Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-P&DB-1995-05-30 eft/ c%rK Approved 6/27/95 Planning and Development Board MINUTES May 30, 1995 Present: David Kay, Chair;Sarah Adams;Susan Blumenthal;Anne Clavel; Carolyn Peterson; Denise Rusoff;John Schroeder. Staff: H. Sieverding, C. Guttman,K.Ross;other interested parties. 1. Review and Approval of FEIS Outline Regarding Wal-Mart Kay stated for the public that the Board was going to go through the FEIS Outline point by point. He passed out a letter from RKG in which RKG categorized which items were straight forward and those which they felt needed guidance from the Board. Sieverding stated there was a$45,000 contract to do the economic impact analysis and that all of those funds had been used up,except for$750. He stated that if the Board wanted RKG to do any additional work, they would need to go back to East Coast Development Company for approval. Blumenthal left at this point. Adams suggested that the Board go through the economic issues and identify who needs to address each specific issue. The Board comments on the economic impact issues are as follows. Adams proposed that no.2 be a specific item to ask Wal-Mart to provide the information for. No. 3 is very similar to no.2 and also should be addressed by Wal-Mart. No. 4 needs more clarification rather than more analysis. Clarification to be provided by RKG or by Clough Harbour(and associated consultants). No. 6 is the issue of net jobs which requires some new information from Wal-Mart. No. 7 covers the definition of Wal-Mart impact on the central business district. Kay feels that they have never gotten beyond the possibility that there would be major negative impacts downtown(i.e.,Woolworth going out of business). He is interested in hearing more about the likely consequences of such an eventuality--understanding that it would be a speculative discussion. Sieverding stated that the Board could ask Saratoga Associates about their capability to do this or go back to RKG for a re-issue of the letter on this subject or go to the Halcyon study for the information. Adams stated the two parts to this issue were: (1)the most likely scenario; and (2) specific measures downtown can take. After some discussion,the Board stated they would change the wording to"Discussion of a`most likely and worst case' scenarios". Minutes of May 30, 1995 Meeting 2 Rusoff suggested that they go through all the items not getting into specifics and then prioritize them,in order to move more quickly through each point. Kay stated that RKG may be unwilling to provide information for no. 9 and that the Planning Board may have to suggest some numbers. In the last sentence in no. 12, Schroeder suggested adding the language"(including fiscal implications)". With regard to no. 13,Kay stated that to do a study of tourism impact would be costly and unrealistic to expect. He stated RKG was not the correct one to do this. Schroeder pointed out one important typo in no. 14 under#2. The correct wording should say"Wal-Mart or the State"; not"Wal-Mart of the State". The Board stated that the information needed for no. 14 was easily obtainable. Adams stated that Wal-Mart would need to provide information for nos. 2, 3 and 6, and RKG could provide nos.4, 5 and 9 with the Board providing numbers to plug in. The Board stated it would be difficult to get a handle on nos. 7, 10, 11, 12 and 13. Adams stated that nos. 7 and 10 are the two most important ones for which they need more information. No. 14 is also a priority issue. Some of the items for which RKG can easily provide information are also priorities. There was some further discussion on the potential impacts of development on the site. Kay stated the Board needed information as to what the impacts of a larger store versus a smaller store would be and what difference it might make. The Board stated that some of the impacts pointed out under no.4.0 (Unavoidable Impacts)may also be addressed in no.6.0. Adams suggested, assuming the Board approves the outline,initialing the outline as to who is responsible for each item and providing a highlighted copy of the specific items to each entity responsible for some aspect of the FEIS. Kay stated that the Board was not going to formally vote on the outline,but would like to get a sense of what the Board feels about it. Kay and Sieverding presented a site plan prepared by staff which shows an approximately 75,000 square foot building with 415 parking spaces. This plan is based on four site development principles: 1. The 1985 substitute parkland line defines the area available for development. 