HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-CAC-1997CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
MINUTES
Meeting of January 13, 1997
Present: Dan Hoffman, Betsy Darlington, Guy Gerard, CC liaison Rick Gray, guest
(and CAC applicant) Lee Adler, IHS guest Jeff Turton, Mr. Turton
In Martin's absence, Darlington opened the meeting at 7:33 PM.
Lacking a quorum, review of Dec. minutes was postponed.
Community access to information about various environmental issues, such as
proposals for projects that could affect the environment, was discussed. It was agreed that
letters to the editor or regular columns in the papers about such matters would go a long way
toward keeping the public informed. The "legals" are not widely read, and in any event,
frequently do not adequately convey the extent of various proposals. Betsy agreed to contact
someone at the Ithaca Journal and suggest having a regular column.
It was pointed out that, while public participation is encouraged, and people are given
opportunities to express their views to various lead agencies in the City, these bodies are in
fact quite circumscribed in what they can or will do. Guy pointed out the importance of
having a CAC rep. at Planning Board meetings, to express CAC's views.
Southwest Area Land Use Study: We reviewed the draft resolution that Dan had
prepared of CAC's comments on the plan, and made a couple of minor changes. We voted
unanimously to approve the revised resolution. Since we didn't have a quorum, Dan and
Betsy will contact those who were absent, send them copies, and see if they approve. Then it
will be sent on to the Planning Board and Common Council /Mayor. Of foremost concern
was that the Planning Board may be on the brink of accepting the plan despite the fact that
there has not been an environmental review of it, and that the plan includes some elements
that need revision.
It was agreed that the CAC's resolution should be read at the upcoming Planning
Board meeting.
Adjourned at 8:35 PM!
Submitted by Betsy Darlington
NEXT CAC MEETING: FEBRUARY 10 , 7 :30 PM, CITY HALL
Planning Board: Jan. 28
Common Council: Feb. 5
TO: Common Council
Mayor Alan J. Cohen
Planning and Development Board
FROM: Conservation Advisory Council
DATE: 1/21/97
RE: "Southwest Area Land Use Study (1994)"
BACKGROUND
The Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) has previously
submitted comments on both the "Draft" and "Final" versions of
the Southwest Area Land Use Study. Certain of the CAC's initial
concerns were addressed in the "Final" (1994) report; however,
the CAC did not receive a formal response to its comments on the
"Final" report. Also, since the release of the "Final" report,
an investigation has revealed the presence of extensive wetland
areas within a significant part of the study area, namely, the
current Southwest Park.
The CAC is aware that the Department of Planning and
Development has recommended that the "Final" report be adopted as
part of the City's comprehensive plan, by the Planning Board and
Common Council (see letter from H. Matthys Van Cort, dated
11/22/96). The following comments and suggestions are intended
for consideration "by Common Council and the Planning Board prior
to any action on the Planning Department's recommendation.
CAC COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS
1. Before the Planning Board or Common Council takes action to
adopt the Southwest Area Land Use Study (SWALUS) recommendations
or make them part of the City's comprehensive plan, adequate
environmental review of the proposed action should be conducted.
The CAC considers the adoption of a comprehensive plan or any
component thereof (eg., this report) to be a Type I action under
SEQRA and CEQRO.
2. Prior to environmental review, the SWALUS should be
supplemented with an addendum that sets forth the newly - gathered
information about wetlands in Southwest Park, and any
recommendations or plans for addressing potential impacts of the
proposed plan on the wetland areas.
3. Work on the alienation of the current Southwest Park, and
particularly the acquisition of parcels that comprise the
proposed substitute Southwest Park should not be delayed or
affected by said environmental review.
4. Any plan approved for the Southwest Area should reaffirm the
full boundaries of the substitute parkland (ie., all of the areas
known as "Al" and 11A211). References to the "Wal -Mart site" as
infringing upon the originally- designated substitute parkland
(eg., Note A to Map 8) should be eliminated.
CAC COMMENTS ON SOUTHWEST AREA LAND USE STUDY Page 2
1/21/97
5. Any approved plan should include recommendation(s) intended
to protect the view from Buttermilk Falls Park, such as overlay
zoning for the commercially -zoned land across Elmira Road from
the Park.
6. Any approved plan should recommend rezoning that portion of
the so- called "parcel S -4" (previously acquired by the City)
which is outside the floodway /substitute park to parkland.
7. Any approved plan should at the most recommend reservation of
specified "transportation corridors," rather than construction of
actual roadways. The plan should explicitly state that future
proposals to build actual roads would require separate,
additional environmental review.
8. Any approved plan should incorporate at least a connecting
corridor of non - commercially -zoned land between Nate's Floral
Estates and any new residential area in the current Southwest
Park (so that the two residential areas are not separated by
conflicting land- uses).
9. Any approved plan should provide for an adequate buffer
between Nate's Floral Estates and any adjacent land to be zoned
commercial.
10. Certain portions of the current Southwest Park should remain
undeveloped, including wooded portions on the westerly side
(bordering the flood control levee and City -owned land along the
Flood Control Channel), as well as the remnant flood plain forest
noted in the current SWALUS. As the identified wetlands lie
primarily in the southern half of the Park, it may make sense to
concentrate development in the northern half, and /or to
consolidate the largest wetlands into the most southerly portion.
11. If the current Southwest Park is to be developed,
residential use should be the preferred recommendation. In
addition to the need for more housing in the City, creative
residential development is more likely (than commercial uses) to
be compatible with retention of undeveloped areas on the site.
12. If the Cherry Street Industrial Park is to be expanded to
the south, a wider buffer (including vegetation) should be
provided between any new buildings and the Black Diamond Trail.
Ideally, any new buildings should be located to the east of the
extended Cherry Street.
Approved, 7 -0.
cc: H. Matthys Van Cort, Director of Planning & Development
MINUTES
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
Meeting of Monday, February 10, 1997
Present: Martin Violette (Chair), Jill Brantley, Betsy Darlington, Dan Hoffman, Guy Gerard;
CC liaison Rick Gray
1. Dec. and Jan. Minutes were approved unan.
2. Betsy agreed to take minutes.
3. Dan suggested that resolutions be attached to the Minutes that are filed in the Clerk's Office. Martin said the
Clerk keeps a separate file of these, but agreed it would be good to have a copy attached to the minutes, as well.
He'll ask the Clerk to put the lavender garden resolution with the Dec. Minutes, and the SW Area resolution with the
Jan. Minutes.
4. Betsy reported on proposed and implemented changes in the Planning Dept. Jon Meigs's position ( "Planner
II ") will be terminated at the end of the year. Meigs will take early retirement at that time and be called in as a
consultant, as needed. Another Planner II position also may be eliminated but replaced with a position called
"neighborhood and historic preservation planner ", presumably to be held by Leslie Chatterton. Other changes - -such
as a new Economic Planner position - -in the Dept. are on hold until Common Council, the Mayor, and the Planning
Dept. decide on how to reorganize it.
Consensus was that it is important for the Dept. to have a dedicated individual overseeing environmental
issues, a role Meigs has served very well.
Consensus also was that the CAC needs to be kept in the loop. Important to attend Planning Committee /Board
meetings where critical issues will be discussed. Martin will ask to have agendas of these committees sent to all
CAC members.
Betsy reported that the Mayor is not planning to reappoint her, but that she can continue to serve until he
finds a replacement. Jill said she and others are being treated the same way. Betsy was asked why he isn't
reappointing her and she said he felt it was good to have turnover on committees (get rid of dead wood ?). He plans to
reappoint Judy and Paul, who can continue to serve until reappointed. He hasn't decided on Lee Adler's appointment.
5. Dan updated us on the proposal for a Natural Areas Commission. Currently, no group deals with non -park,
non -6 -Mi. Cr. natural areas that are owned by the City. 6 -Mi. Cr. Committee, which would become a part of the
new committee, has been concerned that oversight of 6 -Mi. Cr. would be diminished.
