HomeMy WebLinkAboutFINAL Adopted CWD Findings Statement - TOI PB-5-21-20191
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
FINDINGS STATEMENT
Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (State Environmental Quality Review Act), the
Town of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Law (Town Code Chapter 148), and applicable implementing
regulations, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as an Involved Agency under SEQR, makes the following findings.
Name of Action: Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Date: May 21, 2019
Lead Agency: City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Project Sponsor: UnChained Properties, LLC (UP)
Project Location: The Project is located on approximately 95 contiguous acres of land in central NYS,
South of Cayuga Lake in the Finger Lakes Region, and straddles the City and Town
border in Tompkins County (Site or Project Area). The Site is bounded as follows:
To the east, the Site follows South Aurora Street / NYS Route 96B, a major
transportation corridor that connects downtown Ithaca to South Hill, Ithaca College, and
the residential neighborhoods in the Town. It is a primary route for travelers from
Binghamton and points south.
To the north, the Site borders residential neighborhoods comprised primarily of single
and multifamily homes in the City.
To the west, the Site slopes steeply to meet Spencer Street in the City, then traces the
back of the residential properties lining the east side of Spencer Road. In the Town of
Ithaca, the property line traces the alignment of the former Lehigh Valley Railroad and
future Gateway Trail, as well as a large parcel of undeveloped land.
To the south, the Site borders the South Hill Business Campus in the Town.
Classification: Type I Action; Positive Declaration Issued; DGEIS and FGEIS Prepared
Contacts: Lead Agency: Project Sponsor:
Lisa Nicholas David Lubin
City of Ithaca Planning Department UnChained Properties, LLC
108 East Green Street 225 Colonial Drive
Ithaca, New York 14850 Horseheads, NY 14845
Phone: (607) 274-6550 Phone: (607) 739-3826
2
Table of Contents
I. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION ......................................................................................................... 4
II. FACTS AND INFORMATION RELIED UPON TO SUPPORT THE DECISION ................................ 6
III. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES ............................................................................................... 8
A. No-Action Alternative ........................................................................................................ 9
B. Development in Accordance with Existing Zoning Alternative ........................................................ 9
C. Maximum Development Scenario .................................................................................................... 9
IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING THE DECISION ................................................ 10
A. Land Use and Zoning ....................................................................................................... 10
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 10
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 11
B. Land ................................................................................................................................... 13
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 13
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 14
C. Water Resources ............................................................................................................. 15
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 16
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 17
D. Vegetation and Fauna ...................................................................................................... 18
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 18
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 20
E. Public Health and Environment ...................................................................................... 21
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 21
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 23
F. Historic and Archaeological Resources............................................................................ 25
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 26
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 26
G. Transportation and Circulation ....................................................................................... 27
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 27
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 31
3
H. Utilities .............................................................................................................................. 38
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 38
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 39
I. Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 40
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 40
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 41
J. Visual and Aesthetic Resources ...................................................................................... 41
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 42
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 42
K. Community Services ........................................................................................................ 43
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 43
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 44
L. Open Space and Recreation ............................................................................................ 44
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 44
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 45
M. Construction Activities ..................................................................................................... 45
Potential Impacts ............................................................................................................................ 45
Mitigation ....................................................................................................................................... 46
N. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources ..……..………………………………….. 48
O. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts ..………………………………………………………………………………………… 48
P. Growth Inducing Aspects …………………………………………………………………….…………………………… 48
Q. Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources …………………………………………… 49
V. THRESHOLD CONDITIONS ...................................................................................................... 49
VI. VERIFICATION OF FINDINGS .................................................................................................. 51
ATTACHMENTS
A. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
B. FINDINGS STATEMENT CHECKLIST
C. FINDINGS STATEMENT FIGURE 2.3-1 AND TABLE 2.7-1
D. LIST OF ACRONYMS
4
I. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
The Chain Works District (CWD) Project (Project or Preferred Alternative) is a proposed mixed-use
redevelopment of the 95-acre former Morse Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility (Site) that traverses the
City and Town of Ithaca’s municipal boundary. The Site is located along the New York State Route 96B corridor
and where Turner Street and South Cayuga Street meet the northern edge of South Hill. The Project involves
the redevelopment and rehabilitation of the existing architecture and landscape into a 1.7 million square foot
(sf) mixed-use “live, work, play” district. Attached hereto as Attachment A is FGEIS Figure 2.3-2, Conceptual Site
Layout Plan.
The Project consists of removing approximately 92,320 sf of the existing 821,200 sf buildings, constructing
86,600 sf of vertical additions, and constructing 890,700 sf of new buildings. The Project is estimated to be
completed over a seven-to-ten year period. The first phase (Phase I) will consist of redeveloping four existing
buildings generally located at the northern and central portion of the Site. These first four buildings are
approximately 331,450 sf and will contain a mix of office, residential, and industrial uses. Subsequent phases of
development will be determined as the Project proceeds and will include new structures to complete a full
buildout of 1,706,150 sf, consisting of approximately 915 residential dwelling units, along with 184,350 sf of
commercial space and 260,900 sf of industrial use.
Infrastructure work related to the full development of the Project will include the following: (1) removing select
buildings to create public courtyard areas and a network of open spaces and roads; (2) creating pedestrian,
bicycle, and vehicular connections throughout the Site from South Hill to Downtown Ithaca; (3) improving the
existing roads within the Site while creating new access points into the Site; (4) mitigating existing
environmental impacts from historic uses; (5) fostering the development of a link, the Gateway Trail, to the
Black Diamond Trail network; and (6) installing stormwater management facilities, lighting, public water and
utilities, landscaping and other Site amenities.
The development of the Site is fostered by a proposed rezoning of the City portion of the Site into a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), and the Town portion into a Planned Development Zone (PDZ). The PUD and PDZ
divides the development of the Site into four (4) Sub Areas. Sub Areas CW2 and CW3 have been further
enumerated into sections CW2A and B and CW3A and B, as shown in FGEIS Figure 2.3-1 on page 5 of this
document.
The addition of sections CW2A and B and CW3A and B are in response to comments received during the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) process, specifically regarding the character/size of the existing
residential structures adjacent to the Project and the additional need for a transition between the existing and
proposed structures along NYS Route 96B. The Sub Areas and sections are defined as:
Natural Sub Area (CW1): A ± 23.9 acre conservation zone containing a mature Appalachian Oak-Hickory
forest to be used for passive recreation, generally located along the western portion of the Site.
Neighborhood General Sub Area (CW2): A ± 21.2 acre zone for clusters of new residential development
using a mix of housing styles and coinciding with primary points of access into the Site, generally located
at the southeastern end of the Site within the Town. The CW2 Sub Area is split into subsections CW2A
and CW2B. This allowed for the reduction from 6 to 4 stories in the CW2A.
Neighborhood Center Sub Area (CW3): A ± 39.7 acre zone for mixed uses ranging from residential to
industrial, using existing buildings at the core of the Site and clusters of new buildings at the northern
edge of the Site and along NYS Route 96B; located in the City and Town. The CW3 Sub Area is split into
5
subsections CW3A, CW3B and CW3C (CW3C is only in the City). CW3A reduces the maximum allowed
above-grade stories from 6 to 4 and maximum allowed façade length from 180 feet to 120 feet. CW3C
(City) also reduces the maximum allowed above-grade stories from 6 to 4 but also prohibits below-grade
stories.
Industrial Sub Area (CW4): A ± 10.3 acre zone for industrial uses centrally located on the Site using
existing buildings located in the City and Town.
FGEIS Figure 2.3-1 PUD/PDZ Sub Area Boundary Map (R+W)
Following a detailed design process with extensive public outreach and involvement, the Project Sponsor
provided a conceptual site plan in October 2014. On October 28, 2014, the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board (Lead Agency) issued a positive declaration for the Project, requiring the preparation of a
GEIS. The Lead Agency issued notices to all then-known involved or interested agencies to solicit Lead Agency
status for the Project by October 28, 2014. The Project Sponsor then prepared a Draft GEIS (DGEIS), copies of
which were made available for public review. The DGEIS was accepted as complete by the Lead Agency on
March 8, 2016, and a Notice of Public Hearing appeared in the Ithaca Journal on March 18, 2016 and in the
Environmental Notice Bulletin on March 23, 2016. A public hearing on the proposed Project was held on March
29, 2016. Due to extensive public interest, the public comment period was extended from May 10, 2016 to May
25, 2016.
Many comments were received during the public comment period. Copies of all comments received are
provided in Appendices A and B of the Final GEIS (FGEIS), which also incorporates the DGEIS by reference.
Responses to every substantive comment received are provided in Chapter 3 of the FGEIS. Comments covered
the purpose and need for the Project, the alternatives considered, potential environmental impacts, and
6
mitigation measures, among other things. In light of the comments received, various changes were made to the
DGEIS. These changes are detailed in Chapter 4 and Appendix D of the FGEIS.
Final designs for less-defined, more conceptual Project phases and components, or any proposed changes to the
better-defined elements (collectively, Future Project Plans), will require further evaluation pursuant to SEQR.
The lead agency will be responsible for performing an environmental review on the Future Project Plans
proposed in relation to (i) the FGEIS and (ii) the Findings Statement. Once Future Project Plans have been
submitted to the lead agency, that agency must determine if the environmental impacts associated with such
Future Project Plans have been adequately addressed in the FGEIS and SEQR Findings Statement.
Additionally, the following reviews, permits and/or approvals are/were required to facilitate the proposed
Project:
City of Ithaca
• SEQR: Preliminary Site Plan Approval of Conceptual Site Layout Plan and Final Site Plan Approval for two
Buildings (from the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board)
• Rezoning to a PUD (from the City of Ithaca Common Council)
• Building and Demolition Permits; Certificate of Occupancy (from the City of Ithaca Building Division)
• Highway Work Permits; Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the City of
Ithaca Board of Public Works)
Town of Ithaca
• Rezoning to a PDZ (from the Town of Ithaca Town Board), Preliminary Site Plan Approval of the
Conceptual Site Layout Plan and Final Site Plan Approval (from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board)
• Possible Town of Ithaca stormwater, water, sewer, trail or other easements
• Building and Demolition Permits; Certificates of Occupancy, possible Operating Permits (from the Town
of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department)
• Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the Town of Ithaca Public Works
Department)
Tompkins County
• Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the Tompkins County Department of
Health (TCDOH))
• County Planning Review (from the Tompkins County Department of Planning and Sustainability)
New York State
• Highway Work Permit (from the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT))
• 401 Water Quality Certification; State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES)/Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) (from the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC))
• Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the New York State Department of
Health (NYSDOH))
• Review from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Places (NYSOPRHP)
• Amendment to the current Record of Decision (ROD) to allow mixed-use development (NYSDEC)
• Request for Boundary Modification to release southern portion of Site from Inactive Hazardous Waste
Disposal Site (IHWDS) Registry (NYSDEC)
II. FACTS AND INFORMATION RELIED UPON TO SUPPORT THE DECISION
A. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency, conducted a coordinated review
pursuant to SEQR.
7
B. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board commenced the SEQR process for the Project in
October of 2014 by circulating a notice of intent to act as Lead Agency along with a Full Environmental
Assessment Form to all then-known Interested or Involved Agencies:
Involved Agencies
• City of Ithaca (City)
• City of Ithaca Board of Public Works
• City of Ithaca Common Council
• City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board (Lead Agency)
• NYSDEC, Region 7
• NYSDOH
• New York State Department of Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (SHPO)
• NYSDOT, Region 3
• TCDOH
• TCDP
• Town of Ithaca (Town)
• Town of Ithaca Town Board
• Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Interested Agencies & Parties (note: some City groups are no longer in existence as of 2019)
• South Hill Civic Association (SHCA)
• Tompkins County Area Development
• City of Ithaca School District
• Community Advisory Group (CAG)
• City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council (CAC)
• City of Ithaca Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Council (BPAC)
• City of Ithaca Shade Tree Advisory Committee (STAC)
• Disability Advisory Council (DAC)
C. On October 7, 2014 and October 28, 2014 (respectively), the Town of Ithaca Planning Board and the
Town of Ithaca Town Board, as Involved Agencies, concurred with the designation of the City of Ithaca
Planning and Development Board to act as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the Chain Works
District project. None of the other Interested or Involved agencies objected to the City of Ithaca Planning
and Development Board acting as Lead Agency pursuant to SEQR. The City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board was established as the SEQR Lead Agency for the Project in October of 2014.
D. Following a detailed design charrette planning process with extensive public outreach and involvement,
the Project Sponsor unveiled a detailed concept site layout plan for Chain Works in October 2014.
E. On October 28, 2014, the Lead Agency issued a positive declaration for the Project requiring the
preparation of the DGEIS.
F. Following issuance of the positive declaration, a Draft Scoping Report was issued. A Public Scoping
Meeting to solicit comments on the draft scope was held on November 18, 2014. The Town of Ithaca
Planning Board provided comments on the Scoping Document on January 6, 2015. A Final Scoping
Document was approved by the Lead Agency on January 13, 2015.
8
G. Following issuance of the Final Scoping Document, the DGEIS was prepared by UP pursuant to the
requirements of SEQR. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board submitted comments related to the adequacy
of the GEIS on February 16, 2016. On March 8, 2016, the Lead Agency determined that the DGEIS was
complete and adequate for public review and scheduled a public hearing.
H. Copies of the DGEIS were made available for public review at the City of Ithaca Planning Department,
the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, the City of Ithaca Office of the Clerk and the Tompkins County
Public Library. A copy of the DGEIS was also posted on the CWD website. A Notice of Completion of the
DGEIS and Notice of Public Hearing appeared in The Ithaca Journal on March 18, 2016 and the
Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB) on March 23, 2016.
I. A public hearing was held on March 29, 2016 at the Cinemapolis movie theater. Due to extensive public
interest in the Project and several requests made during the DGEIS public hearing, the public comment
period, originally scheduled to expire on May 10, 2016, was extended until May 25, 2016.
J. Notices of comment period extension were published in the Ithaca Journal, the City of Ithaca Planning
and Development Board website and the CWD website. Additionally, comments received after the end
of the public comment period prior to the issuance of the FGEIS were accepted and responded to within
the FGEIS.
K. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board and Town of Ithaca Town Board submitted comments to the Lead
Agency regarding the DGEIS on May 24, 2016. L. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board considered the FGEIS and submitted additional comments to the
Lead Agency via email on December 6, 2018.
M. The FGEIS was issued on February 26, 2019 and a notice of completion of the FGEIS appeared in the ENB
on March 13, 2019.
N. The FGEIS was distributed to the Interested and Involved agencies and copies of the FGEIS were made
available for public review at the City of Ithaca Planning Department and the Tompkins County Public
Library – Central Branch. A copy of the FGEIS was also posted on the CWD website. Pursuant to SEQR,
the FGEIS was held open and available for more than 10 calendar days in order to afford agencies and
the public a reasonable time period in which to consider the FGEIS before the Lead Agency issued its
written findings statement.
O. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as an Involved Agency, has reviewed the information contained in
the DGEIS, including all appendices and the comments to the DGEIS, and the FGEIS including all
appendices (collectively referred to as the GEIS). The Town of Ithaca Planning Board finds that the GEIS
provides a thorough examination of significant potential impacts that would result from undertaking the
Project. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed, questioned and analyzed the various impacts
of, alternatives to, and potential mitigative measures for the Preferred Alternative and weighed these
issues against the social and economic benefits of the Preferred Alternative and other essential
considerations.
III. DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVES
The GEIS provides a comprehensive analysis of the environmental, social and economic impacts and details
appropriate mitigation measures for the Preferred Alternative, as well as the No Action Alternative,
Development in Accordance with Existing Zoning Alternative, and Maximum Development Alternative. Below is
a brief summary of each alternative:
9
A. No-Action Alternative: An evaluation of the No-Action Alternative is required under 6 NYCRR 617.9(b)(5)
and involves the scenario where the existing buildings on the Chain Works property would remain as is.
Under this scenario, the existing contamination on the site would be remediated to a degree that meets
NYS cleanup requirements and could potentially allow industrial uses at the site. The quality of the
buildings on the site could potentially continue to degrade, and trail development or other
bicycle/pedestrian connections to uses that surround the site would be less likely.
The Town’s Comprehensive Plan identifies the Chain Works site as appropriate for redevelopment into a
mixed use complex that would include light industrial uses in the existing manufacturing buildings, along
with apartments, live-work space, studios, retail uses, and office space. The Plan envisions the
development of the Gateway pedestrian and bicycle trail that would connect the Black Diamond Trail
with the South Hill Recreation Way. Public water and sewer, along with bicycle and pedestrian facilities
and public transit, are all available to the site. Additionally, the property is very close to the downtown
Ithaca core and many community services, making it a walkable and easily accessible area for
residential, mixed use development. The No-Action Alternative is not a preferred alternative, given the
viability of this site for development and the current zoning and availability of public amenities that
support it.
B. Development In Accordance with Existing Zoning Alternative: This Alternative includes developing the
Chain Works property to full build out in accordance with the current density requirements for the
existing zoning classifications within the Town and City of Ithaca. The 64+/- acre portion of the property
located within the Town of Ithaca is exclusively zoned Industrial, which does not permit residential or
retail uses of any kind. Under the existing zoning, the existing buildings could be utilized for industrial or
other permitted uses, such as research and development facilities, indoor warehousing, indoor storage
(including self-storage), business, professional or administrative offices and the like. Any expanded
industrial or other currently permitted use would be limited by topography, but there is room on vacant
land within the Town for potentially up to 100,000+/- sf of additional building development under
current zoning.
