg. 24 start these units up, if we lost all power, restart the units, power the campus electrically and provide the steam needs of campus and basically what we call "island ourselves" and supply all of the steam and heating needs. Other than that, we maintain our fuel flexibility. We'll still burn coal and natural gas primarily with a #2 ultra -low- sulfur diesel as backup fuel, and, but our coal use is planned to reduce in about half, reducing a lot of the traffic that would come up to campus as far as coal deliveries. Our plans right now are to obtain Town and City approvals for this project, start construction, hopefully in late February. Excavation primarily. Start with, with the project could be in service for the Winter 2009 -2010. Now, fortunately tonight we were at the City earlier this evening and did obtain final site - plan approval from the City. So, we'd like to have Project Manager Tim Peer kind of discuss the project in more detail and then we will answer any. questions you may have. Mr. Peer — So we were here for sketch plan on November 6th and we heard you on a couple of items. Number one being a couple of you wanted to, asked us to look real hard at getting some trees in the project and we did add, there is a landscaping plan in the packet that we submitted with a, we did add some pines that you guys, that we heard was desired out in that area, east of the project. So we added that, and also a couple of questions came up about noise and as we looked at some of the preliminary information that Jonathan put together, there was a memo there from the Environmental Review Committee about regarding noise. So, want to let you all know that we took noise very seriously on this project and it was addressed as part of SEQR where we hired an expert consultant to do a comprehensive analysis on noise and noise impacts and the Town of Ithaca has a zoning ordinance regarding noise and that analysis showed that we will be well below that noise limit that the Town requires. Board Member Erb — Did the Environmental Review Committee not have that evidence? Mr. Peer — I don't know. Mr. Kanter — I think they had the same materials that you had, basically. Board Member Hoffmann — I know that in the past, what has happened is the Environmental, or the Conservation Board, that this is, ERC is a committee of, often gets some papers fairly early and then there are changes or updates and they often make the comments before they have those changes or updates available. So that could have happened. It used to happen in the past, I don't know if it happens so much anymore, perhaps, but I know that has happened in the past. Ms. Brock — I also wanted to point out that we have no decibel limits in our noise ordinance, so I'm not quite sure what was meant by the statement that this project would operate within the limits of our noise ordinance. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 25 Mr. Peer — Yeah, we found in Ithaca Code, Section 270.55 which defines performance standards for light industrial zones, which we are part of, and it gave a specific decibel limit for light industrial... Ms. Brock — Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were referring to our noise ordinance specifically. You're talking about the performance criteria in the light industrial zone ... okay. Mr. Peer — Yes. We, there are a number of noise mitigation parts of this project so we're confident we will even beat those numbers. So I'll start if that's okay, and we'll just go a little bit through the site plan and some of the other material I brought you to get a better feel for the project. I will reference back and forth ... I have a couple of architectural renderings which are hard to show all at once so I will put that there for now because I want to reference back and forth, and we have some material samples we brought with us tonight also, because that was asked for. The, just walk real quickly through the project here, the plant expansion will be located right behind the existing central heating plant, built into the hill, fairly obscured, but, regardless, there will be, it will be visible from some viewpoints, so we have taken quite a bit of care, I think, to help soften the look of the building from an architectural perspective using industrial -style materials that are more appropriate for this project. The building itself has two primary elements. One is the plant expansion which houses the equipment, and the other one is a little office facility that's attached to it and that will provide new locker rooms for the plant staff and also office space. Outside of that plant expansion itself, there will be two emergency diesel generators that will be inside sound - attenuating enclosures. There is an aqueous ammonia storage and offloading facility and then also, between the central heating plant and the chilled water plant here, there is an air -cool condenser building. So those are the primary elements of the facility. Here we've shown, I have both a south and a west elevation here, so if we could grab the material samples there ... I don't have an architectural rendering of the air -cool condenser building, but we did sort of a colored engineered elevation of it and the brown - siding here is the siding we intend to use on the air -cool condenser and the siding, the profile and the color is consistent with the other sided elements in that area associated with the central heating plant. The plant expansion itself, we are going to go with a lighter, more silver -toned type siding with bronze trim around the windows, doors, etc. and the window glazing will be a coke -bottle green and 'I actually have a sample of that also. The sample that Ed is - holding up is actually a- frosted -sample because -some of those window elements will be over both male and female locker and shower rooms so they will have frosted glass and then it will just be insulated glass panels everywhere else. And then the stacks themselves are steel tube and that will be painted a light gray so as not to provide too much contrast against different weather conditions that we experience here in Ithaca. So what we will do, Ed and I will I'm going to do is go around in corner of Dryden Road and Hoy the before picture of Humphries and here is the after picture wher and the stacks. And so it's... PB 1/22/08 Pg. 26 do, is we'll hold up both the before and after and what a circle, around the facility, so this is taken from the Road, one of the main entrances to campus. This is Service Building, the central heating plant is behind it, e you will be able to see the top portions of the building Board Member Hoffmann — I have a question before you move on. What kind of pine is that beautiful big pine there that you see in the middle? Mr. Peer — I don't know. Board Member Hoffmann — Is that an (inaudible) by any chance? The kind that you're going to plant? Mr. Peer — We are planting white pine. Board Member Hoffmann — No, it says red pine. Mr. Peer — Is it red pine ... oh, I'm sorry ... yes, that is probably a red pine. The other trees that we're ... there are a few pine trees out back that we have to remove, those are red pines, so it's probably....l don't know... Board Member Hoffmann — You usually know what you are planting, but the drawing, which is called 6113 -2506 says "red pine". 