V. LEVEL 2 ANALYSIS ......... 11
A. SITE CRITERIA MATRIX ......... 11
1. Size ......... 11
2. Utilities ......... 11
3. Accessibility ......... 12
4. Zoning Approvals and Impact Fees ......... 13
5. Monetary Factors ......... 14
6. Community Factors, Perception & Sustainability ......... 15
7. Environmental ......... 15
B. MATRIX SUMMARY ......... 16

VI. CAPACITY ANALYSIS ......... 18

LIST OF EXHIBITS

1. Geographic Information System ‘Funnel Maps’
2. Site Selection Matrix
3. St. Luke’s Campus Capacity Evaluation
4. Downtown Site Capacity Evaluation
5. Psych Center Capacity Evaluation

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 1

I. Introduction

A. NYS Legislation
The 2015‐2016 NYS Budget included legislation for the consolidation of health care services in Oneida County, New York. This allocation is intended to build one, combined, hospital providing acute inpatient, outpatient, and other health care services. The hospitals to be combined into a single facility include St. Luke’s, Faxton, and St. Elizabeth’s Medical Center.

The legislation language states the following:

“For payments and grants to support health care facility transformation within the county of Oneida, for capital, non‐operational works. Funding will be awarded in the discretion of the commissioner of health in support of projects located in the largest population center in Oneida County, without a competitive bid or request for proposal process, for the purpose of consolidating multiple licensed health care facilities into an integrated system of acute inpatient, outpatient primary and other health care services. The Dormitory Authority may issue bonds for such purposes in an amount appropriated herein. No expenditures may be from this appropriation to a facility until a facility specific plan has been submitted to the Department of Health and has been approved by the Director of the Budget (12UT15HE).” Total budget allocation: $300,000,000

B. Initial Steps
To assist the hospital in evaluating appropriate locations for the new facility, Mohawk Valley EDGE (“EDGE”) engaged the services of Elan Planning, Design, & Landscape Architecture and O’Brien & Gere. The two firms worked with hospital staff and EDGE staff to undertake a process that began by looking broadly at Oneida County, identified 12 sites for further consideration, and culminated in a focused, detailed evaluation of the top 3 sites.

C. Scope of Work
The siting analysis was completed in 2 steps. The purpose of the first step was to complete an initial evaluation of each of the 12 sites to arrive at a ‘go/no go’ decision. This was determined based on a high level analysis of key items that are necessary for the hospital to function properly including the availability of infrastructure, adequate access, and a good transportation network. The second step immediately followed with a more detailed evaluation of the top 3 sites including evaluating the capacity to fit the hospital operations and associated parking requirements.

At the onset of the project, the design team utilized 2 previously completed reports prepared by the Hammes Company for MVHS to identify the preliminary program of hospital operations. The following information was utilized for the specific siting capacity analysis:

 440 beds proposed (actual reduction of approx. 164 beds for 3 hospitals)
 884,256 SF (current space in 3 hospitals is about 1.3 M SF).
 40,000 SF Medical Office Building (MOB) to be programmed as part of development
 Estimated Cost: $507.7 M or $527.40/SF

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 2

 Urban Site Requirements:
o 433,250 SF (includes parking)
o Total acreage = 10.94

 Suburban Site Requirements:
o 1,927,500 SF
o Total acreage = 48.67

II. Summary of the Evaluation Process

Following is an executive summary of the evaluation process and capacity analysis. A more detailed description follows.

A. Initial data review and meeting with MVHS and EDGE Staff
At the beginning of the process, the design team met with the CEO and COO of MVHS and staff from EDGE to obtain an understanding of the key parameters of the hospital operations. Upon confirmation of the broad project program that identified the key elements of the combined facility, the design team began the evaluation process.

B. County‐wide Site Search
In an effort to identify large parcels in Oneida County, a Geographic Information System (GIS) analysis was used to identify parcels 50 acres and larger that could potentially host a new combined facility. 5 and 10 mile radii were drawn around the city of Utica and a number of properties were identified for initial evaluation.

C. Level 1 Analysis
Using the results of the GIS analysis, the following sites were screened in a ‘funnel’ process to determine if there were ‘fatal flaws’ that warranted sites be eliminated from further consideration. Fatal flaws included such items as lack of infrastructure (sewer/water), access limitations, an in‐adequate transportation network, initial permitting needs, and other factors that could impact the development potential of the site.