However, the development of the project in accordance with existing zoning would not meet the goals
of the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan, which, as stated in the No-Action Alternative above,
encourages mixed use development that includes residential and retail uses and other uses that are not
permitted under current zoning. Therefore, this Alternative is not preferred.
C. Maximum Development Scenario: This scenario results in a higher density development than the
Proposed Action, but with a maximum build-out scenario (most intensive use) that would still comply
with LEED ND Guidelines. The GEIS analyzed a maximum build out by using a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of
1.5 for the buildable areas in the CW2, CW3 and CW4 sub areas, which equates to approximately 2.65
million square feet of development between the Town and City portions of the project. The mix of uses,
general site layout and overall approach envisioned in this scenario would be similar to that of the
Project as currently proposed. The only difference is that the development density of the project would
be increased by 25% in the Maximum Development Scenario. The higher FAR would be achieved by an
increase in building heights, which would particularly change the character of Sub Area CW2 in the Town
of Ithaca, from a mix of townhouses and small apartment buildings to higher density multi-family and
multi-story buildings.
The Maximum Development Scenario would necessitate more parking to accommodate buildings up to
8 stories in height in the area of the project in the Town that is in a topographically prominent location.
10
This would increase the visual impact of the project from both Danby Road/NYS Route 96B and in the
City of Ithaca, downhill from Sub Area CW1. Although the mixed use aspect of this Alternative would
comply with the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, the significant building height increase and increased
parking needs could create significant negative visual impacts and impacts to community character in
the Town-portion of the project. Therefore, this Alternative is not preferred.
IV. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING THE DECISION
A summary of the relevant environmental impacts, facts and conclusions disclosed in the GEIS are described
below:
A. Land Use and Zoning
The GEIS examined the Project’s consistency with existing land use controls and local development plans
and policies to evaluate Project components alongside the visions for this area of the City and Town. The
pre-development land use within the Site is industrial. The existing zoning for the majority of the Site
(64.37 acres) is classified as Industrial (I-1 in the City and I in the Town). The remainder of the
developable portion of the property is zoned Medium Density Residential. The zoning for the adjacent
parcels is also Medium Density Residential, except for the South Hill Business Campus PDZ to the south
of the Site. The City of Ithaca adopted its Comprehensive Plan in September 2015 and PUD Zoning in
October 2014. The Town of Ithaca adopted its Comprehensive Plan in September 2014 and has been
using Special Land Use Districts (now called PDZ’s) since August 1984. There are currently 15 Special
Land Use (Mixed-Use) or PDZ districts within the Town of Ithaca.
Potential Impacts
1. The Project will create land use impacts in terms of both form and intensity of uses. The current
pattern of land use promoted by the existing land use regulations resulted in a large industrial
complex.
a. The most substantial change in land use is the allowance for residential use where no
residential development is currently permitted.
b. In terms of form, the existing zoning does not regulate the size, scale, massing or
disposition of buildings on the parcel in relationship to the surrounding land uses. In
contrast, the Project’s proposed PUD/PDZ zoning will do so.
2. The most important potentially significant adverse impact of a built-out landscape of
conventional zoning is the loss of the neighborhood character along NYS Route 96B.
3. Existing zoning will be impacted by the Project through the rezoning of the Site as a PUD and
PDZ.
a. Rezoning the City portion of the post-industrial Site as a PUD would allow the Project to
respond to and help implement planning and land-use concepts being set forth in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, including the following impacts or opportunities:
• Regional sprawl would be avoided by providing a mixed-use development that
bridges the City and Town, the Region, and Downtown.
• Revitalizing the under-utilized Site with a mix of uses, including housing, would
extend and help implement the City’s goals to provide more housing and
revitalize the urban core.
• Linkages between the City and Town, Ithaca College and Downtown would be
strengthened by developing the Site. This would increase walkability and
accessibility to Downtown, in turn reducing the overall carbon footprint of the
greater community.
• A trail on the western side of the Site would link the Site and the City to a
greater network of trail connections within the City and beyond.
11
• Natural areas will remain largely undeveloped to preserve the acreage of
environmentally valuable and sensitive areas.
b. Rezoning the Town portion of the Site as a PDZ would allow the Project to respond to
the planning and land-use concepts set forth in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan,
including the following impacts or opportunities:
• Promoting efficient utilization of the land by providing denser clusters of
housing with significantly smaller footprints.
• Preserving and protecting environmentally valuable areas as amenities for the
neighborhood and surrounding community.
• Promoting human-scaled, walkable development with physical and social
connectivity within the Project and around the community through trail and
pedestrian connections between the development and the trail and pedestrian
networks on South Hill and in Downtown Ithaca.
• Promoting bicycling, transit, bike and car share and other alternative modes of
transportation.
4. CW1 Sub Area: This Sub Area is intended to remain largely undeveloped, with the potential
development of nature trails and related facilities. With greater intensity of uses adjacent to this
Sub Area, there is a potential impact on the natural condition of this area including the
introduction of recreational trails bringing people within close proximity of a natural area that
has seen little human activity. There could be potential stormwater impacts in the CW1 Sub
Area as a result of the changes to intensity of land use in the CW2 Sub Area upstream.
5. CW2 Sub Area: A potential impact on the surrounding natural areas could result from dense
residential development in what is currently an undeveloped wooded area.
a. Having residential uses in close proximity to the CW1 Sub Area could increase the
amount of human activity within the natural wooded area.
b. The increase in intensity of use will also impact the few off-site residential uses adjacent
to that area, but should have little effect on the commercial use to the south of the Site
or Ithaca College campus to the southeast.
c. There will be a larger number of people moving by foot and by car between the Site and
the surrounding neighborhoods placing more stress on existing sidewalk and street
infrastructure.
6. CW3 Sub Area: A potential impact to the CW3 Sub Area includes impacts to the character of the
district and the relationship of new buildings and uses in close proximity to the existing
surrounding uses, specifically the Hillview-Turner place neighborhood.
a. There will be a larger number of people moving by foot and by car between the Site and
the surrounding neighborhoods placing more stress on existing sidewalk and street
infrastructure.
7. CW4 Sub Area: One potential impact of the project in this Sub Area would be the possibility of
creating very large buildings with significant visual impacts.
Mitigation
1. The rezoning of the parcel to a PUD/PDZ with the establishment of Sub Areas and form-based
zoning elements will mitigate impacts to the form and intensity of land uses.
a. The Town Board will consider whether to add to the PDZ, in areas adjacent to existing
residential zones, to mitigate the intensity of development.
b. Form and intensity of uses will also be mitigated in the City by following site plan review
procedures. The same will be mitigated in the Town by following the requirements in
the Town PDZ, along with site plan review procedures.
12
c. Buildings within a 100-foot buffer along NYS Route 96B will be limited to a maximum of
four stories.
d. In conjunction with the CWD zoning approvals, a Conceptual Site Layout Plan will be
submitted to the Town and City Planning Boards for preliminary site plan approvals
pursuant to §270-185 of the Town Code and §276-6 of the City Code.
e. In the event a final Site Plan submitted for approval is not in substantial agreement with
the Conceptual Site Layout Plan and/or other Project threshold conditions are exceeded,
the Town and City Planning Boards - or whomever is the proper lead agency for the
Project component under consideration - will have the opportunity to determine
whether such changes warrant additional environmental review.
2. The Comprehensive Plans both describe the use of new mixed-use zoning as a tool to implement
shared land use goals for the Site.
3. The preservation of neighborhood is addressed through the development of the CWD PUD and
related Design Guidelines for the City and the PDZ with form based code elements for the Town.
a. In contrast to the existing pattern of development, the Project calls for compact
development, which integrates land uses, creates a strong multimodal network of
streets and paths, and makes for a more efficient use of infrastructure and existing
services.
b. The City Design Guidelines and Town form-based PDZ will mitigate potential land use
impacts by encouraging development that will contribute to the CWD’s unique
character. Moreover, the Design Guidelines and PDZ establish Site Plan Review and
Special Permit procedures with specific regulations for the district.
c. The form-based code elements in the town’s PDZ have been prepared to provide clear
standards and guidelines for the design, construction, and review of development in the
CWD. These standards and guidelines will help ensure that new buildings are pedestrian
scaled and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The elements further
address Site and building standards for each of the proposed Sub Areas and identify site
planning, thoroughfares, lighting, signage, and building design requirements.
4. CW1 Sub Area: The PDZ effectively prevents the development of the CW1 Sub Area, other than
for trails and small ancillary structures (pavilions, sheds, gazebos) that are related to the
recreational use. There is no proposed specific mitigation for this Sub Area because the
preservation of this land as a natural area is in fact part of the proposed mitigation for the Sub
Area.
5. CW2 Sub Area: This Sub Area will allow the development of residential uses in a variety of
housing styles, sizes and types. In response to DGEIS comments, this Sub Area was split into two
subsections (CW2A and CW2B). Per the town PDZ, Sub Area CW2A, located along the Aurora
Street/NYS Route 96B frontage, will not permit large apartment buildings, courtyard buildings,
general buildings or any other residential structure over 4 stories in height. The intent is to
compliment the streetscape pattern of smaller scale, lower profile residential structures that
exist along the existing Aurora Street/NYS Route 96B frontage.
a. To the extent possible, the use of open space preservation techniques, such as the
clustering of dwelling structures, is encouraged for the undeveloped land within the
CW2 Sub Area, to mitigate impacts from dense development in other Sub Areas. Specific
designated trail linkages can be established to existing open space areas throughout the
Site during site plan review.
6. CW3 Sub Area: In response to DGEIS comments, this Sub Area was split into three subsections
(CW3A, CW3B, and CW3C). Per the Town PDZ, Sub Area CW3A, located along the Aurora
Street/NYS Route 96B frontage, will limit the height of buildings to no more than 4 stories in
13
height. Like CW2A above, the intent is to complement the streetscape pattern of smaller scale,
lower profile residential structures that exist along the existing Aurora Street/NYS Route 96B
frontage. The internal Project layout in CW3B will include a network of vehicular and pedestrian
connections to move the increase of people and cars in the most efficient manner possible. This,
coupled with road and sidewalk improvements on the Aurora Street/Route 96B frontage
(outlined in “G. Transportation and Circulation” below) will mitigate the stress on existing
sidewalk and street infrastructure.
7. CW4 Sub Area: This Sub Area involves rehabilitating existing manufacturing structures to
accommodate light manufacturing uses again. There will be no increase in the height of the
existing buildings and no new building development. Improving the interior and exterior
features of the existing buildings will result in positive aesthetic impacts. No other mitigation is
proposed or required.
B. Land
The GEIS examined the Project’s potential impacts on land for the 95 acre parcel, including in-situ soils,
surface geology, and topography. Natural features of the Site include exposed bedrock along the steeper
slopes and a heavily wooded area in the southern portion of the Site. The Site contains mostly
Lordstown series soils, similar to other hillsides in the area. The underlying in-situ soils have high bearing
capacity which makes the construction of buildings acceptable. The Site slopes steeply east-to-west,
with the highest elevation (approximately 800’) at the top of South Aurora Street and the lowest
(approximately 440’) where the Site meets Spencer Street. Approximately 50% of the Site contains
slopes of less than 20%, which are deemed appropriate for development.
Potential Impacts
1. The Project will utilize standard cut and fill excavation methods during construction of the new
roads, parking areas and building pads. In terms of grading, it is estimated that 68,000+ cubic
yards of fill will be necessary to balance the Site. This bulk cut and fill estimate provides total
volumes and does not account for construction materials that are required to be imported nor
does it include the void volume required for below-grade structures, such as storage and parking
areas.
2. The amount of disturbance for Phase I is limited due to the rehabilitation and repurposing of
existing buildings on the Site, which will require the least amount of preparation. The impacts
associated with the Phase I buildings are as follows:
a. Building 21 (City of Ithaca)- Limited to the minor sidewalk and parking area restorations
required to occupy the building.
b. Building 24 (City of Ithaca)- Limited to re-surfacing existing pavement areas and
establishing pedestrian access into the building from parking areas.
c. Buildings 33/34 (Town of Ithaca)- Depending on parking requirements of future
tenant(s), the development of the south parking areas which includes the demolition of
the existing metal storage building and construction of two parking areas.
3. As with all earthwork operations, the full development of the Project will expose soils that
would increase the potential for short and long-term erosion impacts and potential loss of
sediment from the Site.
a. Short term erosion impacts are mainly due to the site construction phase.
b. Potential long-term erosion impacts would be due to improper construction techniques,
including non-compliance with State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES)
General Construction (GC) permit requirements for the stabilization of stockpiles or
14
other idled disturbed areas for periods exceeding 14 days, as well as improper diversion
of stormwater flows through unstabilized areas of construction.
4. Potential impacts to adjacent parcels would include increased noise, vibration, and dust during
construction, potential erosion of soils and other sediment onto adjacent properties, and
increased stormwater runoff from new development.
5. Potential impacts for development beyond Phase I, listed by Zoning Sub Area, are as follows:
a. Sub Area CW1: Impacts to soils and topography in the CW1 Sub Area are limited to the
sections where recreational trails or associated small structures are constructed.
Disturbance due to the development of recreational features will be minimal. The
largest potential impacts to this Sub Area are due to the erosion potential associated
with the development of Sub Area CW2 located upgradient from CW1.
b. Sub Area CW2: This Sub Area contains the potential for the most new development
within the Site and also the most potential impacts to Site soils and topography. CW2
will be terraced to develop multi-family residential units, configured in multiple stories
that benefit from existing sloping grades that accommodate structured parking under
certain residential buildings. Based on previous geotechnical studies, it is anticipated
that blasting will not be required. Heavy construction equipment will be used to remove
as much of the fractured/weathered bedrock as feasible. If additional rock removal is
required, blasting may be necessary. The in-situ soils in CW2 are highly erodible.
c. Sub Area CW3: The CW3 Sub Area consists mostly of terraced parking areas that will be
redeveloped for buildings, parking areas and roads. The portions of CW3 that are
anticipated to include new buildings and parking areas are uphill of the existing
developed portions of the core, largely located within the City of Ithaca. There is
minimal new development proposed in the town portion of this Sub Area.
d. Sub Area CW4: Impacts to CW4 are limited to the potential construction of two parking
areas that total less than 1 acre of disturbance. This is a minor amount of disturbance
and would normally not require a NYSDEC SPDES GC permit. However, since this is part
of a plan of common development, a full SWPPP will be required for this portion of
work.
Mitigation
1. Future development of new areas will be located primarily in areas with slopes less than 20%.
Sub Area CW1, which contains areas with slopes greater than 20%, will be preserved.
Development will be relocated away from areas with unstable soils. Such topographic
restrictions on future development minimize erosion and potential impacts to topography, while
reducing the amount of cut and fill required.
2. The Conceptual Grading Plan was prepared with the goal of balancing the amount of cut and fill,
which minimizes the import/export of materials to and from the Project. Detailed grading plans
of each subsequent phase will be developed to mitigate the excess fill requirements. Subsoils
will be tested by a certified laboratory; and construction specifications will be developed based
on the laboratory analysis and recommendations of the geotechnical testing firm.
3. Side slope grades of all cut and fill areas will be set to minimize the potential for future erosion.
Phase I site plan drawings include an existing conditions survey performed by a NYS Licensed
Surveyor. (subsequent site plans will also include existing conditions surveys).
4. Grading and Erosion Control plans and geotechnical reports for subsequent phases will be
developed during the site plan approval process.
5. Demolition and grading plans will be developed as part of all site plan submissions. Grading
plans will be developed to balance cut and fill requirements with the design intent of disposing
15
of all excess material on-site. Excess soils created by the excavation for below-ground structure
parking and storage levels will be utilized as fill around adjacent structures and, if suitable, in
pavement areas. Complete construction specifications for earthwork and erosion control will be
developed for each phase.
6. Coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES GC Permit (GP-0-015-002) for erosion and sediment control
will be obtained. A SWPPP will be developed for the entire project, and will require the
following:
a. Define the specific limits of disturbance (LOD) for each Phase to maintain impacts within
the permitted area.
b. Develop Erosion & Sediment Control Plans as part of all site plan submissions (as noted
above).
c. Mitigate stream impacts from erosion by minimizing earthwork within 50 feet of the
banks of the existing streams on the Site as well as protecting from excess stormwater
runoff during construction. The Project within the town must comply with the Town of
Ithaca Stream Setback Law (Town Code §270-219.5)
d. Minimize the areas of disturbance for slopes exceeding 20%. Preserve and maintain
vegetated areas to the maximum extent practicable.
e. Determine slope stability by a qualified engineer for development of slopes in excess of
3:1. Retaining walls, turf reinforcement mats or other Best Management Practices
(BMP’s) will be designed by a qualified engineer for slopes exceeding 3:1.
f. Inspect for site stabilization by a qualified inspector as part of the SPDES GC Permit.
g. Obtain written approval from the MS4 prior to the disturbance of five acres or more at
any one time.
h. Obtain certification by a licensed professional engineer that attests to the construction
and implementation of the SWPPP upon completion of the site construction portion for
the individual phases.
7. The developer will follow any applicable excavation management plan approved by NYSDEC to
appropriately manage any impacted soils encountered during construction.
8. If necessary, a system of controlled blasting would be specified that includes methodology,
mitigation and monitoring requirements. The blasting specifications will be developed in
accordance with NYSDOT Geotechnical Engineering Manual: Procedure for Blasting. All Local,
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA)
and NYS Department of Labor (NYSDOL) requirements will be followed. A written blast plan will
be developed and pre-operations meetings will be conducted with the Project Sponsor,
Engineer, Contractor, and City and Town Staff.
