Village of Lansing

Planning Board Meeting

November 14, 2005

The meeting of the Village of Lansing Planning Board was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Ned Hickey. Present at the meeting were Planning Board Members Doris Brown, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos; Alternate Member Mario Tomei; Trustee Liaison Lynn Leopold; Attorney David Dubow; Engineer Brent Cross; Code Enforcement Officer Ben Curtis and members of the public.

Hickey appointed Alternate Member Mario Tomei to fill in for Phil Dankert as an acting member of the Planning Board for tonight's meeting.

Public Comment:

Hickey opened the Public Comment period.

As there was no one present who wished to speak, Stycos moved to close the Public Comment period. Seconded by Tomei. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.

Public Hearing - Special Permit No. 2072, Taughannock Aviation storage hanger:

Hickey stated the next item on the agenda was a Public Hearing for Special permit No. 2072, Taughannock Aviation to construct a 27,000 sf storage hangar proximate to their offices at 66 Brown Road and the Ithaca-Tompkins Regional Airport runway in the Business and Technology District, Tax Parcel No. 45.1-1-53.2.

Roger Dennis of Taughannock Aviation Corporation made the presentation and stated this is Phase III of the proposed three-phase project. The addition and the parking lot have been completed and now they are proposing to construct the new hangar where jets will be housed inside to provide winter coverage. The building is designed as a 150x180 foot hangar. After this hangar is built they will remove the old hangar which is in poor condition and an eyesore.

Hickey opened the Public Hearing. As there was no one present who wished to speak, Stycos moved to close the Public Hearing. Seconded by Tomei. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.

Hickey stated this is pretty straightforward. He visited the site this afternoon and the area has been much improved.

Next, Engineer Cross gave his report. Cross stated that in regards to drainage, the site is already an impervious area so there would be no change. Cross questioned the footprint of the building and whether it might be over utilities such as storm water and possibly electric. Dennis stated if it is electric it would have gone to the old terminal building which has been removed and any utilities would therefore probably be dead wires. Cross stated the electric lines just show up in the drawing and he has no further comments.

Curtis stated Dennis has Proof of Mailing, but forgot to bring it and will be dropping it off to Curtis tomorrow. Curtis also stated that a 239 has been submitted to the County but a response has not been received.

Next, the Board reviewed Part II of the SEQR review. The answers were A - No; B - No; C1- No; C2 - No; C3 - No; C4 - No, although the hangars are being upgraded, it is all consistent with the County’s adopted Airport Master Plan; C5 - None; C6 - None; C7 - None; C8 - No; D - No, as there is no one present to speak against it.

Klepack moved the following resolution, seconded by Stycos:

VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR SEQR REVIEW OF SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 2072 ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2005

WHEREAS:

A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: Special Permit 2072, Taughannock Aviation to construct a 27,000 sf storage hanger proximate to their offices at 66 Brown Road and the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport runway in the Business and Technology District, Tax Parcel No. 45.1-1-53.2; and

B. This proposed action is an Unlisted Action for which the Village of Lansing Planning Board is an involved agency for the purposes of environmental review; and

C. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board, in performing the lead agency function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), (i) thoroughly reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part I, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), and (iii) completed the Short EAF, Part II;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Village of Lansing Planning Board, based upon (i) its thorough review of the Short EAF, Part I, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) its thorough review of the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), and (iii) its completion of the Short EAF, Part II, including the findings noted thereon (which findings are incorporated herein as if set forth at length), hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”) in accordance with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action, and determines that neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required; and:

2. The Responsible Officer of the Village of Lansing Planning Board is hereby authorized and directed to complete and sign as required the Short EAF, Part III, confirming the foregoing Negative Declaration, which fully completed and signed Short EAF shall be attached to and made a part of this Resolution.

The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:

AYES: Mario Tomei, Doris Brown, Ned Hickey, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos

NAYS: none

The motion was declared to be carried.

Next, the Board reviewed the General Conditions for a Special Permit under Section 145-59E of the Zoning Law. Stycos moved that the applicant has met the General Conditions for all Special Permits. Seconded by Klepack. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.

Hickey stated there is a hangup as the Board is still awaiting the response from the County for the 239 Review but in the event that the County has negative comments then the applicants will need to return to this board. Curtis stated the Board would normally have received a FAX prior to this meeting.