As part of the substitute parkland exchange, the City will be acquiring Ithaca Falls and, presumably, more
land near Negundo Woods, to substitute for SW Park. These areas will need oversight. for Cornell to give up Ithaca
Falls, it is requiring that there be an oversight committee with Cornell represented on it.
We reviewed the draft Dan had prepared and made a few suggestions for changes.
6. Community access to info on issues involving the environment:
a. CAC's recommendations to Pl. Bd. and Dept.: some felt our comments are ignored (e.g. on EAF's).
Betsy and Martin said they felt that this was not usually the case. Consensus was that oral presentations should be
made at the Planning Bd. meetings, on the bigger issues (EAF's and otherwise).
b. Media: Betsy spoke to City Editor at Ithaca Journal and suggested covering upcoming meetings where
decisions will be made on big projects, since most people don't read the legals. Also suggested to her that
environmental issues such as burn barrels and wood stoves be covered in the Journal.
C. Everyone agreed we should attend important meetings and give our comments verbally, and be
available for questions.
d. It was agreed that Martin would give a report on CAC actions on EAF's at each of our meetings.
Everyone was encouraged to attend the EAF subcommittee meetings when possible.
7. Martin summarized the EAF's Guy, he, and Betsy reviewed this evening:
Valvoline -- recommended more big trees; deferred on the technical aspects of spill control, etc. since we
lacked the needed expertise.
Bank of Finger Lakes: Larger - -and more - -trees needed, esp. in SE corner and along S property line.
Sidewalk needed. Floor just 0.8' above flood level!
Vision Center: Hasty job by applicant and landscaping details weren't given. This is needed. Hope for large
shade tree species.
Adjourned about 9:15 PM - -Betsy Darlington
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
MINUTES: Meeting of March 10, 1997
Present: Guy Gerard, Jill Brantley, Betsy Darlington, Paul Salon, Judy Jones, Dan Hoffman,; EMC rep.: Barbara
Ebert; CC liaison: Rick Gray; Guest: Doria Higgins Absent: Daryl Anderson, Martin Violette
Martin being out -of -town, Betsy opened the meeting at 7:30 PM, following the EAF subcommittee meeting.
1. Doria passed out the Findings Statement for the Treman Marine Park Master Plan which has just been
officially adopted by State Parks (OPRHP) in Albany. Doria pointed out a sampling of discrepancies, both within the
master plan itself and between the plan and the findings statement. Since the findings statement is based on the master
plan, the discrepancies within the latter are of special concern. None of us had seen the master plan and didn't know if
a copy had been sent to Martin. We all agreed that State Parks should provide CAC with at least one copy, and that
we should continue to be involved. Rick said that he thought any City action was on hold until State Parks requests
the land transfer. Dan said that, prior to deciding about the transfer, the City must prepare a findings statement. We
agreed that there was nothing for the CAC to do until the City has to take some action. It also was agreed that we need
to see the plan.
Judy stressed that protection of the Hog Hole is top priority. Dan said CAC should compare Common Council's
August 1993 resolution with the master plan and the findings statement. Dan, Guy, and Jill agreed to do this. Con-
sensus was that CAC's focus should be on the transfer of the land, and on what demands may not have been met.
2. Betsy described a proposal to change the City's handling of recyclables, with trash tags perhaps being
replaced by clear plastic bags which one would buy from the City. The idea was greeted with considerable skepticism,
but no action was taken since no proposal has yet been put forth.
3. February minutes were approved unanimously.
4. Rick said that all CAC members whose terms expired have been reappointed by Mavor -Cohen and CC.
In addition, the Mayor wanted youth representation on the CAC and has appointed Derek Keil of 316 Fall Creek
Drive to fill the vacant spot.
5. Dan reported on progress of the proposed Natural Areas Commission. Six -Mile Creek Committee is
likely to endorse it, with certain conditions. Cornell is requiring that the City have a NAC as a condition of selling its
land around Ithaca Falls to the City (part of the City's Inlet Island exchange). To the surprise of all, including Rick
who said Common Council hadn't even seen it, Cornell is putting forth a contract it expects the City to sign as a condi-
tion of the purchase. Some felt it was odd that Cornell was putting in so many restrictions on use when its own
stewardship of the area has been less than exemplary. The contract has a number of restrictions which we felt must
substantially lower .the property's fair market value. This was not taken into account in the appraisal of the property,
however. Members wondered if the City should even be acquiring this land.
It was agreed that the CAC should request to be involved in the discussions, to receive correspondence
relating to the purchase, and to receive a copy of the contract.
6. DEIS for Novarr project on College Ave. Project would replace the Collegetown Motor Lodge and its
parking lot with a 118 -unit (252 beds) apartment building with an 84 -space parking lot under it. This is the minimum
parking required under zoning for the area. Not much can probably be done about this since it complies with the zon-
ing, but there was dismay at the impacts this will have on Collegetown: As parking becomes ever -more scarce, there
will be even greater impetus to tear down houses to build parking lots or even another parking garage; there will be
further erosion of neighborhood character; businesses will come under greater stress from inadequate parking; and
sooner or later, the City will feel compelled to build a bigger or a new garage which taxpayers will have to pay for. It
was agreed that developers should have to bear some of the public costs that will result from their projects.
It was remarked that it was better to have these big buildings near where students have to go, but that surely there must
be a limit to how far the City wants to go in transforming Collegetown. Jill told about the transformation of Bethesda
from a charming place to live to a huge, ugly canyonland of big apt. buildings. She forecast the same for Collegetown.
She recommended that the zoning in Collegetown, esp. regarding parking requirements, be re- examined by the City.
Dan warned that this had been a huge battle a few years ago and few are likely to want to revisit it. Betsy said that,
even if the parking requirement were increased, more and more houses would be tom down to provide space for park-
ing lots. Jill asked that next month we begin to look at the zoning requirements and consider reopening the battle.
Betsy reminded people that the public hearing for the project is March 25 at 7.30 PM.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:35 PM.
- -Betsy Darlington
NEXT MEETING: MONDAY MARCH 13, 1997 , 7.30 PM, City Hall
I. Memo to: Planning Board
Valvoline
Cc: Common Council and Mayor
City Attorney
CAC members
BPW, DPW
Building Dept.
From: Conservation Advisory Council's EAF Subcommittee
Re: Valvoline Project on Rt.13
Date: March 12, 1997
Comments: We appreciate the changes that Valvoline has made in the site design,
especially the inclusion of a sidewalk along Rt. 13 and more trees.
We do not have the technical expertise to evaluate other potentially problematic
aspects of the project, having to do with the wet, peaty site conditions and drainage.
H. Memo to: Planning Board -
Christopher George Corporation
Cc: Common Council and Mayor
City Attorney
CAC members
BPW, DPW
Building Dept.
From: Conservation Advisory Council's EAF Subcommittee
Re: Catherine St. subdivision
Date: March 17, 1997
Recommendation: Without knowing how large a structure could be built on the newly
formed property, we cannot evaluate the impact of the proposed change in lot lines. The"
application indicates 11 units more, but how large would each- unit be?
If the new lot would be able to accommodate a very large building, we are concerned
about the impact this would have on neighborhood character, especially along Catherine St.,
but also on the larger Collegetown area- -from both the aesthetic effect and the effect on
availability of parking. If a very large structure could be built on the new lot, we
recommend a positive declaration.
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
MINUTES: Meeting of April 14, 1997
Present: Jill Brantley, Betsy Darlington, Guy Gerard, Dan Hoffman, Derek Keil, Paul Salon, Martin
Violette;
CC liaison: Rick Gray; Guest: Doria Higgins Absent: Judy Jones, Daryl Anderson
1. April minutes approved. J. Brantley commented about "forcing the zoning issue" and said all present
were in favor.
2. Discussion of Festival Lands transfer. D. Hoffinan handed out copies of Common Council resolution of
8/93 on Treman Marina, and a comparison of requests in the resolution and responses (or lack of) in the
FEIS. Discussion followed on whether the City should transfer this land to the state, based on the informa-
tion at hand. Hoffman proposed a resolution opposing transfer of this land from the City of Ithaca to the
state, which was passed unanimously. (copy of resolution attached)
3. M. Violette handed out copies of the Tompins County Waterfront Plan, which will be discussed at the
May meeting.
4. DEIS, Lake Source Cooling Project. This voluminous DEIS was presented for discussion, with comment
to the DEC due by April 21. J. Brantley noted that the size and relative unavailability of the document made
public review difficult. M. Violette noted that he agreed but thought the document is well organized and
can be reveiwed in a timely fashion by the CAC. A comparison of scoping document outline with DEIS
Table of Contents was made, and showed the DEIS to correspond to the scoping document in this respect.
A sample check of approximately seven responses to public comments listed in the scoping document
revealed two comments, one on synergistic effects and another on controlled lake level effects, to have
seemingly inadequate responses in the DEIS. Given the short period of time left to reply, M. Violette
agreed to compare the rest of the public comments and their responses in the DEIS, and to check to see
whether SEQR requirements appear to have been met in the DEIS, and to formulate a comment to the DEC
by 4/21 as required. Visitor D. Higgins remarked that the time allowed for this stage of the SEQR process
seemed inadequate, and all agreed.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:45 PM.
-- Paul Salon
NEXT MEETING: MONDAY May 12, 1997 , 7.30 PM, City Hall
EAF Committee, 7:00 PM
Conservation Advisory Council
City of Ithaca
Memo to: BZA and Building Department
Applicants as noted below
Copy to: Common Council and Mayor
Planning Board & Dept.
City Attorney
CAC
From: Conservation Advisory Council's Environmental Review Subcommittee (Darlington, Gerard,
Violette)
Subject: EAF Review(s)
Date: April 14, 1997
1. Appeal #2330,1071/2 Dryden Road, Mauro Daigle.
Comments: Appears to be a use which conforms with existing conditions, and we agree that parking prob-
lems are not likely to be exacerbated.
Recommendation: Negative declaration.
2. Appeal #2331,116 Mitchell Street, CSP Management/ Beth and Jay Hyman.
Comments: We do not find any of the arguments in this appeal convincing. Existing zoning regulations in
this section of the City need to be strictly enforced to preserve the existing balance between various types of
occupancy, and no compelling reasons are evinced to justify modifying these regulations.
Recommendation: Positive declaration.
Conservation Advisory Council
City of Ithaca
Memo to: Planning Board & Dept.
Applicant(s), as noted below
Copy to: Common Council and Mayor
BZA and Building Dept.
City Attorney
CAC
From: Conservation Advisory Council's Environmental Review Subcommittee (Darlington, Gerard,
Violette)
Subject: EAF Review(s)
Date: April 14, 1997
1. Lama/Agway Subdivision
Comments: None
Recommendation: Negative declaration.
2. 104 -110 Cottage Place
Comments: None
Recommendation: Negative declaration.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 EAST GREEN STREET
ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850
OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272 -1713
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL CODE 607
RESOLUTION from the Conservation Advisory Council
FESTIVAL LANDS TRANSFER (4/14/97)
WHEREAS, the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation ( OPRHP) wants the
City of Ithaca to transfer the so- called "Festival Lands" to the State of New York, which transfer would
make the City-owned land part of Allan H. Treman State Marine Park ( AHTSMP); and
WHEREAS, OPRHP recently completed environmental review of a proposed "Final Master Plan" for
AHTSMP, adopted "findings" based on the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), and then adopted
the Plan; and
WHEREAS, while the Final Master Plan incorporates improvements suggested by Common Council, the
Conservation Advisory Council and others during environmental review, the Plan and the FEIS fail to
address several serious concerns, particularly those pertaining to the following elements of the Final Master
Plan:
- relocation of the entrance road
- severing of the vehicular connection between AHTSMP and Cass Park
- reconfiguration of the parking lots (requiring the loss of
a number of mature trees)
- possible expansion of seasonal boat slips within the marina basin; and
WHEREAS, the construction of a new entrance road, severing of the connection with Cass Park and cre-
ation of new boat slips all involve and require control of the Festival Lands; and
WHEREAS, while the current OPHRP plan for AHTSMP includes environmentally positive elements and
only relatively modest intrusions into the "undeveloped" portions of the Park, said plan is not immune to a
change in philosophy at the State level; furthermore, it is the descendant of much more environmentally
damaging designs, which were altered by OPRHP only as a result of vigorous and sustained public pressure;
and
WHEREAS, OPHRP has stated that its highest priority for AHTSMP is to serve the perceived needs of
boaters from throughout the region; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is likely to be more responsive to local concerns about access and non-
boating oriented uses of the area; now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Conservation Advisory Council reaffirms its earlier recommendation that Common
Council retain title to and control of the "Festival Lands "; and it is further
RESOLVED, that the Conservation Advisory Council urges Common Council and the Office of Parks,
Recreation and Historic Preservation to cooperate in reducing traffic and parking problems associated with
the existing entrance to ATSMP (without requiring construction of a new road) and in implementing a joint
management plan that will keep the Festival Lands, Hogs Hole area and Lake shoreline in as natural a state
as possible.
Unanimously passed, April 14, 1997
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program"
CITY OF ITHACA
I OEI EAST GREEN STREET
ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850
OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272 -1713
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL CODE 607
April 18, 1997
Mr, Michael K. Barylski
Deputy Regional Permit Administrator
NYSDEC
Division of Compliance Services
t285 Fisher Avenue
Cortland, NY 13045 -1090
Re: Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Cornell University Lake Source
Cooling Project
Dear Mr. Barylski:
The Conservation Advisory Council of the City of Ithaca submits the following comments on the draft EIS
for this project. We have examined this document for adequacy in three areas: 1), that it corresponds to the
scoping document; 2), that comments received from the public on the draft scoping document are
responded to adequately; and 3), that it conforms to requirements set forth in SEQR regulations.
1. In our review, the DEIS appears to completely conform to the requirement that it corresponds to the
scoping document.
2. As a result of our examination of the responses to public comments contained in the DEIS, we would
like to make the following comments:
Comment 11, "Consider how a controlled change in lake level might alter the impacts of the pro-
ject". Our original comment was "4. 2.3.1.2. should be expanded to include q fects of permanent lower-
ing of the lake level_for_tlood control, and appropriate sections should discuss these effects. ". The
relevant section cited (2.3.2.2.6) does not contain comments about this issue.
Comment 12, "Discuss the possibility of synergistic effects ". Our original comment was -6. There
needs to be a discussion of the potential for synergistic effects of the various impacts, and especially of
worst case scenarios, perhaps in a separate chapter. " The intent of the question was to explore the
consequences of the concurrent impacts of separate environmental conditions, for example, a lowering of
lake levels through man -made controls, intensified global warming, and the necessity to revert to
chemical mussel control. We do not see this directly addressed in the DEIS.
Comment 20, "Explain the impact of biofouling controls on drinking water quality". We feel it might
have been informative to add 2.3.6.2.2.5 as a section where this issue is addressed.
Comment 34. "Consider alternative energy sources (hydrogen, clectrolumineseence, wind, solar) ". Sec-
tion 1.2.2 mentions, but does not "consider" such alternatives.
3. Conformance to SEQR requirements.
In our view. SEQR requirements for a (D)EIS can be divided into two broad categories, one which governs
the substance of the document, and a second which governs its style. in terms of substance, this DEIS,
except as noted above, appears to be completely responsive. All required elements are present.
In terms of style, there are two aspects of the DEIS we think deserve comment. First, this document is
exemplary in its readability, by reason of its clear language and its excellent organization. Our task was
made much easier by these characteristics.