C. Water Resources
The GEIS analyzed the impacts to water resources that would be associated with each of the
alternatives. In particular, the GEIS analyzed the potential impacts associated with stormwater
management, groundwater and hydrogeological conditions. There are three unnamed tributaries that
converge and run east-to-west within the Site to Six Mile Creek, which is located approximately 500 feet
to the northwest of the Site. No other surface water or ephemeral water features are known to exist on
the Site. There are no Federal or State mapped wetlands inventoried on the Site. No wetlands were
encountered on field walks in the developable areas of the Site. Groundwater at the Site includes a
shallow fractured bedrock horizon and a deeper, competent bedrock in which groundwater resides in a
fractured vertical network. Groundwater may also be found in certain locations within the thin
overburden and fill material located throughout the Site. Pockets of “perched” groundwater can be
16
encountered in the overburden areas. On-Site stormwater infrastructure is in place from previous
development, all of which pre-date current State, Local, and Federal stormwater regulations.
Potential Impacts
1. Surface Water and Hydrogeological Setting: It is anticipated that there will be four crossings of
the unnamed tributary proposed for the Project, all in CW2that, without proper mitigation,
could result in erosion or bank destabilization, resulting in blockage or redirection of flow
through the stream.
a. Even though the potential of on-Site flooding is minimal because of topography and
existing grades, the increased amount of impervious surfaces will consequently increase
stormwater peak runoff rates that could potentially impact downstream stormwater
conveyance systems.
b. The total volume estimated during the 100-year design storm event will increase by
2.992 acre-feet (roughly one million gallons). However, assuming no infiltration or
evapotranspiration, the potential increase in the water surface elevation for Cayuga
Lake is immeasurable (0.00084 inches).
c. Additional potential impacts include erosive velocities from peak runoff rates and
volumes depending on the discharge location.
2. Groundwater: The Phase II Environmental Site Assessment indicates areas of perched
groundwater due to the on-Site bedrock. This will potentially impact structures with subgrade
levels, specifically structured parking.
a. Construction may be potentially impacted by high groundwater or perched pockets of
groundwater that may be experienced at various locations.
b. Groundwater may impact the design of the foundation including the selection of
materials as well as construction methods.
c. Groundwater dewatering may also impact downstream drainage structures. Because of
the impacts to groundwater from historic uses, special handling of groundwater at
certain locations on the Site may be necessary.
3. Stormwater: The creation of impervious surfaces is the main cause of increased stormwater
runoff rates and impacts to stormwater quality.
a. There are numerous existing catch basins and stormwater sewers to collect and
transport stormwater runoff along with grass swales. The full extent of the system and
its connection and outfalls are currently unknown, but will be fully investigated during
the site plan review process.
b. The Conceptual Site Layout Plan anticipates an increase of impervious surfaces of 11.2
acres (from 17.3 acres to 28.5 acres). Approximately 35.75 acres, or 37% of the Site, will
remain pervious.
c. The runoff flow and volume estimates for POS-A are anticipated to increase by
approximately 5%, due to the utilization of the green areas adjacent to NYS Route 96B.
d. POS-B through POS-D consists of areas that are mostly redevelopment and are likely to
see negligible differences in the estimated runoff rates and storm volumes.
e. POS-E, which includes all of Sub Area CW1 and CW2, will be the area with the most new
development and therefore will have the greatest increase in stormwater volume. The
runoff rates for drainage Sub Areas E-3 and E-4 will peak higher but earlier in the storm
period. This will actually reduce the total peak stormwater runoff rates for POS-E due to
the much larger upstream area (Sub Areas E-1 and E-2).
17
Mitigation
1. Town Code §270-219.5 defines required setbacks, prohibited activities and required mitigations
for development in the town along streams. The portion of the Project in the town will be
required to comply with the provisions of the Town of Ithaca Stream Setback Law, which
requires stream delineations and crossings for two of the streams on the Site that are located in
the Town of Ithaca, along with limits on soil disturbing activities, vegetation removal, staging
and development within setback Zones 1 and 2 (defined in the law), and mitigation for stream
setback disturbance.
2. All stream crossings will be designed in accordance with NYSDEC standards.
3. A Conceptual Stormwater Phasing Plan will be developed for the whole Site (to meet the
requirements of the NYS SPDES Permit). Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) for
each of the development phases will be submitted and reviewed during the site plan review
process. These SWPPPs will provide specific mitigation measures for surface
water/hydrogeological resources.
4. Stormwater quantity and quality mitigation may include the following:
a. The addition of more diversion swales.
b. Use of the guidance for redevelopment projects in the NYS SWMDM Chapter 9.
c. Runoff reduction practices in accordance with the NYS SWMDM Chapter 3. Utilization of
traditional stormwater infrastructure such as curb, gutter and storm sewers for
collection/conveyance.
d. Mitigation of stormwater velocity to ensure protection from erosive flows including
proper groundcover protection (biological as well as structural).
e. Green infrastructure mitigation practices to mitigate both stormwater quantity and
quality impacts, including bioretention facilities, planters, rain gardens, green roofs, and
other infiltration practices, depending on the suitability of the in-situ soils.
f. On-Site storage and reuse of stormwater flows as reduction practices, such as
repurposing the on-Site underground water storage tanks near Driveway III or creation
of a new storage area in Sub Area CW2.
5. Alternative stormwater quality mitigation practices known as hydrodynamic systems such as
gravity or vortex separators (stormwater management devices that separate out trash, debris
and settleable particles, e.g. sediment, from stormwater) will also be considered during site plan
approval.
6. All existing stormwater utility structures will be mapped in accordance with the SWPPP.
7. All new stormwater facilities will be designed in accordance with the most current version of the
NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual.
8. Stormwater facilities will be reviewed for capacity during individual site plan reviews.
9. The NYSDEC will issue a ROD Amendment that identifies the required remedial work to support
mixed-use development and addresses previously unidentified potential impacts to
groundwater and stormwater from existing contamination, in compliance with the Inactive
Hazardous Waste Site Program regulations and guidance documents. Typical remedial
approaches associated with any impacts to groundwater include:
a. Excavation and off-Site disposal of source area materials to reduce or prevent
contaminants from impacting stormwater and groundwater.
b. Capture/treatment of impacted surface or groundwater.
c. Solidification/stabilization or capping of impacted soils to reduce or eliminate leaching.
d. In-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater.
e. Routine monitoring of groundwater.
18
f. Implementation of any applicable groundwater management plan approved by NYSDEC
for groundwater encountered during construction.
10. The proposed Phase I mitigation is depicted on the Site Plan Drawings and includes:
a. Reduction of impervious areas within the Phase I project limits.
b. Rehabilitation of existing stormwater collection system in the existing road and parking
areas in the Phase I Project limits.
c. Construction of stormwater collection systems in new parking areas.
d. Conservation of natural areas directly adjacent to Phase I.
e. Installation of rain gardens and/or bioretention areas in and adjacent to parking areas.
D. Vegetation and Fauna
The existing vegetation and fauna on the Site have been surveyed as part of the GEIS. Seventy-seven
acres, or approximately 80% of the Site, are currently forested (34 acres/35%) or vegetated state (43.7
acres/45.5%), while 17.3 acres, or 20%, are comprised of buildings, roads, and other impervious
surfaces. The New York State Natural Heritage Program (NYSNHP) was consulted to obtain a summary of
rarities found in the Site vicinity. A qualified biologist was unable to find any of these, or any other
species, listed as Rare, Threatened, Special Concern, or Endangered in NYS by NYSNHP or NYSDEC within
the Site.
Potential Impacts
1. There are potential impacts to plant and wildlife habitats, particularly with regard to the
removal of some plants and habitat areas for the construction of the proposed new
development.
2. The Conceptual Site Layout Plan anticipates an increase of impervious surfaces of 11.2 acres
(from 17.3 acres to 28.5 acres). As such, the vegetated area will decrease by approximately 11.2
acres. A majority of this decrease is planned to occur in areas containing invasive plants
identified throughout the Site, resulting in fewer quantities of invasive species on Site. The
Project will maintain 35.75 acres, or 37% of the Site, as pervious.
3. With the reduction of vegetated areas, wildlife habitat may also be impacted. The qualities of
forested areas vary, with some being highly disturbed. As a result of development in CW2, CW3,
and CW4, fauna found in these zones of lesser habitat quality will be displaced, likely relocating
to CW1 where forests containing higher habitat quality will be preserved. Development may
have an impact on the native deer population.
DGEIS Table 5.4-1 describes the maximum acreage of potential vegetative cover that could be lost in
each Sub Area as a result of the Project:
Sub-Areas Area (Acres) development (Acres)(Acres) (%)
Appalachian Oak-Hickory
Total 23.86
CW2
-Hickory 54.57%
21.21%
19
Successional Old Field 82.82%
Total 21.17
CW3
33.17%
70.00%
67.16%
2.38%
Total 39.73
CW4
-Hickory
34.30%
73.81%
den
Total 10.27
Entire Parcel
-Hickory 14.76%
24.08%
y Cult. Successional Forests 68.05%
Total 95.03
4. The following describes the forest types that will be impacted through full, partial, or selective
removal resulting from the Project by Sub Areas:
a. CW1: Appalachian Oak-Hickory forest is a native, older growth forest containing high-
quality species and ecological habitat. All of this forest type located within CW1, which
constitutes 16.68 acres of the total 23.04 acres, or approximately 72.4% of this forest
type on the Site, will be preserved.
b. CW2: This Sub Area consists of two types of vegetative cover:
• Successional Old Field consisting of successional shrubs and young trees. The
make up of this vegetative cover largely consists of invasive species as is
typically found on disturbed sites. Portions of this vegetative cover will be fully
removed where new development will occur, and other areas will be selectively
removed and replanted with native species as an open space amenity for CW2.
20
• Appalachian Oak-Hickory as described in CW1 is in the north to northwestern
portions of this Sub Area, encompassing approximately 6.23 acres. A portion of
this vegetative cover is likely to be disturbed by proposed development in CW2.
c. CW3: This Sub Area consists of three types of vegetative cover:
• Successional Forests, which are characteristic of disturbed sites, consisting
largely of invasive and pioneer species. These areas are located in the eastern
area of CW3. This forest type is also located around the existing structures in
CW3.
• Formerly Cultivated Successional Forest containing species that have been
cultivated in the past and have naturalized and become invasive. Some species
include Barberry and Norway Maples. These zones are largely located at the
junction between single-family homes and the Site. This vegetative cover is
found in the area around Building 21.
• Maintained Lawns/Garden Areas are largely lawns with some cultivated plants.
This vegetative cover is found in the northeastern area of CW3.
• Portions of the vegetative cover described above will be fully removed where
new development will occur, and other areas will be selectively removed and
replanted with native species as an open space amenity for CW3.
d. CW4: Successional Forests, as described in CW3 above. This vegetative cover is found
around the existing structures in CW4. As with CW3, portions of this vegetative cover
will be partially or selectively removed in areas where the redevelopment of the existing
structures will occur.
Mitigation
1. Much of the forested and cultivated areas on portions of the Site, which have historically been
disturbed, are of poor quality and contain numerous invasive species. Although new impervious
areas will be constructed, abandoned existing impervious areas – walks, parking lots, and stairs
– that no longer serve a purpose, will be removed and replaced with native vegetation.
2. Phase I is designed to minimize impacts to the existing trees, although there are some removals
necessary. A majority of trees that will undergo removal are either invasive or naturalized
species with little ecological value for native habitats. A detailed tree survey will be performed
when development is proposed in conjunction with Site Plan review to minimize impacts to
older trees.
3. Mitigation for an increase of the Site’s impervious area resulting from the Project includes the
designation of a portion of the Site as a new Sub Area known as CW1.
a. The Project Sponsor is willing to offer mechanisms, such as appropriate deed
restrictions or conservation easements, to memorialize the preservation of the CW1 Sub
Area. A majority (approximately 72%) of the high quality Appalachian Oak-Hickory forest
is located in the CW1 Sub Area, and will be preserved as an amenity and recreational
area.
b. The designation of the CW1 Sub Area will minimize disturbance in an area with high
quality native vegetation, provide the means for the development of long term
conservation plans in specified areas of the Site, and landscape and tree preservation
standards.
c. Any wildlife that may be disturbed due to the development of other Sub Areas will likely
relocate to CW1, where forests containing higher quality habitat will be preserved.
Under the rezoning of the Site, this area is to be maintained as natural forest that will be
preserved in perpetuity.
21
d. Additional trails will be developed to allow the recreational and educational use of the
higher quality forested CW1 Sub Area.
4. Over 50% of the Appalachian Oak-Hickory forest located in CW2 will be lost to accommodate
Post-Phase I development in the CW2 Sub Area. Efforts to minimize the loss, such as the
submission of tree surveys, preservation and protection plans, will be explored during the site
plan review process for CW2.
E. Public Health and Environment
The GEIS evaluated potential impacts to public health and the environment that the Project and each of
the alternatives may have due to existing contamination. The existing environmental investigation data
generated by the property owner and the Project Sponsor provide sufficient information to analyze
potential significant impacts from identified Areas of Concern (AOCs) as a result of the Project and the
alternatives as well as an analysis of mitigation measures to protect human health and the environment
from impacts that may arise from redevelopment of the Site.
Potential Impacts
1. Multiple AOCs were found to have contaminants exceeding their relevant cleanup standards for
soil and groundwater, including but not limited to Trichloroethylene and other Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOCs), arsenic, barium, cyanide, polychlorinated bi-phenyls, and petroleum
products. If not addressed over time these contaminants can have impacts to public health and
the environment.
a. Specifically, impacts in soil can leach to groundwater or, if within the surface soil, can be
a potential contact issue for people on site or off site if erosion occurs.
b. Impacts in subsurface soils can be a concern in the event the future ground intrusive
work encounters those impacts and they are not properly handled.
c. Impacts in groundwater can migrate off-Site and can present in surface water down
gradient in locations where bedrock fractures outcrop at the surface, creating seeps.
d. (VOCs) impacting soils or groundwater beneath a building can impact indoor air through
soil vapor intrusion.
2. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board acknowledges that, in anticipation that the Project will move
forward in a manner consistent with the Conceptual Site Layout Plan, NYSDEC has approved an
Interim Remedial Measure (IRM) Work Plan using, in some instances, the Soil Cleanup Objective
(SCO) that applies to the proposed use of an area based on the Conceptual Site Layout Plan. In
other instances, the Protection of Groundwater SCO is proposed.
a. As part of implementing the IRM, select locations along the sanitary sewer lines will be
investigated to assess pipe integrity and potential impacts in soil beneath or adjacent to
the sewer lines.
b. Any areas where soil impacts exist above the applicable SCOs will need to be
remediated.
3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board further acknowledges that the property owner performed a
Boundary Reassessment Study that assessed conditions on the 36.76 acre undeveloped portion
of the Site to the south of the creek that runs east/west across the Site and produced evidence
that prior operations and/or disposal did not take place in that area. As a result, NYSDEC
realigned the Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site (IHWDS) boundary to exclude that
southern portion of the Site from remedial requirements of the IHWDS Registry. Because of the
presence of soil vapors in the vicinity of the sewer lines running through that portion of the Site,
the property owner filed a declaration of covenants and restrictions requiring that the potential
22
for soil vapor intrusion be addressed to the satisfaction of NYSDEC and NYSDOH whenever any
habitable structures are built within an 80 foot wide area around the sewer lines.
4. The current Record of Decision (ROD) calls for the Site to be remediated to allow only for
industrial use. Therefore, NYSDEC will need to amend the ROD to allow for the proposed mixed
uses at the Site contemplated under the Project. The requirements for remediating the Site will
be more stringent for mixed-use with a residential component than industrial or commercial
uses alone. As a result, the Project will improve the existing impacts from the Site’s historic uses
and the Preferred Alternative will be more beneficial from a public health and environment
perspective than the No Action Alternative and the Existing Zoning Alternative.
5. This more stringent cleanup will mitigate impacts to the environment, public health, and
surrounding residences by: (1) completing the remediation of more contaminants for a mixed-
use than under an industrial use; (2) addressing previously unknown contaminants thus
significantly reducing the potential for migration downgradient and impacting the surrounding
community and environment; and (3) establishing proper management of the Site over time.
6. Specifically, for soils, the following AOCs will have to be addressed:
a. Former department 507 Degreaser Area (AOC1).
b. Building 24 area (AOC26).
c. Former salt baths area (AOC27).
d. Building 30/oil shed area (AOC28).
e. Former propane storage area (AOC29).
f. Rice paddy area (AOC30).
g. Upper Parking Lot 6 area (AOC31).
h. Former spray pond area (AOC32).
i. Area east of Buildings 13A and 14 (AOC34).
j. East of Building 24 (AOC35A).
k. Building 11A (AOC35C).
l. Near Parking Lot 4 (AOC35D).
m. South of Parking Lot 3 (AOC35G).
n. Parking Lot 3 (AOC35H).
o. Former railroad right-of-way (LBA-SB-240) (AOC35K).
p. Former railroad right-of-way (DS-1) (AOC35L).
7. If the No Action or Existing Zoning alternatives were to be implemented for only the industrial
use and, in some instances, the protection of groundwater SCOs would apply leaving the
following AOCs not remediated or remediated to a lesser extent for soils:
a. AOC29
b. AOC31
c. AOC32
d. AOC35A
e. AOC35G
f. AOC35H
g. AOC35K
h. AOC35L
8. Additional environmental issues that will need to be addressed to a greater degree than under
the No Action or Existing Zoning alternatives include:
a. Vapor intrusion for VOCs for existing buildings that will be routinely occupied.
b. Vapor intrusion for VOCs for any habitable structures to be built in the vicinity of the
NCR sewer or Ithaca College sewer lateral within Sub Area CW2 and an eastern portion
of CW3.