1. Yahnundasis Golf Club, Seneca Turnpike, New Hartford, NY
2. Twin Ponds Golf Country Club, Main Street, New York Mills, NY
3. New Hartford Business Park, New Hartford, NY
4. Property adjacent to SUNY Polytechnic Institute, fronting onto Route 12 South, Deerfield, NY
5. Sadaquada Golf Club, Whitesboro, NY
6. Hidden Valley Golf Club, Castle Road, Whitesboro, NY
7. Domenico's Golf Course, Church Road, Whitesboro, NY
8. Downtown ‐ generally bounded by Oriskany Blvd on the south, Broadway on the east, State St on the west, and City Hall on the north
9. St. Luke’s Hospital Campus, New Hartford, NY
10. NYS Psych Center grounds Utica, NY
11. Tect Utica, Whitesboro, NY
12. Faxton Hospital‐Murnane Field, Utica, NY

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 3

D. Level 2 Analysis
With the fatal flaws analysis completed, a site selection matrix was created to complete a detailed screening of the top sites including:

1. Downtown ‐ generally bounded by Oriskany Blvd on the south, Broadway on the east, State St on the west, and City Hall on the north
2. St. Luke’s Hospital Campus
3. NYS Psych Center

E. Capacity Analysis
In addition to a detailed evaluation using the site selection criteria matrix, the team prepared a capacity analysis for the top 3 sites. This included identifying areas for hospital operations, hospital expansion area, parking facilities (surface and structured), medical office building, and patient towers. An initial capacity concept plan was prepared for all 3 sites and two sites were advanced further to consider circulation and functional entrances.

III. County‐Wide Site Search
A cursory Geographic Information System (GIS) based site identification survey was conducted to identify 10+ sites for further evaluation. The initial criterion threshold for an acceptable site was single parcels ≥ 50‐acres. Multiple contiguous parcels under singular ownership, which cumulatively met the 50‐acre threshold, were not included due to inconsistencies in the method of identifying parcel owners within the GIS. The GIS‐based survey was limited to Oneida County parcels although several Herkimer County sites were discussed with decision‐makers (i.e., Schuyler Business Park, Frankfort 5S South Business Park). The ‘funnel’ process did not account for: site control, current site build‐out, or existing or past land uses (and associated impacts). The completed GIS map can be found in Exhibit 1.

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 4

EXHIBHIT 1
GIS ANALYSIS “FUNNEL MAPS”

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 5

The following steps were employed to identify sites:

1. Parcels meeting the 50‐acre threshold were identified (keyed to a legend) and plotted on a base map, which included:

 County and municipal boundaries
 Oneida County property lines (2011)
 Topographic relief

2. Sites identified in conjunction with the concurrent matrix evaluation were identified on the base map (see Level 2 Analysis):

 Yahnundasis Golf Club, Seneca Turnpike, New Hartford, NY
 Twin Ponds Golf Country Club, Main Street, New York Mills, NY
 New Hartford Business Park, New Hartford, NY
 Property adjacent to SUNY Polytechnic Institute, fronting onto Route 12 South in the town of Deerfield, NY
 Sadaquada Golf Club, Whitesboro, NY
 Hidden Valley Golf Club, Castle Road, Whitesboro, NY
 Domenico's Golf Course, Church Road, Whitesboro, NY
 Downtown ‐ generally bounded by Oriskany Blvd on the south, Broadway on the east, State St on the west, and City Hall on the north
 St. Luke’s Hospital Campus, New Hartford
 NYS Psych Center grounds, Utica, NY
 Faxton Hospital‐Murnane Field Site, Utica, NY
 Tect Utica, Whitesboro, NY

3. A negative‐based “funnel” process was employed to eliminate parcels, which were characterized by unfavorable conditions. Unfavorable conditions are exiting site conditions, which impact the developable acreage and/or increase development costs and “time‐to‐market.” Sites were eliminated from further consideration if developable acreage encroached upon the following conditions:

 Wetlands (New York State1 and potential federal²)
 100‐year floodplain
 Steep slopes (>15%; created using USGS 10m Digital Elevation Models [DEMs])

4. The following “positive” attributes were overlaid on the “funnel map”:  MVHS Primary Service Area (PSA)

¹ Based on NYS Freshwater Wetland Maps.
² Based on US Fish & Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory.