On the other hand. SEQR requirements for EIS content refer to the necessity for being "concise" and not
"encyclopedic" [6.1.7.9(bX I and 2)]. We recognize the difficulty of preparing an EIS for a project of the
magnitude and level of innovation such as the Lake Source Cooling Project, but the practical effect of a
DEIS of this size is that reviews such as ours, done by agencies which may meet only once during the time
period given, and then only towards or at the end of this time period, are done somewhat in haste.
SEQR specifies that the minimum period for this part of the review process is 30 days, which is what has
been allowed, but we would like to note that a longer review period would have been more appropriate,
given both the size and the technical nature of the material we were required to examine.
We would also like to express our concern that an adequate number of copies (at least of vols. 1 & 11) be
made available to the public during the next phase of the process.
Please feel free to call me at 607- 277 -2699 if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely yours,
Martin Violette. Chair
Conservation Advisory Council, City of Ithaca
cc: Mayor and Common Council. City of Ithaca
Robert Bland, Cornell University
Lanny Joyce, Cornell University
Conservation Advisory Council
City of Ithaca
Memo to: BZA and Building Department
Applicants as noted below
Copy to: Common Council and Mayor
Planning Board & Dept.
City Attorney
CAC
From: Conservation Advisory Council's Environmental Review Subcommittee (Darlington, Gerard, Kell,
Violette)
Subject: EAF Review(s)
Date: June 23, 1997
1. Appeal #2333, 416 Hillview Place
Comments: We agree with comments from neighbors that this will be a change for the better, provided a
limit of five people is applied.
Recommendation: Negative declaration
2. Appeal # 2334, 531 Esty Street
Comments: Although this appears to be a suitable use for the location, parking considerations are the
most important issue here. Can this problem be resolved through the use of parking on other properties as
suggested, or will on- street parking problems be made worse. This needs to be completely resolved before
approval.
Recommendation: Negative declaration, if the above conditions are met.
CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
City of Ithaca
108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850
September 8, 1997
Mr. Michael K. Barylski
Deputy Regional Permit Administrator
NYSDEC
Division of Compliance Services
1285 Fisher Avenue
Cortland, NY 13045 -1090
Re: Final Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Cornell University Lake
Source Cooling Project
Dear Mr. Barylski:
The Conservation Advisory Council of the City of Ithaca submits the following final comments on the draft
EIS for this project. These comments are based on input received from members of the Ithaca community,
as well as our own deliberations during the public review period which ends today. These comments are
intended to supplement, rather than replace, our earlier written comments.
We find that certain deficiencies persist, in our view, in the dEIS. These are as follows:
1. Under 617.9(5)(iii)(`d') of SEQR, "growth inducing aspects" are required to be discussed. Chapter 6
discusses only the growth in utilization of this technology by Cornell, and does not include a discussion of
other possible "growth ". Specifically, the possibility that this project will invite other agencies, organiza-
tions, institutions or businesses to to use lake source cooling for their physical plants should be discussed .
2. In the same section of SEQR, under 617.9(5)(v)(`a' through `g'), a discussion of "reasonable alterna-
tives" is required. Although it seems that other approaches were considered, for example a "closed- loop"
system, no mention is made of these, so it is impossible to judge whether they were fairly evaluated.
3.617.9(6) requires a discussion of "information about reasonably foreseeable catastrophic impacts" which
may be "essential to an agency's SEQR findings ". We have repeatedly asked for such a discussion under
the rubric of "synergistic effects ", but we still note the lack of such a discussion.
4. We do not see an adequate discussion of the handling of dredge soils, as required by 617.9(5)(iii)(`a),
"reasonably related... environmental impacts ".
5. Is there sufficient backup so that there is no economic dis- incentive to cease operations if unforeseen
major environmental impacts occur?
Please feel free to call me at 607 - 277 -2699 if you have any questions or comments.
Sincerely yours,
Martin Violette, Chair
Conservation Advisory Council, City of Ithaca
cc: Mayor and Common Council, City of Ithaca
Robert Bland, Cornell University
Lanny Joyce, Cornell University