23
9. Construction for the Project will encounter impacted soil and fill materials. These activities have
the potential to impact the on-Site workers or the environment if not properly handled.
Specifically, the Project may incur the following impacts:
a. General construction activity creating dust which could have contaminants such as
heavy metals or SVOCs.
b. Excavations within areas of soil impacted with VOCs could create vapor emissions.
c. Dewatering to support excavations could result in the discharge of contaminated
groundwater to surface soils, surface waters and/or the sewer system.
d. Construction workers could come into contact with impacted media.
e. Construction vehicles could transport impacted media off-Site to unregulated areas.
f. Stockpiled soils exposed to precipitation could transport contaminants through runoff.
10. Typical remedial approaches discussed in the GEIS include:
a. Excavation and off-Site disposal of impacted soils, which has been and is currently being
implemented by an IRM for 16 AOCs and previously employed for PCB impacted soils
around a former transformer pad.
b. Placing a barrier or cap above soil/fill materials impacted with contaminant
concentrations above the applicable SCOs. Again, this is a technique currently being
implemented as part of a NYSDEC approved IRM.
c. Solidification/stabilization of impacted soils.
d. In-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater.
e. In-situ or ex-situ thermal treatment of soil and/or groundwater.
f. Extraction and treatment of impacted groundwater and/or soil vapor.
g. Routine groundwater monitoring.
h. Sub slab depressurization (SSD) systems and/or pressurization monitoring of buildings
for mitigation of potential soil vapor intrusion.
Mitigation
1. An amendment to the existing ROD must be approved by NYSDEC before construction. The
amendment will facilitate development of the Site in a manner that protects public health and
the environment under a mixed-use redevelopment scenario with a restricted residential
component.
2. The specific final remedy or remedies at the Site will depend on the contaminant type, location
and impacts to groundwater. The pros and cons of each remedial approach will be evaluated as
part of the study of remedial alternatives that will be presented in a feasibility study and
reviewed by NYSDEC in a separate regulatory process that results in the further amendment of
the ROD. Specifically:
a. A feasibility study evaluating remedial approaches will be completed by the property
owner for review and approval by NYSDEC. Following NYSDEC approval, all necessary
remedial work will be completed to the requirements of the use for the specific area
being developed or which will be affected by development.
b. All disturbances of soil (e.g., construction of new buildings, renovation of existing
buildings, and/or utility work) within Sub Areas CW3 and CW4 and that portion of CW1
north of the creek that runs generally west to east across the Site will require the
implementation of an Soil Management Plan (SMP) and associated Excavation Work
Plan, Groundwater Management Plan and a Community Air Monitoring Plan (CAMP).
• All such work would require an Environmental Monitor to complete appropriate
oversight and management/characterization of disturbed materials. This
includes continuous air monitoring for VOCs and fugitive dust, monitoring
24
excavations for potential impacted media, sampling of all water and soil
generated, stockpiling soils on plastic and covering with plastic until the final
disposition of materials are determined and approved by NYSDEC.
• These measures will address concerns related to VOC emissions, transport of
impacted media off-Site, fugitive dust and run-off.
• All work will be done by appropriately trained personnel, under oversight by an
environmental monitory and with NYSDEC approval.
3. The Site must be: (1) remediated to restricted residential, commercial and/or industrial SCOs, as
appropriate based on the proposed uses at the Site, or to protection of groundwater standards if
a particular area of the Site experiences impacts to groundwater above relevant standards; (2)
subject to groundwater treatment and/or monitoring in those areas where groundwater impacts
exceed applicable standards; (3) subject to appropriate use restrictions consistent with the
proposed uses at the Site; (4) subject to appropriate prohibitions on the use of groundwater at
the Site without approval from NYSDEC; (5) subject to development and implementation of an
appropriate Site Management Plan (SMP); and (6) subject to on-going monitoring that
institutional and/or engineering controls are being properly implemented and/or maintained.
4. An SMP will be developed by the property owner and approved by NYSDEC after completion of
the IRMs and issuance of the amended ROD which will set forth engineering and institutional
controls for that portion of the Site north of the creek that remains on the IHWDS Registry.
a. The SMP and its components will be used to facilitate redevelopment and be amended
as needed subsequent to installation of additional remedial systems and completing all
remediation activities at the Site.
b. Implementation of a SMP will assure that the IRMs and other remedial actions selected
through a feasibility study and amendment of the ROD will remain functional and
effective.
c. Regular inspection of the caps, soil covers, and permanent erosion controls (e.g., gravel
and vegetation) will identify potential problems and allow maintenance actions to be
taken before more serious issues arise.
d. An inspection procedure and frequency will be developed as part of the SMP to record
and track Site conditions. Repair and maintenance procedures will be described to
restore the deficiencies to the desired conditions. The plan will include routine
maintenance activities such as sealing of asphalt cracks.
e. The SMP will identify locations where contamination remains and will include
procedures for assuring the institutional controls remain in place and effective.
f. An excavation work plan will address proper management of soils and groundwater that
may be encountered during any future ground intrusive activities. These plans will
provide the process by which one properly manages both known and any unknown
contamination that may be encountered during ground intrusive activities and require
monitoring of such activities by an environmental professional.
g. In addition to soil excavation and groundwater management, the SMP will contain a
CAMP, and operation, monitoring and/or reporting requirements specific to the
remedial alternatives selected by NYSDEC for the Site.
h. Finally, the SMP will contain operation, maintenance and monitoring requirements for
treatment systems and/or monitoring programs for groundwater treatment systems or
soil vapor intrusion systems that may be employed at the Site as part of the final
remedy along with a schedule of regular reporting on the activities conducted under the
SMP to NYSDEC.
25
i. Enforcement of the SMP requirements will be through the filing of an environmental
easement covering the Site.
5. Areas of impacted concrete (Buildings 4, 8, 13A, 14 and 34) will require remediation which will
most likely take the form of removal or capping.
6. In the event air monitoring indicates fugitive dust or VOCs, appropriate vapor and/or dust
suppression actions will be taken.
7. Occupation of existing buildings and construction of new ones in the CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas
will require the Project Sponsor to address the potential for soil vapor intrusion via mitigation
and/or monitoring. Specifically, for the Preferred Alternative this includes:
a. Mitigation of Buildings 1, 2 (basement portion), 3, 4, 5, 6 and 6A (remaining portions), 8,
9, 10, 18, 21, 24, 33 (remaining portions) and 34.
b. Monitoring of Buildings 13A and 17.
c. Building 2 (upper portion) would require additional analysis to determine whether
additional actions are required to reduce exposure as part of the feasibility study.
d. Evaluation of areas designated for new construction in CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas for the
potential for soil vapor intrusion followed by NYSDEC and NYSDOH approval.
e. Compliance with the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions that requires evaluation
of areas designated for new construction in the CW2 Sub Area for the potential for soil
vapor intrusion when habitable structures are planned to be constructed in the vicinity
of the former NCR and Ithaca College sewer lines.
8. Filing of and compliance with an environmental easement that: (i) restricts the use of the portion
of the Site still on the IHWDS Registry to Restricted Residential, Commercial and Industrial uses
(as those terms are defined by the relevant NYSDEC regulations); (ii) restricts the use of
groundwater without NYSDEC approval; and (iii) requires the implementation of an SMP.
9. The property owner has commenced NYSDEC-approved IRMs to address 16 different AOCs at the
Site based upon cleanup objectives consistent with the Conceptual Site Layout Plan. All approve
IRMs will be completed in compliance with NYSDEC-approved plans.
10. Mitigation also includes development of emergency action plans and compliance with
Community Right-to-Know requirements by tenants using hazardous substances. Pre-
demolition/rehabilitation surveys will be performed during each phase of development on those
buildings where warranted based upon historical use, visual evidence, and prior investigation
results to further assess the need for special management of demolition debris.
F. Historic and Archaeological Resources
The GEIS evaluated the potential impacts on Cultural Resources listed on or eligible for listing on the
State or National Register of Historic Places in and around the vicinity of the Project Area. This included
evaluating potential effects to architectural and archaeological resources. A Determination of Eligibility
was prepared for the Site for review by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic
Preservation (NYSOPRHP) to determine whether the above-ground historic architectural resources are
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Site has been determined eligible for
the National Register of Historic Places. A Phase 1A archaeological survey was conducted under the
supervision of a Registered Professional Archaeologist and in accordance with the NYSOPRHP’s Phase 1
Archaeological Report Format Requirements. Archaeological investigations did not result in information
that would significantly add to the understanding of the construction, function, or use of the
manufacturing facility and no additional archaeological investigations were recommended.
26
Potential Impacts
1. In order to bring air and light into the redeveloped complex, and provide sufficient space for
circulation, selective demolition is planned, potentially resulting in impacts to the existing
structures through partial or full removal. These buildings are: Buildings 3A (1920s), 4A (1920s),
portions of 6 (1950s) and 6A (1940s), 8A (1920s), 9 (1900s), 10A (1940s), 11A (1940s) and
14(1940s). All of these buildings are in the City of Ithaca.
Mitigation
The Project Sponsor is not currently seeking the historic tax credits that were originally considered
during the DGEIS process. Subsequent consultation with NYSOPRHP has determined that the
redevelopment of the existing buildings as mixed-use structures via utilizing the Architecture 2030 goals
has precluded coverage under the historic tax credit system. All of the historic structures in the Project
are located in the City of Ithaca. The city has imposed the following list of mitigations related to the
historic elements of the project. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board will impose #9 below, so new and
old structures will complement each other. The Board will also require compliance with the City’s
mitigations as a condition of site plan approval.
The change of use and redevelopment of the existing buildings in the City of Ithaca, in accordance with
current energy/buildings codes, will take precedence over the following historic mitigation:
1. The Project Sponsor is pursuing a variety of options to retain the historical character and
significance of the CWD by retaining key individual structures, including the pre-1965 portions of
the factory building (all sections except 13B, 34 and 35), the Office Building (21), and the
Office/Commercial Building (24), to mitigate any potential impacts to the existing structures
resulting from the selective or full demolition of buildings.
2. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines serve as a methodology to identify,
document, and evaluate which existing structures and areas within the Site are appropriate for
preservation and rehabilitation. These guidelines help determine how best to accommodate
building removal, how best to maintain/rehabilitate significant structures, and how to integrate
complementary (adjacent and out-lying) new development. The Project Sponsor has and will
continue to employ these guidelines where feasible.
3. Pursuing certification by the USGBC for LEED ND, a framework for identifying, implementing,
and measuring green building and neighborhood design. Credits 6 and 7 require the retention
of at least 20% of the surface of historic buildings except when authorized by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission and/or NYSOPRHP and to the extent allowed while
maintaining compliance with applicable energy codes and goals set forth under Utilities and
Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources.
4. Restoring and/or rehabilitating existing structures-to-remain in a way that preserves, reflects,
enhances and promotes the inherent historic and architectural significance of these selected
buildings.
5. Cleaning and repairing existing exterior walls as individual buildings are redeveloped and
occupied.
6. Repairing, enhancing and restoring existing fenestration at existing openings.
7. Replacing existing windows (deteriorated to the point of inoperability) to closely emulate the
design, pattern, color, and perhaps material construction of what currently exists on various
existing CWD structures.
8. Wherever possible, restoring and maintaining the interior character of key existing structures
with additional modifications developed to meet the needs and requirements of potential
tenants as well as applicable building codes.
27
9. Enacting architectural guidelines, as described in the PUD Design Guidelines, that help establish
a common character for new Site development and which will in turn complement the rhythm,
variety, proportion, size, and scale of the existing and remaining historical structures.
10. Working with an appropriate professional to adequately photo document those structures that
will be demolished, so that a historical record of the architecture will remain.
11. Selectively preserving historically significant elements of buildings, both internal and external,
that contribute to the historical narrative of both the structure and the Morse Chain Factory
itself.
G. Transportation and Circulation
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts related to the local transportation network. A broad study area
was scoped in consultation with City traffic engineers and the NYS Department of Transportation
(NYSDOT). The study locations consist of 30 existing intersections. These intersections were observed
during both AM and PM peak intervals to assess current traffic operations.
Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure are key to providing a complete transportation system for
residents and visitors of the City/Town. Within the City alone, approximately 42% (15% Town) commute
to work via walking (2012 American Community Survey 5-year Estimates). The TCAT system provides
transit service for over 100,000 Tompkins County residents. Ridership has been increasing steadily over
the past several years, with a 6.3 percent increase in trips between 2011 and 2013. Of the 33 routes that
service the County, Route 65 provides rural commuter service along NYS Route 96B with stops at the
nearby South Hill Business Park and Longview and Route 11 provides downtown coverage and services
Ithaca College and travels along Coddington Road/Hudson Street. The Site is currently accessed via four
drives along NYS Route 96B as well as a connection at Turner Place. Marginal access is also available via
South Cayuga Street.
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared to assess existing and future traffic operations on the street
network in the vicinity of the Site, to evaluate potential traffic impacts resulting from the Phase I
development and the full build out of the Site, and to identify appropriate mitigation measures to avoid
or minimize potential impacts to the transportation system (the Traffic Impact Analysis is included in
Appendix I of the DGEIS).
Potential Impacts
1. The Project significantly increases development density in an area characterized by a heavy
volume of commuter traffic to and from South Hill, including to Ithaca College via South Aurora
Street / NYS Route 96B. The Site is in close proximity to residential neighborhoods, which will be
impacted by increased traffic volume. The Site’s proximity to the downtown core and Ithaca
College makes it well situated for alternative modes of transportation (e.g., walking, biking,
carpooling, and mass transit).
2. A review of both AM and PM peak hour capacity analysis results for the pre-developed condition
indicate that the overall levels of service (LOS) operate at “D” or better at the signalized
intersections, which is an acceptable capacity level. The signalized intersections are the major
roads leading to and around the Site.
a. The overall vehicle traffic in this area will be higher subsequent to completing the
Project.
b. Availability of queue spacing has been identified as a potential impact.
3. The eastbound and westbound approaches at the intersection of Clinton Street/Aurora
Street/Prospect Street operate at LOS “F” during both peak hours for the pre-developed
28
condition. Generally, all other approaches to the study area intersections operate at “D” or
better, with only four intersections operating with approaches of “E.”
4. The Phase I trip generation estimates are 228 vehicles per hour (vph) for the AM peak hour and
182 vph during the PM peak hour. The total computed Full Development trip generation
estimates are 945 vph for the AM peak hour and 925 vph for the PM peak hour, as shown in
FGEIS Table 5.7-5, provided below:
PHASE LAND USES SIZE
Phase I
Trip Reductions -30 -10 -18 -40
Total New Trips 186 42 39 143
-out
Trip Reductions -76 -63 -178 -180
Total New Trips 467 250 273 470
Full
Development Total New Trips Under Full Development
5. The cumulative effect of Project-generated traffic on the transportation network is dependent
on the origins and destinations of that traffic and the location of the access drives serving the
Site. Based on the network’s traffic volumes, it is estimated that 62 percent of the total trip
generation will originate from west, north, and east of the Site. An estimated 8 percent will
travel from NYS Route 96 and Elmira Road. The remaining 30 percent will originate from areas
south of the Site.
6. The capacity analysis results shown in FGEIS Table 5.7-8 indicate that most of the approaches
and overall LOS at the study intersections will operate within acceptable parameters between
existing, background, and full development conditions. Additional traffic from the proposed
Project may increase the potential for collisions. Potential impacts related to each access drive
are outlined below:
a. Proposed Driveway I/Aurora Street:
• Under Phase I full development conditions, the eastbound approach is projected
to operate at LOS “E” and “D” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
• Between Phase I and Phase II, the LOS is projected to decrease to LOS “F” during
both peak hours.
• Driving patterns may change to reflect the typical operating conditions along
NYS Route 96B at the Site’s driveways and may utilize other points of ingress/
egress.
29
b. Proposed Driveway II/Aurora Street: This intersection is projected to operate as an
enter-only driveway, so little to no delay is projected.
c. Aurora Street (NYS Route 96B)/Proposed Driveway III: Between Phase I and Phase II full
development conditions, the eastbound LOS decreases from “C” and “B” during the AM
and PM peak hours, respectively, to “F” during both peak hours.
d. Coddington Road/Danby Road/Driveway IV: Under Phase I full development conditions,
the eastbound left/thru approach is projected to operate at LOS “D” during both peak
hours. Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions, the LOS decreases to
“F” during both peak hours. The anticipated delay and corresponding LOS for the
eastbound movement is characteristic of un-signalized side roads on heavily trafficked
arterials such as NYS Route 96B. Between both phases of full development, the
westbound approach from Coddington Road decreases in LOS from “C” to “E” during the
AM peak hour and from “C” to “D” during the PM peak hour.
e. Proposed Driveway V/Danby Road (NYS Route 96B): This intersection will be constructed
during Phase II of full development conditions. A LOS of “C” is projected for eastbound
exiting traffic during the AM and PM peak hours. All other approaches operate at LOS
“A.”
f. Clinton Street (NYS Route 96B)/Aurora Street/Prospect Street: The eastbound left and
westbound approaches operate at LOS “F” between all conditions during both peak
hours. Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions during the AM peak
hour, the eastbound right approach decreases from LOS “C” to “E”.
g. State Street/Aurora Street: The westbound left approach operates at LOS “C” during the
AM peak hour and “F” during the PM peak hour under Phase I development conditions.
