Typeset from the PDF of the official document (read by OCR) — headings, motions and recorded votes are detected automatically, so spacing may differ from the original. The official copy governs.
PHONE: 315.435.3770 FAX: 315.435.3669 ONGOVED.COM Meeting Agenda June 8, 2021 8:00 AM Call to Order the Regular Meeting of the Agency A. Approval of Minutes-April, 29, May 6 and May 11, 2021 B. Treasurer’s Report C. Payment of Bills D. Conflict of Interest Action Items
Ranalli Super DC, LLC is proposing the construction of approximately 364,000 sq. ft. warehouse, distribution center, and office space in the Town of Lysander. The project will ultimately be leased to United Auto Supply of Syracuse, West, Inc. The
applicant is requesting exemptions from certain sales and use taxes, real property taxes, real estate transfer taxes and mortgage recording tax.
Agency Action Requested:
a. A Resolution of the Board to authorize a public hearing.
Representative: James Trasher, CHA Consulting
Proposed date is June 29, 2021 @ 8:00am
The Tuesday, July 20 meeting, is re-scheduled to Tuesday, July 13, 2021 Adjourn
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Special Meeting Minutes April 29, 2021 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, April 29, 2021 via Zoom Teleconference.
Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:34 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Victor Ianno Steve Morgan Susan Stanczyk Kevin Ryan
ABSENT:
Fanny Villarreal
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert Petrovich, Executive Director Nancy Lowery, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary, Agency Carolyn Evans-Dean, Economic Development Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm Angela Sicker (Patrick Hogan shared information as to how the meeting will be conducted in light of COVID- 19 at the start of the Audit Committee Meeting.)
Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Payment of Bills Schedule #455.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved the Payment of Bills Schedule #455 for $56,331.98. Motion was carried.
Patrick Hogan stated the Board is not voting on anything today so there will be no conflict of interest. UPDATE ON THE DRAFT SUPPLEMENT GEIS FOR WHITE PINE COMMERCE PARK.
Robert Petrovich stated we are underway with the preparation of a supplement draft GEIS and that effort is ongoing. He stated we are working with Barclay Damon and have convened a 3 member working group of the Board consisting of Patrick Hogan, Janice Herzog and Susan Stanczyk. He asked Susan Stanczyk to give a brief overview of what has been going on in the working sessions, where we are and what the future looks like over the next week. Susan Stanczyk stated the working group was afforded the opportunity to review the draft supplement GEIS. She stated they have had 2 meetings so far and she suspects they will have more as needed. She stated as they started the review they were tasked with looking at what was previously studied versus the expansion of the park. She stated as the Board is aware this is not a brand new site that has never been reviewed before but has been reviewed many times previous to this. She stated they looked at what was already submitted and the new submission to see if anything changed. She stated some things changed and some things did not change. She stated they reviewed transportation, which was the largest portion, as well as data, wetlands, noise, air, water, ground water and the aesthetics of the site. She stated there was a lot of conversation. She stated they were able to ask a lot of questions, look at site plans and get a better understanding of what the new proposal would entail and the vastness of the proposal. She stated she does not believe there was anything truly outstanding that was a major concern. She stated most things they saw were things they expected to review with transportation being one. Robert Petrovich stated it might be helpful having Jeff Davis take the Board through a macro overview of what has been going on with respect to the technical team, our consultants at JMT, what they have been working on and what are the next mile stones.
Jeff Davis stated he will reflect upon the two workshop sessions that were held. He stated as the Board remembers the process to start and comment the Supplement Generic Environmental Impact Statement started on December 9 and a positive declaration was issued under SEQR declared the Agency’s intent to be lead agency under SEQRA to undertake supplements. He 2 stated a prior GEIS was done on the current White Pine Park footprint which is approximately 340 acres. He stated that GEIS has the parameters as to what the Board needs to do should there be changes, like an expansion of the park, and that requires a supplemental GEIS which is the task we are undertaking now. He stated December 9 started the process and agencies had 30 days to consent to OCIDA being lead agency. He stated DEC provided a letter consenting to OCIDA being lead agency. He stated others either consented or did not respond which means there consent is granted by their lack of response after 30 days. He stated OCIDA has taken the lead agency and has started the process of preparing a supplemental GEIS. He stated the first step in that is preparing a draft which undergoes a review as to what was previously studied in the generic and really what the delta is between what was studied previously and what is the proposed action now. He stated the proposed action now is the expansion of the footprint of the park from the 340 acres +/- to 1250 acres +/-. He stated they undertook a review of all the items of SEQR and what was studied in the generic and then identification for any new or unstudied impacts or changes from 2013 that required additional review. He stated also an understanding of what those potential impacts could be and a review of what the mitigation efforts could be. He stated that is the process of SEQR and if there is potential environmental impact on any of the items then you identify mitigation. He stated that process has been underway. He stated traffic is probably the biggest review item by the consulting team at JMT and there is a significant appendix for traffic and the largest portion of the document. He stated it addressed a traffic study area from the Route 481/Route 31 interchange East along Route 31 all the way to Lakeshore Road which is on the side of the Route 31/Route 81 interchange in Cicero as well as the area along Caughdenoy Road and especially Caughdenoy south to Route 481 including the interchange there. He stated there was a review of the intersections and what could be impacts on traffic as a result of an expanded park which obviously could support an expanded use of the park. He stated in a GEIS like this one, everything is done in a generic format. He stated we do not have a project and we do not have an applicant that has put forth what they want to do yet but SEQR allows you to study things in a generic format by making certain assumptions on what could be built there and doing your environmental review based upon that. He stated similar to what was done in 2013 we have made certain assumptions as to the type of industry that could be there. He stated we focused in on the nanotech industry, the number of jobs that could be at this site being approximately 4,000 jobs, the number of square feet that could be built on prime developable area on the site, studying roughly 4,000,000 square feet of building which is about double of what was studied previously in 2013 and other assumptions. He stated at the end of the day assuming that the draft GEIS is accepted, passed and after it goes out for public 3 comment, we get to a final GEIS that means that the site has been studied in a generic format for a type of use based upon the assumptions OCIDA has created. He stated any user or tenant that would want to come and utilize the park for development, an investment in the economy and the future of Onondaga County, we would compare their proposal to what we have studied in the generic format to see if it meets with the environmental review that has been completed. He stated if it does then the project would be reviewed based on that and if it doesn’t then it means it would require additional environmental review. He stated one of the goals of the consulting team, JMT, and working with staff has been to identify the types of uses we think and we would like to have here and also identify all those types of impacts based upon the assumptions that have been made. He stated where we are in the process right now is the draft supplemental generic environmental impact statement has been created and it is undergoing a final QA review over the next 48 hours by the legal team and staff. He stated that document will then be pushed to the full Board and contains all the sections that the working group has already looked at. He stated another special meeting of the Board will be requested for a review and detail of those various sections of the draft. He stated the request of the Board will be a vote to accept the draft as adequate to commence the public comment period. He stated that is all the first step of SEQR when you are doing an environmental impact statement. He stated the threshold is the material that has been created sufficient to commence the public comment period which requires a notification to various entities, involved agencies, interested parties under SEQR, notification in the ENB (Environmental Notice Bulletin) as well as submission of the document to any parties that have requested a copy and we have some people who have requested copies. He stated that will commence a 30 day public comment period. He stated we are not required to do a public hearing but we have decided to hold a public hearing so that will commence and set a date for a public hearing within that 30 day comment period. He stated after all the comments are received from the public hearing and anything that is submitted in writing, the task then falls back on the consulting team because all of those comments must be organized, addressed and answered in a written format as an additional appendix that is added to the supplemental GEIS. He stated that process will commence after the public hearing process and public comment period ends. He stated at this point the update for the Board is you should expect to see the draft supplemental generic environmental impact statement after the final QA QC that is being done today and tomorrow by the OCIDA legal team and staff. He stated it will come in two different documents. He stated one will be the text which will have an executive summary which summarizes all the various impacts. He stated the second volume is the appendices that are referenced in there. He stated one of the appendices is traffic, one is visual, one is some letters 4 that were received from involved agencies etc. He stated those break up what the document looks like. He stated the Board review is to focus in for your review and education starting with the executive summary. He stated then everything after the executive summary is in greater detail of the things that are discussed in the executive summary. He stated in going through each one of the portions of the environmental impact statement, there is discussion and alternatives, there is discussion of the environmental setting which includes land use and zoning, community character, transportation, utilities, topography and geology, water resources, air resources, ecological resources, cultural and archeological resources, visual, environmental, and aesthetics, noise and human health. He stated each one of those items is an item under SEQR and each one of those items is discussed in this supplemental GEIS recognizing what the current situation is of the park and what the situation could be if the park is expanded to 1250 acres. He stated there is a discussion of the impacts and the mitigation. He stated some areas have no impacts by expanding the park so therefore there is no further mitigation that needs to be studied. He stated if somebody wanted to come in and propose the use of ground water that would be outside of the assumptions and we would have to look at it. He stated other areas, like traffic, there is an impact by a greater number of assumed employees at the site and obviously there has been a change in traffic pattern since 2013 so there are mitigation measures discussed in traffic. He stated there is a section on cumulative impacts and this a requirement in the GEIS with regard to what the project does to all the area with all the other projects that are currently approved but not yet built or proposed. He stated there is a discussion if the park is expanded to 1250 acres and what are the cumulative impacts in the area. He stated there is discussion of unavoidable adverse impacts recognizing that certain things are unavoidable when you expand the park. He stated there is discussion of irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources which is again a requirement of the GEIS. He stated there is a discussion of energy, the use of energy and compliance with New York Energy Code etc. He stated there is discussion of solid waste management etc. He stated all of those items are the key items that are required in an EIS and they have all been addressed and you will see that in the review. He stated that is a good overview as to where we are in the process for the document the Board is going to see and review. He stated the plan will be a request for a special meeting next week to set a time to walk through again in detail and answer questions after the Board has reviewed the document. He stated the working group have reviewed it in more detail and we recognize that there are other Board members who have not seen it yet but we have talked through it here and they will have a chance to review it. He stated then a request at the next special meeting for a vote of the Board to accept it as adequate to go out for public comment.
5 Victor Ianno asked when the document will be made available. Jeff Davis stated they are going to go through a 48 hour QA QC review of the document and then it will be pushed out to the Board. He stated we are looking to hold a special meeting next Thursday so the Board would have ample time in advance of the meeting to determine whether it is adequate to send out for public comment. He stated at the next meeting the vote will be is the document sufficient to send out for public comment.
Victor Ianno stated that last time he was involved in a project like this there had to be archeological studies and other studies. Jeff Davis stated that is written in the document and there is a section on cultural and archeological resources that was already studied previously in the 340 acre park. He stated they have already obtained information from DEC as well as the SHPO website that says that the expanded park area in not within an area that requires further testing based upon the information available now. He stated should the State Historic Preservation require us to do anything we would need to do that but based upon a review of everything so far and the comments received from DEC and the SHPO zoned database no further archeology study would be required.
Patrick Hogan stated this is probably the most thorough evaluation of a piece of property he has ever seen. Jeff Davis stated he equally agrees that for a GEIS there is a significant amount of detail and analysis aided by the fact a significant portion of the site was previously studied in 2013 so there is that information. He stated an interesting thing is the location of this park was a process that started by the county and the city in the early 1990’s when a study was commissioned by the County and the City to develop an industrial park so a full study was done for the best location for something like this. He stated they identified two locations back in the 1990’s with one being in Lysander and one was this site in Clay. He stated ultimately the site in Clay was chosen and that process commenced. He stated this is a process that has been ongoing for quite some time in terms of development of the park. He stated this location was chosen because of its unique nature. He stated it sits directly across from one of the largest substations for electrical power, it is immediately adjacent to railroad tracks, and it is located almost equal distance between 481 and 81 with route 31 going directly south of the site. He stated there is water already at the site with a significant water line that comes right to the site. He stated Oak Orchard is a short distance away. He stated utilities are all there and available for industry. He stated the expansion as discussed in December of 2020, is a result of what is happening in the efforts to develop the park, the current 340 acre footprint is not large enough to attract the type of 6 development that would want to come and build here and that we want to have built here in terms of the paying jobs and type of industry. He stated when you look at someone who is going to make hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars of investment in a piece of property, they need a larger campus like setting and that is what is being built. He stated certainly in the nanotech industry which is the area of focus of this supplemental generic environmental impact statement. He stated as a result a larger footprint is needed to allow for that to happen and allow for parameters to happen in the development of a site. He stated very similar to other industrial parks that have been developed across New York State and in other counties so what we are doing here is consistent with that and consistent with the goals of OCIDA in their mission to bring advanced jobs and creation of jobs within the county.
Victor Ianno asked if there will be a total of 1250 acres. Jeff Davis stated yes, roughly and that is the study that is being done.
Victor Ianno asked if it is going to be one user for the entire property or is it going to be a large user taking a portion of it and the rest will be developable opportunity for other people to join in. Robert Petrovich stated that is not determined. Jeff Davis agreed with Mr. Petrovich and said what has been studied is a developable footprint and the type of uses that can go on the site and those are the assumptions. He stated it is assumed that the site will have an initial development of a certain number of buildings and jobs etc. He stated those could be one tenant or multiple tenant that work in harmony with one another for a particular industry.
Victor Ianno stated he finds it hard to understand if there is one single user using the whole site versus several. He asked if it is one user where would people go if they want to be support services there. Jeff Davis stated it could be one user that uses the whole site, it could be one user that wants to build something to start at the site but have the ability to expand in the future. He stated any future expansion beyond what the assumptions are would require further environmental review. He stated we have only reviewed something that assumes what we would think is an appropriate initial investment by an entity or entities coming into utilize the site. Robert Petrovich stated even though it is a 1250 acre study area that doesn’t mean all 1250 are developable. Jeff Davis agreed.
7 Jeff Davis stated one of the things in the report is the discussion of what has been identified as the prime developable area of the site. He stated of the 1250 acres, roughly 730 acres are identified as the prime developable area and the rest of that is an area that is either wetlands or the power lines. He stated the goal is to avoid any wetlands to the maximum extent possible so of the 1250 acres, 730 acres is the area we think would be the most likely area that somebody would want to develop on. He stated what that means is the 1250 acres allows us to preserve a lot of the wetlands surrounding the site and allows us to have significant buffering and set back areas. He stated it allows the development of a campus type business setting.
Robert Petrovich stated the legal and technical team have been doing the yeoman’s work over the last few months and the 3 member working group has been deeply involved in this process of taking a deeper dive on some of these issues. He stated he thinks one of the things that is going to be clear once the Board reviews the document is the absolute comprehensive nature of the evaluation of the site and the fact that it has been a holistic approach; one that doesn’t have every square inch of the site developed but creates the ability to buffer certain zones and areas while at the same time maximizing the footprint for an advanced manufacturing semiconductor facility He stated if you are set back from the power lines, set back from the railroads, the vibration or electromagnetic interference, those areas could potentially be used for parking or other uses that are not sensitive to the semiconductor industry requirements. He stated the Board will be able to get fuller flavor of this once the document is presented in the next day or two. Patrick Hogan stated this is our first public meeting on this and there will be another public meeting where the Board will vote whether to send the document out or not. He stated then there will be a public hearing where people will be able to comment on this. He asked Jeff Davis to go over the timeline. Jeff Davis stated the plan for today is to set another special meeting date to discuss the draft that the Board will receive and at that meeting should the Board vote to accept the draft as appropriate or sufficient to send to public comment and start the public review process, that will commence the 30 day public comment period. He stated the 30 day comment period technically does not start until the notice is put in the ENB so there is a little bit of lag there. He stated in essence from the date the document is being voted on as being as being adequate it becomes a public document available for public review and comment and written comment. He stated the Agency would then have a public hearing and we will set that public hearing at the next special meeting because we don’t want to set the public hearing unless we determine that product is adequate to go out for public review. He stated the public hearing is 8 not required by SEQR but we have taken the step to do that. He stated there will be both a written public comment period as well as a public hearing on the document and once the public comment and hearing period closes then the timeline is back to the consulting group to address all public comments, review the document to see if there are changes that need to be made from the draft based upon public comments or comments received from other agencies and their review. He stated we have already had a meetings with NYS DOT and County DOT so they may look at the document and have some comments they would like to see and we have to address those comments in one way or another. He stated then ultimately a final supplemental GEIS will be presented to the Board at which time the Board would vote to accept as final and that is the generic environmental impact statement. He stated a few days after that the Board has to vote on a findings statement.