2. Building be located out of viewshed from Buttermilk Park. 3. Parking lot include planting strips at least 12 feet wide in every bay. 4. Landscaping/buffering occur on Elmira Road side of substitute park line. C:Ke11y\1hys\Planbrd\5-30mtg.doc Minutes of May 30, 1995 Meeting 3 The Board decided that given these four criteria, the 75,000 square foot store is the most appropriate. Clavel had some objections. Kay directed staff to move ahead with the preparation of the FEIS based on the overall FEIS outline discussed at today's meeting (and attached hereto) since a majority of the Board members were comfortable with it. C:Ke11}\Thys\Planbrth5-30mtg.doc FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT OUTLINE WAL-MART DEPARTMENT STORE ELMIRA ROAD,ITHACA,NEW YORK APRIL 21, 1995 (revised April 25,May 10,May 30,June 5, 1995) C:\ITHACA\FEIS.DOC FEIS OUTLINE: The outline that follows describes the organization,topic areas,and additional analysis that will be presented in the Final Environmental Impact Statement. The fEIS will, wherever appropriate, address both Alternative SE-1 and Alternative 2b(a site plan based on an approximately 75,800 sq.ft. and 416 parking spaces). Alternative 2b will conform to the following guidelines: 1. All building and pavement(including parking areas, access lanes and loading docks and maneuvering areas) shall occur entirely on the Elmira Road side of the southern boundary of subsitute parkland defined in Chapter 757 of New York State laws of 1985; 2. The entire building shall be located completely outside of the Buttermilk Falls State Park viewshed as viewed from primary observation points on the main trail; 3. Double loaded parking bays shall be separated by continuous twelve foot wide planting strips parallel to Elmira Road; 4. A planted buffer area shielding the substitute park land from the building and paved area shall exist south of the Chapter 757 line described above. 1.0 Project Design and Layout 1.1 Store Size The fEIS will further analyze the impact of development of a "supercenter" on the proposed site. Alternatives to the proposed 159,768 s.f. (full development) store will be examined within the context of the other issues/topics being discussed. However, the fEIS will emphasize analyses of Alternatives SE-1 and 2b. 1.2 Building Elevation Further analysis will resolve the aesthetic issues related to the building's facade treatment. 1.3 Access and Site Circulation The fEIS will address the emergency access restrictions caused by a single access and pinch point where the site drive and the parking lot meet in Alternative SE-1. 1.4 Parking The fEIS will review three parking standards - the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the Urban Land Institute, and Wal-Mart's company standard to determine if the site area devoted to parking can be reduced;thereby lowering development costs,reducing runoff volumes and associated water quality impacts,reducing the number of outdoor lighting fixtures,reducing the visual impact, etc. 1.5 Grading The differences between the fill(and overall site disturbance/grading)required for site development alternatives SE-1 and 2b will be compared and assessed. 2 FEIS OUTLINE: 1.6 On-site Circulation Alternative 2b will examine ways to improve the safety and convenience of pedestrians and bicyclists on-site. Pedestrian collectors and driveway design will be assessed. 1.7 Lighting The fEIS will examine alternatives to the 40+ft.outdoor light fixtures proposed by the applicant. 1.8 Landscaping The positive impact of additional landscaping treatment, both as a visual buffer around the periphery of the site and to break up the visual dominance of the parking lot,will be examined. 2.0 Natural Resources 2.1 Geology The fEIS will assess the impact of soils on constructability, the impact on the floodway of alternatives SE-1 and 2b, and the loss of some of the County's most productive soil types. 2.2 Surface Water and Site Drainage The complex issue of surface water and site drainage will be examined within the context of the following issues: • runoff water quality • assimilative capacity of remaining wetlands given rerouted and increased flows. • temperature impacts • detention/retention of surface runoff,including basin outside and inside parking area • pollution prevention • drainage patterns • silt, nutrient,and pollutant load • stormwater management plan meeting the SPEDES requirements • Corps of Engineers wetland disturbance permit • overall impact on wetlands, changes in water volume, velocity, silt load, nutrient load, temperature and pollutant load • Hydrologic analysis meeting the requirements of FEMA regulations in Volume 44 of Code of Federal Regulations, including an analysis of the cumulative impacts due to development up to 1995 in the 100 year floodplain • Explanation of any error readings in the floodplain analysis 3 FEIS OUTLINE: • Analysis of the impact of proposed development on flooding and functioning of the flood control system,including any opinion rendered by the Army Corps of Engineers. 