The AM peak hour LOS for the approach decreases to “F” under Phase II full
development conditions. The northbound approach decreases from “B” and “C” to “C”
and “D” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, between Phase I and Phase II
full development conditions.
h. Clinton Street/Cayuga Street: Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions
during the AM peak hour, the overall LOS decreases from “D” to “E”. The southbound
left approach decreases from “E” to “F” during both peak hours between Phase I and
Phase II full development conditions.
i. Pine Tree Road/NYS Route 79: The southbound approach during the PM peak hour
between Phase I background conditions and Phase I full development conditions
decreases from LOS “E” to “F”. Between Phase I and Phase II full development
conditions, delay increases by 55.1 seconds.
j. Access via Turner Place and Cayuga Street: The alternative capacity analysis that was
performed and provided in the FGEIS shows that delays are projected to increase for all
approaches during both peak hours at the Aurora Street/Clinton Street/Prospect Street
intersection.
7. The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant provided the following tables from the FGEIS (pages 5-
145 and 5-146), which depict the results of a driveway queuing analysis at the proposed Site
access driveways during Phase I and Full Development Conditions:
30
AM Peak Hour Driveway Queuing Analysis Results
Site
Access Driveway
Phase I Driveway Length
(in feet)
Full Development Driveway
(in feet)
with Mitigation
Driveway
Available Storage
to First
Intersection
(in feet) Average Percentile Average Percentile Average Percentile
Driveway I
(City of Ithaca) 20 49 46 78 52 91 160
(City of Ithaca)NA NA NA NA NA NA N/A
7 26 36 60 19 39 211
Driveway IV 6 24 40 72 52 83 475
Driveway V NA NA 36 73 29 48 422
FGEIS: Table 5.7-12A: Driveway Queueing Analysis, Phase I and Full Development –AM Peak Hour Queueing Results
PM Peak Hour Driveway Queuing Analysis Results
Site
Access
Driveway
Queue
Length
Driveway Queue
Length
with Mitigation
Driveway Queue
Available Storage
to First
Intersection
(in feet) Average Average Average
Driveway I
(City of Ithaca) 31 69 290 358 98 154 160
NA NA NA NA NA NA N/A
9 29 115 231 30 52 211
Driveway IV 24 54 60 117 63 106 475
Driveway V NA NA 35 53 41 73 422
FGEIS: Table 5.7-12B: Driveway Queueing Analysis, Phase I and Full Development –PM Peak Hour Queueing Results
Based on the above queuing analysis, there are sufficient storage lengths at Driveways IV and V during both
peak hours. Driveway III during the PM peak hour is borderline based on 95th percentile queues. However,
queues of this length are expected to be infrequent and are intended to illustrate a worst-case scenario. On the
other hand, Driveway I during the PM peak hour shows queues that are longer than the conceptual available
storage.
8. The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant also provided the following sight distance evaluation in
the FGEIS:
31
Drive North South
Drive I > 500 ft. 400 ft.
Drive II (proposed to be only an entrance) 400 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive III > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive IV > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive V > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
AASHTO Intersection Sight Distance
Speed Distance
Based upon the above data, there is sufficient sight distance at all the proposed access points except for Drive I,
south and Drive II, north.
9. In addition to the driveway queueing analysis and sight distance analysis, the FGEIS included an
intersection sensitivity analysis for the Project. The NYSDOT requires such an analysis to specify
the future trip generation numbers, per intersection, that would trigger the need for mitigations
such as traffic lights, turn lanes, road widening, etc. associated with the affected intersection.
The intersection sensitivity analysis indicated that there may be a need for further mitigation at
the NYS Route 96B/Coddintgon Road/Proposed Driveway IV intersection, aside from the left-
turn lanes required by the NYS DOT noted below.
Mitigation
General Mitigation Measures
1. Project mitigation will involve all direct access points to the Project, including existing and
proposed drives on NYS Route 96B, as well as the extensions of Turner Place and South Cayuga
Street into the Project. General mitigation measures will include access drive improvements,
such as intersection signalization, signal coordination, turn lanes, and geometric improvements.
2. Off-Site traffic mitigation measures will consist of signalization optimization and other traffic
control measures.
3. Additional mitigation will take the form of vehicle sharing and improvements to
pedestrian/bicycle facilities.
4. In addition, the Project Sponsor will implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
strategies to reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trips to and from the Site. The following
potential TDM strategies have been proposed for Phase I implementation. The Project Sponsor
will pay for and implement these strategies, in collaboration with the appropriate state and local
agencies, and will seek funding through a variety of sources (Project Sponsor may find that the
municipality is required to sponsor a strategy in order for it to get funded):
a. Market-priced parking
b. Preferential parking for ridesharing services
c. Bicycle parking facilities
d. Subsidized transit passes
e. Connections to transit stops (i.e. construct sidewalks to existing stop at Hillview
Place)
f. Dedicated shuttle service
g. Transportation Alternatives Information
32
h. Coordination with Smart Trips Ithaca
i. Connected and improved pedestrian network within the Phase I limits (i.e.,
improvements to sidewalks within Sidewalk Improvement District No. 4 in the City)
j. Pedestrian oriented design within the Phase I limits
k. Bicycle network facilities within the Phase I limits
l. Easement to nearby Gateway Trail
m. Follow Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in all
design
n. Coordination with Ithaca College and South Hill Business Campus
Phase I Specific Mitigation (needs to be mitigated before or during Phase I construction)
1. The NYSDOT has specified certain mitigation requirements to NYS Route 96B relative to Phase I
development. The Town will require the implementation of these mitigations before the
issuance of any certificates of occupancy for Phase I. Specifically, NYSDOT will require:
a. Changing the four-lane section of NYS Route96B south from the city/town line to past
Bella Vista Dr., by reconfiguring the two southbound lanes into one through lane,
incorporating left turn lanes for both directions at intersections, and providing hatching
where appropriate.
b. Requiring the construction of a sidewalk along the frontage of the Site, on the western
side of NYS Route 96B, from the city/town line to the Coddington Rd. intersection
c. Creating a one-way ingress-only for the proposed driveway, immediately south of
city/town line (Driveway II); no traffic will be allowed to exit onto NYS Route 96B at this
location.
Post-Phase I Mitigation
1. A post-Phase I Traffic Study will be performed as part of the Phase II site plan application.
2. The Project Sponsor has also committed to adapt and scale Washington State’s “Commute Trip
Reduction” (CTR) program (http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/transit/ctr), explained on page 5-130 of
the DGEIS and on pages 5-130 and 5-150 of the FGEIS, to the projected employment centers
proposed within the CWD.
3. Additional TDM or CTR initiatives will be implemented as follows. As noted above, the Project
Sponsor will pay for and implement these strategies, in collaboration with the appropriate state
and local agencies, and will seek funding through a variety of sources (Project Sponsor may find
that the municipality is required to sponsor a strategy in order for it to get funded):
a. Transit Coordination – Continued coordination with TCAT on transit routes and
marketing the nearby routes of 65 and 11. This will boost ridership through increased
awareness, coupled with improved service.
b. Route Expansion – Working with TCAT to provide new/expanded bus service through
the Site, to provide an opportunity for greater mode choice resulting in trip and
parking reductions.
c. Bus Stop Amenities – Providing a clean, well-lit, informative bus stop with shelters
and seating, which will greatly improve the image of the transit serving an area.
d. Employer Carpooling – Carpooling will be encouraged by providing incentives and
other services such as ride-matching.
e. Emergency Ride Home – In case of a personal emergency during the day,
transportation to one’s vehicle, residence, or other place such as childcare, doctor’s
office, etc. will be provided at no cost.
33
f. Preferential carpool/vanpool parking – Investigate the use of vRide for employers
located on the Site.
g. Transportation Alternatives Information – Bus schedules, walking and bicycling maps,
neighborhood and on-Site wayfinding will be made readily available.
h. Telecommuting and compressed work schedules – Employers will be encouraged to
offer flexible work options. Employee vehicle trips are reduced by the percentage of
employees that telecommute or have a “free” day gained through a compressed
schedule, on an average day.
i. Location and Quantity of Bicycle Parking Spaces – The Project will include convenient
bicycle parking locations in clear sight of access points into buildings, safe and secure
longer term storage within parking areas, and a sufficient number of bicycle parking
spaces that encourages a greater number of residents, employees, and visitors to
utilize bicycling as a means of transportation.
j. The Price of Parking – Parking spaces that are typically included in building and rental
costs will be reviewed, and “unbundled” parking, paid as a separate item, will be
considered.
k. Financial Incentive Programs – Developing Commuter Financial Incentive Programs,
such as Parking Cash Out, and/or offering employees the choice of receiving a
subsidized parking space and/or an equivalent financial incentive.
l. Bike Share – Developing a micro bike share system for the Site, or working with the
City and Town to promote a more robust system (i.e. Lime Bike), to encourage more
transit ridership and provide additional public transportation options.
m. Car Share – Coordination with Ithaca Carshare will be pursued during Phase I as
demand potentially grows through increased residential and commercial based
occupancy rates.
n. Relationship with Ithaca College – The Site is located less than a half-mile from Ithaca
College. An integrated and coordinated approach to the development of the Site and
potential for interaction between the two entities will be explored by the Project
Sponsor.
o. Electric Vehicle charging station – Tompkins County will be conducting a study to
identify needs and opportunities. This could be included in the Project as an amenity
to residents, and it supports the County’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
4. Monitoring and Mitigation Implementation Plan (MMI Plan): Following completion of Phase I,
the Project Sponsor will implement an on-going Monitoring and Mitigation Implementation Plan
(MMI Plan). The MMI Plan will include an update of traffic conditions, based on full occupancy
of Phase I of the development, utilizing field-collected data. Before the remaining phases begin,
the Project Sponsor will verify the underlying MMI Plan assumptions and evaluate the
effectiveness of the TDM strategies that have been put in place. The MMI Plan will also include
the following elements:
a. Traffic study updates that will be reviewed by NYSDOT and the City Traffic Engineer.
The post-Phase I traffic updates will evaluate the following intersections:
i. Aurora Street/Prospect Street/Clinton Street
ii. Aurora Street/State Street
iii. State Street/Seneca Way
iv. State Street/Green Street
v. Clinton Street/Cayuga Street
vi. Cayuga Street/Seneca Street
vii. Cayuga Street/Spencer Street.
34
The post-Phase I occupancy traffic update will also include an evaluation of all site
access driveways and whether a traffic signal is warranted at all site access driveways.
b. The MMI Plan will also provide for additional traffic study updates at the following
stages of development:
i. Immediately following tenant occupancy of Phase I of the Project;
ii. When proposed post-Phase I development within the CWD results in more than
75 vehicle trips per hour (cumulative additional trips beyond those added by
Phase I); and
iii. Each time a proposed post-Phase I development within the CWD will result in
more than 150 vehicle trips per hour
c. In addition, per NYSDOT, a traffic study update will be required for each phase of the
project where modifications and/or additional mitigation is proposed in the NYSDOT
R.O.W. Traffic study updates will verify trip distribution models and confirm when
traffic mitigation measures identified in the GEIS should be implemented. Other than
the update immediately following tenant occupancy of Phase I of the Project, all
updates will be submitted and reviewed, per the threshold conditions established
herein, in conjunction with proposed site plans for each phase of development. The
intersections to be analyzed in each traffic update include:
i. Site Accesses 1 and 2
ii. Site Accesses 3, 4 and 5 (NYSDOT owned)
iii. Aurora Street/Prospect Street/Clinton Street
iv. Prospect Street/Turner Place
v. Columbia Street/Aurora Street
vi. Aurora Street/State Street
vii. State Street/Seneca Way (NYSDOT owned)
viii. State Street/Green Street (NYSDOT owned)
ix. Clinton Street/Cayuga Street
x. Cayuga Street/Seneca Street (NYSDOT owned)
xi. Cayuga Street/Spencer Street
xii. Pine Tree Road/SR 79 (NYSDOT owned)
xiii. State Street/Stewart Avenue
xiv. Turner Place corridor between site access and Prospect Street
xv. Cayuga Street corridor between site access and West Spencer Street
If traffic conditions at the above intersections degrade to a LOS E, or to a higher delay LOS E for
any approach as a result of Phase I development, then additional mitigation will be required
before Post Phase I development may occur. The Project Sponsor will propose an analysis
methodology for approval by the Lead Agency (City of Ithaca).
To ensure that mitigation measures are commensurate with projected impacts, the timing of all
proposed mitigation identified in the DGEIS associated with Phase II will be determined based
on projected trip generation of development proposals. As part of the MMI Plan, these future
traffic impact assessments to be performed at the Site Driveways and intersections identified
above will provide updated trip distribution and generation figures. These traffic impact
assessments will go beyond standard theoretical capacity analysis by utilizing actual traffic
assessment data such as intersection delay studies, queueing analyses and gap studies. Overall,
35
the MMI Plan will be used to refine the projected traffic impacts and determine the most
effective and responsive mitigation strategies.
5. MMI Plan - Specific Intersections -Additional Mitigation Measures: Additional mitigation
measures at specific intersections (dependent upon and subject to future traffic study updates)
are described as follows:
a. Proposed Driveway I/Aurora Street: This intersection should be monitored after
redevelopment of the Phase I buildings for delay and operation for drivers entering and
exiting the Site to determine what point in the future a traffic signal is installed. Internal
roadways interior to the Driveway I access will be designed to mitigate potential
spillback into internal intersections. The Project Sponsor’s proposed mitigation for
Driveway I includes installing advanced intersection warning signage (Manual of
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) W2-2L) for northbound approaching vehicles.
A left-turn lane off of Aurora Street is also potentially warranted here.
b. Proposed Driveway II: This intersection is projected to operate as an enter-only
driveway, with little to no delay projected. No mitigation is necessary or proposed.
c. Proposed Driveway III: Delays at this driveway are projected to decrease from LOS “F” to
LOS “E” with the installation of traffic signals at Driveway’s I and IV. A left-turn lane off
of Aurora Street, immediately south of Grandview Avenue in the City of Ithaca is also
potentially warranted here.
d. Coddington Road/Danby Road/Driveway IV: A left-turn lane off of Danby Road is
recommended under Full Development. Also, based on the expected delays under Full
Development conditions and the traffic signal warrant analysis, a three-colored traffic
signal is recommended for the intersection of Coddington Road/Danby Road/Driveway
IV. The traffic signal should be designed to provide a permitted/protected northbound
and southbound left-turn phase.
e. Proposed Driveway V: A left turn-lane off of Danby Road is recommended under Full
Development conditions. Additional traffic analysis may be necessary as part of site plan
approval for the Full Development phase.
f. Prospect Street/S Aurora Street –Impacts to Aurora Street/ Clinton Street/Prospect
Street and potential mitigation does not include physical improvements to the
intersection, as ROW and existing buildings limit the ability to expand the intersection.
Additionally, a traffic signal is not an appropriate treatment. Therefore, higher capacity
people mover systems (i.e., new TCAT routes and improved headway, and potential
automated transit service between the Commons and the Site) are needed.
g. S Aurora Street/Columbia Street – Traffic signal warrants are not met at this intersection
to alleviate delays for Columbia Street traffic. All traffic can be accommodated, as
needed, at the existing traffic signal at Aurora Street/Hillview Place. The reduction of
SOV trips and increased mode share of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit trips will reduce
total site generated traffic passing through this intersection.
h. Cayuga Street/Clinton Street – The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant developed signal
timing adjustments for the PM peak hour and the associated capacity analysis results
which are presented at Appendix F of the FGEIS. These adjustments reduce the
projected LOS “E” for the northbound thru/right approach and LOS “F” for the
southbound left approach to LOS “D” for both approaches. The Project Sponsor has had
discussions with ITCTC about an automated fixed route system along Cayuga Street that
would shuttle people between the Commons and the Site. The Lead Agency
36
recommends that a feasibility study of such a system be performed by ITCTC with
participation from the Project Sponsor.
i. Aurora Street/State Street (MLK Jr. Street): In order to improve the existing and future
peak hour operating conditions at this critical intersection, an alternative that provides
two westbound approach lanes on State Street was investigated. By restriping the
westbound approach to include separate left and right-turn lanes (the right-turn lane
should be restriped to include 100 feet of storage), the overall delay decreases during
the AM peak hour by 17 seconds per vehicle. Similarly, during the PM peak hour there is
a decrease in delay by over 13 seconds per vehicle. In order to provide the two
approach lanes on State Street, peak hour ONLY parking restrictions are recommended
for the two metered parking spaces on the approach to the intersection. During off-
peak hours of operation, drivers can continue to use the approach as a single-lane
approach with the ability to continue using the two metered parking spaces on the
north side of State Street.
Summary
The table below summarizes the structural mitigation measures that will be implemented at the various
phases of development:
PHASE LOCATION MITIGATION MEASURE
I
All signalized city intersections System-wide signal timing update to ensure optimized signal
Aurora Street/Clinton Street/ The use of TDM strategies to reduce vehicle trips generated as a result of
the Project.
Seneca Street/Cayuga Street System-wide update of signal timings.
Clinton Street/Cayuga Street TDM strategies.
Pine Tree Road/Slaterville The intersection will be monitored for delay as it relates to potential
Proposed Driveway I/Aurora Street
Installation of a three-color traffic signal after redevelopment of the
existing buildings, prior to new development in Sub Areas CW3 and
CW4, if warranted by NYSDOT. A study of intersection delay at this
point will confirm the need for a potential signal. This signal should
be coordinated with the traffic signal at Hillview Place.