1 just think that is a very beautiful one there in your photo and the photos are very helpful, by the way. Mr. Peer — Can you ask that question again ... yes, the trees were are planting are red pines, yes. Chairperson Howe — Right but she was asking about the one... Mr. Peer — Yes, I don't know. Do you want me to find out and .... it is a nice tree and it is in a nice place. It obscures the view. Going behind the plant, looking from the south side of the plant looking north, this is actually one of the primary viewpoints of the project. This is Maple Ave directly behind the project where the Maple Ave parking lot is located and then and after picture, again, you will see the stacks. This portion of the building is the air - intake plenum so this is the louvered area for the intake for the combustion turbines. And you will be able to see just the roofline of the office portion of that project. Moving just a bit further to the east, still on Maple Ave, just past the, this is a Plant Science research area - looking back on the project- and--there is not very many visible elements other than the stacks from that view. The skyline is why we have chosen a light gray. We shadowed the gray a little bit harder in these photo -sims to make sure they were visible. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 27 This location is actually about where the Ithaca Recreation Walkway terminates at Maple Ave. And so we went further down the Recreation Walkway right at the corner of where the old railroad trestle goes over. Pine Tree Road, yes, and so this is the before picture and we took this picture, we waited until we actually got some spoils disposal from the yard project that was approved last summer, because at that time Eva had asked about the profile of the hill and how that would be changing so this gives you a better idea about what's going on there. And so that's the before picture and in the after picture, of course it will be all returned to horse pasture, and you can see some of the red pines that we planted there ... the stacks are just visible and we also added in this rendering the third A -frame for the substation expansion that was part of that other site plan approval. Coming up on Campus, up on Kite Hill looking, this is a more elevated view looking more down on the projects and you can see that the facility is quite visible from that view. Over here the air -cool condenser is just barely visible above this one tree and that's the only view where that was really visible. Okay? Board Member Thayer — Excellent pictures. Board Member Erb — Yes, very nice. I wondered where the other stack was in that one, but... Mr. Peer — I wondered myself, and I questioned our consultant very hard that put this together and it just ... the views wrap around and it just happens to be that picture they are right on top of each other. So I have nothing else in my presentation, so, take it from there. Chairperson Howe — Well there are a number of issues that we know this does impact, are there some places that you want to spend some time particularly talking about? Any issues you want to make sure to talk about in more detail? George? Board Member Conneman — I think the pictures answer a lot of .... someone once said a picture is worth a thousand words, well, that's true. Chairperson Howe — Eva, any major things you... Board Member Hoffmann — I wanted to add, or ask, why they have specified what they have about the UNA, but I think in general, the things that I have been concerned about when I had read this through carefully, I feel that my concerns have been answered. There are explanations, and as well as the explanations you had given earlier, take care of my concerns. But, I wish the pages were numbered, again, they are not ... this is toward the end of the handout -we got, it is before-the-last part, which .is the_ hydrological analysis, and it's about three pieces of paper before that ... it's the open space recreation and critical environmental area impact. And it states "that there is the locally designated Unique Natural Area, the Cascadilla Gorge UNA, which is located to the north and west of the subject site." And I am sure there are parts of it to the north and west, but the way I think about it, most of it is located to the east of this site. That whole trail and the PB 1/22/08 Pg. 28 whole Cascadilla Creek that goes into the Town up to Game Farm Road is a UNA, part of that UNA, as I remember anyway. So I think you need to add to the east to that. And I know this is, you didn't prepare this probably, this is the... Everyone — It's on the Neg -Dec, we can't do anything to that... Board Member Hoffmann — Oh, all right. Well, maybe somewhere some statement could be added that you are aware that the UNA stretches to the east of this project as well. It doesn't have to be here maybe but... Mr. Peer — Yes we... Mr. Kanter - I think simply including that in the minutes of the meeting is fine. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. I just don't want it to be forgotten or not counted as part of the UNA. Mr. Peer — We are very well aware of it and we are working with folks at Cornell and Cornell Plantations in planning to make sure we minimize impacts in that area. Board Member Erb — I had a couple little clarifications where I wanted to know what the units of measurement were and I really wanted to talk about where the fill is going and how, the truck routing for that. Chairperson Howe — Okay. And we'll come back to that. Dan, is there anything you want to say about the stormwater management. I think you gave us a memo saying they're handling it... Mr. Walker — Yeah, they're handling it. It's a fairly small area underground filtration system to take care of the water quality. Chairperson Howe — Okay, Hollis, why don't you address... Board Member Erb — On this, this bit of material, on page three... Chairperson Howe — This is the supplemental information? They're using an Board Member Erb — Yeah, I get confused which is which .... no, it's not the supplemental. The supplemental is different... Mr. Kanter — It's the one date stamped December 5th? Board Member Erb It's page 3 of 8 ... you Ire talking about the retention pond around the -- aqueous storage .facility._...and -you _ say _it's_2Q,.0.00_and _you don't say it's 20,000 what ... is that in fact gallons so it greatly exceeds the 12,000 gallons of the... Mr. Peer — Yes, that is 20,000 gallons. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 29 Board Member Erb — Okay. Just wanted to know that for sure. Now, on the supplemental, where we have the nice picture of the lumen map ... I interpret this as a bird's -eye view as if the coal is placed at the zero spot, is that correct? Mr. Peer — Let me catch up to you... Chairperson Howe — Part of the Cooper lighting? Board Member Erb — Yes, part of the Cooper Lighting. Mr. Peer —Okay. Yup. Board Member Erb — Are we talking about lumins or foot candles, rather, at ground level or at five feet, where an eye would be, or what ... the lumen measurement is at what height above ground, first of all? Mr. Peer — Let me ask one of my colleagues... Board Member Erb — All right, because what I am about to say is if these grid numbers are kilometers, I hate your project, because there's ... what I think is that these are distance markers, as well, and they are not specified as to what distances they are. And so I would like some clarification on that grid picture, and I know it's marketing material given to you, but I'm interpreting it as zero is where the pole is and I would like to know what height off the grounds then the lumins are measured and when it moves out from the zero 1, 2, 4, I'd like to know whether that's feet, meters, miles... Chairperson Howe — And you don't have anyone here that can answer that ... Mr. Peer — No, we'll get an answer for you, but it ... the light complies with the Town of Ithaca law, so it is a sharp -cutoff fixture and it's, I think it's only a 150 watt bulb, so, it will not be a large light. Board Member Erb — Okay. I just looked at that grid, and when axis are not labeled, it makes it very difficult to interpret. Mr. Peer — Yeah, I just took the grid off the project, off their information website, and submitted it. Board Member Erb — Okay. The other thing I had is that the balance, or the imbalance between excavation and backfill is on the order of approaching 600 truckloads of fill that will have to go someplace? Where did I see that ... you had, again, on the supplemental material, on the very last page... Mr. -- Peer--_Y up, cut and- fill...