2.3 Groundwater Resources The impact of development on groundwater.resources will be further examined; particularly as these resources are impacted by increased soil temperatures, sand, salt, oils, and other contaminants. Potential impacts on the underground acquifer(pollution, loss of recharge capacity) will be addressed. 2.4 Air Quality The fEIS will examine air quality at the site based on future traffic volumes. 2.5 Ecological Resources The fEIS will include an examination of ways to mitigate expected noise, air quality, lighting, visual and litter impacts on Negundo Woods. It will also contain an inventory and analysis of amphibian,reptile,and mollusk species and the impact this development will have on their breeding sites and habitats. Similar research will be conducted for the raptors found on, or using, the site. Finally, the fEIS will include the results of a search of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NY Natural Heritage Program records for threatened or endangered species. The DEC's concerns about the impact of the project on Cayuga Inlet fisheries(especially trout)will be addressed. 3.0 Human Resources 3.1 Transportation 3.1.1 Existing Road Network The fEIS will expand the traffic analysis to include the possibility that no new roads will be built. The fEIS will explain the context of any recommendations for new roads in the area. The fEIS will also explain that no City study ever proposed all the new roads assumed in the dEIS year 2005 traffic analysis. 3.1.2 Intersections The traffic analysis will be expanded to include impacts on the following intersections: • Seven Mile Road • Meadow Street • Spencer Road and Floral Avenue 4 FEIS OUTLINE: • four new intersections on Elmira Road • Spencer Road • Buttermilk Falls Road • coordination of traffic signals in the impacted area 3.1.3 Traffic Operations Numerous traffic operations issues will be addressed: • Full compliance with ADA requirements • Turn lanes • Adequate vehicle storage • Analyze the null/no improvement alternative • Pass-by/diverted trips • Signage • Street widenings • Spanwire analysis • Coordination with NYSDOT activities • Analysis of arterial operations • Travel time and delay study • Spencer Road/Floral Ave. sensitivity analysis • Spin-off demand • Peak season adjustment • Accident rate information and analysis • Substantiation of growth assumptions • Resolve supermarket question-increase trip rates • Correction of numerous technical inaccuracies and discussion of omitted technical issues • Safety issues • Unacceptable traffic operation for 2005 • Use Free Standing Discount Store trip generation figures • Future traffic operations with and without the proposed Wal*Mart and its induced development. 3.1.4 Pedestrian and Bicycle Acceptable methods of providing pedestrian and bicycle facilities will be presented to include discussion/application of current standards for shared vehicle/bicycle use. Off-site pedestrian/bicycle access needs will be addressed. 3.1.5 Public Transportation 5 FEIS OUTLINE: The fEIS will reflect coordination with the local public transportation provider for the placement of a bus stop on Elmira Road. The idea of a park and ride facility will be dropped. 3.2 Land Use,Comprehensive Plans,and Zoning 3.2.1 Land Use The fEIS will address impacts of Alternative SE-1 and 2b on Southwest Park Substitute Park Land; clarify what the Southwest Area Land Use Study does and does not advocate (including the effect of development in the FW-1 zone); and will balance the discussion of neighboring land uses by including a discussion of the adjacent green belt. The fEIS will also discuss impacts on adjacent City owned land purchased for recreational purposes. 3.2.2 Comprehensive Plans An expanded discussion of relevant planning documents will be included in the fEIS. 3.2.3 Zoning The fEIS will clarify the boundaries and nature of the B-5/FW-1 Zones and will discuss the roles and responsibilities of the Planning Board and the Board of Zoning Appeals. It will also address the practical function of the FW-1 Zone in the flood control system. Lastly,the discussion will clarify the status of the Conditional Variance issued by the BZA in 1992. It will also clarify the precise area to which this Conditional Variance applies. 3.3 Community Services Detailed information on water demand and wastewater loads and solid waste and recycables generated will be provided. Maintenance and operation of new infrastructure will be specified. Information will be provided on the typical impact of a 100,000 sq.ft. development of this type on the demand for police services and staffing levels. 