II
Aurora Street/State Street
Restripe the westbound approach to provide separate left and right-
turn vehicle movements during peak hours only. Enforce peak hour
NYS Route 96B/Coddington
Road/Proposed Driveway IV
Realign, restripe the intersection to include opposing
northbound/southbound left-turn lanes, and install a three-color traffic
signal. The Project Sponsor will work with NYSDOT and the property
owners affected by any intersection realignment.
Proposed Driveways III and V at Install northbound left-turn lanes at Proposed Driveways III and V.
Cayuga Street/Seneca Street System-wide update of signal timings.
Cayuga Street/Clinton Street System-wide update of signal timings.
37
Downtown Ithaca
Update a downtown circulation plan with the purpose of developing
a workable multimodal circulation system supportive of all modes of
travel in the Ithaca CBD. The plan should be flexible to
accommodate evolving modes of transportation.
1. The Project will incorporate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly accessibility and mobility
design characteristics where possible.
a. Pedestrians: High visibility pedestrian crossing treatments (e.g. raised medians, signage,
striping, flashing lights, etc.) will be installed at all intersections. Mid-block crossing
locations may be installed, where feasible, and will not be located further than 400 feet
from the nearest crossing location.
b. Bicycles: Bicycle facilities will be present throughout the Site via on-street pavement
markings and signage directing riders to destinations on and off-Site. Bicycle lanes,
when present, will be required to be at least 5 feet in width, adjacent to curbs. Shared
lane markings, e.g. “sharrows”, should be used to indicate bicycle-friendly streets, in lieu
of dedicated bicycle lanes, where street widths are too narrow for one to be installed.
Bicycle signage along the roadways will be used to increase vehicular awareness of
bicyclists as well as to encourage bicycle ridership.
c. General trails: An on-Site multi-use trail system will provide off-street circulation routes
for pedestrians and bicyclists. This trail system will be connected to the Gateway Trail
along the western ridge of the Site.
d. The proposed Gateway Trail will be developed via easements between the Project
Sponsor and the city and town to connect the South Hill Recreation Way to the existing
Black Diamond Trail.
e. Sidewalks: The internal pedestrian sidewalk network will connect to the existing
sidewalk network in the city along Aurora Street and allow connections to downtown
through or along the edge of the Site. Pedestrian sidewalks will be constructed in safe
and convenient locations, connecting users of the Project to the existing pedestrian
network in adjacent neighborhoods. On the east side of NYS Route 96B, from the Ithaca
College main entrance at Alumni Circle to the city/town municipal line, construction of a
new sidewalk is anticipated to get underway in early 2020. The town is the project
sponsor having received a Federal Highway Administration’s grant administered by NYS
DOT. As of May 2019, the project is in the final design stage. The new sidewalk will
allow for safe pedestrian access from Ithaca College and the South Hill Business campus
to the Site.
f. Parking: Parking and parking lot design guidelines have been developed and are
included in the PDZ as further mitigation. While it is important to provide parking as a
component of the Project, a number of measures have been incorporated into the plan
to minimize the need for parking, e.g. increasing trail, pedestrian and bicycle
connections to strongly encourage walking and bicycling.
g. Transit: Mass transit access will be provided in locations that are agreed upon through
coordination between the Project Sponsor and TCAT as the Site is developed. Per the
TDM initiatives noted above, the Project Sponsor will coordinate with TCAT on transit
route marketing and potential expansion. The Conceptual Site Layout Plan depicts two
on-Site bus stops. These stops, along with details on amenities, and who will pay for and
construct them, will be finalized during the site plan review process.
38
H. Utilities
The GEIS evaluated the potential impacts to the utility infrastructure, with additional emphasis on public
water supplies, sanitary sewer and stormwater systems. The Site in the City of Ithaca is currently served
by public utilities that have sufficient capacity to provide for additional demand and without the need of
expanding public district or service areas. The Site is supplied with potable water by the city, which is
connected to the public water system on Turner Place and at a dead-end line on South Aurora Street
near Parking Lot 4. The City Department of Public Works (DPW) indicates there is adequate capacity and
pressure in the water supply system. The on-Site, City of Ithaca, private portion of the water system
consists of approximately 3,960 lineal feet of 12-inch water main. Approximately 2,340 lineal feet is
located outside of the buildings and 1,620 lineal feet is located inside the buildings. The watermain is a
mixture of an older cast iron pipe and a newer ductile iron pipe. All upgrades and repairs to the water
system were completed using ductile iron pipe. There are 15 fire hydrants connected to the private
watermain that protect the existing structures. The system performs with a static pressure of 90 to 130
psi with the ability to provide up to 1,700 gpm for fire flow.
The Town of Ithaca portion of the Site is currently served by separate water utilities that are not
connected to the city system. The current Town water mains are located in three areas on the Site:
around the existing manufacturing buildings, along NYS Route 96B near proposed Driveway IV (across
from Coddington Road), and running east-west across the Site from the proposed Gateway Trail to NYS
Route 96B near proposed Driveway V.
In terms of sanitary sewer, the City and Town of Ithaca and Town of Dryden are joint owners of the
Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant (IAWWTP). The existing sanitary sewer system connects to
the City sanitary sewer system at two locations. There is a 12-inch sewer located on Turner Place,
adjacent to building 21, and a 10-inch sewer located on South Cayuga Street. The total flow capacity for
these two mains is 2,033 gpm and 1,450 gpm, respectively. There is also a 20-foot sanitary sewer
easement located east and uphill of the existing buildings that connects to NYS Route 96B. This
easement contains the Town sewer main (10 inches in some areas and 12 inches in others), which has
the current capacity of 1,400 gpm. There are no existing connections to the Town sewer collection
system from the Site. However, sewage from the portion of the site in the Town will flow through
interceptors that are jointly owned by the Town and City, en route to the IAWWTP. Potential Impacts
1. The total estimated water usage for the full development buildout is approximately 271,500
GPD (110,000 GPD for the existing buildings and 161,500 GPD for the new buildings). This is an
average demand of 188 gpm. Using a peaking factor of 8.0, there is a peak demand of 1,500
gpm. Overall, the main impact to the water system is the increased usage estimated for the
Project. As noted in the DGEIS, the capacity, pressure, and flow of the town water system will be
evaluated as part of the site plan review process.
2. The wastewater generation rates will mirror the estimates for the public water usage. The
estimated wastewater generation is 271,500 GPD. This is an average demand of 188 gallons per
minute. Utilizing an 8.0 peaking factor, it is estimated that the peak flows are approximately
1,500 gpm. The main impact to the sanitary sewer system is the increased usage estimated for
the Project. As noted in the DGEIS, the capacity, pressure, and flow of the Town and City sewer
systems will be evaluated as part of the site plan review process.
3. The Site is currently served with stormwater drainage facilities consisting of catch basins,
stormwater sewers, and grassed swales. The Site does not have any stormwater control
facilities, such as retention basins or underground infiltration systems. The Site also does not
39
have good infiltration characteristics, as it contains many rock outcroppings with generally
minimal depth to bedrock. With the exception of the undeveloped portion of the Site in the
Town of Ithaca in Sub Area CW2, there is also very little existing green space to develop
traditional drainage basins.
4. The existing 6” natural gas line serving the Site is rated at medium pressure which is currently
operating at approximately 20 psi. It is assumed that total energy consumption is 98,000 BTU/sf
for commercial space and 94,000 BTU/sf for residential space for the purposes of estimating
annual baseline usage. Natural gas usage is estimated at 32% of the total usage. Therefore the
natural gas usage annual base line is 45,900 MMBTUs.
5. The Site is served by the NYSEG South Hill electric substation located on South Cayuga Street.
The Coddington-South Hill 34.5 kV Line #526 traverses the Site from the South Hill substation
easterly to Coddington Road. The Site is also served by a private electric substation that is
powered by Line #526. This substation was sized to serve the entire Site at its peak operational
needs. Based on conversations with NYSEG Staff, depending on final electric usage as well as on-
site generation (i.e. photovoltaic), additional upgrades to the existing substation equipment may
be necessary.
6. The Project will require high-speed data to provide services expected in a new community such
as the CWD. The 915 dwelling units and approximately 400,000+ gross square footage of space
dedicated to business uses will put a demand on these utilities.
7. Lighting from the Project, once fully developed, will be greater than under current conditions
and will increase light levels in the outdoor environment. Without proper planning and design,
light trespass (the spillage of light into a neighboring property) can occur. Light going up into the
sky, or sky glow, can reduce visibility of the stars.
Mitigation
1. Water/Sanitary Sewer
a. The City may be able to restore the old cast iron pipe likely to have heavy tuberculation
that historically fed the three water storage tanks on Site to have better flowrates.
However, the City recommends adding a new public water connection point further
down South Aurora Street near the main entrance drive to loop the system when the
new buildings are constructed in the CW3 Sub Area. If the tuberculation cannot be
mitigated, then a replacement watermain will be paid for by the Project Sponsor and
installed by the City or a Project Sponsor contractor approved by the City.
b. Loop existing City water system through Sub Area CW3 from the current connection at
NYS Route 96B/Driveway III intersection to a new point of connection at the NYS Route
96B/ Driveway I intersection.
c. Construct and/or upgrade any new public water and/or sewer mains to have a minimum
diameter of 8-inches and be looped (if practicable). All work shall be in accordance with
Ten State Recommended Standards for Water Facilities and Water Works and Town of
Ithaca standards.
d. Construct any other new infrastructure (tanks, mains, etc.) in accordance with Ten State
Recommended Standards for Water Facilities and Water Works and Town of Ithaca
standards.
e. Use NYS required water-saving plumbing fixtures. The Project will follow LEED ND
guidelines for new buildings and buildings undergoing major renovations by reducing
indoor water usage 20% from a baseline, demonstrable through product cut sheets and
fixture schedules.
f. Meter and audit individual buildings.
40
g. Investigate the on-Site storage and reuse of stormwater by repurposing the on-Site
underground water storage tanks near Driveway III or creating a new storage area in
Sub Area CW2 to reduce on-Site water demand.
2. Stormwater Infrastructure
a. At a minimum, the on-Site storm sewer collection system will be designed for the 10-
year design storm.
b. A full SWPPP (that encompasses the entire Site) and coverage under NYSDEC General
Construction SPDES permit will be required. The stormwater mitigation features for the
redeveloped portions of the site will designed in accordance with NYSDEC’s guidelines
for redeveloped projects. The new construction areas will fall under NYSDEC regulations
for traditional development.
c. A majority of stormwater controls will be green infrastructure suitable for the urban
setting. The “Water Quality Volume” and ‘Runoff Reduction Volume” will be treated
using a combination of green roofs, stormwater planters, and hydrodynamic separators. d. Develop an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan to insure the proper use of the
stormwater conveyance system.
3. Electric/Natural Gas Energy Use
a. Alternative energy measures are being investigated for the Site including PV, wind, and
CHP or cogeneration systems.
b. New buildings will meet LEED criteria and include efficient design and renewable energy
systems necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in compliance
with the Architecture 2030 Challenge. That would reduce energy usage by up to 53,000
MMBTUs per year and return the usage estimates to pre-developed estimates for
typical industrial use of the existing Site based on the 821,200 sf GSA.
4. Lighting
a. A full photometric plan will be submitted with each site plan application and will
incorporate “Dark Sky” techniques to confine and minimize light to the extent
practicable while maintaining proper safety. The Project within the Town will be
required to comply with the Town of Ithaca Outdoor Lighting Law. Additionally, any
proposed LED lighting should comply with the Tompkins County Environmental
Management Council’s 2017 recommendation for maximum color temperature less
than or equal to 3000K.
I. Air Quality
The GEIS focused specifically on the potential impacts to area wide/regional air quality and air quality on
the Site. On Site outdoor and indoor air quality was tested for over a decade, with data reported
annually through NYS Ambient Air Quality Reports. For the GEIS, these reports were compared with data
from area wide/regional air quality analyses, and included an evaluation of the US EPA’s National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common pollutants and an assessment of Greenhouse
Gas Emissions from on-Site emissions. The six common pollutants analyzed were carbon monoxide, lead,
nitrogen oxides, ozone, particulates and sulfur dioxide. The GEIS also evaluated whether the Project
would result in violations of ambient air quality standards or health related guidance values for vehicle
emissions, building emissions and historical impacts.
Potential Impacts
1. There will be some temporary air quality impacts during construction due to vehicle emissions.
2. Based on the criteria identified in the NYSDEC FEAF Workbook and the assessment of the
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions due to the Project, there are impacts to air quality from the
41
Project related to carbon dioxide emissions. GHG emissions resulting from the use of natural
gas (45,901 mmBTU annually) to serve the buildings for the Project are projected to total 2,686
Tons of Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2e). The GHG components include Carbon Dioxide (CO2 -
2,685 MT/yr), Methane (CH4- 0.048 MT/yr) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O - 0.00025 MT/yr).
3. In addition to GHG from building emissions related to energy consumption, tenants with certain
types of commercial or industrial operations may emit pollutants into the air. The degree and
type of air pollutants emitted depends on the tenant’s specific operations.
4. Since the Project includes occupation of many existing buildings not routinely occupied, adverse
impacts have the potential to arise from the occupation of Buildings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 6A (any
remaining portions), 8, 10, 13A, 13B, 15, 24, 33 (remaining portions), 34 and 35. The potential
for SVI into existing buildings to be occupied and new buildings would need to be addressed by
mitigation, monitoring, or further analysis.
5. The analyses that were performed reveal no significant impacts to air quality, with the exception
of potential exceedance of threshold criteria for carbon dioxide from building emissions and soil
vapor intrusion from historical impacts potentially affecting indoor air quality.
Mitigation
1. Vehicle Emissions: No mitigation measures are proposed beyond those set forth under traffic
mitigation measures.
2. Building Emissions: New buildings will meet LEED ND criteria and include efficient design and
renewable energy systems necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in
compliance with the Architecture 2030 Challenge. That would reduce total energy usage by up
to 53,000 MMBTUs per year. Any commercial or industrial tenant operations with the potential
to emit air pollutants must identify and control those sources through the NYS Air Pollution
Control Program (6 NYCRR Part 201) and any other applicable laws and regulations.
3. Historic Impacts: As previously mentioned in section E. Public Health and Environment (page
17), the prior testing for soil vapor intrusion will be utilized by the Project Sponsor in
coordination with NYSDEC and NYSDOH to determine which structures warrant mitigation or
monitoring. Existing buildings likely to require mitigation, monitoring or additional analysis
include:
a. Mitigation of Buildings 1, 2 (basement portion), 3, 4, 5, 6 and 6A (remaining portions),
8,10, 18, 21, 24, 33 (remaining portions) and 34
b. Monitoring of Buildings 13A and 17
c. Buildings 2 (upper portion), 10A, 13B, 15 and 35 may require some additional action to
identify sources and reduce exposure.
4. Prior to any new building construction in the CW3 or CW4 Sub Areas, the VOC data for soil and
groundwater within the proposed building footprint will be analyzed for the potential for soil
vapor intrusion and mitigation will be included as part of the construction, as warranted. The
Town will require this analysis before final site plan approval.
5. Mitigation measures set forth in the Public Health and Environment and Traffic sections, shall
also serve to mitigate impacts to air quality.
J. Visual and Aesthetic Resources
Visual and aesthetic resources are characterized by various elements that form a viewer’s perception
and aesthetic response to a place, object, or setting. The GEIS reviewed critical vantage and viewpoints
where the visual environment is considered an important aspect of the Site from within the City and
Town. Many of these views are listed in the Town Scenic Resources Inventory and the Tompkins County
Scenic Resources Inventory. These views include Danby Road, Taughannock Boulevard, Cliff Street,
42
Hector Street, West Haven Park, Sheffield Road, Upper Bostwick Road, East Shore Park, and Tutelo Park.
Specific points in the City include Meadow Street, Route 13 heading south mid-way down the hill,
Stewart Park, Allan H. Treman State Marine Park, Cass Park, South Cayuga Street heading south, and
Cornell University on East Hill.
The field analysis performed for the GEIS included a before/after comparison using photography to
collect near and distant views. Eighteen (18) existing views were documented in late February during
leaf off conditions in order to capture the maximum potential visual impact. Massing models have also
been created to illustrate the potential visual and aesthetic impacts of proposed development in the
context of existing Site conditions. The visual impact analysis included the following:
• Photographs of existing views of the Site during leaf off conditions, as identified in the
Scoping Document.
• Photographic perspectives, visual renderings, and visual simulations of the Project from
each critical receptor point, providing a before/after comparison.
• Maps of each viewshed illustrating the sight lines and views internal and external to the
Site.
• View descriptions from critical vantage points of the proposed development using
photographs.
• Architectural elevation drawings of the Phase I buildings were developed.
Potential Impacts
1. In varying degrees, the existing Site buildings are (and some proposed new buildings will be)
visible from a number of locations throughout the City and Town.
2. The visual and aesthetic character of NYS Route 96B, as illustrated in viewsheds 9 and 10, will
incur the greatest impacts, with significantly increased density along the roadway, larger
buildings and varying architectural character of questionable compatibility with the existing
surrounding homes and buildings along NYS Route 96B.
3. More distant views and views with limited visibility of the Project, such as viewsheds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 14 will have fewer visual impacts, as the proposed new structures will either
not be visible at all, will blend with the existing structures from a distance or will be softened by
existing and proposed vegetation or other visual mitigation noted below.