- Board Member Erb — These are cubic yards... there's a 5,810 cubic yard that's not being backfilled ... and if I've been .... what is it ... one truck is how many cubic yards? ... 10ish... 10 ... that's approaching 600 truckloads going someplace, and I'd really like to know PB 1/22/08 Pg. 30 where they're going, whether they are going to be pulling into those intersections at peak traffic hours, and what route they're taking. Mr. Peer — All excavated material will be kept on -site on the spoils - disposal site that we indicated on the plans. No excavated material is leaving that vicinity at all. Board Member Erb — At all. Okay. I'm sorry, I did not pick that up when I read this and I was looking for it. So, you have adequate fill site for... Mr. Peer — The remainder of the spoils that will be generated, yes we do. Board Member Erb -- ... 6,000 cubic yards. Okay. Thank you. Those are my concerns. Chairperson Howe — Why don't you have a seat and we will open up the public hearing. We will open the public hearing at 8:26 p.m, for the Continuation of Prelimina >osed Cornell Universit, Site Plan A ombined Hea iI and Special Permit for the and Power Plant Pro Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this topic? There being no one. The public hearing was closed at 8:26p.m. Chairperson Howe — Jon, Mike... anything... Dan... anything that you would want us to ... Mr. Kanter — No, I outlined the issues that I went through when I reviewed the site plan and put those in my memo to the Board and there were just a few things that we were suggesting be carried over into the resolution of approval but other than that, I don't think we have anything else. Chairperson Howe — I think I have been a little concerned about noise, but I think that they've addressed that more and more and (inaudible, the sound system was doing something) but I am more comfortable with that. Is everyone comfortable with the planning schedule... good, good. Board Member Erb — Do we want to acknowledge their memorandum and point out to them that Susan Riha is also a member of the Board? Chairperson Howe — Yes. Hollis is referring to just the memorandum about full disclosure that some of us have relationship, work at Cornell, have worked at Cornell, and Susan Riha is not on there. So she is duly noted. Would someone like to move the resolution? ... moved by George ... is there a second... seconded by Hollis...all those in favor say aye... Mr. Kanter — Just one thing. We did receive the letter from the County Planning Department today and they had no problem with this. Chairperson Howe — Anyone opposed ... any abstentions... it's passed unanimously. I think your all set. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 31 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB Resolution No. 2008 - 007 Cornell University Combined Power & Heating Project Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit Tax Parcel No's. 63 -1 -5, 63 -1 -8.1 and 63 -1 -8.2 (Town) Central Heating Plant, Dryden Road Town of Ithaca Planning Board, January 22, 2008 Motion made by George Conneman, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS. 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Combined Heat and Power Plant project located to the south of the Central Heating Plant on Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63 -1 -5, 63 -1 -8.1 and 63- 1 -8.2, City of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 65 -3 -1.2 and 65- 3 -1.1, Light Industrial and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zones. The proposed main addition will occupy a footprint of approximately 18,000 square feet to house two combustion turbine generators which will be matched with dual - pressure heat recovery steam generators. The project will also include a new +/- 3,200 square foot employee support addition, two new emergency diesel generators, an aqueous ammonia storage facility, and other site improvements. The portion of the project within the LDR zone requires the issuance of a Special Permit for the modification of a facility that is part of an institution of higher learning. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Tim Peer, P.E., Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, acting as lead agency in coordinating the environmental review, has on November 6, 2007, made a negative determination of environmental significance, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on January 22, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate application materials, including "Project Information Submitted for Site Plan Review" for the "Cornell Combined Heat and Power Project (CCHPP), prepared by Cornell University Facilities Services, date stamped received December 5, 2007; "Site Plan Approval Documents — Supplemental Information, Cornell Combined Heat and Power Project", prepared by Cornell University Facilities Services, dated December 14, 2007; "Hydrologic Analysis for the Proposed Combined Heat and Power Project, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, Tompkins County", prepared by Cornell University, date stamped received December 5, 2007; a series of Site Plan Drawings, titled "Cornell Combined Heat and Power", with original dates of Oct. 07 and Dec. 07, all reissued for site plan approval dated Dec. 4, 2007 and prepared by GIE Niagara Engineering Inc., PC, including Drawings No, 6113 -2500, 6113 -25019 6113 -2503, 6113 -2505, 6113 -2506, 6113 -25081 6113 -2509, 6113 -2510, 6113- 2511, 6113 -2512; a series of Site Plan Drawings, titled "Cornell Combined Heat and Power, with original dates of Oct. 07 and Dec. 07, all reissued for site plan approval dated Dec. 13, 2007 and prepared by GIE Niagara Engineering Inc., PB 1/22/08 Pg. 32 PC, including Drawings No. 6113 - 2501 -A, 6113 -2502, 6113 -2504, 6113 -2507, 6113 -2514, and 6113 -2515; and other application materials, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Combined Heat and Power Plant project, as shown in the application materials referenced in "Whereas #3" above, subject to the following conditions to be accomplished prior to Final Site Plan Approval, unless otherwise noted: a. Obtaining any necessary variances from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, and b. Submission of evidence that the Ithaca City Fire Department has approved the adequacy of access to the site and building for fire and emergency service equipment, and c. Submission of any sign details to conform to all relevant sections of Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding "Signs ", and