Jeff Davis stated the only thing the Board is being asked to do today is vote to set another special meeting next Thursday, May 6 at 10:45 am.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution to set a special meeting on Thursday, May 6, 2021 at 10:45 am. Motion was carried. Patrick Hogan stated he commends Jeff Davis Onondaga County and the IDA as far as the efforts for transparency on this issue and all the work and thoroughness that has gone through this whole project.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 9:12 am. Motion was carried.
_________________________________ Nancy Lowery, Secretary 9
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Special Meeting Minutes May 6, 2021 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Thursday, May 6, 2021 via Zoom Teleconference.
Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 10:52 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Steve Morgan Susan Stanczyk Kevin Ryan
ABSENT:
Victor Ianno Fanny Villarreal
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert Petrovich, Executive Director Nancy Lowery, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary, Agency Carolyn Evans-Dean, Economic Development Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm Angela Sicker, Barclay Damon Law Firm Yvonne Hennessey, Barclay Damon Law Firm (Patrick Hogan shared information as to how the meeting will be conducted in light of COVID-
Patrick Hogan stated the Board is not voting on anything today so there will be no conflict of interest.
PARK AND SET PUBLIC COMMENT AND HEARING SCHEDULE.
Jeff Davis stated he is going to walk through briefly the discussion and overview as to where we are. He stated then he will review the proposed resolution before the Board for consideration. He stated the goal today is to review the draft GEIS. He stated this process commenced in December 2020 with the Board issuing a positive declaration under SEQR for the expansion of the White Pine Park that is currently 340 acres to a proposed 1250 acres. He stated since that time in December the Board’s consultant, JMT, has been working to review the change in the environmental impacts as a result from the original GEIS that was done versus the 340 park and what changes could occur by the expansion of the park to 1250 acres. He stated the Agency has held two work shop sessions with a subset of the Board, one held on April 20 and one on April 27. He stated last week a special meeting of the Board was held to review and discuss the draft supplemental GEIS. He stated the draft supplemental GEIS is being prepared consistent with SEQR and the regulations of SEQR. He stated this process and the development of a park in this area of Clay commenced in 1991 when OCIDA and the Syracuse Chamber of Commerce commissioned a study to identify potential locations for locating an industrial park in Onondaga County. He stated they ultimately identified two primary locations and at that time settled on a
location in Clay. He stated since that time movement has occured to develop an industrial park in Clay. He stated in 2013 the OCIDA Board acting as lead agency completed a generic environmental review process for the development of a 340 acre park where it currently sits along Caughdenoy Road and Route 31 in the Town of Clay. He stated thereafter OCIDA has spent time marketing the park to various entities that are consistent with the goal for OCIDA to develop a large scale tenant on the location. He shared his screen showing the location of the park. He stated after the Board meeting held last week all the Board members received a copy of the draft supplemental GEIS. He stated he has received some comments and calls from the Board members with questions. He stated the goal today is to walk through this and ultimately request a vote of the Board that will allow the document to go out for public comment. He stated basically the vote is recognition that the document presented to the Board is adequate to commence the public comment period which would submit the document to all involved and interested agencies as well as commence a public hearing process which will be set should the Board vote to do that at the end of this meeting. He stated the draft supplemental GEIS walks through the expansion of the park from 340 acres to 1250 acres and the reason for that is so OCIDA can market to a broad range of high tech state of the art manufacturing commercial businesses focusing in on the semiconductor industry. He stated the 2013 GEIS identified a series of assumptions as to what would be developed at the park and the types of uses that would be there. He stated in 2013 what was studied was a 2 to 2.5 million square foot industrial development from the 340 acres to be developed over a series of years. He stated what is being done here in the DSGEIS is looking at the difference between what was studied before and what is studied now. He stated with a larger footprint from 340 acres to 1250 we had to identify 2 certain assumptions for assumed development that could be studied under the SGEIS. He stated for this process as outlined in the document before the Board the assumptions are that there could be approximately 4,000,000 square feet of buildings in a campus like setting. He stated the types of uses are manufacturing, laboratory, research and development, fabrication, warehousing, office, support, utilities, waste facilities, service yards, etc. He stated a maximum height of approximately 160 feet. He stated there would be approximately 50 acres of paved areas or parking within the campus like setting of 1250 acres. He stated there will be 2 access roads, one off route 31 and one off Caughdenoy Road. He stated approximately 4 miles of new gas line will be brought to the park. He stated approximately 5,000 linear feet of underground electric will be brought to the park from the substation across the street on Caughdenoy Road. He stated there is an existing sanitary sewer that is being extended as part of a project through WEP for the Oak Orchard service area that would also be a connection point for the park to utilize. He stated part of the assumptions are the conservation of wetlands and the creation of areas like storm water management and green space, etc., landscaping, security, all the those items you would put in for an assumption for a project. He stated we had to assume those for a generic standpoint as to what could be developed in this 1250 acre parcel. He stated the plan would be then if a final supplement GEIS is adopted by the Board then any future projects would be studied against the GEIS to determine future environmental review that may be necessary or not necessary to complete the SEQR process. He stated the document has various sections, most of them are required by a supplement GEIS process and others are included because they were part of the GEIS process and they are discussing the delta. He stated one of the items in the supplement was the discussion of alternatives which is a requirement in doing any GEIS under SEQR. He stated they looked at 4 different alternatives; one is a no action alternative which is required under SEQR where nothing is done at all at the property. He stated alternative 2 is there is no expansion of the park. He stated alternative 3 is a smaller expansion of the park. He stated alternative 4 is put the park in a different location. He stated the discussion through the draft supplement GEIS discusses each one of the alternatives and identifies why the alternatives do not meet the criteria and goals of OCIDA at this location for various reasons and the creation of a business park in the County etc. He stated there are environmental reasons as well why certain alternatives were rejected. He stated then you get into the discussion of the environmental setting, impacts and potential mitigation of the development of the park. He stated the first one of the discussion items is land use and zoning. (He shared his screen of the existing map in the Town of Cicero) He stated there is an industrial area currently. He stated the western half of the White Pine Commerce Park is currently zoned industrial and the lands that are part of the 3 expansion are currently zoned residential or agricultural. He stated there is a review of land use and zoning in the draft supplemental GEIS that talks that there will be a change in zoning and land use patterns as a result of the expansion of the park to 1250 acres. He stated that would be required and would require a zone change or development of a planned development district (PDD) in the Town of Clay. He stated OCIDA currently owns 648 acres at the proposed expanded White Pine Park and it has another 282 acres under contract and intends to acquire the remaining 320 acres through voluntary purchase agreements or the use of eminent domain. He stated there is a discussion that then goes into potential community character impacts as a result of the converting the area from a zone residential/agriculture area, most of the lands being vacant, to conversion of that land to industrial and the discussion of what those impacts could be in resulting mitigation are laid out in the supplemental draft GEIS. He stated a lot of those mitigations in those sections discuss the rezoned or development of a PDD for the property in the future and then the use and compliance with the Town of Clay zoning codes or the PDD that is developed. He stated of course the use of setbacks, buffers, green space, avoidance of wetlands etc. He stated there will be an impact and conversion of lands from residential to industrial and that is also discussed in a later section of the supplement GEIS with regards to unavoidable impacts for the expansion of the park. He stated a more significant part of the supplemental GEIS is the discussion on transportation. He stated there is a discussion of transportation in Volume 1 and there is a significant appendix in Volume 2 dealing with transportation. He stated the transportation area was studied along Route 31 from 481 starting in the west to the Lakeshore Road along Route 31 east as well as along Caughdenory Road north and south down to Route 481. He stated JMT looked at the intersections along that traffic impact corridor and worked with State DOT and County DOT to identify the parameters for the study and the requirements under state and county guidelines. He stated as a result they have identified certain intersections in the area that are currently non passing intersections from a transportation standpoint and some that could be impacted as a result of an increase in traffic from the development of the site and expansion of the site to 1250 acres. He stated one of the assumptions that is built into the review under this GEIS is that there could be a maximum of 4,000 employees at the site over 3 shifts working 24/7, 365 days a year so