Mitigation
1. Sub Area CW3 was broken into CW3A and CW3B as a result of the comments received in the
DGEIS and FGEIS, pertaining to potential significant visual impacts of the Project on the
surrounding Aurora Street/NYS Route 96B neighborhood. Sub Area CW3A encompasses a
narrow area along the NYS Route 96B road frontage. Visual mitigation measures in Sub Area
CW3A can be found in the PDZ language and include a variety of architectural approaches,
building designs, building materials and themes that are consistent with the surrounding
neighborhood, such as reduced building heights, required building frontage elements (front
stoops, porches or at-grade entries), visual screening and planting/landscaping and carefully
locating components within the Project.
2. The PDZ language requires the remaining development to be of similar character as existing
structures on the Site. For example, architecture strategies such as fenestration of the proposed
structures that continue the rhythm and character of the existing structures, will allow for new
structures to blend with the Site as it exists. The form-based language in the PDZ includes
detailed limits on the heights of proposed building (as noted above, different limits for each Sub
Area), along with building setbacks, maximum façade length, and public frontage elements.
43
3. Sub Area CW1 is designated as a Natural Area, as it contains significant steep slopes on the
western side of the Site. This Sub Area is highly visible from many viewpoints. The existing
vegetation in this area will be preserved in its natural state to the greatest extent possible, as it
provides some screening of the existing upslope buildings.
4. The Project Sponsor will be following LEED ND guidelines including compact development, tree-
lined and shaded streetscapes, and minimized site disturbance to mitigate the impacts of the
development on the surrounding area.
5. Tree preservation plans, landscaping and visual screening plans will be submitted and reviewed
by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board as part of Site Plan review.
K. Community Services
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts to community services including Government Facilities, Solid
Waste Management, Educational Facilities, Cultural Facilities, Religious Facilities, Health Care Services,
and Public Safety. The Site, located in both the City and Town, is relevant to both municipalities’ offices.
The City of Ithaca City Hall is located at 108 East Green Street and the Town of Ithaca Town Hall is
located at 215 North Tioga Street, each respectively 0.5 miles and 0.6 miles north of the Site. The
United States Postal Service downtown Ithaca office is located at 213 North Tioga Street, approximately
0.6 miles north of the Site. Additionally, a number of approved postal provider satellite sites are located
within a 1.5-mile radius of the Site.
Potential Impacts
1. Government Facilities: The Project will result in a notable increase of the tax base, as described
under Cumulative Impacts, thereby increasing the revenue for the city, town and county
governments. The Project will also result in an increase in municipal utility usage, which will be
evaluated during the site plan review process.
2. Solid Waste Management: The Project will result in an increase of solid waste. In addition to the
solid waste generated by residences on-Site, there will be an increase in commercial and/or
manufacturing waste, depending on tenants. Consultation with the TCRSWC revealed that it is
currently operating at 21% of its capacity for waste and 41% for recyclables.
3. Educational Facilities: The Site is located within the Ithaca City School District (ICSD) boundary.
The Project estimates there could be approximately 50 children living on-Site, potentially
creating a new demand on the ICSD. Based on correspondences with ICSD, schools in the ICSD
have the capacity to accommodate future residents of the CWD. Higher learning educational
facilities in close proximity to the Site include Cornell University (located approximately 1.0 mile
northeast of the Site) and Ithaca College (located approximately 0.5 miles to the southeast).
4. Cultural Facilities: The Project will result in a greater demand on existing cultural facilities. It is
expected that some employees commuting to the CWD would use existing cultural facilities
during their non-work hours. The Project will also provide a significant amount of community
space, resulting from the selective demolition of portions of existing buildings. This space will
provide opportunities for markets, collective gatherings, festivals, and other larger community
events.
5. Religious Facilities: The Project will result in a greater demand on the existing religious facilities.
Additionally, it is expected that some employees commuting to the CWD would use existing
religious facilities during their non-work hours.
6. Health Care Services: The Project will result in a greater demand on the existing health care
services due to increased demand largely as a result of the increased residential population, but
also to a lesser extent, the workforce employed at the CWD. The Project’s residential population
44
is expected to be approximately 1,830, and the employee population to range between
approximately 800-1,000 people.
7. Public Safety Services: The Project Site is served by a City police station, fire station, county
sheriff’s office, NYS police and Bangs Ambulance service. An increase in the Project’s population
will impact the existing public safety services, requiring resources and staff time from the police
(City of Ithaca Police Department, the Tompkins County Sheriff’s Office and at times the New
York State Police), fire (the City of Ithaca Fire Department and as needed adjacent and nearby
community fire stations and departments) and emergency medical services.
Mitigation
1. Analyses of the existing community services indicate that there will be adequate capacity for
services despite increased demands resulting from the Project. Any increased demands from the
Project on such services will be mitigated by the additional tax base generated by the increased
property assessment for the Site. The assessed value of the Site will increase from $3.5M to an
estimated $236M.
2. Additional mitigation includes sales tax and other taxes on revenue generated by the operations
of the Project as well as individual business operations located on-site. These additional taxes
have not been considered in this analysis but would nevertheless further mitigate the cost of
providing community services to the Project.
3. In terms of fire, police and emergency services, the Site lies in both the City and Town.
However, there would be no jurisdictional confusion, as police protection operates on a “close-
car” concept, and fire protection and emergency medical services operate without regard to the
City and Town distinctions.
L. Open Space and Recreation
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts to open space and recreation as a result of the Project and its
alternatives within and adjacent to the Site, including parks, trails and other recreational resources. The
City, Town, and New York State own many open spaces and provide residents and visitors with a wide
variety of recreational resources, including hiking, biking, boating, fishing, and educational resources.
There are a large quantity of trail networks within and connecting to these parks and recreational
resources. Buttermilk Falls and Robert H. Treman State Parks have their own internal hiking trails and
are connected by the Finger Lakes Trail System. The Finger Lakes Trail system is over 950 miles in length
and runs from the Pennsylvania-New York border in Allegany State Park to the Long Path in the Catskill
Forest.
Potential Impacts
1. The existing impervious area on the Site is 35.75+/- acres. The Project will reduce the overall
potential open space on the Site by approximately 11% or 11.2 acres, with an increase of
development and impervious surfaces in the future.
2. The Project will impact open space and recreation by allowing the construction of the proposed
Gateway Trail. The Gateway Trail will provide a missing link between South Hill Recreation Way,
Buttermilk Falls State Park, the Finger Lakes Trail, and the Black Diamond Trail, creating broader
connections between the City, Town, and Tompkins County.
The construction of the Gateway Trail will be a positive impact on current residents and visitors
to the City, Town, and Tompkins County as a whole, as well as the future residents and
employees at the CWD.
Additionally, the construction of the Gateway Trail will provide another pedestrian route to,
from, and through the Site. This will allow the Site to become an important link and node in
45
connecting an extensive hiking and recreational trail network that allows for non-motorized
activities such as snowshoeing and cross-country skiing in the winter.
Mitigation
1. To ensure the long term benefits on open space, Sub Area CW1 is proposed to limit
development and uses to only recreationally-based programming.
2. In addition to the Gateway Trail, a series of sidewalks and pedestrian connections established
within the Site as part of the Project development will become a bridge between South Hill and
Downtown Ithaca. A pedestrian network will traverse the Site, connecting NYS Route 96B to S.
Cayuga Street, allowing for greater accessibility to downtown amenities and services, and vice
versa.
3. Open spaces, courtyards, and the network of sidewalks and trails will provide passive and active
recreational opportunities throughout the CWD.
4. The City of Ithaca and its consultants published a draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan in
November 2017. The City’s Plan, along with the existing Town of Ithaca Park, Recreation and
Open Space Plan, highlights the future connection of the Gateway Trail/Buttermilk Falls Corridor
as one of the key planned trail system enhancements. A permanent easement will be
established along the western portion of the Site to assist with such trail enhancements.
M. Construction Activities
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts from Project construction activities and measures to mitigate
them. The Site has been utilized as a construction staging area for multiple off-Site projects in the area
including the City-sponsored Commons infrastructure redevelopment project.
Potential Impacts
1. The Project calls for the full development of the Site over a seven to ten year period in multiple
phases.
Because the Project will have multiple phases over many years, there are both short and long
term potential impacts. Many of these impacts are typical of any construction project and
include work related to site work, foundations, steel work, concrete flatwork, exterior wall
construction, roofing, interior finish work, and exterior site improvements.
2. Construction work for the Project in the CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas may encounter impacted
media and building materials such as concrete floor slabs. As such, these activities have the
potential to impact on-Site workers, neighboring properties, or the environment if not properly
handled.
3. Additional construction impacts typical for a project of this nature include:
a. Construction Staging: Due to the multiple phases, a construction staging area may
potentially impact the residents/occupants of the Site as well as the adjacent property
owners.
b. Soil Erosion/Dust: Development of the Site will include clearing and grading of land
which creates the potential for soil erosion due to land disturbance and stormwater
runoff. Particulate matter and dust generation is also a potential impact due to
demolition and grading.
c. Solid Waste: Construction and demolition on the Site will generate related solid waste.
Those materials not reused or recycled will require disposal.
d. Noise/Emissions: Noise, air emissions and vibration will be generated from construction
activities, worker traffic, heavy equipment operation and delivery vehicles.
46
e. Construction Traffic: Traffic volumes will increase from the movement of construction
workers and off-Site construction equipment.
f. Asbestos: Projects that involve demolition typically encounter asbestos containing
materials (ACM).
g. Worker Safety: Projects of this type have potential impacts to workers including health
and safety concerns typically associated with construction activities.
Mitigation
1. NYSDEC ROD Amendment: A SMP (which includes an Excavation Work Plan and Groundwater
Management Plan) and various other Remedial Work Plans specific to the area being addressed
will be developed and implemented for all areas of the Site that remain on the IHWDS Registry,
i.e., all areas generally located north of the creek that runs west to east across the Site.
a. All work at the Site involving the disturbance of impacted soils or groundwater in the
IHWDS areas will also be implemented under CAMPs and Health and Safety Plans in
order to ensure that impacts to on-Site workers and the surrounding community are
mitigated. This includes continuous monitoring during periods of impacted soil or
groundwater disturbance by an environmental professional.
b. Construction activity will be coordinated with NYSDEC-approved remediation
requirements to eliminate or minimize disturbance of impacted media and building
materials.
2. Construction Staging: The majority of the construction will be staged in the Town of Ithaca, in
former Parking Lot #6 (which is the parking area east and uphill of Building 34). This staging area
is centrally located and will allow ease of access to the Site and also provides a large paved area
to reduce temporary construction impacts. The area utilized for staging will be fenced and gated
to control access.
a. The staging area will minimize traffic interruptions by providing two separate
construction access points on NYS Route 96B that can easily be operated and
maintained with typical flagging in accordance with NYSDOT requirements, or possibly
with the addition of temporary traffic signalization. This staging area will also maintain
the pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle access and parking for the CWD population
throughout the multiple development phases.
b. Limits of disturbance during construction will be clearly delineated to reduce
encroachment into sensitive or prohibited areas; and the areas of disturbance will be
limited to the extent practicable.
c. The Site Plan drawings for Phase I will include a detailed construction staging plan.
d. Project identification and wayfinding signage to distinguish construction and public
access points will be used. Signage shall also be provided to indicate contacts for
complaints and/or questions regarding the Project. Details on proposed signage in the
Town of Ithaca shall be submitted for Site Plan review and shall conform to the Town of
Ithaca Sign Law (Town Code, Article XXIX). Signage shall be maintained throughout the
construction phase.
3. Soil Erosion/Dust: A SWPPP has been prepared for the full development of the Site. A Full
SWPPP will be developed for the Phase I Site Plans in accordance with the NYS SWMDM and the
NYS Erosion and Sediment Control Manual. Mitigation will include coverage under a SPDES
General Construction Permit (GP-0-15-002), installation of proper erosion and sediment (E&S)
control measures in accordance with the approved SWPPP, and weekly inspections by a
qualified professional (per SPDES Permit).
47
a. Dust creation will also be mitigated by implementing the SWPPP. Specific mitigation will
include wetting of roadways and hydroseeding/mulching immediately upon grading to
minimize dust and promote vegetative cover. Potential fugitive dust emissions from
material storage piles will be controlled through the use of enclosures, seeding, covers
or spraying with a dust suppressant as necessary.
b. The generation of airborne demolition-related dust will be reduced through standard
construction practices including application of dust suppressants over the involved area
to minimize blowing and circulation of exposed soils/materials. The need for blasting
will be minimized as much as possible. If blasting is deemed necessary, any permits and
authorizations will be clearly identified and obtained as part of the Site Plan approval
process prior to commencing. Blasting specifications would be developed in accordance
with NYSDOT procedures for blasting. Any blasting will be minimized when developing
grading plans.
4. Solid Waste: Prior to demolition, the Project Sponsor will consult with Finger Lakes ReUse to
determine eligibility for their “deconstruction” program that identifies suitable buildings for
deconstruction, safely dismantles them by hand to harvest maximum materials, and then sells
the materials through their existing ReUse Center at discounted prices. All other metal
construction debris will be separated and recycled. Any remaining debris will be disposed of at a
permitted construction and demolition (C&D) landfill.
a. A construction disposal plan for non-recyclable construction waste handling and
removal in accordance with local regulations (and following LEED guidelines) will be
developed. Phase- specific disposal plans will be developed during the site plan review
process.
b. All remaining demolition debris will be disposed of at C&D landfills or recycling facilities
permitted by NYSDEC (per 6 NYCRR 360 Solid Waste Management Facilities). NYSDEC
requires demolished materials containing lead paints to be disposed of at permitted C &
D facilities.
5. Noise/Emissions: Proper maintenance of all construction equipment and appropriate muffler
systems on all equipment will be required. Construction vehicles will be shut down whenever
practicable and the idling of such vehicles will not be permitted.
a. Hours of operation for exterior construction will be limited to 7:00 am to 6:00 pm
Monday through Saturday. Noise from interior construction occurring in the Town must
comply with the Town Noise Law.
6. Construction Traffic: A safe construction/delivery routing plan will be developed and submitted
during the Site Plan review process for each Phase. This includes the development of a
Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan for all work zone areas. Parking for construction-
related personnel will be located on-Site. A potential road use agreement may be required and
will be evaluated as part of the site plan review process.
7. Asbestos/Hazardous Materials: An asbestos survey in accordance with 12 NYCRR 56 Section 5
will be completed for all structures scheduled for renovation or demolition prior to such activity
to determine the presence, if any, of asbestos-containing building materials. This survey will be
performed by a licensed asbestos inspector certified in compliance with 12 NYCRR 56 Section
3.2.
8. Worker Safety: All work will be completed in accordance with OSHA requirements including
developing an accident prevention program that provides for frequent and regular inspection of
the jobsites, materials, and equipment by competent persons designated by the employers in
accordance with 29 CFR 1926.20(b).
48
N. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources
As part of the impact analysis, SEQR requires that the GEIS identify the irreversible and irretrievable
commitment of resources, if any. The GEIS identified several irreversible and irretrievable commitments
of resources required for construction and operation of the Build Alternatives, which would include
construction materials, energy (construction and operation phases), labor, capital, and land. One specific
irreversible commitment of resources is the loss of open space in its natural state to permanent
development, particularly in the CW2A & B Sub Areas. The operation of the Project after development
will require the irretrievable use of water, utilities, and energy resources. The Project Sponsor will
undertake practical efforts to minimize impacts through the implementation of a project-specific
Sustainability Program, using LEED ND as the framework for the development and operation of the
Project.
Public and private financial commitment is likely to provide residents and municipalities in the
immediate area, region, and State with increased property and sales tax revenue, growth in land values
surrounding the Site, other revenues directly or indirectly generated by the new development, along
with other intangible quality of life benefits to the City and Town, including the provision of improved
access to downtown and the 95 acre parcel itself.
O. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
SEQR also requires an analysis of unavoidable adverse impacts. The GEIS found that the Build
Alternatives are generally consistent with local and regional plans and policies for redeveloping the Site
and would result in significant short- and long-term benefits. However, some unavoidable adverse
impacts would result from implementation of the Build Alternatives. The unavoidable adverse impacts
are similar for each Build Alternative but may vary in degree of impact.
Construction-phase impacts would include localized and temporary impacts to soil erosion, solid waste
generation, sound levels, air quality, and traffic. Short-term noise impacts associated with construction-
related vehicles would be regulated by local and state regulations and standards. Soil erosion would be
mitigated through the NYSDEC SPDES process and the development of project specific SWPPPs. Air
quality impacts would be limited to short-term increases in fugitive dust and mobile source emissions
from construction equipment. Construction traffic will be minimized with the development of on-site
staging areas.
Overall, the Build Alternatives would have significant, positive long-term impacts. However, as with any
sizable urban development, there may be minor long-term impacts. These impacts include increased
vehicular traffic, noise and air quality resulting from denser development patterns. Some existing
viewsheds will be altered due to the placement of new structures on the site. In addition, there would
be impacts to public utilities due to increased usage including natural gas, electric, fiber optics, public
water, and sanitary/storm sewers.
P. Growth Inducing Aspects
The GEIS identified the following potential growth-inducing aspects of the Project:
1. Potential future development in other areas of South Hill as a result of infrastructure
improvements.
2. Possible creation and/or relocation of employment opportunities as a result of new
manufacturing and business development in the Chain Works District project.
3. Potential increase in tourism as a result of enhanced recreational opportunities and trail
connections.
49
4. Possible stimulation of additional economic investment of properties and uses that surround the
project.