3.4 Visual and Cultural The fEIS will discuss the impacts of alternatives SE-1 and 2b on visual and cultural resources including Buttermilk Falls State Park, Negundo Woods and the proposed bicycle and pedestrian trails. In addition it will discuss the visual impact of night lighting. An expanded mitigation section will be included. 6 FEIS OUTLINE: 3.5 Noise The fEIS will quantify existing and post-development noise levels on-site by time of day and season of year. Quantify existing and post development noise levels within Buttermilk Falls State Park both for the campground and the main park gorge by time of day and season of year. Revise the noise study for future conditions at"sensitive receptors." Impacts will be identified and mitigation proposed. 3.6 Socio-Economic A number of substantive comments were made concerning the assumptions and methodologies employed by RKG in the preparation of the fiscal and economic impact assessment and the impact the proposed project may have on the character of the community. This section of the FEIS will provide a response to these comments. The following issues will be analyzed: Economic Impact Issues 1.The following issues will be analyzed for Alternatives SE-i(including the proposed expansion area)and 2b. The Board will proceed under the assumption that no grocery unit will be included in the proposed development unless otherwise notified by ECDC. 2. Sales per square foot based on Wal*Mart's experience in the New York and other northeast markets and documented by convincing and conclusive evidence will be presented. To the extent this sales experience is different than the forecasted per square foot sales for an Ithaca Wal*Mart,an adjustment to the sales forecast for this store,or analysis of why no adjustment is necessary will be provided. 3. Total store sales based on Wal*Mart's experience with similar sized stores in New York and other northeast markets and documented by convincing and conclusive evidence will be presented. To the extent this sales experience is different than the forecasted total store sales for an Ithaca Wal*Mart, an adjustment to the sales forecast for this store,or analysis of why no adjustment is necessary will be provide. 4. Substantiation of the assertion that approximately 50%of the forecasted sales will be transferred from existing mass merchandisers in the market. If this assertion cannot be substantiated with a high level of confidence,the quantitative implications of adopting alternative assumptions of roughly equal plausibility will be discussed. 5. Clarification of the discrepancy between the statement that 20%of sales will be drawn from outside the PTA and the source of sales information presented in Table A-8 which appears top show that 29%of sales are derived from outside the PTA. In addition, substantiation of the amount of sales(whether 20%or some other number)that will be drawn from outside the region will also be provided as well as a sensitivity analysis assuming different rates of sales from outside the PTA. If the assertion relative to the amount of sales cannot be substantiated with a high level of confidence,the quantitative implications of 7 FEIS OUTLINE: adopting alternative assumptions of roughly equal plausibility will be discussed. In addition,substantiation of the transferred sales from other Wal*Marts must be provided. 6. Clarification of the net new jobs to be created by Wal*Mart's entry into the market. This analysis will take into account jobs created by Wal*Mart less jobs lost due to transferred sales from within the market, and the loss of jobs that may result should the businesses absorbing this impact downsize or go out of business. This job impact analysis will include a breakout of full time and part time employment at the proposed Wal*Mart. The analysis will also discuss the applicability to Ithaca of three studies cited during the public hearing(session II oral comments,transcript page 162)indicating that a typical Wal*Mart eliminates substantially more jobs than it creates. The results will be reported for the County or PTA as a whole as well as for the City of Ithaca. 7. Discussion of a"most likely"and"worst case"scenario with respect to the impact of Wal*Mart on retailers in the Central Business District and a more specific discussion of measures the CBD community could take to address these impacts. The fEIS will note the major financial investment the City has made in downtown revitalization efforts. 8. An analysis reconciling the difference between RKG's sales tax figures and the sales tax figures presented in the Dorman report(as provided by the NYS Department of Taxation and Finance). To the extent the differences cannot be reconciled,what impact does this have on the forecast for sales tax revenue and employment likely to be generated by a Wal*Mart store. 9. Amend the existing analysis to account for plausible reductions in the educational sector of the local economy and reductions in state and local budgets,all of which may result in employment reductions. 10. Clarification of whether induced development is likely to be new business to the PTA or transfer of business from other areas within the PTA. To the extent these are transferred sales, what are the effects of these transfers. In addition, a discussion of the impact of the various types of induced development that may occur and what impact this type of development may have on other retail districts in the City,particularly on the CBD. If significant losses in sales or property value are expected, an estimate of resulting negative fiscal impact on the City of Ithaca will be provided. 11. To the extent Wal*Mart sales are captured from existing locally owned businesses there may be leakage of capital out of the region(i.e.,locally owned businesses are more likely to reinvest profits locally,while non local business is more likely to transfer profits out). An estimate of the impact on the local economy of this loss will be provided. This estimate will take into account the multiplier effect of money spent or invested locally,with reference to available multipliers most applicable to this PTA. 12. A review of any available evidence should be provided that will shed light on Wal*Mart's entry into other upstate New York markets and effects on property values in the CBDs of those areas will be included. An evaluation of the fiscal implications and relevance of these experiences for Ithaca should also be provided. 8 FEIS OUTLINE: 13. A discussion of whether a Wal*Mart located at the specific proposed site would have a significant effect local tourism,the County's third largest local industry. Relevant issues include potential negative effects on(1) Buttermilk Falls State Park and its immediate vicinity(visual, noise,traffic); (2) Trout fishing in the Cayuga Inlet; (3)Proposed recreational trails and substitute park land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed site. If a significant negative economic impact is anticipated,an estimate of its magnitude will be provided. 14. The expected fiscal impact on the City of Ithaca of the costs of(1)Any of the traffic improvements called for in the DEIS Page 52 that Wal*Mart does not commit to pay for;(2)Any traffic improvements required by NYS DoT that Wal*Mart or the State does not agree to pay for; (3)Any new roads or traffic signals or other traffic improvements required to handle increased year 2005 traffic generated by Wal*Mart and its expected induced development; (4)Any increased demand expected for City police services and staffing levels. Social Impact Considerations A summary and discussion of the predominant comments made during the public hearing period regarding the effect of the proposed project on the character of the community will be provided. 3.7 Neighborhoods The fEIS will examine the impact of the project on the Spencer Road neighborhood and the neighborhood along Buttermilk Falls Road. 4.0 Unavoidable Impacts The discussion of unavoidable adverse impacts will be an outgrowth of the on-going technical studies outlined above. The list of topic areas anticipated to have unavoidable impacts is as follows: • Traffic- volume and intersection capacity • Pedestrian/Bicycle access • Visual-including lighting • Flooding • Wetlands • Water Quality • Ecological Resources • Economic • Community Resources • Social • Proposed Substitute Parkland Buttermilk Park Viewshed 9 FEIS OUTLINE: 5.0 Mitigation Mitigation strategies will be developed for all the impacts eventually identified in 4.0 Unavoidable Impacts, above. For example, landscaping plans should be developed for the undeveloped portion of the site with native floodplain tree species prior to its donation to the City of Ithaca. 6.0 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources • Identify the impacts in Section 4.0 that may lead to an irreversible and irretrievable commitment of resources such as the loss of potential substitute parkland 7.0 Energy Use and Conservation The fEIS will state which energy saving methods will be used and document the benefit derived. The fEIS will justify the applicability or nonapplicability to Ithaca of measures adopted by the `Ecostore' in Lawrence,Kansas. 8.0 Other Comments on the DEIS 1.The overly promotional language will be identified 2. Minor errors in the DEIS will be identified and correct information provided. 10