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 6

 MVHS Secondary Service Area (SSA)
 Utility lines (limited)

5. The following radii were overlaid on the “funnel map” to identify potential sites that might be considered as reasonably central to serve PSA and SSA customers.

 10‐mile radius from the approximate geographic center of Utica
 5‐mile radius from the approximate geographic center of Utica

6. In addition to the matrix‐identified sites, the following additional parcels were highlighted on the “funnel map”:

 Parcels ≥50‐acres
 Parcels ≥50‐acres within the 10‐mile radius and within the PSA
 Parcels ≥30‐acres and < 50‐acres within the 10‐mile radius and within the PSA ( ≥30‐acre parcels were added to capture additional urban‐centric sites)
 Parcels, which substantially meet required geographic parameters, as well as those parcels, which are not characterized by “unfavorable” environmental conditions.

IV. Level 1 Analysis

Using the funnel map, the following sites were evaluated for “fatal flaws” that would eliminate the site from further consideration. These are listed in no particular order of preference

1. Yahnundasis Golf Club, Seneca Turnpike, New Hartford, NY
2. Twin Ponds Golf Country Club, Main Street, New York Mills, NY
3. New Hartford Business Park, New Hartford, NY
4. Property adjacent to SUNY Polytechnic Institute, fronting onto Route 12 South, Deerfield, NY
5. Sadaquada Golf Club, Whitesboro, NY
6. Hidden Valley Golf Club, Castle Road, Whitesboro, NY
7. Domenico's Golf Course, Church Road, Whitesboro, NY
8. Downtown ‐ generally bounded by Oriskany Blvd on the south, Broadway on the east, State St on the west, and City Hall on the north
9. St. Luke’s Hospital Campus, New Hartford, NY
10. NYS Psych Center grounds, Utica, NY
11. Tect Utica, Whitesboro, NY
12. Faxton Hospital and Murnane Field

For each of these sites, the team evaluated access, utilities, transportation network, and general location to determine if the site warranted a level 2 analysis.

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 7

The following ‘fatal flaws’ were identified:

Yahnudasis Golf Club

 Access Issues:
o According to NYSDOT, access would be near the existing entrance off of Commercial Drive but it would require a re‐configuration of the Route 12 ‐ Genesee Street/Route 12B/Route 5 intersection.
o The road network has the capacity but there are potential operational issues with restrictions on number of options for ingress/egress.
o There is a railroad spur that would need to be crossed but it has extremely limited use.
o Secondary access from Route 840, Route 12 or Commercial Drive is not feasible.

 High Tension Power lines are present
 Mud Creek with associated wetlands impacts a large portion of the golf course site
 New Hartford planning and permitting process
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation
 Site is eligible for listing on National Register and State Register

Twin Ponds

 Adjacent to older well established neighborhoods that might resist ‘Not In My Back Yard’ (NIMBY)
 New Mills planning and permitting process
 Generally hilly site
 Twin Ponds is a 1950s icon – with some associated history
 Access Issues:
o Main Street and Burrstone Road have capacity issues. Three‐legged intersection with rail crossing is at Main St, Burrstone Road and Clinton St that creates circulation issues.
o A secondary access from Burrstone Road would require residential property acquisition and there are capacity concerns about access from Burrstone Road.
 No assessment has been made of utility and infrastructure capability and whether additional upgrades would be necessary to serve a hospital use.
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

New Hartford Bus Park

 Access Issues:
o Operational issues along approach at “Jay – K intersection”

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 8

o Capacity and operational issues along Middle Settlement Road
o Woods Highway at Route 5 is not a feasible main entrance
o Creating interchange at Route 840 to allow westbound access to the site would be at a cost of $20‐$30 million.
 Power lines cut through site, which reduces available acreage.
 New Hartford Planning and Permitting Process
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

Deerfield Property SUNY Poly and Route 12 South)
 North of NYS Thruway – further from population centroid
 Along a divided highway. Traffic from south, west or east would need to travel north on Route 12 and take exit ramp at Mulaney Road to then travel south to enter site.
 Only known access to site is through access road off of Mulaney Road that runs from Bank of America to site. Not clear if access could be provided off of service road parallel to Route 12 or through SUNY Poly.
 Highest and best use of site is for expansion of SUNY Poly
 Site has not been investigated for stream and wetlands that could impact site  Improvements would be required to bring power to the site.
 No ability to expand site as site is landlocked by Route 12 to east, Bank of America to the north, and SUNY Poly to west and south
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