5. Possible additional housing development of all types in the area surrounding the Project.
The Project could create a hub on South Hill, with additional employment, housing, and recreational
opportunities. Rezoning the CWD to allow the development of new housing will reduce pressure on
existing neighborhoods, and will accommodate Ithaca’s job growth and demand for housing in walkable
neighborhoods.
Q. Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources
The construction and operation of the Build Alternatives would have both short-term and long-term
impacts on the use and conservation of energy resources. In the short-term, construction of all Build
Alternatives would require the use of nonrenewable energy resources including: gasoline, diesel fuel,
and electricity. In addition to construction-related energy use by equipment, the indirect use of energy
would also occur as a result of construction workers commuting to and from the construction site.
The long-term impact on energy resources would differ in magnitude for each of the Build Alternatives.
The Low-Density Alternative would have the least impact and the High-Density Alternative would have
the most impact. Long-term impacts on the use and conservation of energy will result from the
consumption of energy from day-to-day Project operations, such as heating, cooling, powering various
commercial and industrial operations and lighting buildings, and from Project-generated traffic.
New buildings will meet LEED ND criteria and will include efficient design and renewable energy systems
necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in compliance with the Architecture 2030
Challenge. That would reduce total energy usage by up to 53,000 MMBTUs per year and return the
usage estimates to pre-developed estimates for typical industrial use of the existing Site based on the
821,200 sf gross square area (GSA).
Finally, the Project’s adaptive reuse of existing buildings allows for the preservation of the energy
embodied in existing buildings. By preserving the existing buildings where feasible, the Project will avoid
the disposal of thousands of BTUs worth of building materials. Building reuse extends the life cycle of
buildings and conserves resources such as energy by requiring less manufacturing and transportation of
materials.
V. THRESHOLD CONDITIONS
Pursuant to SEQR, Agencies may prepare a GEIS when there is a need to assess a wide variety of impacts at a
more conceptual level on a larger geographic area, often including cumulative impacts, rather than project-
specific or site-specific EIS’s. As the Project plans move forward, Project changes may occur as the conceptual
development plan is developed into final design proposals for the well-defined elements, but more likely, for the
less defined components. Such changes may specifically include proposed changes to the contemplated
development program.
The Project was evaluated utilizing a GEIS to analyze Site-specific impacts associated with various aspects of the
Preferred Alternative as well as more long-term and/or cumulative impacts associated with future phases of
Project development. Final designs for less-defined Project components as well as any proposed changes to the
more well-defined elements (hereinafter referred to as “Future Project Plans.”) would require further evaluation
pursuant to SEQR. An appropriate agency would be responsible for performing an environmental review on
Future Project Plans and must consider Future Project Plans proposed in relation to the GEIS and the Findings
Statement. Upon development of Future Project Plans, the Project Sponsor would work with the then-lead
50
agency to determine if the environmental impacts associated with such Future Project Plans have been
adequately addressed in the GEIS and SEQR Findings Statement, taking into account whether the proposal
exceeds any of the threshold conditions outlined below. Such a determination must be made before any Future
Project Plans are approved. A Checklist for Future Project Plans Consistency with GEIS has been developed and
is attached hereto as Attachment B.
In the event that the then-lead agency determines that:
A. Future Project Plans do not meet any of the threshold conditions established below, then no
further SEQR compliance would be required;
B. Future Project Plans do not meet any of the threshold conditions established below, but are not
addressed or are not adequately addressed in this Statement of Findings, then an amended
findings statement must be prepared;
C. Future Project Plans are not addressed or are not adequately addressed in the GEIS for the
Project, and would not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts, then a negative
declaration must be prepared; or
D. Future Project Plans are not addressed or are not adequately addressed in the GEIS for the
Project and may have one or more significant adverse environmental impacts, then a
supplement to the GEIS must be prepared.
Future Project Plans that meet any one of the following threshold conditions shall not be considered to have
been addressed by the GEIS/Findings Statement and must be evaluated by the Lead Agency to determine
whether additional environmental review (e.g., a Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement)
would be necessary:
Environmental Setting Threshold Condition
Land Use Changes in the allowable uses in Sub Areas
Changes in the size or location of Sub Areas (see Figure 2.3-2, PUD/PDZ Sub Area
Boundary Map and Table 2.7-1, attached as Attachment C)
Changes in the maximum Sub Area coverage
Changes to the maximum density of the Sub Areas.
A material change to the Conceptual Site Layout Plan, e.g. the general location or
grouping of structures and streets or Site access points.
Changes in the total square footage of uses (residential, commercial and industrial)
Development proposed on slopes greater than or equal to 20%.
Future proposed action likely to exceed total impervious site coverage rate of 70%.
Vegetation Any non-recreational facilities proposed in CW1.
Vegetation loss in the town-portion of CW1 beyond what is noted in the GEIS.
Public Health and Environment
Remedial actions that are different than those required by the NYSDEC Issued ROD
Amendment to allow for the mixed-use of the Site and/or than those analyzed in
51
VI. CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS
Having considered the DGEIS and the FGEIS, including the comments received on the DGEIS and the FGEIS, and
having considered the preceding written facts and conclusions relied upon to meet the requirements of 6 NYCRR
617.9, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as an Involved Agency, finds and certifies that:
A. The requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Conservation Law and the implementing
regulations of NYSDEC, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and local regulations, have been met; and
B. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable
alternatives available, the action is one that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts
to the maximum extent practicable, and that adverse environmental impacts will be avoided or
minimized to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as conditions to the decision
those mitigative measures that were identified as practicable.
The Town’s designees are hereby directed to file and distribute this Findings Statement as required by 6
NYCRR Part 617 pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (SEQR).
These Findings were adopted by majority vote of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board at a duly called meeting
held on May 21, 2019.
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Signature of Responsible Officer: __________________________________ Date: ___________________
Name/Title of Responsible Officer: _________________________________
Transportation Changes to the LOS beyond those identified in the GEIS.
Future proposed action likely to exceed a mixed-use development of 1.7 MSF or
square footage allocations for land uses set forth in Table 5.7-4.
Utilities
Water
Discharge to Turner Place Sewer
Discharge to South Cayuga Street
Sewer
Total peak sewer discharge
Changes to the Project’s total demand beyond the calculations outlined in the GEIS, which are:
271,500 GPD and peak @ 1500 gpm
2,033 gpm
1,450 gpm
1,500 gpm
143,400 MMBTU
Air Quality Changes likely to cause Project’s total emission of carbon dioxide equivalent to
Visual and Aesthetic Resources
Proposed maximum building heights that exceed those outlined in the GEIS or in
the PDZ requirements.
Vegetation loss in the town-portion of CW1 beyond what is noted in the GEIS.
Open Space Any non-recreational facilities proposed in CW1.
LOADINGDOCK
LOADINGDOCK
10
8
10
RetainingWall
N16
LOADINGDOCK
N1
N2
N3
N5
N6
N7
N9
N10
N11
N12
N17
N20
N27
N31
N30
N29
N33
N34
N35
N36
N38
N32
N28
N13
N14
N15
N37
N18
N19
N21
N22
N23
E2-6
N24
N25
N26
N8
N4
FGEIS FIGURE 2.3-2
OVERALL CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT PLAN (PROJECT TEAM) *
1
Chain Works District
Findings Statement Attachment B
Checklist for Future Project Plans Consistency with GEIS
Tips for Completing this Checklist:
Review all relevant information from the Findings Statement; refer back to the GEIS if necessary.
Answer each part of the 14 questions on this Checklist
If you answer “Yes” to a numbered question, please complete all questions that follow in that section.
If you answer “No” to a numbered question, move on to the next numbered question.
If you answer “Yes” to any question (a) - (c), characterize the extent of the impact by checking either “None, or
small impact may occur,” or “Moderate to large impact may occur.”
If you are unsure or undecided about a response, review the Findings Statement or refer back to the GEIS.
When answering a question, consider all components of the proposed action.
Consider the possibility of long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts.
Complete Part 3 of the Full EAF for any impact which may have a moderate to large impact or where there is a need
to explain why a particular element of Future Project Plans does or does not require additional environmental
review.
#
Environmental Criteria
Response
If you respond “Yes” to any
question (a) - (c),
characterize the extent of the
impact
None, or
small
impact may
occur
Moderate to
large impact
may occur
1
1) Land Use and Zoning
The proposed action is not completely consistent with future
land use plans in the GEIS.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 2.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Land Use and Zoning?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
2
2) Land
The proposed action may involve construction on, or physical
alteration of, the land surface of the proposed site
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 3.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Land?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
2
3
3) Water Resources
The proposed action may impact groundwater, surface water, or
stormwater.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 4.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Water Resources?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
4
4) Vegetation and Fauna
The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 5.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Vegetation and Fauna?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
5
5) Public Health and Environment
The proposed action may have an impact on human health from
exposure to new or existing sources of contaminants.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 6.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Public Health and Environment?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐ ☐
6
6) Historic and Archeological Resources
The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or
archeological resource.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 7.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Historic and Archeological Resources?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
3
7
7) Traffic and Circulation
The proposed action may result in a change to the existing
transportation systems.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 8.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Traffic and Circulation?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
8
8) Utilities
The proposed action may result in a change to the existing
utilities.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 9.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Utilities?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
9
9) Air Quality
The proposed action may include a state-regulated air emission
source.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 10.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Air Quality? ☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
10
10) Visual and Aesthetic Resources
The proposed action creates a sharp contrast to a scenic or
aesthetic resource.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 11.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that have
not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐YES ☐ ☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project thresholds
related to Visual and Aesthetic Resources?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
4
11
11) Community Services
The proposed action may create a demand for additional
community services (e.g., schools, police, fire, solid waste
management, etc.)
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 12.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that
have not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project
thresholds related to Community Services?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
12
12) Open Space and Recreation
The proposed action may result in a loss of recreational
opportunities.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to section 13.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that
have not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project
thresholds related to Open Space and Recreation?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
13
13) Construction Activities
The proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors,
or outdoor lighting.
If “Yes,” answer a-c. If “No,” go to Part II. B.
☐
NO
☐
YES
a) Does the proposed action have any potential impacts that
have not been analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
b) Is the proposed action consistent with mitigation measures
that were identified in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
c) Does the proposed action exceed any CWD Project
thresholds related to Construction Activities?
☐
NO
☐
YES
☐
☐
14
14) Other Environmental Factors
Are there any other potential environmental impacts (not
discussed above) associated with the Future Project Plans which
were not analyzed in the GEIS?
☐
NO
☐
YES
If “Yes,” characterize the
extent of the impact
None, or
small impact
may occur
☐
Moderate to
large impact
may occur
☐
Doc #01-3224132.5
Attachment C
Figure 2.3-1 & Table 2.7-1, referenced in the chart on page 50 (section V. Thresholds)
FGEIS Figure 2.3-1 PUD/PDZ Sub Area Boundary Map (R+W)
The PDZ Zoning Code establishes four separate segments of activity and density within the Site. The
proposed adaptive reuse of existing structures and new development within each of these four (4) Sub
Areas (CW1, CW2, CW3, and CW4), including proposed program and layout, are summarized in Table
2.7-1 below. Total GFA is defined as the area of an entire building, comprising of exterior and interior
walls, the structure, and interior program and support spaces.
Table 2.7-1 Development Summary by Sub Area
Sub
Area
Approximate
Acreage
Residential Commercial Industrial Building
23.86 acres 0 0 sf 0 0 sf 0 0 sf
21.17 acres 448 568,400 sf1 0 0 sf 0 0 sf 568,400 sf
CW3 39.73 acres 467 692,500 sf1 9 184,350 sf 2 46,000 sf 922,850 sf
10.27 acres 0 0 sf 0 0 sf 4 214,900 sf1 214,900 sf
Total 95.03 acres 915 1,260,900 sf1 2
1 – Building area includes structured parking.
2 – Number also includes mixed-use buildings.
List of Acronyms Page xix
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
List of Acronyms
amsl above mean sea level
ac-feet Acre-Feet
AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic
ACM asbestos containing materials
ACS American Community Survey
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADT Average Daily Traffic
Acc/MEV accidents per million entering vehicles
AOC Area of Concern
AOI Area of Interest
AQI Air Quality Index
ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning
Engineers
BASE Building Assessment and Survey Evaluation
bgs below ground surface
BMP Best Management Practice
BR bedroom
BTU British Termal Units
CAAA Clean Air Act Amendments
C&D Construction and Demolition
CBD Central Business District
CBECS DOE’s Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey
CEA Critical Environmental Area
CEQR City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
cfs Cubic Feet Per Second
CGC Cleaner, Greener Communities
CHP combined heat and power
CJS Chaintreuil Jensen Stark Architects, LLP
CO Carbon monoxide
Code Code of the City of Ithaca
CRIS Cultural Resources Information System
CS Community Services
CSMA Community School of Music and Arts
CTR Commute Trip Reduction
CVOCs chlorinated volatile organic compounds
CWD Chain Works District
List of Acronyms Page xx
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
dBA Decibels
dbh diameter at breast height
DEM Digital Elevation Model
DGEIS Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
DOE Determination of Eligibility
DPW City of Ithaca Department of Public Works
E&S Erosion and Sedimentation
ECL Environmental Conservation Law
ED Economic Development
EDR Environmental Design & Research, Landscape Architecture, Engineering,
& Environmental Services, D.P.C.
EIS Environmental Impact Statement
EPR Economic & Policy Resources, Inc.
EPT Emerson Power Transmission
ENB Environmental Notice Bulletin
EPM NYSDOT’s Environmental Procedures Manual
EPT Emerson Power Transmission
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
ESDC Empire State Development Corporation
FAR Floor Area Ratio
FE Fagan Engineers & Land Surveyors, P.C.
FEAF Full Environmental Assessment Form
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FGEIS Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FIRM FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map
FOIL Freedom of Information Law
FS Feasibility Study
GC General Construction
GEIS Generic Environmental Impact Statement
GFA Gross Floor Area
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GIB Green Building and Infrastructure credit category for LEED ND
GLA Gross Leasable Area
GP General Construction Permit
GPD or gpd Gallons per Day
GPM or gpm Gallons per Minute
List of Acronyms Page xxi
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
GSA gross square area
GSF gross square footage
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HVAC heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
I Industrial
ICSD Ithaca City School District
IECC International Energy Conservation Code
IFD Ithaca Fire Department
IHWDS New York State Inactive Hazardous Waste Disposal Site
ISO Insurance Services Office
IPD Ithaca Police Department
ITCTC Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
J-SA Johnson-Schmidt, Architect, P.C.
LACS Lehman Alternative Community School
LEAF Long Environmental Assessment Form
LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LEED BD+C Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Building Design and
Construction Guide
LEED ND Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Neighborhood
Development
LOD Limits of Disturbance
LOS Level of Service
LRTP Long Range Transportation Plan
LU Land Use
MGD Million Gallons per Day
MMBTU one million BTUs
MPH miles per hour
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization
MUTCD Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices
MXD Mixed-Use Trip Generation Model
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NAPL non-aqueous phase liquid
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
NYCRR New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations
NOI Notice of Intent
List of Acronyms Page xxii
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
NOx Nitrogen oxides
NPS National Park Service
NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NTCHS National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils
NWI National Wetlands Inventory
NYCRR New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations
NYS New York State
NYSDAM New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
NYSDEC New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
NYSDOH New York State Department of Health
NYSDOL New York State Department of Labor
NYSDOS New York State Department of State
NYSDOT New York State Department of Transportation
NYSEG New York State Electric and Gas
NYSERDA New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
NYSNHP New York State Natural Heritage Program
NYSOPRHP New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Places
NYS SWMDM New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
OU Operable Unit(s)
Pb Lead
PBMR Project Benefits Metrics Report
PCBs Polychlorinated biphenyls
PCE Perchloroethylene
PDZ Planned Development Zone/Zoning
PILOT Payment In Lieu of Tax
POS Points of Study
ppm parts per million
psi pounds per square inch
PUD Planned Unit Development
PV Photovoltaic
QCT Qualified Census Tract
R+W Randall + West
RBC Regal Beloit Corporation
REC Recognized Environmental Conditions
RI Remedial Investigation
List of Acronyms Page xxiii
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
ROD New York State Record of Decision
RRv Stormwater Reduction Rates
SCO Soil Cleanup Objective
SEQR State Environmental Quality Review Act
SF square feet
SHPO State Historic Preservation Office
SIP State Implementation Plan
SMP Site Management Plan
SO2 Sulfur dioxide
SOV Single-occupancy vehicles
SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure
SPDES State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
SRF SRF & Associates
SSD Sub-Slab Depressurization
STREAM STREAM Collaborative Architecture + Landscape Architecture DPC
SVI Soil Vapor Intrusion
SVOCs semi-volatile organic compounds
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TC3 Tompkins County Community College
TCAD Tompkins County Area Development
TCAT Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit
TCDOH Tompkins County Department of Health
TCE Trichloroethene or trichloroethylene
TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leachate Procedure
TCRSWC Tompkins County Recycling and Solid Waste Center
TCSD Tompkins County Sheriff’s Department
TDM Transportation Demand Management
t-GEIS Transportation-focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement
TIMS Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies
TIS Traffic Impact Study
TND Traditional Neighborhood Development
TRM turf reinforcement mat
ULI Urban Land Institute
UNA Unique Natural Area
UP UnChained Properties
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USDA NRCS United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation
List of Acronyms Page xxiv
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT
January 5, 2016
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
Service
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service
USGBC United States Green Building Council
USGS United States Geological Survey
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compounds
vph Vehicles per Hour
VPD Vehicles per Day
WPD Whitham Planning & Design, LLC
WSP WSP Environmental Strategies
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant