Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2011-07-05FILE �(� k/r/. DATE � TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, July 5, 2.011 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Hollis Erb, Linda Collins, George Conneman, John Beach, Jon Bosak Staff Present: Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Christine Balestra, Planner Call to Order Ms. Erb called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Cornell University Monopole located off Dryden Road (NYS Route 366) behind the fleet garage, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves the construction of a 140 +/- foot tall monopole to accommodate at least four separate cellular antenna arrays. The project will also involve security fencing, several equipment shelters and concrete pads, a gravel access area, and a geothermal well field to cool and heat one of the equipment shelters. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Thomas P. LiVigne, Agent. Tom LiVigne gave an overview of the project. The structure, which will more likely be 134 feet tall, will house the three cellular carriers that are now on the water tower. The water tower is slated to come down on December 16, 2012, but they would like to take it down in February because that's when the ground is really hard. The current tower is 110 feet high. The cell towers feeding into the three antennas limit where the monopole can be located. The easiest thing to do would be to put the monopole on a building, but that would be problematic because all of the buildings in the area are slated for roof work, and Cornell's contract with the carriers allows them to move the towers only once at the carriers' cost. They eliminated the current tower site and another possible site because of cost and visibility factors. The evaluation criteria for the site were: • the availability of coverage • the aesthetic impact on campus • the height of the tower • the ability to accommodate the geothermal well field • municipal regulations. They chose the Plantation site because it is the least visible, it fits the tower footprint, and it accommodates the geothermal well field. There is no view of the tower from the houses in Forest Home. The only place in Varna from which the tower can be seen is the Fox Bridge. Residents of the apartments in the immediate vicinity of the tower will be able to see it. All photos were taken when the leaves were off the trees. The Board requested more photos of the site from areas in Forest Home and Varna. Mr. Bosak suggested putting all the views online or on a CD so Cornell doesn't have to print all the photos for all of the Board members. Ms. Ritter said the staff would need a copy of the photos for the official file and some Board members might want them printed out. Ms. Erb suggested they print out a limited selection of photos that the Board will most likely want to discuss at a meeting. PB Minutes 07 -05 -2011 Page 2 of 3 Ms. Erb asked if Cornell can be required to save trees located on other Cornell property that impede the view of the tower. Staff was of the opinion that this might be a problem if the property the trees are on is a separate tax parcel. It's a question for Ms. Brock. Ms. Erb stated that if the view is protected specifically because of those trees, she'd like Cornell to commit to saving them, even if they're not legally required to do so. Mr. LiVigne responded that this is old growth forest that is part of the Plantations and that Cornell is committed to protecting these valuable trees, unless the wind takes them or they become diseased. Mr. LiVigne said that the tower is sized for four companies, and the last company may be Cornell for their emergency services. Regarding color, the Board agreed that the tower should be light grey. To a question from Ms. Collins regarding possible noise associated with the complex, Mr. LiVigne responded that the only noise will come from the air conditioning systems that cool the buildings, and that the noise would travel only up to 50 yards. Ms. Erb would like evidence that the noise is unlikely to be heard at the nearest residences on Game Farm Road, Route 366, and Fairway Drive. Ms. Erb noted that there is some contention over emergency generators at the Animal Health Diagnostic Center. She requested information about noise production: how often generators will be tested, what time of day they will be tested, when and if they will be used, and what kind of baffling material will be around them. Ms. Erb noted that drilling for geothermal will leave some volume of materials on the surface, and that she would prefer it to be left on site as long as it is not unsightly. Ms. Balestra asked the Board if they would want an inventory report of other cell towers in the general area. She said that Ms. Brock is of the opinion that the Board should consider such a requirement. Ms. Balestra also asked if the Board will want to see propagation studies. The Board agreed that they would like studies with the current location, the new location, and no location (to show gaps that would occur if the antennas were not there). AGENDA ITEM Discussion of a Traffic Impact Education Session for Planning Board Members Ms. Erb wanted to make clear that the table she created was her attempt at getting all the data into one table. She is not wedded to any of those pieces or to the format; she simply wanted to start the process of establishing a generic table the Board can require applicants to use. Mr. Conneman wants to take a different approach, because he doesn't think the table tells him anything. He wants to understand what traffic engineers count and how and when they count it. He complained that engineers sometimes use books put together for another city like Columbus, OH, and say it's just like Ithaca. Ms. Ritter explained that for traffic counts, they actually do go out and count cars, but it's often just a snapshot of one day, not several days, during the two two -hour peak periods. The Board discussed the types of meaningful information they would like to be considered in a traffic study and questions they'd like addressed. PB Minutes 07 -05 -2011 Page 3 of 3 Mr. Beach thought the impact of construction should be taken into account and wondered how the times and days of a traffic study are selected. Mr. Bosak stated that it sometimes seems that traffic methodology is an instrument or tool for getting development to happen. Ms. Collins would like curb cuts to be considered, citing the back entrance out of Greenstar: if a driver in the traffic stream allows a car to pull in front of him or her out of the parking lot, everyone behind needs to wait through another traffic light. She suggested looking into the possible creative ways other communities have come up with to determine traffic impacts. Mr. Bates suggested monitoring off -peak hours in addition.to peak hours. Mr. Bosak noted that Susan Brock advised the Board that they can create traffic study requirements for applicants as long as the rules are in place in advance of a specific project. He suggested that the Planning Board first hold an informational session where one or more experts educate Board members about traffic studies, then form a subcommittee to draft a straw proposal to address specific details. Ms. Erb said that Bruce Brittain's list has eight or ten items she cares about more than others. What are the shoulders of the road? Instead of just the traffic stream, she wants to know about the trucks, buses, and bicycles. She wants to know delays for pedestrians crossing the street and delays for local traffic. Some of Mr. Brittain's points are taken into account when the speed is set. Ms. Erb summed up the discussion: the Board would like an information session open to the public, possibly on a meeting night where there isn't much on the agenda. It's too late to impose new rules on the projects already underway, such as Carrowmoor and the Cornell Linac, but the Board can insist on presentation. AGENDA ITEM Other Business Ms. Ritter encouraged possibly canceling the meeting of July 19th. There's only one small item on the agenda, which might be postponed. Adjournment Upon motion by Beach, the meeting adjourned at 8:26 p.m. Respectfully submitted, (Z 'LL — , " (( � D�_� - Jeb-ra DeAugis ' eputy T w Clerk Generic Transportation Questions draft 5 25 it from HNE Hi, Jon. For your perusal, and as follow- through to our conversation Monday 5/23. 1 look forward to your comments am NOT wedded to having all the capacity data on the table, because I still do not think that we understand those —but I wanted to see if we could get most of what we considered at the Board during HH discussion within a table. 1. What is the effect of increasing the growth rate on the difference in seconds of delay (at intersections) between the no -build and build scenarios? (Le., will the "build seconds of delay" increase or will it decrease with increased background growth ?) 2. Can we copy the output from typical traffic - analysis software to a spreadsheet program (e.g., Excel)? 3. Is there any good reason that the applicant cannot provide the differences in seconds of delay between the no -build and build scenarios? 4. What are the interpretations of the numbers and letter scores provided in intersection - capacity analysis? 5. Is there any good reason that the applicant cannot provide the differences in % of capacity between the no- build and build scenarios? 6. What methods exist for calculating the total driver time to get through a designated set of intersections (given a specified direction or route of travel)? [i.e., how can we calculate the time from the approach to the first intersection (including any waiting time there) to exiting the last intersection in the set ?] 7. Is there an industry- recognized term or name for a set of intersections in series? The draft generic example table is on the next page, Jon. From: Bruce Brittain (mailto:bruceb2 @mindspring.com] Sent: Sunday, July 03, 201112:46 PM To: Hollis Nancy Erb Subject: Impacts of Traffic f 1� r Hi Hollis- - I understand that you are, at least in part, responsible for agenda item #3 for Tuesday's PB meeting: 3. Discussion of a Traffic Impact Education Session for Planning Board Members. If so, thank you! It often seems that developers ask the Planning Board to accept their rather simplistic analysis of "the impact" of "traffic," rather than fully consider the complex interaction that the various aspects of roads and traffic have on many different affected parties. To an engineer, the only impact worth considering is how traffic affects other drivers' mobility. (This is termed Level of Service, abbreviated LOS.) As you know, this is an extremely narrow view, but is often accepted without question, without even understanding how much impact is being disregarded. Bicycle advocates, too, have often taken a narrow view, defining problems faced by bicyclists as a lack of their assumed solution (e.g., "There are no bicycle lanes on Forest Home Drive. "). If the Planning Board is going to have an educational session relative to traffic impacts, I hope that it would be complete and balanced. Just off the top of my head, such a discussion should examine the impacts of the roadway and traffic stream on a variety of affected parties. For example: CHARACTERISTICS OF ROADWAY Lane width Number of lanes Shoulders (width and material) Overall pavement width Road alignment (vertical as well as horizontal) Streetscape design/vegetation Posted speed limit (distinct from actual vehicle speed) Pedestrian facilities (crosswalks as well as facilities along the street) Bicycle facilities CHARACTERISTICS OF TRAFFIC STREAM Volume Speed Percent trucks Percent buses TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, July 5, 2011 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Cornell University Monopole located off Dryden Road (NYS Route 366) behind the fleet garage, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves the construction of a 140 +/- foot tall monopole to accommodate at least four separate cellular antenna arrays. The project will also involve security fencing, several equipment shelters and concrete pads, a gravel access area, and a geothermal well field to cool and heat one of the equipment shelters. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Thomas P. LiVigne, Agent. Discussion of a Traffic Impact Education Session for Planning Board Members. 4. Approval of Minutes: June 21, 2011 5. Other Business: 6. Adjournment Susan Ritter 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.) Generic Transportation Questions draft 5 25 11 from HNE Hi, Jon. For your perusal, and as follow- through to our conversation Monday 5/23. 1 look forward to your comments. I am NOT wedded to having all the capacity data on the table, because I still do not think that we understand those —but I wanted to see if we could get most of what we considered at the Board during HH discussion within a table. 1. What is the effect of increasing the growth rate on the difference in seconds of delay (at intersections) between the no -build and build scenarios? (Le., will the "build seconds of delay" increase or will it decrease with increased background growth ?) 2. Can we copy the output from typical traffic - analysis software to a spreadsheet program (e.g., Excel)? Is there any good reason that the applicant cannot provide the differences in seconds of delay between the no -build and build scenarios? 4. What are the interpretations of the numbers and letter scores provided in intersection - capacity analysis? 5. Is there any good reason that the applicant cannot provide the differences in % of capacity between the no- build and build scenarios? 6. What methods exist for calculating the total driver time to get through a designated set of intersections (given a specified direction or route of travel)? [i.e., how can we calculate the time from the approach to the first intersection (including any waiting time there) to exiting the last intersection in the set ?] 7. Is there an industry- recognized term or name for a set of intersections in series? The draft generic example table is on the next page, Jon. JUN 211011 J M W N 0 ITH-4 -_., PLANNING / ENGINEEAiN0 z Possible generic format for the table of data needed for Planning Board deliberations on traffic studies. Data for the AM and PM peaks must be in separate tables, with intersections presented in consistent and logical ordering within and between tables. The footnote is to be on each table. Each also will have an appropriate applicant- specific title. Hollis' comments: > Clearly, the Intersection column needs to be wider and other columns might need different spacing. We are at the limits of my "table" skills. > The column shadings are to help "bundle" like columns; the row shadings are to help readers' eyes track across the page for any particular intersection. I chose gray so they would print on anyone's printer. I'd like something like this to be required. > "NB minus E" and similar headings are to clarify the direction of the subtraction that gives the "change." Intersection Capacity NB NB B minus minus inu minu MINI 1011MM NEI NN f � uw a 10110M W'101"Imllmm E = Existing conditions as of DD /MM /YYYY; NB = No Build = projected traffic XX years trom Existing conamons (includes background growth and other "known" projects, but the applicant's project is Not Built); B = Build (the applicant's project is Built and adds to the No Build conditions) From: Bruce Brittain [mailto:bruceb2 @mindspring.com] Sent: Sunday, July 03, 201112:46 PM To: Hollis Nancy Erb Subject: Impacts of Traffic Hi Hollis- - I understand that you are, at least in part, responsible for agenda item #3 for Tuesday's PB meeting: 3. Discussion of a Traffic Impact Education Session for Planning Board Members. If so, thank you! It often seems that developers ask the Planning Board to accept their rather simplistic analysis of "the impact" of "traffic," rather than fully consider the complex interaction that the various aspects of roads and traffic have on many different affected parties. To an engineer, the only impact worth considering is how traffic affects other drivers' mobility. (This is termed Level of Service, abbreviated LOS.) As you know, this is an extremely narrow view, but is often accepted without question, without even understanding how much impact is being disregarded. Bicycle advocates, too, have often taken a narrow view, defining problems faced by bicyclists as a lack of their assumed solution (e.g., "There are no bicycle lanes on Forest Home Drive. "). If the Planning Board is going to have an educational session relative to traffic impacts, I hope that it would be complete and balanced. Just off the top of my head, such a discussion should examine the impacts of the roadway and traffic stream on a variety of affected parties. For example: CHARACTERISTICS OF ROADWAY Lane width Number of lanes Shoulders (width and material) Overall pavement width Road alignment (vertical as well as horizontal) Streetscape design/vegetation Posted speed limit (distinct from actual vehicle speed) Pedestrian facilities (crosswalks as well as facilities along the street) Bicycle facilities _ CHARACTERISTICS OF TRAFFIC STREAM Volume Speed Percent trucks Percent buses {ANC dv Platooned vs steady flow Percent bikes AFFECTED PARTIES Residents in their homes Residents in their yards Kids playing in yards, along streets Pedestrians Bicyclists Pets and wildlife Customers in commercial areas Other motorists IMPACTS Aesthetics Welcoming vs hostile environment Sense of community, along and across the street Safety Noise Vibration Smell/pollution Delays for pedestrians crossing street Delays for local traffic (access /egress to driveways and side streets) Delays for through traffic (Level of Service) As you will note, delays for motorists represent only a small part of the overall picture. Again, thank you for initiating this worthwhile discussion. Have a great Fourth! - -Bruce