Klepack moved the following resolution, seconded by Brown:

VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 2072 ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2005

WHEREAS:

B. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board held a public hearing regarding this proposed action, and thereafter reviewed and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant in support of this proposed action, including information and materials related to the environmental issues, if any, which the Board deemed necessary or appropriate for its review, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations; and

C. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Action for which the Board is an involved agency, and in performing the lead agency function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), the Board (i) thoroughly reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part 1, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), (iii) completed the Short EAF, Part 2; and (iv) made a negative determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”) in accordance with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action and determined that an Environmental Impact Statement would not be required; and

D. On November 14, 2005, in accordance with Section 7-725-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Sections 145.59, 145.60, 145.60.1 and 145.61 of the Village of Lansing Code, the Village of Lansing Planning Board, in the course of its deliberations, reviewed and took into consideration (i) the general conditions required for all special permits (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.59E), (ii) any applicable conditions required for certain special permit uses (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.60), and (iii) any applicable conditions required for uses within a Combining District (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.61);

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOW:

1. The Village of Lansing Planning Board hereby finds (subject to the conditions and requirements, if any, set forth below) that the proposed action meets (i) all general conditions required for all special permits (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.59E), (ii) any applicable conditions required for certain special permit uses (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.60), and (iii) any applicable conditions required for uses within a Combining District (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.61); and

2. It is hereby determined by the Village of Lansing Planning Board that Special Permit No. 2072 is granted and approved, subject to the following conditions and requirements:

1. 239 determination by the Tompkins County Planning Department that the proposed development has no negative intercommunity, or county-wide impacts.

2. Proof of mailing confirming that owners of contiguous property in the Village were mailed notice of the Public Hearing at least five days prior to the Hearing.

The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:

AYES: Mario Tomei, Doris Brown, Ned Hickey, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos

NAYS: none

The motion was declared to be carried.

Special Permit No. 2071 - Homewood Suites - Continued Discussion:

Hickey stated the Homewood Suites was discussed previously and was adjourned to allow additional time for review by the Village Engineer to resolve drainage issues. Subsequently, Curtis and Hickey have had two meetings with the engineers and discussed material provided by Andy Sciarabba outlining issues to be addressed.

Andy Sciarabba made the presentation and provided Board members with a chart indicating the issues to be resolved and possible mitigation proposed to address each issue. The first item was insufficient onsite parking. The original proposal was for 98 onsite spaces and 16 shared spaces. In response to the County’s 239 concerns about the 5 spaces at the north end of the site where vehicles would be backing into traffic, alternate plans were devised. One plan indicates two handicapped parking spaces parallel to the curb rather than the 5 spaces perpendicular to the curb. The 2 spaces would be 10 feet wide by 20 feet long and would have an 8 foot wide sidewalk ramped down to the level of the paved area for access. This new proposal will eliminate 3 spaces and will leave 95 on-site parking spaces and 19 off-site shared spaces for a total of 114 parking spaces. Richard Thaler, speaking for Triphammer Development Corporation, owner of both properties, stated they are in agreement with this off-site parking arrangement and will prepare a written agreement for approval by the Village Attorney which will then be recorded. Cross stated this new proposal satisfies his concerns.

The next issue to be resolved was in regards to signage. Sciarabba stated they were unaware that signage required a separate permit and was handled directly by Curtis; the proposed signage will be submitted to Curtis with the required sign applications.

The next issue was in regard to fire department access. Sciarabba has met with the Lansing Fire Department and their biggest concern was the west side of the property where they would need to access the third level. of the building from the narrow driveway at the east end of Triphammer Mall. The Fire Department requested a wider paved area than the existing drive where they could set up their ladder truck. Sciarabba is proposing that the driveway be widened to 28 feet in the area where they indicated they would need the ladder truck. Thaler stated he was in agreement with the widening of the pavement and there would be an easement for this additional area which would be submitted for approval by the Village Attorney and recorded.

On the issue of additional trees for Cinema Drive, Sciarabba noted that at the previous meeting the sidewalk was shown on the curb line. Sciarabba has met with Superintendent of Public Works John Courtney and upon the recommendation of Cross, the sidewalk will be relocated to the property line which will create a grass strip between the curb line and the sidewalk. Existing trees will be relocated to this grass strip. Any trees not surviving one year after construction ends would be replaced. Sciarabba stated the grass strip would be in the Village ROW.

Pedestrian access to Triphammer Mall through the site will be improved with crosswalks and the sidewalk plan revised as requested to minimize exposure to traffic. The crosswalk has been moved for safer passage as depicted on the revised Layout Plan and Supplemental Drawing 5. The Board had requested that the curb cuts be reduced to 24’, but the Fire Department requested a minimum 28’ curb cut on the east side to get their big trucks through the tight turns. Sciarabba reduced the curb cut to 28’. Aisle widths will be narrowed to 24 feet for the drop off loop.

Regarding traffic concerns, the geometry on the entrance onto Cinema Drive has been revised to form a “T” intersection as shown on the Layout Plan. The Village striping will be modified to indicate a “T“intersection rather than a 90⁰turn. Hickey stated the intersection will continue to be a three-way stop.

There is concern about the existing trees along the western side of the property. The retaining wall will necessitate their removal. The new proposal is to remove the trees, put in the wall and then replant the trees which were removed and hope they survive. Hickey stated he will be doing landscaping inspections and the trees which are planted as part of the approved landscape plan must be maintained. Thaler stated the trees have been there 16 years and he is personally committed to saving them.

For the retaining wall, Sciarabba stated the wall on the west portion of the site will be from approximately 6 inches high at the north end to 9 feet or more at the south end due to the topography of the site. It will be a segmented block retaining wall similar to the Unilock "Pisa Stone" wall depicted in the handout he provided. The color and size has not been chosen but it will be of that style and will not be a solid concrete wall. Tomei asked if there would be a fence on top of the railing. Sciarabba stated there would be plantings and a railing in some locations to limit pedestrian access to the wall. The only access to the mall would be around the end of the wall at the northern end. Curtis and Hickey noted that many individuals would take shortcuts and will not walk to the entrance driveway to access the mall area. A fence should be placed in the area on the south end to prevent pedestrian access. Thaler stated this will be addressed and fence installed at least until the adjoining property is developed.

Sciarabba has met with Cross regarding stormwater management. Sciarabba has designed a detail to detain as much volume as possible in the open grass swale at the base of the retaining wall. The detail would also provide some filtration for water quality. Cross stated the effort by Sciarabba addresses the ability of the site to handle the stormwater. Cross feels the new proposal is better than that previously submitted, and although it does not meet the EPA regulations for a newly developed site, it is the best that can be done on this site given the constraints of existing development.

Next, the Board reviewed Part II of the SEQR review. The answers were A - No; B - No; C1- No, all of the concerns listed are ones which will be mitigated and are subject to review and approval by the Village Engineer.; C2 - No, it will be an improvement to the neighborhood; C3 - No; C4 - No, it is in a high-commercial district which is where it should be located; C5 - None; C6 - None; C7 - None; C8 - No; D - No.

Stycos moved the following resolution, seconded by Tomei:

VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR SEQR REVIEW OF SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 2071 ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2005

WHEREAS:

A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: Special Permit 2071, Ithaca Suites, LLC to construct a 70,700sf, 91 unit extended stay hotel on the location of the old Cinema 4 Theater, 36 Cinema Drive in the Commercial High Traffic District, Tax Parcel No. 46.1-6-4.1; and

B. This proposed action is an Unlisted Action for which the Village of Lansing Planning Board is an involved agency for the purposes of environmental review; and

C. On October 25, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board commenced its review and analysis of (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant in support of this proposed action, including information and materials related to the environmental issues, if any, which the Board deemed necessary or appropriate for its review, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised by the public and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations, whereupon it was determined that further information, materials and Board deliberation would be appropriate and necessary; and

D. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board, in performing the lead agency function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), (i) thoroughly reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part I, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review (including the additional information and materials provided following the Board’s October 25, 2005 meeting), (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), and (iii) completed the Short EAF, Part II;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:

completed and signed Short EAF shall be attached to and made a part of this Resolution.

The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:

AYES: Mario Tomei, Doris Brown, Ned Hickey, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos

NAYS: none

The motion was declared to be carried.

Cross noted that the new intermunicipal sewer agreement had not been completely finalized. Although it is not yet official, this is not meant to constrain development. The Village of Lansing currently possesses 35 sewer units. Until there is a formal declaration releasing future sewer permits, it is unclear as to how a situation would be handled where there is a need for more than the 35 units which the Village currently is allotted. Dubow recommended a condition of approval stating issuance of a building permit will be subject to the availability of the necessary and required number of sewer units. Cross is unsure how many units will be required, but it could be more than the 35 units the Village currently has. When the new permits become available a new fee structure will probably also be adopted. Curtis stated the applicant would probably pay the amount in effect at the time of the permit application. Cross stated that at the time of the Courtyard Marriott approval, information from other facilities was provided indicating their water consumption which did not equate to one sewer unit per dwelling unit. Hickey requested the applicant obtain data for the last 2 or 3 years from comparable facilities that they manage. Cross stated Cayuga Heights would then make a determination as to the number of units required.

Next, the Board reviewed the General Conditions for all Special Permits under Section 145-59E of the Zoning Law. Klepack moved that the applicant has met all the General Conditions for a Special Permit. Seconded by Brown. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.

Stycos moved to approve the applicant's request for reduction in the number of parking spaces to 95 on-site parking spaces with additional off-site spaces allowed for alternate parking. Seconded by Tomei. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.

Dubow noted for the record that the Village received the 239 Review from the County confirming that there would be no negative County-wide or inter-community impact, with the recommendation that the 5 spaces at the north end of the site be eliminated.

Discussion ensued with regard to conditions that might be imposed as part of the approval. Klepack moved the following resolution, seconded by Stycos:

VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT NO. 2071 ADOPTED ON NOVEMBER 14, 2005

WHEREAS:

B. On October 25, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board held a public hearing regarding this proposed action, and thereafter commenced its review and analysis of (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant in support of this proposed action, including information and materials related to the environmental issues, if any, which the Board deemed necessary or appropriate for its review, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations, whereupon it was determined that further information, materials and Board deliberation would be appropriate and necessary; and

C. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Action for which the Board is an involved agency, and in performing the lead agency function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), the Board (i) thoroughly reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part 1, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review (including the additional information and materials provided following the Board’s October 25, 2005 meeting), (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), (iii) completed the Short EAF, Part 2; and (iv) made a negative determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”) in accordance with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action and determined that an Environmental Impact Statement would not be required; and

D. On November 14, 2005, the Village of Lansing Planning Board continued its thorough review and analysis of (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the applicant in support of this proposed action, including information and materials related to the environmental issues, if any, which the Board deemed necessary or appropriate for its review, and also including the additional information and materials provided following the Board’s October 25, 2005 meeting, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations; and

E. On November 14, 2005, in accordance with Section 7-725-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Sections 145.59, 145.60, 145.60.1 and 145.61 of the Village of Lansing Code, the Village of Lansing Planning Board, in the course of its further deliberations, reviewed and took into consideration (i) the general conditions required for all special permits (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.59E), (ii) any applicable conditions required for certain special permit uses (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.60), and (iii) any applicable conditions required for uses within a Combining District (Village of Lansing Code Section 145.61);

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOW:

3. It is hereby determined by the Village of Lansing Planning Board that Special Permit No. 2071 is granted and approved, subject to the following conditions and requirements:

1. Approval by the Village Attorney of i) a shared parking agreement between the hotel parcel and the adjoining parcel to the south; ii) an easement from Triphammer Mall permitting the widening of the fire access road to 28’ along the west side of the hotel property; and iii) a R.O.W. agreement permitting continued public use of the connecting driveway between Cinema Drive and Triphammer Mall.

2. An exterior lighting plan approved by the Village of Lansing Lighting Commission.

3. A landscaping plan approved by the Village of Lansing Planning Board including provision of a guard for the exposed section at the south end of the retaining wall and screening for the dumpster, storage building and makeup air unit.

4. Approval by the Village Engineer of the storm water management system, drainage, site work, parking lot and traffic circulation measures.