d. Submission of an operation and maintenance plan for the stormwater facilities, for review and approval of the Director of Engineering prior to issuance of any building permits, and e. Submission of all final site plan drawings showing all engineering details and construction specifications of all proposed structures, roads /driveways, water /sewer facilities, stormwater facilities and pond, and other improvements, including, but not limited to, specifications for water lines, including locations and descriptions of mains, valves, hydrants, appurtenances, etc., and profiles and specifications for sanitary sewers and storm drainage facilities, including locations and descriptions. of pipes, manholes, and other facilities, and each having the name and seal of each registered land surveyor, engineer, architect, or landscape architect who prepared any of the site plan materials, and f. Submission of documentation of all necessary approvals from county, state, and /or federal agencies prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy, and g. Submission of documentation from the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board that the necessary City of Ithaca approvals for the PB 1/22/08 Pg. 33 Cornell Combined Heat and Power Project have been granted, prior to the issuance of any building permits for construction over which the Town of Ithaca has jurisdiction, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants a Special Permit for the portion of the proposed Cornell University Combined Heat and Power Plant project located within the Low Density Residential Zone, as shown in the application materials referenced in "Whereas #3" above, determining that: 1. the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community, in harmony with the general purpose of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code and the specific purposes, are being promoted, and 2a being an educational use, the premises are legislatively deemed to be reasonably adapted to the proposed use, and such educational use is legislatively deemed to fill a neighborhood or community need, and 3. the proposed use and the location and design of proposed structures are consistent with the character of the district in which they are located, and 4, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate neighboring property or seriously inconvenience neighboring inhabitants, and 5, the presumed benefit of the proposed expansion of the educational use outweighs any objectionable impacts of operations in connection with the proposed educational use regarding noise, fumes, vibrations, illumination, or other public nuisance, and 6, community infrastructure and services are of adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed use, and 7, the proposed use, facility design, and site layout comply with all of the provisions of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code, subject to obtaining any necessary variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals, and to the extent considered by the Planning Board, with other regulations of the Town, and with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan, and 8, the proposed access and egress for all structures and uses is safely designed and the site layout provides adequate access for emergency vehicles, and 9. the presumed benefit of the proposed expansion of the educational use - outweighs any detrimental effects upon the community as a whole, and 10, the lot area and access are sufficient for the proposed use, and PB 1/22/08 Pg. 34 11. natural surface water drainage is adequately managed in accordance with good engineering practices, and existing drainage ways are not altered in a manner that adversely affects other properties, and 12, to the extent reasonably deemed relevant by the Planning Board, the proposed use or structure complies with all the criteria applicable to site plan review set forth in the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Mr. Wilson — Our plan is to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals on January 28th. We have a height restriction, a sprinkler restriction, we're looking for, and we would like to be back on the 51h of February for final approval. Mr. Kanter — That depends on a lot of things as we are balancing all of the different things coming before the Board. I think there were just a couple of things that would need to be addressed. Besides the variances, we did need an actual letter from the Fire Department, and the sign details... there may not be any sign, so if there aren't, that's fine. And otherwise, any site details ... we didn't really talk about anything that needed to be addressed further tonight so we should be okay there. Everything else is not prior to final site -plan approval, so ... just documentation from the City of their approval, that's basically all we would need. Mr. Wilson — Well we'd appreciate your consideration on having us on the 5th of February. Thank you. Board Member Erb — I'm surprised they didn't ask to be on following the public hearing for the Athletics and Events Center .... (laughter)..I Approval of Minutes Chairperson Howe — Approval of minutes of December 18th ... is there a motion to approve those minutes... moved by Larry, seconded by Hollis... all those in favor say aye ... any abstentions... okay. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 008 Minutes of December 18, 2007 --Town of Ithaca_Planning_Board January 22, 2008 MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Hollis Erb. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 35 WHEREAS: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from December 18, 2007, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on December 18, 2007. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Chairperson Howe — Okay. And moving on to approve the January 8, 2008 minutes ... a motion ... moved by Eva, seconded by Hollis ... all those in favor ... any abstentions ... no.,. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 009 Minutes of January 8, 2008 Town of Ithaca Planning Board January 22, 2008 MOTION made by Eva Hoffmann, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from January 8, 2008, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on January 8, 2008. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer and Erb Nays: None Absent: Wilcox and Riha The motion was carried unanimously. Other Business Chairperson Howe — I sent around an email ... you may have already heard or seen it before, but there is a workshop next Wednesday if anyone is interested on Complete Streets. They will be talking about making room for pedestrians, bicyclists, transusers, it's at 4:00 in Ithaca City Hall. Is any Staff going? PB 1/22/08 Pg. 36 Mr. Kanter — I'm not sure ... weIre so busy... Chairperson Howe — Another thing that ... you know, I don't really want us to go into a lot of detail since Fred and Susan aren't here, but at some point, I would really appreciate us to have and I am going to send out some thoughts, just a discussion about balancing the things that we have to do has a Board. So we want to be efficient with our time but we don't want to shortcut the discussion and dialogue that we need to have happen as well, but we certainly want to be proactive in getting some input early on in the processes as well as the public hearings, so, you know, I don't know if we've ever really talked about how do we conduct our meetings so that we are making good use of our time as well as applicants' times and moving through deliberations as well as we can. So, I just wanted to put that on the table. I think it might become more important because I think that Staff has always been able to spend a lot if time sort of prepping us for these meetings and I'm not sure ... I think because of some other issues that they are going to have to focus on, we may get less hand - holding than we've had in the past. Jonathan, do you want to say anything about that. Mr. Kanter — Well, of course the big project is the Comprehensive Plan update and at this point, I mean, we just have no idea how much time that's going to involve but I know it's going to be a lot and so, you know, our plan is to keep doing what we've been doing to the extent that we can and to provide as much assistance to the Board as possible in these reviews. I've kind of just thought to myself over time, that Staff does put huge amounts of time into these development reviews, sometimes I think maybe too much, compare to all the other things we do. I know it's important stuff and you're talking about efficiency of meetings and I would just kind of suggest to the Board members that some of that really needs to be taken on by the Board itself in terms of efficiency, reviewing materials, so, you know, I think by a combination of the Staff continuing to do what we've always done, but perhaps maybe not quite as much, and the Board, you know, really trying to focus on key issues ... I know a lot of the details that some of you go through are really important and obviously you catch things that Staff doesn't even catch and that's a good thing, but, you know, I think coming in to the meetings, for all of us, Staff as well as Board members, as organized and as prepared as possible really is a big part of the efficiency factor. So, regardless of how much we pre- review for the Board, I think it's still incumbent upon the Board members themselves to really be as familiar with the projects as possible beforehand and ... you know ... but we'll continue to prep the applicants as much as we can and you can see the varying results ... you know, some do better than others in terms of there preparation, so... Chairperson Howe — So, I don't know, if maybe at some meeting we'll have some extra time and we can have ... I'd rather wait until we have Susan and Fred here, but, would people find that valuable to talk about, so we would have time to talk about how do we interact with one another.. how do we balance all of these things that we have to do at a meeting and move forward in a timely fashion ... so, I'll email out some thoughts that I had ... I don't know if it's a separate meeting kind of thing ... I think it's just as we have time, to just keep moving forward ... I guess it's a good time to experiment since we've shaken things up a little bit and Fred's not the Chair, so it's always good to experiment with different ways of doing things when you've had a change. So I just wanted to put that out there. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 37 Board Member Hoffmann — No, I think that's great, and actually, way back, there were times when we would get together... sometimes maybe there were problems involved in doing it because we were a Board and we didn't have a public meeting, I think we weren't quite aware that we weren't supposed to be getting together and discussing Town matters ... It was very useful for practical things like this and you know, one of the things that I think, I wonder sometimes, when we get new members, whether there are certain basic duties of the Planning Board that are listed on a sheet of paper that we give to the new members so they know, for instance, that we're expected to read all the papers, we're expected to go out and look at the sites, we're expected to read the minutes ... you know, all those things... Board Member Thayer — That is all down in black and white. Chairperson Howe — The answer is yes. Board Member Hoffmann — Does everybody get that? Board Member Thayer — oh yeah. Board Member Hoffmann — Good. Sometimes I wonder. Board Member Erb — I don't remember getting that. Mr. Kanter — Alright, maybe-we were deficient... Ms. Neilsen — You had on- the -job training... Mr. Kanter — In the past ... maybe we screwed up this time ... but we normally give new, members materials from the Department of State, all kinds of things... Board Member Thayer — I know way back in the old building, I got a pile like that (hands tall) when I first came aboard. Board Member Erb — I got the Town Comprehensive Plan and I got the color map of the zoning areas. Mr. Kanter — You should, if you don't have it we could still get you one, because there's a really nice publication put out by the Department of State on the role and functions of Planning Boards. Board Member Erb — I would read it. Chairperson Howe — I just want to make sure... something that Eva said .... if we ever wanted to get together and just talk about how we work together, I don't think...) think you can do that right? Because you're not talking about an application before you. ..so I think... Ms. Brock — You're talking about how you'll conduct your meetings? PB 1/22/08 Pg. 38 Chairperson Howe — And just.:.yeah ... trying to find techniques. I think you could do that... Ms. Brock — No, I think that would still be considered business of the Planning Board and that should be done in open session at an open meeting. Mr. Kanter -- However, there's no reason the Board couldn't, for instance, set up a special working meeting to do that. It would still be advertised but, you know, it's not likely you would get a lot of people attending it. Chairperson Howe — Well, we'll see... I think we might be able to do this around the edges but we'll keep that in mind. Board Member Erb — One thing that's become real obvious and again, it's another thing for Staff to help us with, but, to the extent that you prep applicants... we saw it again tonight ... if someone had just, before they made all their copies, gone through and put a big #1, #21 #3 on all the addenda pages so that we could all immediately just go, okay, page 14 ... that would have saved a lot of paper rustling and focused attention in the discussions. Mr. Kanter — Sometimes we don't even get them soon enough to be able to suggest that. In this case, it was a quick turnaround... Board Member Erb — No, I mean, if, in general statements you make to them, if there is any little pattern or anything you have on the website of advice to applicants... Mr. Kanter — No, and I don't think we're going to have much time to spend on actually doing something like that in the near future... Board Member Erb — No, I'm not suggesting you guys do it. Mr. Kanter — You're saying something on our website.. I Board Member Erb — Anything like that, I don't know... Mr. Kanter — But I'm saying there isn't anything and I don't know how we would put something on... Board Member Erb — Okay. I didn't know ... I'm just saying, when you prep applicants who are going to come in with stuff like this, if those pages had had a big, one -inch high number on one corner, every one, that just, 1,2,3,4.... Mr. Kanter — Again, let me get back to, you know, the Board's responsibility itself, I mean, -there are certain things - that -we as Staff just can't spend the time on and if you have ... because not every one of you are going to look at things the same way. Eva will have her things, some of you may not agree with them at