that number of trips and employees was modeled along with the development that would also include truck traffic etc. for a semiconductor chip manufacturing type facility. He stated there are certain improvements that are identified in the supplemental draft GEIS that would address traffic improvements. He stated the important thing to note is that even though there would be an increase in overall traffic along Route 31 corridor, the improvements and mitigation proposed in this supplement GEIS improves the current 4 intersections and traffic flow in this area including the intersections of 81 and 31 in Cicero and Route 11 and Route 31 in Cicero which are currently not passing intersections and makes them passing intersections even after the inclusion of additional traffic from the development. He stated there are a series of proposed improvements or mitigation of a northbound left turn lane at Henry Clay Boulevard and Route 31, an additional left turn lane at Route 31 and US Route 11, a series of proposed changes and mitigation at the Route 31/81 interchange including additional left turn lanes off of Route 81, additional left turn lanes onto Route 81, phasing and widening of lanes and to add different items underneath the bridge currently there to allow a better flow of traffic. He stated there is also additional changes at various intersections along the corridor and that is all laid out in the document and the addendum to the document Volume 2. He stated the draft supplement GEIS looks at energy usage, utilities and community services. He stated again assumptions that were built into the review for SEQR services or that an end user at the site may need up to 500 megavolt amps of electricity, up to 5 million gallons of water per day, up to 4 million gallons per day of waste water and up to 7,000 meters cubed per hour of natural gas. He stated JMT has reviewed, and OCIDA has received letters from National Grid saying they can meet, both the electric and natural gas requirements. He stated the electric requirements would come directly from the substation across Caughendoy Road and the natural gas would come a short distance to the site from an existing gas metering station near the Town of Clay hall. He stated water is currently located at the site. He stated there is a large water forced main that crosses through the site and we have heard from OCWA that they can supply the projected 5 million gallons per day. He stated we have heard from Onondaga County WEP that the 4 million gallons per day of waste water can be treated at the Oak Orchard Treatment Plant and there could be a connection from the White Pine site to the planned improvement Oak Orchard sewer district boundary area. He stated we have heard from all of the utility providers that it is adequate to meet the capacity as proposed by WEP. He stated the document discusses topography, geology and soils. He stated much of this review again was a review of what was done in 2013 and the review was to whether there was any additional mitigation necessary for development on a larger footprint. He stated as it is laid out in the document, there is really no change in these various items for topography, geology and soils at the site as defined by SEQR. He stated the topography is relatively the same from the 340 acre site over to an expanded 1250 acre site. He stated there is no additional mitigation that is identified or necessary than was detailed and required in the 2013 final GEIS. He stated the same with geology over a review of the expanded footprint, there is no new type of geological features that were not studied previously and therefore no additional mitigation is needed for the expansion of the site from 340 acres to 1250 5 acres. He stated there is a discussion in the draft supplemental GEIS of the different types of classifications of soils that exists on the expanded site and what those classifications mean. He stated the end result is there is no additional mitigation for onsite soil disturbance is necessary and this same type of mitigation that was discussed in the GEIS in terms of best management practices for construction purposes, fencing, compliance with certain permits that would be needed from DEC like a SPDES permit etc. for construction. He stated there is really no change at all in the discussion from topography, geology and soils from 2013 to this expanded review for this supplemental GEIS for the expanded site. He stated there was a discussion of water, water resources and ground water. He stated there is no change in the review of ground water from the 2013 GEIS to now. He stated the ground water is not intended to be used for any development at the site and so the same mitigation measures in terms of construction measures will be taken to protect ground water and impacts of ground water from the 340 acre to the 1350 acre site. He stated the next section in the supplement is the review of air resources. He stated there were certain assumptions made by OCIDA for the type of development they are trying to bring to this site. He stated as a result of those assumptions an air permit will be required from NYSDEC for a development of this size. He stated the draft supplemental GEIS goes through discussion of air resources including the review of the requirements under the greenhouse gas emissions section of the new regulations of 6 NYCRR part 496 and goes through a review and discussion of mitigation which is primarily compliant with any air permit criteria and compliance with NYS DEC regulations. He stated the next section discusses ecological resources and that is an expansion review of wetlands onsite. He stated the 2013 final GEIS reviewed the wetlands on the 340 acre site. He stated that the expansion of the park from 340 to the proposed 1250 acres does bring in new wetlands to the 1250 acre site that were not previously studied. (He shared his screen of a map showing the prime developable area of the site in orange which is roughly 732 acres.) He stated the area outside the orange is areas that have potential impacts from either state or federal wetlands. He stated one of the goals of this draft supplemental GEIS is to avoid wetlands impacts to the extent practicable. He stated the supplement assumes the area of prime development would be in the orange 732 acres thus to avoid impacts for wetlands. He stated that would be south of the National Grid and NYPA power lines. He stated the discussion through the ecological resources talks about the wetlands section and the primary goal in the mitigation of avoidance of wetlands to maximum extent practical through careful site planning and design and compliance with any NYS DEC regulations based upon the design that could be presented by an end user in development within that developable footprint. He stated the final few sections deal with cultural and agricultural resources. He stated this was an area that was studied in 2013 6 and 2014 and the original 340 acre park received a no effect letter from SHPO (State Historic Preservation Office) with regard to historic archeological resources. He stated JMT and OCIDA has communicated with NYS DEC and has reviewed the state historic preservation data base and based upon that review of the expanded park footprint it is not located within a previously designated archeological sensitive area. He stated this is an area that has been studied in five different locations in the past few years and there has been nothing that has been identified as archeological sensitive with the project footprint area. He stated the SHPO is an involved agency and they have received a copy of the notice letter originally and they will receive a copy of this supplement and OCIDA will follow any recommendations with regard to historic resources that may be required. He stated this will be the same for cultural resources. He stated a review of those was conducted and was discussed in the supplement.
Jeff Davis stated there is a discussion of visual impacts that is a review of potential sensitive receptors that could be impacted as a result of the development of the site. He stated the original review identified on the original 340 acre park, roughly 34 potential sensitive receptors within the area. He stated the expansion of the park brought in an additional 18 sensitive receptors and that is reviewed and discussed not only in the word version of the Supplemental GEIS but a separate standalone visual addendum which is part of Volume 2. He stated resulting impacts from visual impacts are discussed as well as mitigation. He stated talk about various mediation measures to address potential visual impacts including earth and berms, use of certain materials, preservation of forest as buffers on site to the maximum extent practical, landscaping, project design, lighting etc.
Jeff Davis stated there is the discussion in the supplement of noise and there were two noise studies done at the site as part of this expanded review. He stated JMT was at the site and took a review of the ambient noise levels across the site and then looked at the potential impacts from noise as a result of development of 1250 acres at the site and proposed assumptions that were discussed earlier in terms of 4 million square feet. He stated the end result of that noise study is that the operations of the expanded park are not anticipated to increase sound level above the current day time levels that surround property lines or sensitive receptors and that the operations of the park in the evening may increase sound levels slightly by 4.4 decibels but that is within an area that is identified by NYS DEC guidelines as unnoticeable or tolerable in terms of a slight increase. He stated there has been a discussion of proposed mitigation for any noise impacts as a result of development at the site.
7 Jeff Davis stated the supplement talks about other areas that are required in the GEIS including human health, unavoidable impacts, solid waste management etc. He stated that is an overview of the draft supplement GEIS that the Board has received for review of the expansion of the park from 340 acres to 1250 acres. He asked if there are any questions or comments from the Board on the document they received and what was discussed here before moving forward. Patrick Hogan asked the Board if there are any questions from members of the Board. He stated he thinks everyone is impressed with how exhaustive and comprehensive this process has been and he congratulates him and everyone involved in the process including the Economic Development team.
Jeff Davis stated the request before the Board is a resolution that the Board recognized the document that is submitted to the Board as adequate to proceed to public comment which is the next step in the SEQR process in this supplemental GEIS process. Jeff Davis read the proposed resolution before the Board.
WHEREAS, to accomplish its stated purposes, the Agency is authorized and empowered under
the Act to acquire, construct, reconstruct and install “projects” (as defined in the Act) or to cause said projects to be acquired, constructed, reconstructed and installed, and to convey said projects or to lease said projects with the obligation to purchase; and
WHEREAS, the Agency currently owns White Pine Commerce Park (“Park”) located northeast of
the intersection of NYS Route 31 and Caughdenoy Road in the Town of Clay, Onondaga County, New York; and
WHEREAS, in an effort to transform the Park into a modern industrial park for advanced
manufacturing and state-of-the-art industrial uses, the Agency previously performed a thorough environmental review of the Park and its anticipated environmental impacts pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law of the State of New York, as amended, and the regulations of the Department of Environmental Conservation of the State of New York promulgated thereunder (collectively referred to hereinafter as “SEQRA”), which included, but was not limited to, the following: (1) classifying the Park project as a Type 1 action; (2) acting as Lead Agency for the purpose of a coordinated environmental review; (3) conducting necessary studies and holding required hearings in connection with the preparation of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“GEIS”) to address anticipated potential impacts associated with the proposed multi- use industrial park; (4) preparation of a subsequent Final GEIS (“FGEIS”) that incorporated the DGEIS by reference and included responses to public comments received; and (5) preparation and issuance by the Agency of a Findings Statement in October of 2013 that (a) concluded the project avoided or minimized adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable, (b) incorporated mitigation measures that were considered practicable, and (c) identified certain impact thresholds that, if exceeded, may require supplemental determinations of their significance 8 and/or impact evaluation, and possibly mitigation measures in addition to those identified; and
WHEREAS, the Park was created to be capable of supporting a mix of industrial and/or
commercial uses with related office space, advanced state-of-the-art research, large- or small-scale manufacturing, assembly, warehousing, data management, material processing and distribution facilities in a campus-like setting; and
WHEREAS, since 2013, the Agency has attempted to market the Park for development around the
country to potential manufacturing and industrial users, but those efforts have been unsuccessful and the Park remains vacant; and
WHEREAS, through its marketing efforts and communications with desired tenants around the
country, the Agency has determined the Park is not large enough and must be expanded significantly to be considered an attractive, viable location for prospective large- and small-scale manufacturing and industrial developers; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has devoted substantial time and effort into determining the highest and
best use of the Park, with a particular focus on site attributes that will bring high-tech facilities and high paying jobs to Onondaga County; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has focused its efforts on the semiconductor industry, and those efforts
have been unsuccessful to date as it has become apparent that a larger geographic footprint is necessary in order to support this type of industry and the associated investment required by a prospective tenant(s); and
WHEREAS, the Agency, as Project Sponsor, proposes to expand the Park to approximately 1,250±
acres (the “Project” or “Action”), of which the Agency currently owns approximately 648± acres, has another 282± acres under contract, and would acquire approximately 320± additional acres, with such additional acreage consisting of parcels contiguous to the current Park and generally located along NYS Route 31 and along the east and west sides of Burnet Road, and which will be acquired by the Agency through purchase agreements with existing landowners or, if necessary, pursuant to the Eminent Domain Procedure Law (“EDPL”), to avoid fragmented parcels that would hinder future development; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to SEQRA, the Agency is required to make a determination whether the
“action” (as said quoted term is defined in SEQRA) to be taken by the Agency may have a “significant impact on the environment” (as said quoted term is utilized in SEQRA) and the preliminary agreement of the Agency to undertake the Project constitutes such an action; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to SEQRA (6 NYCRR § 617.9(7)(i)), the Agency recognizes the proposed
Project represents a significant change from the Park’s current footprint that presents changed circumstances from those evaluated by the Agency under its prior SEQRA review in 2013; and
WHEREAS, the Agency prepared and completed a Full Environmental Assessment Form (the
“FEAF”) to aid in determining whether undertaking the Project may have a significant adverse impact upon the environment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution adopted on December 8, 2020, the Agency determined that
the Project was a Type I action, issued a positive declaration, declared its intent to act as “lead agency” (as said quoted term is defined in SEQRA), and resolved that a Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement (“SGEIS”) will be prepared; and 9
WHEREAS, pursuant to SEQRA, the Agency notified each identified “involved agency” (as said
quoted term is defined in SEQRA) of its intent to act as lead agency concerning the coordinated environmental review of the Project; and
WHEREAS, no involved agency objected to the Agency acting as lead agency; and
WHEREAS, the Agency, with the assistance of its consultants, has prepared a Draft SGEIS; and
WHEREAS, the Agency has completed its preliminary review of the Draft SGEIS and has
analyzed the Draft SGEIS for compliance with the applicable SEQRA regulations;
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the members of the Onondaga County Industrial
Development Agency as follows:
(1) The Agency hereby confirms its status as lead agency concerning the coordinated environmental review of the Project.
(2) Based upon an examination of the Draft SGEIS prepared for the Project, the criteria contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617, including §617.9, and based further upon the Agency’s knowledge of the area surrounding the Project, and such further investigation of the Project and its potential significant environmental impacts as the Agency has deemed appropriate, the Agency determines and finds that the Draft SGEIS, dated May 2021, is complete for commencement of the public review pursuant to SEQRA.
(3) The Agency hereby adopts a Notice of Completion of Draft SGEIS and Notice of Public Hearing (the “Notice of Completion”) concerning the Project, which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
(4) The public comment period concerning the Draft SGEIS shall commence upon the filing and circulation of a notice of completion pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA, and such public comment period shall remain open until June 11, 2021. (5) Pursuant to 6 NYCRR §617.9, the Agency shall hold a public hearing concerning the Draft SGEIS on May 24, 2021 at 6:00 p.m., which hearing shall be held remotely due to COVID-19.
(6) The Agency shall arrange for filing and distribution of the Notice of Completion and Draft SGEIS pursuant to the requirements of SEQRA.
(7) Copies of the Draft SGEIS and Notice of Completion, as well as a copy of this Resolution, shall be placed on file in the office of the Agency where the same shall be available for public inspection during business hours, and a copy shall also be made available for public review at the Town of Clay Town Hall, 4401 Route 31, Clay, NY 13041.
(8) This Resolution shall take effect immediately Patrick Hogan asked Robert Petrovich if he wanted to add anything. Robert Petrovich stated he does not have anything substantive to add. He stated counsel did an excellent job in 10 summarizing the process and the steps that we went through. He stated with the working group that Chairperson Hogan was a part of, he believes the Board has had adequate time in total to review the document as presented and we would look forward to the Board to take action in support of this request.
Patrick Hogan stated it was a pleasure being a member of the working group. He stated if you were a part of the working group you knew how much work was done on this particular issue. Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Steve Morgan, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution accepting the supplemental draft GEIS as adequate for public review, issue Notice of Completion of Supplemental Draft GEIS and authorization to OCIDA staff and counsel to take all necessary steps to comply with SEQA notice requirements. Motion was carried. Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Steve Morgan, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution to set a public hearing on the Supplemental Draft GEIS for May 24, 2021. Motion was carried.
Jeff Davis stated we will take the steps necessary to get the notice out and commence the public review process.
Upon a motion by Susan Stanczyk, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 11:34 am. Motion was carried.
_________________________________ Nancy Lowery, Secretary 11
Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Regular Meeting Minutes May11, 2021 A regular meeting of the Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency was held on Tuesday, May 11, 2021 via Zoom Teleconference.
Patrick Hogan called the meeting to order at 8:00 am with the following:
PRESENT:
Patrick Hogan Janice Herzog Victor Ianno Susan Stanczyk Kevin Ryan Fanny Villarreal
ABSENT:
Steve Morgan
ALSO PRESENT:
Robert Petrovich, Executive Director Nancy Lowery, Secretary Nate Stevens, Treasurer Karen Doster, Recording Secretary, Agency Carolyn Evans-Dean, Economic Development Jeff Davis, Barclay Damon Law Firm Kevin McAuliffe, Barclay Damon Law Firm Amanda Fitzgerald, Barclay Damon Law Firm Elie Schechter, C2 NY Sentinel Heights Solar Andrew Day, Taft Road Solar, LLC Vittorio Pascarella, Ur-Ban Villages PFA Steve Calocerinos, Calocerinos Engineering Sarah Stephens, Ur-Ban Villages PFA Douglas Sutherland, Camillus Mills Redevelopment Brian Gerling, Bond, Schoeneck & King Law Firm Michael Cocquyt, Taft Road Solar, LLC (Patrick Hogan shared information as to how the meeting will be conducted in light of COVID-
APPROVAL OF REGULAR MEETING MINUTES – APRIL 13, 2021 Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved the regular meeting minutes of April 13, 2021 meeting. Motion was carried.
TREASURER’S REPORT Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Treasurer’s Report for the month of April 2021. Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved the Treasurer’s Report for the month of April 2021. Motion was carried.
Nate Stevens gave a brief review of the Payment of Bills Schedule #456.
Upon a motion Janice Herzog, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved the Payment of Bills Schedule #456 for $13,012.35, PILOT payments to the City of Syracuse for $1,981.29, Onondaga County for $9,526.00, Town of Camillus for $5,200.68, Town of DeWitt for $156.23, Town of Elbridge for $2,118.96, Town of Geddes for $70.50, Town of Onondaga for $3.15, Village of Camillus for $899.40, Village of Solvay for $563.46, East Syracuse Minoa School District for $747.66, Jamesville Dewitt School District for $101.26, Jordan Elbridge School District for $17,938.33, Marcellus School District for $268.50, Solvay Union Free School District for $3,597.08, Syracuse City School District for $1,489.21 and West Genesee Central School District for $12,632.04. Motion was carried.
The Conflict of Interest was emailed to Board Members present to sign off.
Robert Petrovich stated we have Brian Gerling from Bond Schoeneck & King to represent the Agency as conflict counsel as Barclay Damon has a conflict.
2 Elie Schecter stated C2 NY Sentinel Heights has secured all the planning and zoning approvals they need and the interconnection agreement with National Grid. He stated they look forward to working with the IDA on the final paperwork for the PILOT agreement. He stated they have been working with the School District and the Town Supervisor and he thinks everyone is on board and supportive of the project. He stated it is a community solar project on about 20 acres on Sentinel Heights Road in the Town of Lafayette. He stated members of the community are going to have the opportunity to subscribe and purchase from the solar project at a lower rate than they are otherwise buying from National Grid. He stated they have their NYSERDA incentive locked in so all their pieces are ready to go for the project.
Nancy Lowery stated a public hearing was held and there were no comments but we do have a letter of support from the Town. She stated we received the resolution from the School District which is in the new packet sent out and is live on our website.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing adoption of SEQRA negative declaration determination for the C2 NY Sentinel Heights Solar, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing the financial assistance the Agency will provide to include exemptions from certain sales and use taxes, real property taxes and real estate transfer taxes for the C2 NY Sentinel Heights Solar, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Andrew Day stated this is a community solar project. He stated it is 3.7 megawatts AC located off Taft Road. He stated SLH II is a wholly owned subsidiary of Source Renewables that owns the land and Taft Road Solar LLC is the name of company. He stated they had previous approval for the PILOT and financial assistance for 5 megawatts but through the planning process the size was lowered to 3.7 megawatts AC. He stated he is here today to update the application. He stated they are in the process of pulling building permits and getting the project under construction in the next month or two.
3 Jeff Davis stated later on the agenda there is a termination of the prior project that was approved and since we are terminating that project it would include the SEQR that was done. He stated the SEQR Resolution needs be repassed that was done previously.
Jeff Davis stated he would like to amend the agenda to include a SEQR resolution. He stated this is an unlisted action under SEQR and the materials from the applicant have been received and reviewed. He stated this is more a change in ownership on how everything is going to be done with the project. He stated the motion requested to the Board will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and the agency issue a negative declaration pursuant to SEQR. Nancy Lowery stated a public hearing was held for Taft Road Solar and Tom Lorrizo from the Carpenter’s Union called in. She stated he thought this was a very good project but wanted to make the Board aware that they are interested in doing work for solar projects in our area. Patrick Hogan asked if we have Mr. Lorrizo’s information. Nancy Lowery stated yes. Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing adoption of SEQRA negative declaration determination for the Taft Road Solar LLC/SLH II, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing the financial assistance the Agency will provide to include exemptions from certain sales and use taxes, real property taxes and real estate transfer taxes for the Taft Road Solar LLC/SLH II, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Patrick Hogan stated there has been a lot of interest about this project in the community and what he has heard it has been extremely favorable.
Vittorio Pascarella stated they are excited about the project. He stated they are looking to take the property at the former Will and Baumer candle factory on Buckley Road and repurpose the 11 or 12 buildings into 250 apartments and some commercial aspect that is yet to be determined. 4 He stated the project will be 3 phases over 5 years and they are in phase 1 right now. He stated they are planning to save all the buildings on site, decoupling all the connector pieces, reskinning and repurposing the shed-like buildings into covered parking and parking garages. He stated they will have underground parking for about 75% of the parking needs onsite and what that means is they are hoping every resident has the availability to park at least one car either indoors or under cover.
Patrick Hogan stated it replicates a village. Vittorio Pascarella stated yes and it grew over time one building at a time. He stated they are trying to keep in touch with that with every building having its own unique characteristics starting with the first building, the iconic piece built in the late 1800’s.
Patrick Hogan asked how much will rent be. Vittorio Pascarella stated it is still too early to narrow down rents. He stated they are not sure what the costs are going to be. He stated there is a lot of speculation about price increases in terms of material and inflation. He stated they are trying not to pin themselves down because the future of building and construction is way too volatile at this point.
Nancy Lowery stated a public hearing was held and there were no comments.
Jeff Davis stated this is an unlisted action under SEQR and the project is designed for the preservation/renovation reuse of a project facility and will not produce adverse traffic or other impacts. He stated there are some specific project related conditions relative to the preservation/ renovation reuse of the project which are addressed in the site plan review process in the Town of Salina and based on that the resolution the Board is voting on is there are no significant adverse effects on the environment and the issuance of the negative declaration pursuant to SEQR.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Fanny Villarreal, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing adoption of SEQR negative declaration determination for the UR-Ban Villages PFA, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing the financial assistance the Agency will provide to include exemptions 5 from certain sales and use taxes, real property taxes, real estate transfer taxes and mortgage recording taxes for the UR-Ban Villages PFA, LLC project. Motion was carried.
(3101-21-08A) INITIAL MEETING Patrick Hogan stated he received a lot of positive comments on this project.
Doug Sutherland stated before the Board is the 2nd of a 3 phase project. He stated the first phase was the historic rehabilitation certified rehab of the old headquarters completed in late 2017. He stated the building has 29 apartments and about 8500 square feet of commercial space. He stated Phase 2 is to be built on the slab of the old Camillus Cutlery Factory which burned in 2013. He stated the building will have 58 apartments and 6500 square feet of commercial space. He stated it is a 3 story building built over a lower parking level that allows them to build up and beyond the flood plain. He stated it is a Brownfield site and 90% of the property they are working with is in the flood plain. He stated they have had to take extra measures to develop this. He stated there is a 3rd phase planned and will probably happen when they identify tenants for it. He stated it will be a smaller building. He stated it is meant to look like an old industrial campus with a cluster of buildings. He stated the 2nd phase, while new construction, is designed in the spirit of the original cutlery main manufacturing building. He stated they have their site plan approvals, SEQR approvals and still need a building permit but not much more than that.
Patrick Hogan asked if they are going to use the same concrete slab and build above it. Doug Sutherland stated they are keeping the slab but will have punctures within it to drive piles. He stated the soil is fairly soft underneath. He stated for the most part the concrete slab remains and they will patch in where they need to create holes for piles.
Patrick Hogan stated it’s a Brownfield and a flood plain so it’s an area that has challenges. Doug Sutherland agreed and stated was a large hole in the center of the Village. He stated when the fire occurred that really changed the character. He stated they think that filling in the hole with architecture that feels like the original building is a good thing to do and they are excited. 6 Patrick Hogan stated that was the largest fire in Onondaga County history. Doug Sutherland agreed. He stated it really taxed the first responders’ ability but fortunately is didn’t extend over to the headquarters building. He stated it was 140,000 feet of space and all wood framed. Nancy Lowery stated a public hearing was held and the Mayor of Camillus called to express his support and he is very anxious for the project to get going.
Jeff Davis stated this is a Type I action and as noted the Village of Camillus Board previously did SEQR on a Type I and at that time OCIDA was not considered an involved agency so we were not noticed. He stated in recognition of the fact that we would have been an involved agency and consent to the lead agency status, he is recommending we reaffirm, accept and adopt the negative declaration that was issued by the Village Board for the project. He stated it is attached to the resolution that Barclay Damon has prepared for the Board and therefore based on that the motion is to reaffirm, accept and adopt the negative declaration that was issued by the Village Board.
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution to reaffirm, accept and adopt the SEQR negative declaration determination issued by the Village of Camillus Board for the Camillus Mills Redevelopment Company, Inc./Camillus Mills II, LLC project. Motion was carried.
Upon a motion by Janice Herzog, seconded by Victor Ianno, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing the financial assistance the Agency will provide to include exemptions from certain sales and use taxes, real estate transfer taxes and mortgage recording taxes for the Camillus Mills Redevelopment Company, Inc./Camillus Mills II, LLC project. Motion was
carried.
Robert Petrovich stated as noted earlier there was a change and the new project has already had action take on it. He stated this is an administrative action by the Board and a cleanup activity for the sake of making sure the I’s are dotted and the T’s are crossed.
7 Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Susan Stanczyk, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution acknowledging the Source Land Holdings LLC/Taft solar LLC, project number 3101- 20-01A, is revoking all financial assistance granted in connection with the project associated with this number. Motion was carried.
Robert Petrovich stated we have been working on the White Pine project and we currently have a contract with Ramboll Engineering, which used to be O’Brien and Gere, to provide assistance on a number of different items related to the project in terms of engineering and development in bringing that project to the floor. He stated staff is asking for an increase of O’Brien and Gere’s authorized amount by $35,000 to facilitate additional work that is needed to be done on the project. He stated this would be the subcontract to Ramboll.
Patrick Hogan asked if O’Brien and Gere is subcontractor to Ramboll. Robert Petrovich stated O’Brien and Gere has a subcontractor they would like to hire and the amount of their fee is not to exceed $35,000 without additional authorization and approval by the Board.
Kevin Ryan asked who the subcontractor is. Robert Petrovich stated Mower and Associates. Upon a motion by Kevin Ryan, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board approved a resolution authorizing previously approved engineering firm to procure, select, coordinate and oversee a sub-contractor in connection with the White Pine Commerce Park Project. Motion was
carried.
Upon a motion by Victor Ianno, seconded by Janice Herzog, the OCIDA Board adjourned the meeting at 8:32 am. Motion was carried.
_________________________________ Nancy Lowery, Secretary 8
PHONE: 315.435.3770 • FAX: 315.435.3669 May 31, 2021
Revenue / Expense / Income Current Period Current YTD Amount Change to Budget Operating Revenue 517,475 1,016,992 1,646,000 (629,008) Administrative Expense 43,405 188,170 1,008,000 (819,830) Operating/Program Exp. 27,536 271,653 638,000 (366,347) Net Ordinary Income 446,534 557,169 - 557,169 Current Assets Current YTD Prior YTD Total Cash 2,962,811 4,497,091 Less Pass Through Received 4,009 - Available Cash 2,958,801 4,497,091 Receivables (less pass through rec.) 829,941 969,914 Grant Reimbursements - 268,733 Total 3,788,742 5,735,738 Reserve for Contracts County Operations 2021 819,830 333 W. Washington St 2021 Rent 50,015 OBG WPCP CO #4 Additional Studies 418,947 JMT 800 Hiawatha Engineering 11,816 Barclay Damon WPCP Options 50,000 Total 1,350,609 Receivables 0-120 days 829,941 > 120 days 222,024 Total 1,051,965 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss May 2021
Income
2116.1 Agency Fees 3,500.00 2116.2 Application Fees 3,000.00 Total 2116 Fees 6,500.00 2410 Lease Income 750.00 2655 Other Operating Revenue 510,195.24 Total 500 Operating Revenue 517,445.24
2401 Interest Income 29.30 Total 501 Non-Operating Revenue 29.30
529 PILOT Income 57,293.74 Total 534 Pilot & Pass Thru Revenue 57,293.74 Total Income $574,768.28 GROSS PROFIT $574,768.28 Expenses
6401 Insurance D&O Liability 5,809.00 6405 General Accounting 364.50
6406.50 Consulting Services 2,500.00 Total 6406 Other Professional Services 2,500.00 6407 Administrative Expense 43,404.54 6408 Meeting Expenses 337.81 6410 Office Expense 585.65 6414 Marketing 240.00 Total 6400 Operating Expense 53,241.50
6460 IDA General Legal 7,181.25 Total 6450 Barclay Damon 7,181.25 Total 6440 Legal Fees 7,181.25 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:01 PM GMT-04:00 1/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Profit and Loss May 2021
6510.4 Other Expenses 129.60 6510.6 Taxes/SDC 4,096.30 6511 WPCP Closing Costs 6,292.00 Total 6510 White Pine Commerce Park 10,517.90 Total 6500 Agency Program Expenses 10,517.90
6605.2 PILOT Expense 57,293.74 Total 6605 Pilot & Pass Thru Expenses 57,293.74 Total 6600 Non-Operating Expenses 57,293.74 Total Expenses $128,234.39 NET OPERATING INCOME $446,533.89 NET INCOME $446,533.89 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:01 PM GMT-04:00 2/2 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of May 31, 2021
Current Assets Bank Accounts 200 Cash 0.00 200.1 Cash - M & T Checking 2,081,360.48 200.2 Cash - M & T Money Maker Savings 890,358.10 200.4 Destiny USA Restricted Cash -8,957.82 210 Petty Cash 50.00 Total 200 Cash 2,962,810.76 Total Bank Accounts $2,962,810.76 Accounts Receivable 380 Accounts Rec.
380.6 A/R Fees, Lease & PILOT 833,950.58 Total 380 Accounts Rec. 833,950.58 Total Accounts Receivable $833,950.58 Other Current Assets 391 Long Tern Receivable 222,024.00 Total Other Current Assets $222,024.00 Total Current Assets $4,018,785.34 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:00 PM GMT-04:00 1/4 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of May 31, 2021
Fixed Assets
101 White Pines Commerce Park 3,305,401.50
101.101 CHA GEIS 1 267,452.05 101.102 CHA GEIS 2 219,439.36 101.104 GEIS Reg Plan Board Overview 19,797.74 Total 101.1 WPCP GEIS 506,689.15 101.2 WPCP Legal 69,774.25 101.3 Engineering Services 52,675.00 101.301 Temporary Access 4,055.44 101.4 Environmental/Demo Services 10,318.98 Total 101.3 Engineering Services 67,049.42
101.501 Land Purchases 1,160,063.57 101.502 Closing Costs 3,168.14 Total 101.5 Land Acquisition Costs 1,163,231.71 Total 101 White Pines Commerce Park 5,112,146.03 106 North Salina Properties 0.00 106.1 435 North Salina 17,083.55 106.3 435 North Salina Building 634,421.53 Total 106 North Salina Properties 651,505.08 107 800 Hiawatha 604,840.42 Total 100 Land 6,368,491.53
104.1 Office Furniture 1,429.00 104.2 Equipment 1,432.40 Total 104 Machinery & Equipment 2,861.40 211 A/D Office Furniture -2,862.00 213 A/D Buildings -81,335.00 Total Fixed Assets $6,287,155.93 Other Assets 240 Blue Sky Redevelopment 1,641.76 Total Other Assets $1,641.76 TOTAL ASSETS $10,307,583.03 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:00 PM GMT-04:00 2/4 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of May 31, 2021
Liabilities Current Liabilities Other Current Liabilities 600 Accounts Payable 0.00 600.1 Due to Related Party - OED 188,170.19 600.206 Mileage Reimbursement 92.34 600.208 BlueRock Energy Agreement Deposit 25,000.00 600.209 Syracuse Rail Overpayment 500.00 Total 600 Accounts Payable 213,762.53
603 PILOT Pass Thru 8,018.69 604 Other Pass Thrus 74,063.70 Total 601 PILOT and Pass Thru Payable 82,082.39
631.105 Camillus -20.00 631.12 Dewitt 140.76 Total 631.1 Towns 120.76
631.305 Baldwinsville 1.00 631.315 East Syracuse-Minoa 747.66 631.325 Jamesville-Dewitt 26.64 631.356 Syracuse 1,489.19 631.36 West Genesee -0.01 Total 631.3 Schools 2,264.48 631.4 Onondaga County 1,220.36 631.5 City of Syracuse 411.36 Total 631 Due to Other Governments 4,016.96 Total Other Current Liabilities $299,861.88 Total Current Liabilities $299,861.88 Total Liabilities $299,861.88 Equity 3900 Equity Unreserved 6,735,894.07 3901 Equity-Investment Fixed Assets 2,345,838.63 463 Reserve For Contracts 1,350,609.00 465 Equity - Unreserved -977,780.00 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:00 PM GMT-04:00 3/4 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency Balance Sheet As of May 31, 2021
Net Income 553,159.45 Total Equity $10,007,721.15 TOTAL LIABILITIES AND EQUITY $10,307,583.03 Accrual Basis Wednesday, June 2, 2021 04:00 PM GMT-04:00 4/4
PAYMENT OF BILL - SCHEDULE #457 June 8, 2021
1. PARK STRATEGIES, LLC* $ 2,500.00 Inv#16584634, May 2021 Consulting 2. ADVANCE MEDIA NEW YORK* $ 537.60
3. TJMG PROPERTIES, LLC* $ 129.60 Inv#482456, WPCP 8739 Burnet Road Shutdown 4. BARCLAY DAMON LLP* $ 312,541.90 Land Purchase 5. BARCLAY DAMON LLP* $ 328,151.34 Land Purchase 6. BARCLAY DAMON LLP* $ 604,695.06 Land Purchase 7. BARCLAY DAMON LLP $ 337.50 Inv#5122295, Roth Steel Brownfield thru 4-30-21 8. BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC $ 320.00 Inv#19866293, BlueRock legal thru 3-31-21 9. GROSSMAN ST. AMOUR CPA'S PLLC $ 14,000.00 Inv#80023, 2020 Audit Final Billing TOTAL $ 1,263,213.00 *Ratification of Checks dated May 11, 2021 1
PAYMENT OF BILL - SCHEDULE #457 June 8, 2021 PILOT Payments 1. CITY OF SYRACUSE $ 411.36 2nd 2021 Armoured One PILOT Payment 2. ONONDAGA COUNTY $ 1,220.36 2nd 2021 Armoured One PILOT Payment 3. TOWN OF DEWITT $ 140.76 2nd 2021 Armoured One PILOT Payment 4. EAST SYRACUSE MINOA CSD $ 747.66 2nd 2021 Armoured One PILOT Payment 5. SYRACUSE CSD $ 1,489.21 2nd 2021 Armoured One PILOT Payment TOTAL $ 4,009.35 1
DESCRIPTION TERM CONTRACT PAID OUTSTANDING ONONDAGA COUNTY OED 2021 1-1-21-12-31-21 $1,008,000.00 $188,170.19 $819,829.81 333 W. WASHINGTON ST 2021 RENT 1-1-21-12-31-21 $65,000.00 $14,984.58 $50,015.42 OBG WPCP CO #4 ADDITIONAL STUDIES 11-30-18-12-31-21 $800,000.00 $381,052.63 $418,947.37 JMT 800 HIAWATHA ENGINEERING 2/13/19-12-31-21 $25,000.00 $13,183.60 $11,816.40 BARCLAY DAMON WPCP OPTIONS 11/30/20-12-31-21 $200,000.00 $150,000.00 $50,000.00 $2,098,000.00 $747,391.00 $1,350,609.00
AGENCY FEES RECEIVABLE $317,496.00 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE GENERAL $512,445.24 QUASI-EQUITY LOAN RECEIVABLE $0.00 GRANTS RECEIVABLE $0.00 LONG TERM RECEIVABLE $222,024.00 TOTAL $1,051,965.24 Onondaga County Industrial Development Agency DRAFT Project Summary 6/7/2021 1. Project Ranalli Super DC, LLC 2. Project Number 3101-21-10A 3. Location Lysander 4. School District Baldwinsville
5. Tax Parcel(s) 055.-01-19.1; 055.-01-20.0; 055.-01-18.0 Village - 7.Total Project Cost $ 40,250,000.00 8. Total Jobs 135 Land $ 650,000 8A. Job Retention 0 Site Work $ 10,000,000 8B: Job Creation 135 Building $ 24,000,000 (Next 5 Years) Furniture & Fixtures $ 3,000,000 Equipment $ 2,000,000 Equipment Subject to NYS Production Exemption $ - Engineering/Architecture Fees $ 450,000 Financial Charges $ 50,000 Legal Fees $ 100,000 Other $ - Cost Benefit Analysis Ranalli Super DC, LLC Project Description Fiscal Impact ($) Estimated Abatement Cost $6,004,115 Sales Tax Abatement $1,920,000 Mortgage Recording Tax Abatement $225,000 Real Property Tax Relief $3,859,115 New Investment $108,183,296 PILOT Payments $2,641,845 Project Wages (10 years) $57,151,383 The proposed new state of the art 350,000 sq. ft. facility in the Town of Lysander , will be home Construction Wages $10,882,500 to an auto parts warehouse, distribution center and office space. The $40 million investment into this site will create approximatly 135 new jobs after full staffing and operation. Employee Benefits (10 years) $2,857,569 Project Capital Investment $34,650,000 Benefit:Cost Ratio 18.02 :1 Ranalli Super DC, LLC 5/4/2021 A) PILOTS Estimate Table Worksheet DRAFT for 15 years OCIDA estimate of current market value $ 322,000 Projected investment $ 24,000,000 OCIDA estimate of increase in value $ 11,585,000 OCIDA estimated value after project is completed $ 11,907,000 Taxes that would have been collected if the project did not occur $ 175,805 Scheduled PILOT payments $ 2,641,845 Full Tax Onondaga Net PILOT YEAR Exemption % Lysander Baldwinsville Total PILOT Payment w/o County Exemption
2020-2021 $ 1,658 $ 638 $ 7,670 $ 9,967 1 100% $ 1,691 $ 651 $ 7,824 $ 10,166 $ 375,921 $ 365,755 2 100% $ 1,725 $ 664 $ 7,980 $ 10,369 $ 383,440 $ 373,070 3 90% $ 8,090 $ 3,114 $ 37,425 $ 48,630 $ 391,108 $ 342,478 4 90% $ 8,252 $ 3,177 $ 38,174 $ 49,602 $ 398,930 $ 349,328 5 80% $ 15,003 $ 5,776 $ 69,406 $ 90,185 $ 406,909 $ 316,724 6 80% $ 15,303 $ 5,891 $ 70,794 $ 91,989 $ 415,047 $ 323,059 7 70% $ 22,461 $ 8,647 $ 103,910 $ 135,018 $ 423,348 $ 288,330 8 70% $ 22,911 $ 8,820 $ 105,988 $ 137,719 $ 431,815 $ 294,096 9 60% $ 30,498 $ 11,741 $ 141,088 $ 183,327 $ 440,451 $ 257,124 10 60% $ 31,108 $ 11,976 $ 143,910 $ 186,994 $ 449,260 $ 262,267 11 50% $ 39,147 $ 15,071 $ 181,101 $ 235,319 $ 458,246 $ 222,927 12 40% $ 47,496 $ 18,285 $ 219,722 $ 285,502 $ 467,411 $ 181,908 13 30% $ 56,163 $ 21,621 $ 259,815 $ 337,599 $ 476,759 $ 139,160 14 20% $ 65,157 $ 25,084 $ 301,425 $ 391,665 $ 486,294 $ 94,629 15 10% $ 74,489 $ 28,676 $ 344,595 $ 447,759 $ 496,020 $ 48,261 TOTAL $ 439,494 $ 169,193 $ 2,033,158 $ 2,641,845 $ 6,500,960 $ 3,859,115 Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 Jobs Current/Actuals Creation Goals Total Employment Goals 0 54 54 12 10 5