5. Issuance of a Building Permit is subject to the availability of the required number of sewer connection permits.

The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:

AYES: Mario Tomei, Doris Brown, Ned Hickey, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos

NAYS: none

The motion was declared to be carried.

Curtis reminded Sciarabba that he needs to provide the Village with the receipt for the filing of the two subdivision plats.

Approval of Minutes - October 25:

Klepack moved to approve the minutes of October 25th as revised. Seconded by Stycos. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Minutes approved.

Other Business as Time Permits:

Hickey stated he provided Board members with information regarding the model municipal ordinance for wind energy conversion systems. Hickey is unsure how to utilize this information but will keep it for future use. Hickey also thanked Curtis for his quarterly reports. Members were provided with information regarding case law updates from Planning News. Hickey mentioned that Lee Shurtleff would be speaking on Emergency Preparedness at the December meeting of the Health Planning Council of Tompkins County at Kendal. Brown and Hickey may attend. Hickey also provided information from Zoning Practice on Classifying and Defining Uses and Building Forms.

Village Storm Water Management Plan:

Hickey stated David Herrick of TG Miller is working on the Stormwater Regulations for the Village of Lansing. This must be in effect by 2008 and the Board should be aware of this. Hickey would like to send a note to the Mayor urging the Board of Trustees to work on developing the stormwater regulations which will be required in 2008. Brown moved authorization for Hickey to e-mail the Mayor to this effect. Dubow stated the Board of Trustees has discussed this and is aware of it. The Town of Lansing has already adopted a lengthy document but the Board is interested in developing a simpler document and working with other municipalities to reduce the costs. Leopold stated little has been done about the regulations recently but there is information available from the state called Stormwater Management Gap Analysis. Dubow stated there are some stormwater regulations in the Subdivision Law, but the new regulations must be applicable to all actions being considered by the Board. Leopold and Dubow stated there are sample laws available. Curtis will contact the DEC for materials. Planning Board members felt this should be pursued by the Board of Trustees. Leopold also stated there is money budgeted for this. Dubow felt the Board of Trustees will be asking the Planning Board for input. Hickey will send the e-mail to the Mayor as the new law will provide guidance to the Planning Board. Dubow stated it will also be important to get assistance from Engineers. Hickey stated once there is approval from the Mayor to go-ahead, then the Planning Board can form a committee and pursue the issue. Dubow stated it might be beneficial for Cross to request and review the 25 page document (Local Law No.l) from the Town of Lansing.

Reports:

Training: Tomei attended Big Flats training sessions with John Wisor from the BZA. The training sessions were put on by NYS Dept. of State and were divided into separate groups for Planning and Zoning Appeals Boards. Tomei stated there were many seasoned Board Members there as well as new-comers and elected officials. Topics covered included such items as Board membership, BZA roles, subdivision issues and quorum matters. Tomei learned training sessions are held twice a year and provided surveys to Board members to complete with recommendations for future training topics. Hickey called the County to request training and found out that money has been cut for local training. Cross stated Cayuga Heights also has some of the same concerns. Members will fill out the survey and return them at the next meeting and responses will be consolidated and forwarded.

Greenway Trail Names:

Hickey stated he received an e-mail from John O'Neill suggesting former Planning Board member Steve Halevy's name be considered for a trail name. Hickey responded that Halevy’s name is being saved for consideration for the proposed park in the Lansing Trails 1 Subdivision. O'Neill also suggested Wood Thrush Hollow be changed to Edelman's Walk. Dubow recommended if any person’s name is to be used, it be with that person’s permission. Board members discussed using the Edelman name at a later date in some manner. Recommendations for the Greenway Trail names are Hart's Walk and Wood Thrush Hollow Walk. Klepack noted that since the Village identifies with the Lab of Ornithology, all trail names might be associated with birds such as Wood Thrush Hollow Walk. Other names mentioned were Henslow Sparrow Walk, Wood Cock Walk, Highgate Walkway and Deer Run. Klepack felt for consistency all names should end with Walk. Names recommended to the Board of Trustees will be Wood Thrush Hollow Walk, Highgate Walk and Deer Run Walk

Adjournment:

Klepack moved to adjourn at 9:12 P.M. Seconded by Stycos. Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack, Stycos and Tomei. Motion carried.