all ... if you have certain set things that you think should happen during you know, a pre - package of a formatting or whatever, I mean, you also, in many cases have dialogues with applicants before they PB 1/22/08 Pg. 39 come in to you, so, it shouldn't just be up to Staff to put these things forth to applicants... Board Member Conneman — But I agree with Hollis, because it's like bringing in samples of materials. We made that point as a Board and now they do it, and if you say to them, "the Board looks down upon people who don't put their ... bring their samples..." Mr. Kanter — You shouldn't say it that way. You should say "the Board looks very favorably upon those who do bring ... " ... (laughter)... but it's certainly not a requirement... Board Member Conneman — But it seems to me that that is a very important thing which took us several years to get to but they do bring them in. (talking over)....and numbering pages. If you have ... Ithaca College numbered most of their pages, I give them credit for that... Board Member Erb — No, well, you were talking about efficiency and I'm thinking of efficiency at this meeting, a lot of time was wasted in paper rustling going trying to get everybody on the same page because we had no idea what page it was. That's what l was saying. Mr. Kanter — Not to put anyone down, but sometimes it happens the other way too where a Board Member will refer to something and not be clear where or exactly what it is they're referring to, so.... Chairperson Howe — The other thing I wanted to mention, I know there is questions about the Town Planning Committee. So one of the things that we are doing, Jon, Herb and I are going to try and meet on some regular basis just to start sharing information. We're meeting for the first time this Friday afternoon, but I think that at that meeting I am going to ask Herb if someone can come in and meet with us and talk more about that Planning Committee. I believe that it's Will who's Chair of that Committee, so, Board Member Thayer — As per your quote in the paper... Chairperson Howe — I haven't seen ... I haven't read it... Board Member Thayer — The Ithaca Times, yeah... Chairperson Howe — So, anyway, the goal is for open communications but I know there are questions about that Planning Committee so I'll talk to Herb about that when we meet on Friday, and then we can make that happen. Agenda Mr. Kanter — Well, possibly the Heating Plant back for final. This Weidemeyer fill site on Burns and Slaterville Road that we mentioned to you over the past couple of months with the violation in terms of the fill that was loaded onto the site and how that affected the approved subdivision. PB 1/22/08 Pg. 40 Chairperson Howe — So what can we do, I mean isn't it more ... trying to enforce what somebody didn't do what they were supposed to do? Mr. Kanter — It's that, but it's also reclaiming the site using the fill - permit provisions of our ordinance to try to get that to happen. It's also happening through the DEC stormwater and erosion control permit process, the SWPP, because they were in violation of SWPP. Mr. Walker — they violated the SWPP by extending the excavated area over a larger area than was originally shown and it's got to come to this Board at some point because I think it's over 2,500 cubic yards or disturbance and if it's over 2,500 it's got to get a referral from this Board before the ZBA can issue a fill permit, plus it's in the conservation zone, the, for the Six Mile Creek area and this Board may want to see it restored back to it's original condition, which ... Those are all issues that we wanted to bring it back here. I mean, it's amazing what you can do with a D8 in a couple of days. Mr. Kanter — And then we have ... there's a proposed local law to allow bed - &- breakfast facilities in the Eco Village special land -use district so the Town Board has referred that to the Planning Board. Now, we have actually gotten a preliminary draft scoping document for the Holochuck Homes subdivision. The, formerly known as Cayuga Cliffs. They have been in and we did the pos -dec requiring the environmental impact statement and they have now put together a draft scoping document which Staff is going to review first and then at some point we will refer that on to the Planning Board for discussion and possible acceptance. That may end up being the second February meeting but that depends on how complete it is at this point. Board Member Erb — Does that draft scoping document include the new sort of overlay of how many 7 -acre building lots there really are to indicate... Mr. Kanter — Haven't looked at enough yet to know that. Board Member Erb — Okay. But I mean, is it appropriate for this stage? Because that drives a lot of the rest of it. How many units they can have is driven, if I understand it correctly, by how many potential 7 -acre building lots there are, right? Mr. Kanter — There definitely will be something, there will need to be something, whether it's in there now or not, I don't know, but there will have to be something about the density and number of units proposed in the development, how that was determined, and probably alternatives that would include some other numbers of units under different scenarios. So yeah, those things will have to be in there. Board Member Erb — I think_tha_that's_ going to drive a lot of the_discussion. From my t__ point of view, that's going to drive a lot of the discussion. Mr. Kanter — So, you'll get a chance to look at that pretty soon. Chairperson Howe — Is that it Jonathan? PB 1/22/08 Pg. 41 Mr. Kanter — Then there are a couple of things for February 19th. So we'll tentatively have the public presentation for the Athletic & Event Center. There's a demolition proposal for the Courtside Fitness Center. We've got a recommendation on the sign variance for the Ithaca Childcare Center up on Warren Road and we'll be providing, and depending on how much time there is, maybe a short overview of our 2007 Annual Report that we typically do for the Board. Probably not the kind of thing we have to spend too much time on, but it's always good to look back on the year and see what happened. Chairperson Howe — Anything else? Board Member Erb - I understand that a lot of behind - the - scenes work is being done for the review of the Town's Comprehensive Plan, but have you any idea when meetings are going to actually start? Mr. Kanter — I'll be talking to the Chair of that committee, Mr. Engman, to figure that out ... it's probably going to ... I think he wants to start them up within the next couple of weeks... Chairperson Howe — And you're our representative from... Board Member Erb — Well, I think I am because Jon said I was, but, I don't know for sure that I am... Mr. Kanter — That's because I was at the Town Board meeting where they did appoint you... Board Member Erb — Okay. Well I must be... Chairperson Howe — You haven't had any notice.... Board Member Erb — I had a prior phone call testing the water, but I had no, I did not know until Jon said I was ... If Jon said I am then... Mr. Kanter — Unless I was hallucinating at that meeting, which... Chairperson Howe — Anything else? Board Member Conneman — I won't be here next, on the 5th. I'll be here on the 19th Chairperson Howe — Actually somebody mentioned to me ... I don't drive by that part of town that often, but, the hotel that's being built up past Ithaca College ... that it's taking a long time ... Do we know what's going on there? Mr. Kanter —Well, not much. Mr. Walker — Well, it's been painful. They started construction and then I think they changed construction managers or they ran out of ... they didn't have money ... they did a foundation, everything froze ... they had to redo the foundation... we've had terrible time PB 1/22/08 Pg. 42 getting them to maintain the site, sediment/erosion control. They've gone through a couple of different site contractors. They've gone through several project managers, site superintendents or building superintendents. They've had some issues with building codes and inspections... this past weekend, as cold as it was, they were furiously planting trees and seeding and mulching so they could come up to speed on their sediment and erosion control so that the building inspector could go back in and start doing inspections again. So it has not been a good plan for someplace... I've had my reservation for spring of 2006 1 think they promised me a room. Board Member Conneman — I saved the flyers that say they are going to open in the spring... Mr. Walker — And the coupon is in the phone book, but they are coming around, I think... Board Member Conneman — Mr. Monkemeyer, has he ... you know... Jonathan, he was so ... personable... Board Member Thayer — On the Plaza... Board Member Erb — On the Plaza and then came in with the... Board Member Conneman — on the Plaza and then everything and we haven't heard a thing... Mr. Kanter — So far, no. Although, should we mention the building permit... Mr. Walker — I could, briefly ... he's had a building permit for that Russo Garden Center in effect since 2005 1 believe, and he has basically done no work on that. The foundation was partially built and is deteriorating. So he's applied to extend the building permit and we are in the process of denying that in the Code Enforcement section. Board Member Erb — Where is that? Mr. Kanter — The same site as the shopping center... Mr. Walker — It's the same site but he's .... the extension of the building permit is being denied because he has not followed the Town rules according to that and State building code, so... Mr. Kanter — And that the foundation itself has now deteriorated beyond the point where it would serve a useful purpose really. Mr. Walker — So I am sure we will be hearing from Mr. Monkemeyer shortly. Board Member Hoffmann — But I think there have been other projects before these two where he has gotten quite far along and then he just hasn't done anything. He's dropped it, it seems, and came up with another idea for something else. I don't understand why...but. PB 1/22/08 P& 43 Chairperson Howe — Is there a motion to adjourn? Mr. Walker. — I've got one little thing if you don't mind. On this January 30th in the Northeast we are going to have a public meeting to solicit comments about localized drainage problems in the Northeast. So, you're not quite there, it's not even your neighborhood, we're not worried about Forest Home. But if anyone here wants to spread the word that we are going to have a public meeting at 7:00 at the Northeast School. I was hoping Susan Riha would be here tonight so I could get some contacts to ensure that, but, just, any Planning Board members are welcome to come here. It's specifically more for localized drainage problems. It's not related to the stormwater plans for the proposed development or anything along that line, but, the Town Board and the Public Works Committee has decided that with all the concerns that people had with localized drainage problems, wet basements, swampy yards, dead trees, that it would be good to get a good inventory on that and we are going to be doing, in February a mailing to all the properties in the area. So George, you will get a letter with a survey in it asking for people to identify problems that they have. Chairperson Howe — I forget, when does the moratorium end? Mr. Kanter — June something and at a recent Town Board meeting where the consultants came to report their interim report, the consultants did recommend that they think the study should actually extend through the summer season so they were initially recommending an extension of the moratorium. And the Conservation Board just passed a resolution on to the Town Board recommending the extension of the moratorium to do that. Board Member Erb — Which consultants are these? Are these the ones that... Mr. Kanter — LeCain Environmental... Board Member Erb — The same ones from before? Ms. Brock — No. Mr. Kanter — The consultants that the Town hired specifically to look at the ecological values of the area. Board Member Conneman — It's better to do it and do it right than make a decision. Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah and everybody on the Conservation Board felt that it would be much more valuable if you had a survey that covered all four seasons instead of just a couple of seasons or even just three seasons. Upon motion the, meeting adjourned at 8:56 p.m. Respec4lly submitted by Paulette Neilsen Deputy Town Clerk PB 1/22/08 Pg. 44 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday January 22, 2008 AGENDA ':00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 1:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: 2 -Lot Subdivision, 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road. 1:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to legalize an existing 2 -lot subdivision located at 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 38 -3 -11.1 and 38 -3 -11.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 3 acre property into two lots, both with existing residences. The property abuts Buttermilk Falls State Park. The northernmost lot has insufficient lot depth (200 feet required, 187 +/- feet provided).- -Both lots meet all of -the other -requirements of the LDR Zone. The deeds for the lots were recorded in the County Clerk's Office without receiving the necessary Town subdivision approval. Anthony Ingraham and Elizabeth L. Bauman, Frederick J. Manzella and Francine T. Spadafora Manze.11a, Owners /Applicants. 7:10 P.M. Continuation of the determination of adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed Ithaca College Athletic and Events Center located on the eastern side of the Ithaca College campus near the Coddington Road campus entrance, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 41 -1 -30.2, 41 -1 -11, 41 -1- 12.2, 41 -1 -24, and 42- 1 -9.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of +/- 300,000 square feet of indoor athletic facilities including an indoor 200M track with practice /game field, Olympic size pool and diving well, tennis courts, rowing center, gymnasium, strength and conditioning center, and floor space for large.indoor events: Outdoor facilities include a lighted artificial turf field, a 400M track with open space for field events, and lighted tennis courts. The project is proposed in several phases and will also include the construction of +/- 1,002 parking spaces (687 displaced spaces and 315 new spaces), relocating overhead power lines, constructing a new loop road, walkways, access drives, stormwater management facilities, lighting and landscaping. The Planning Board may also consider scheduling a public hearing regarding the DEIS. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Agent. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Combined Heat and Power Plant project located to the south of the Central Heating Plant on Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63 -1 -5, 63 -1 -8.1 and 63- 1 -8.2, City of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 65 -3- 1.2 and 65- 3 -1.1, Light Industrial and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zones. The proposed main addition will occupy a footprint of approximately 18,000 square feet to house two combustion turbine generators which will be matched with dual - pressure heat recovery steam generators. The project will also include a new +/- 3,200 square foot employee support addition, two new emergency diesel generators, an aqueous ammonia storage facility, and other site improvements. The portion of the project within the LDR zone requires the issuance of a Special Permit for the modification of a facility that is part of an institution of higher learning. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of this Type I action, issued a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for this project on November 6, 2007. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Tim Peer, P.E., Agent. 6. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 7. Approval of Minutes: December 18, 2007 and January 8, 2008, 8. Other Business: 9, Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday January 22, 2008 By direction of the Chairperson 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, January 22, 2008, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to legalize an existing 2 -lot subdivision located at 368 & 370 Stone Quarry Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 38 -3- 11.1 and 38 -3 -11.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 3 acre property into two lots, both with existing residences. The property abuts Buttermilk Falls State Park. The northernmost lot has insufficient lot depth (200 feet required, 187 +/- feet provided). Both lots meet all of the other requirements of the LDR Zone. The deeds for the lots were recorded in the County Clerk's Office without receiving the necessary Town subdivision approval. Anthony Ingraham and Elizabeth L. Bauman, Frederick J. Manzella and Francine T. Spadafora Manzella, Owners /Applicants. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Combined Heat and. Power Plant project located to the south of the Central Heating Plant on Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63 -1 -5, 63 -1 -8.1 and 63- 1 -8.2, City of Ithaca Tax Parcel No "s 65 -3 -1.2 and 65- 3 -1.1, Light Industrial and Low Density Residential (LDR) Zones. The proposed main addition will occupy a footprint of approximately 18,000 square feet to • house two combustion turbine generators which will be matched with dual - pressure heat recovery steam generators. The project will also include a new +/- 3,200 square foot employee support addition, two new emergency diesel generators, an aqueous ammonia storage facility, and other site improvements. The portion of the project within the LDR zone requires the issuance of a Special Permit for the modification of a facility that is part of an institution of higher learning. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of this Type I action, issued a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for this project on November 6, 2007. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Tim Peer, P.E., Agent, Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matter or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, 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. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, January 14, 2008 Publish: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 Wednesday January 16;.20081 THE ITHACAiOI`1RNAL- TOWNOF ITHACA PLANNING= BOARD. _.' NOTICEAF +.; PUBUC HEARING Tuesday, January 22,;.2008 7.301..:P.M.,."Considera- ,By direction of ifie�Chair- )° tion . of..Preliminary Site.' person of the .;Planning Plan Approval, and Special 11 Board, NOTICE,;;IS HERE.I! Permit ;tor the "proposed: �BY ;- ,GIVEN that Public` Cornell;' - University. Com biped ,.'Heat +and Power. Hearings will :be `held .by " t the<Plannmg .Board of the Plant. project. located .to.the Town of Ithaca on,, Tues , } Lsouth of„ the Central He'dt- day, "'.Janus ..y +, 22, ° Sing Plpnl:on Dryden Rood; 20081 at 215 North T:o= Town of Ithaca Jai Parcel :r,l No s 1 '6315 `,63-1-8.1: ya Street; Ithaca N Y at ` ' Jand 63 =1.8 2 City -of Itha T6 following timestandtion r Ica Tax' Parcel No.'s 653' the following matters l 2 and.65 -3 1 1., .Light In:', to leg "olize an existing 2-lot icon will „occupy'a footprint subdivision located at 368,E :of approximately) 18,000 8370 Stone Quarry' jsquareleet'to house-two: Road, Town of1thac6 Tax- jcombustion turbine, genera Parcel Nos ',.,'38-.3--11' 1. fors w m hich .will be atched ond,383I1 2 Low Densr : with duaGpreswre heat�re -` 41 y Residential Zones The ,covery' °steam ggeneratojs. proposul.mvolves s`ubdiwd Thes'pr'oject will.also in mg the, ± / 3 acre property,; �clude.,a new +/•'3,2001 into two lots, both wdhh.ez I quare.:Foot employee sup- fisting - residences:' The;, uport' -,addition, -2two new. Property abuts -Buttermilks emergency'diesel_;genera, Falls State-Park:'-'The north ,tors,. an aqueous ammonia ernino5t.1ot has in"sufficient' °storaq4'`faciliy; -dnd other' lot .'depth 200' feet re- " :, site improvements. ' -The' Sul 4A 'Feet pro Portion ;of the, project with;, vided).' < Both lots `meet all' ` in ih6. :-.LDR., zone requires ;of, the.:other',requirements lthe issuance -of -o Special` of .the LDR Zone The * ,Permit for. the modification deeds .for the_ lots_ w,ere;re;= ;of a 'facility, that is part -of`! corded' m the `Count',- an institution -of� :higher.. Clerk's; `Office- without re• rt �Iearriing: The NYS- Depart ceiving the + ,necessary j 'ment of Environmental .Town. subdivision appro- Conservghori; :acting as val., ', Anthony, ;Ingraham . 1Lead Agency in the envi land Elizabeth -_ L: •:Bauman; i ronmental review of this `Frederick J. ManA116 and :' tType h'achon,' issued a �Fiancine T Spadafora Wegatrve Declaration • of IManzella Owners/ Apply;' �Environmental - Significance, cants.; , ..� `•_ for'this.pr"oI'ect . on Novemn tber 6, 2007: Cornell, Uni -' iveisiy,: _Owner /Applicant TWPeer „P.E.,',Ageni.• '- i Said: ^Planning'Board will tat,- rswid ' time ;,and said ;place' heaF ='dll persons in ,,Mace' of: --such ;matter or. bring timpairmennr. -,or.y tier' special, needs;, wilt? :.'' :prov_ided- `with- assis -'' nce •cis-necessary,- ,_uponµ quest. -. Persons desmng sistamo must'make such requestl;not.les's.than 48 iurs• prior to 'the time of publkjhearing: inathan Kanter, AICP DiriDaorof.Planning 273-1747 - oited:'Monday; Januarryy 14,•2008 iblisl% Wednesday Januaiify.1 2008. Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street January 22 2007 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name bj �' s d /n r Address JL4 CS 40", C��L C� it u jA U�v too l°C Oq e Lf lic 4.�c cc,' ��haGc, C6 i z Cold V .4 y�Z 4 3F7V -2 ptin TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Sandra Polce, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Public Hearings to be Hall. 2 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. anm We N Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio ag Street. Date of Posting Date of Publication: January 14, 2008 January 16, 2008 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 16`h day of January 2008. l otary Public JUDITH C. DRAKE Notary Public, State of New York No. 01 DR6084358 Qualifiec in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 2, 20XL