Sadaquada Golf Club

 Access Issues:
o Henderson Street has operational and capacity issues
o Approach would be along Commercial Drive which has the highest traffic volumes in the region
o Clinton Street and Clark Mills Road also have capacity issues
 Utility and infrastructure availability and capacity not assessed
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

Hidden Valley and Domenincos Golf Course Sites

 Remote Site
 Access Issues:

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 9

o North Side of NYS Thruway – further from population centroid
o Access north on 840 past Westmoreland Road
o Lack of secondary access points

 Power lines cut through the site
 No infrastructure at site
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

Tect Utica Site
 Remote Site
 Access Issues:
o Halsey Road has capacity issues
o Clark Mills Road has capacity issues
 Potential wetlands
 Power lines
 Infrastructure upgrades needed – sewer upgrade
 Tect Utica may not be compatible – vibrations and noise
 Site is located outside the Major Population Center as required in the 2015‐2016 NYS Budget legislation.

Faxton – Murnane Field
 Alienation of park lands required with replacement of Murnane Field required
 City of Utica School District approval required to acquire Murnane Field
 Access Issues:
o No access from Burrstone Road
o Burrstone Road and Sunset Avenue have existing capacity issues, which would be compounded with development on Murnane and potentially Pin O Rama sites.
o Additional Property acquisition would be required – Pin O Rama Block
 Site would require overhead connector with Faxton from Murnane.
 Would need to consider integration of Faxton campus with new hospital complex to determine whether there is value in maintaining Faxton site and using property at Murnane Field and Pin O Rama for expansion.

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 10

V. Level 2 Analysis

The design team formulated a detailed site selection matrix that examined a variety of factors necessary for a successful and functioning site that will meet the hospital current and future expansion needs. This section presents the comparative analysis of three preferred sites using the seven evaluation categories listed below:

1. Size
2. Utilities
3. Accessibility
4. Zoning Approvals and Impact Fees
5. Monetary Factors
6. Community Factors, Perception & Sustainability
7. Environmental

Criteria and sub‐criteria were established for each category. Each sub‐criterion was assigned points with the higher values representing more desirable features or development conditions. The total point value for each category was then weighted so that the maximum achievable score under each category was 10 points. The detailed scoring matrix is provided as Exhibit 2.

A. Site Criteria Matrix

1. Size

Size evaluation was based on the programming guidelines set forth by Hammes in their January 28, 2015 report and adjusting for urban and suburban environments. The Hammes report established a minimum lot size of 11 acres for an urban location and 49 for a suburban location. The points assigned in this section are based on current available acres for development.

Scoring results under the Size Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 7 points
 Psychiatric Center – 10 points
 St. Luke’s – 7 points

2. Utilities

Water, sewer, stormwater, electrical, natural gas, and fiber line utilities were evaluated under this category. Water capacity is sufficient at all three sites. However, static pressures at the Psychiatric Center (approximately 60‐70 psi) are less than the static pressures at the other two sites (approximately 90 psi). The Downtown location is also surrounded by older infrastructure that has experienced frequent water main breaks during deep winter frosts. All three sites have good redundancy.

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 11

Sanitary and storm sewers are not separated at the Downtown site and the site is not conducive to green infrastructure features. A sewer separation project would need to be planned in advance of hospital construction at this location. The sewer improvement project would need to eliminate stormwater inflow from the combined sewers in this area. Stormwater lines would need to be constructed to separate stormwater flow and direct it under the main rail lines to the north and then to the canal.

None of the sites are in the “downtown electrical network,” which would likely prohibit the development of a Combined Heat and Power facility (CHP). Natural gas is likely available near each site at the appropriate capacity for a gas turbine CHP system, however, the level ofsystem improvements necessary to deliver this volume of gas is not yet determined.

The Downtown site has the potential to be the better site among the three for power delivered from the electrical grid. This downtown site is relatively close to National Grid’s Terminalsubstation located to the north at Harbor Point. The Terminal station has two transformers and distribution buses. As a result, it functions in a manner similar to two separate substations.

National Grid would need to explore the possibility of running two dedicated 13.2 kv underground cables to the new hospital. This would provide a high level of reliability since the cables would serve only the hospital, be relatively short in distance, and have no exposure to the factors that impact overhead lines.

While the other sites (Psych Center and existing St. Luke’s campus) can be fed from two 13.2 kv lines, as well, the lines would run above ground and would not be dedicated and there is a question whether they could handle the loads.

Regarding St. Luke’s, there are also two 46 kv circuits at the intersection of Main Street, Clinton Street and Burrstone Rd in New York Mills. Lines could be run from this intersection to St. Luke’s which would improve the reliability at this location.

Scoring results under the Utilities Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 6 points
 Psychiatric Center – 8 points
 St. Luke’s – 8 points

3. Accessibility

Accessibility was reviewed both from the distance to NYS Routes and the NYS Thruway. The NYS Routes included:

 North‐South Arterial including Route 840 Section
 Oriskany Street/NYS Route 5A/ NYS Route 5S
 NYS Route 49
 Non‐arterial sections of NYS Routes 5 and 12

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 12

In addition, likely road and signal improvements were reviewed with NYSDOT Region 2. The Downtown location has the potential benefit of being planned in conjunction with the Department’s Oriskany Street/5S project so that the access needs of the Hospital from Oriskany Street could be incorporated into the project. NYSDOT expects this project to be constructed in 2018.

It is anticipated the Psychiatric Center location would require improvements along the Jason Street and Court Street corridors to improve access. For the St. Luke’s location, signal improvement would be anticipated at Burrstone Road and Champlin Avenue intersection.

Travel distance for employees was scored by reviewing zip code data of the employees to determine an approximate centroid of the base employment zone. The intersection of the North‐South Arterial and the East‐West Arterial (Route 8 and 840) was used as this centroid.

Based on a preliminary review of incorporating a heliport into the new facility, there does not appear to be any overriding deficiencies, which would promote one site over another in reference to this criteria. Helicopter access is essentially design‐driven including approach and departure procedures, which require two unobstructed flight paths in and out from the heliport. For safety reasons, roof‐top heliports are recommended by the FAA. Coordination with municipal planners and zoning commissions are necessary to promote proper zoning, as well as safeguards to prevent future development from interfering with approved flight paths. The design should plan for growth, and account for proximity to sensitive receptors.

With regard to visibility, the downtown site is the only sight with direct sight lines to State routes.

Scoring results under the Accessibility Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 9 points
 Psychiatric Center – 5 points
 St. Luke’s – 6 points

4. Zoning Approvals and Impact Fees

Basic zoning was reviewed for each site to determine if the hospital is an allowed use as of right and what the lot coverage and height requirements are. The zoning ordinances for the City of Utica and the Town of New Hartford were reviewed. While there are other components to zoning, these three regulations provide the ability to determine if a zoning change or enacting a Planned Unit Development would be warranted.

Zoning for the downtown site and the St. Luke’s campus are adequate and in place. For the downtown site, the hospital is an allowed use with a special permit, the lot coverage allowed is 100%, and there are no height restrictions.

The St. Luke’s campus has a planned development district in place so no zoning changes would be required, but development would be subject to site plan approval by the Town. The hospital on the Psych center site is an allowed use by special permit the lot coverage and height restrictions would not be sufficient for the hospital’s requirements therefore a zoning change would be required.

The additional sub‐criteria relates to sewer offset requirements. Development projects that are in service area of the Sauquoit Creek Pumping Station (SCPS) require flow credits in place before they can proceed because of

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 13

stormwater inflow and Infiltration issues in this basin. The SCPS basin generally follows municipal borders. The towns of Whitesboro and New Hartford are inside the SCPS basin and the City of Utica is out.

Flow credits are established by tracking the amount of stormwater removed from the sanitary sewer system during a one‐year, 24‐hour storm and dividing that volume by 5. The flow credits, assuming they are available from the municipality, are then applied against the anticipated gallons per day of sewer flow of the pending development. In contrast, development within the City of Utica is not currently not subject to sewer offset requirements but may be under similar restrictions by 2017 but only at a 2:1 offset ratio. Although the St. Luke’s site is in New Hartford, the majority of its sewer discharges enter the City’s sewer system. Assuming the connection to the City’s system would remain, new development at the St. Luke’s site would be viewed as outside the SCPS basin.

Scoring results under the Zoning Approvals and Impact Fees Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 8 points
 Psychiatric Center – 5 points
 St. Luke’s – 8 points

5. Monetary Factors

Site assembly was reviewed, in general terms, based on the number of properties involved in land acquisition. Further, some consideration was given to additional investment potential based on the site location and the project’s relation to broader downtown revitalization, neighborhood revitalization, and/or preservation features. These same interests could also result increased fundraising. This is not meant to include the $300 million allotted under the State budget. At this time, all Level 2 sites are deemed equal with regard to their status in terms of the budget item.

Constructability issues were weighed with regard to demolition, geotechnical, and phasing elements of the project. With regard to demolition, allsites will require 2 to 4 acres of demolition and judged equal for this level of analysis. Geotechnical conditions are likely preferable at the Psychiatric Center and St. Luke’s sites. However, further geotechnical studies will be needed to determine how these conditions will translate to the cost of foundation construction. The St. Luke’s site presents a challenge with regard to construction phasing. The existing operations will need to be maintained and protected during the construction of the new facility. A myriad of issues would need to be explored with regard to employee access, construction access, circulation, noise, vibrations, etc. if the new hospital is to be located at the current St. Luke’s campus.

The Downtown site has the added benefit of utilizing some percentage ofshared public parking which may offset some operational costs.

Sanitary sewer discharges from the St. Luke’s site predominately flow into the City of Utica’s combined sewer system and therefore not subject to additional sewer fees established under the Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Mitigation Program to implement improvement projects in the SCPS basin.

Scoring results under the Monetary Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 5 points
 Psychiatric Center – 6 points

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 14

 St. Luke’s – 4 points

6. Community Factors, Perception & Sustainability

This section of the matrix evaluated existing community policy documents, whether or not the site was in an existing neighborhood, and if there are sustainability features that could be implemented.

For the community policy document the sites were examined to determine if they are consistent with an existing comprehensive or master plan and if the site is within or adjacent to an existing or proposed Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA). All three sites are consistent with a master plan and only the downtown and Psychiatric Center are near a proposed BOA. Being adjacent or within a BOA can be helpful in obtaining state funding if the project is consistent with the BOA planning document.

The next sub‐criteria examined the location of site in relation to the surrounding neighborhood. The downtown site is the only site not situated near a neighborhood whereas St. Luke’s and the Psychiatric Center are near neighborhoods but a buffer is possible.

The final sub‐criteria examined sustainability features as it relates to the ability to provide a microgrid and if it can be considered an urban infill project (vs. greenfield development). The Central Utility Building at the Downtown and Psychiatric Center sites have the potential to serve a as microgrid power sources. CHP’s themselves are considered a more sustainable for generating electric power option versus relying 100% on the electrical grid. CHP are more energy efficient and rely on cleaner sources (i.e. gas turbines) reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and other air pollutants in comparison to regional power stations.

Finally, consideration was given to Downtown and Psychiatric Center sites for re‐purposing urban parcels for re‐use which is considered a sustainable initiative as higher densities in the urban environment minimizes the need for energy, allows for non‐motorized types of transportation, and increases the efficiency for the delivery utilities and services. All three site options would likely comply with the State’s Smart Growth Development Policy, but the Downtown and Psychiatric Center would be viewed more favorably if state funds are pursued to assist with the development of either of these sites.

Scoring results under the Community Factors, Perception & Sustainability Category are as follows:

 Downtown – 10 points
 Psychiatric Center – 8 points
 St. Luke’s – 4 points

7. Environmental

For this portion of the matrix the following factors were evaluated: 100‐year floodplain, cultural resources, wetlands, steep slopes (amount of land with less than 15% slope), and endangered and threatened species. All 3 sites are not located in a 100‐year floodplain. Only the St. Luke’s site is not listed or eligible for listing on the State and/or Federal Register; it is also not located within an archeologically sensitive area. None of the sites encroach upon state wetlands or the buffer area; St. Luke’s does encroach upon a potential federal wetland. All 3 sites are relatively flat and none of the sites will have restrictions for clearing as it relates to the Indiana Bat and other endangered species.

Development of the Psych Center and Downtown sites will require coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Buildings on the Psych Center campus, particularly Old Main, will be subject to

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 15

review on the renovation and reuse of these buildings, and any demolition that may be part of the hospital redevelopment. The capacity analysis shows integration of Old Main into the proposed redevelopment program, which likely would receive favorable support from SHPO. The Downtown site would require demolition of all buildings within the defined property boundaries for the hospital. This will require coordination with SHPO. However the downtown option will also create opportunities to catalyze development of key downtown buildings that lie on the periphery of the hospital development (e.g., Hotel Utica, E. Tudor Williams Building, Utica Paint Buildings, as well as key buildings along the Genesee St. corridor).

 Downtown – 8 points
 Psychiatric Center – 8 points
 St. Luke’s – 9 points

B. Matrix Summary

The final scoring for the 3 sites is as follows:

 Downtown – 53 points
 Psychiatric Center – 50 points
 St. Luke’s – 46 points

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 16

EXHIBHIT 2

SITE SELECTION MATRIX

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 17

II. UTILITIES Total Potential Points - 32 Points

A. Sanitary Sewer 1) Capacity improvements require less than 500 linear feet of upgrades (4 points) 4 4 2) Capacity improvements require between 500 and 1000 linear feet of upgrades (2 points) 2 3) Capacity improvements require more than 1000 linear feet of upgrades (0 points)

B. Potable Water 1) Capacity improvements require less than 500 linear feet of upgrades (4 points) 4 4 4 2) Capacity improvements require between 500 and 1000 linear feet of upgrades (2 points) 3) Capacity improvements require more than 1000 linear feet of upgrades (0 points) 4) Redundancy: 2 main feeds from different reserviors/tanks + 2; 2 main feed from same source +1 points 2 2 2 5) Potential useful life or pressure issues ( minus 1 to -2 points) -1 -1

C. Electrical 1)Adequate Capacity: Currently available +2 points; need National Grid upgrade + 1 point 2 1 1 2) Redundancy: 3 independent sources +2 points; 2 sources + 1 points 1 1 1 3) Reliability: reliable dedicated feeder +2 points; reliable shared feeder +1 points 2 1 1 4) Service voltage: 115Kv +2 points; 34.5 Kv +1 points; <15Kv + 0 points 2 0 1

D. Natural Gas 1) Capacity: supports hospital w/ future CHP +4 points; supports hospital only +2 points 4 4 4 2) Upgrades: services extensions >500 feet minus 2 points; >1000 feet -4 points TBD TBD TBD

E. Fiber Network Availability 1) Yes (2 points) 2 2 2

F. Storm Drainage 1) Separate storm sewers onsite (+2 points) 2 2

2) Soils and depth to water table conducive to green infrastructure (+2 points) 2 2 3) Property available for onsite detention (+2 points) 2 2 SUBTOTAL: 20 24 26 WEIGHTED SUBTOTAL: Weight (10/32) = .3125 6 8 8

B. Attract Additional Outside Investment C. Cost of Construction - Foundations C. Cost of Construction - Phasing A. Site Assemblage Downtown Psych Center St. Luke's VI. COMMUNITY FACTORS, PERCEPTION & SUSTAINABILITY Total Potential Points - 16 Points A. Community Priority Site/Area 1) Consistent with Master Plan (+4 points) 4 4 4 2) Within or adjacent to proposed/existing Brownfield Opportunity Area (+2 points) 2 2 B. Proximity to Existing Neighborhood 1) Not within residential neighborhood (4 points) 4 2) Within neighborhood but buffer zone is possible (2 points) 2 2 3) Within neighborhood and no buffer zone (0 points) C. Sustainability and Resilency Features 1. Potential Microgrid opportunity (+2 points) 2 2) Smart Growth - represents retrofitting/urban infill project (+4 points) 4 4 SUBTOTAL: 16 12 6 WEIGHTED SUBTOTAL: Weight (10/16) = .625 10 8 4 VII. ENVIRONMENTAL Total Potential Points - 8 Points A. 100-year Floodplain 1) Project site/footprint is not located within 100-year floodplain (2 points) 2 2 2 B. Cultural Resources 1) Project is not located on a site listed or eligible for listing on the SR/NR (1 point) 1 2) Project is not located within an archaeologically sensitive area (1 point) 1 C. Wetlands 1) Project does not encroach upon potential federal wetlands (based on NWI or delineation) (1 point) 1 1 2) Project does not encroach upon State wetlands or buffer (1 point) D. Steep Slopes 1) No slopes >15% (1 point) 1 1 1 E. Endangered & Threatened Species 1) No tree clearing restrictions due to Indiana Bat/Northern Long-eared Bat (1 points) 1 1 1 SUBTOTAL: 6 6 7 WEIGHTED SUBTOTAL: Weight (10/8) = 1.25 8 8 9 TOTAL WEIGHTED SCORE: 53 50 46

MVHS Site Selection Analysis, Summary Memo, June 12, 2015, 18