Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PLED-2003-07-23 ,Sarah Myers- Rezoning of Ithaca Gun Co. site Page 1 From: "Daniel Hoffman" <Dan@Isss-law.com> To: "Alan Cohen" <mayor@cityofithaca.org>, "Ed Hershey" <enh2@cornell.edu>, "Pat Pryor" <patp@cityofithaca.org>, "Pat Vaughan" <paty@cityofithaca.org>, "Paulette Manos" <paulettem@cityofithaca.org>, "Peter Mack"<peterm@cityofithaca.org>, "Susan Blumenthal" <susanb@cityofithaca.org>, "Diann Sams" <dianns@cityofithaca.org>, "David Whitmore" <davidw@cityofithaca.org>, "Dan Cogan"<dcogan@cityofithaca.org>, "Carolyn Peterson" <carolynp@cityofithaca.org>, <joannc@cityofithaca.org> Date: 7/21/03 9:59PM Subject: Rezoning of Ithaca Gun Co. site Dear Members of Common Council and the Planning Board: Attached in RTF (and pasted in below, probably with much loss of format), please find comments regarding the proposed rezoning of the Ithaca Gun Company site, on behalf of the Natural Areas Commission and Conservation Advisory Council, together with some personal additions based on later developments since both of those groups met to discuss this issue. I don't have email addresses for all members of the Planning Board, so by copy of this message to JoAnn Cornish, I am asking her to forward this message to them and to provide hard copies of the attachment for your meeting on July 22, 2003. I apologize for the length and lateness of these comments, but I will also note that the CAC's first knowledge of the rezoning concept came about with receipt of the concept memo a few days prior to our 7/14 meeting. The NAC received no direct notice at all -because I happen to be on the CAC as well, I shared the materials I received as a CAC member with the NAC. Also, this issue is a complex one, and new information has been emerging over the past week as a result of discussions between NAC members and JoAnn and with the Building Commissioner regarding the Gorge Protection Area designation. I will try to attend the meeting of Council's Planning & Econmomic Development Committee on 7/23, to answer questions or to explain anything in these comments, but I have another meeting on 7/22 which will probably prevent me from appearing at the Planning Board meeting. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Dan Hoffman MEMO TO: Members of Planning & Development Board Members of Common Council Mayor Alan J. Cohen FROM: Daniel Hoffman DATE: July 21, 2003 RE: PROPOSED REZONING OF ITHACA GUN COMPANY SITE As most or all of you know, I chair the City's Natural Areas Commission (NAC)and am a member of the City's Conservation Advisory Council (CAC). Each of these groups had its regular monthly meeting on July 14, 2003, and both groups discussed and decided to comment on the"concept memo"and/or the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared to support the possible rezoning of the so-called "Ithaca Gun Company site"from "Industrial" (I-1)to commercial (B2-a). I hope that each of you received a copy of the CAC's written comments. The purpose of this memo is to convey the NAC's comments, to amplify the CAC's comments, and, where noted, to add my personal comments and recommendations to the extent that further review has occurred or additional information has been received since the July 14th meetings. ,Sarah Myers - Rezoning of Ithaca Gun Co. site Page 2', NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION COMMENTS Background: It is the NAC's understanding that land acquired by the City several years ago, in the vicinity of Ithaca Falls, as"substitute parkland," is considered by the City to be primarily or entirely a"natural area" and as such is within the jurisdiction of the NAC, with regard to oversight and advisory opinions to the City. (In fact, the impetus for converting the former Six Mile Creek Advisory Committee into the NAC came primarily from the City's desire to induce Cornell to convey Ithaca Falls to the City, and both the authorizing legislation for the NAC, in the City Code, and the agreement between the City and Cornell specify a role for the NAC with regard to the Ithaca Falls area.) You may recall that in 2002 the NAC (after consulting with the Planning Department and the Board of Public Works) initiated a community"charette" intended to solicit concerns and ideas about how the Ithaca Falls area could best be"designed"and maintained as a natural area and community asset. It so happens that a preliminary design of the project spearheaded by Wally Diehl for the Ithaca Gun factory site became available at that time and part of the charette was devoted to community reactions to that concept. There appeared to be a shared concern that Mr. Diehl's project,which then involved retrofitting of the existing factory and construction of an inn and restaurant on the so-called "island"overlooking the gorge, should not preclude public access to and along the"island"and that the"island"was not an appropriate site for development of the type and scale than envisioned by Mr. Diehl. Since that time, Mr. Diehl has met with the NAC (in 2002)and has stated on several occasions that he has heard the community concerns about his proposed development, that he will take them into account, that he wants to provide public access to the portion of the"island" he will own and that he wants his final plans to be acceptable to the community. We understand that since our initial meeting with Mr. Diehl his intentions for the old factory have changed substantially, and that he now wishes to demolish most of it and replace it with a multi-story building (or buildings)that would include residential units, parking and possibly a restaurant and retail. His exact plans for the"island"are unknown to us. Also, we have not seen drawings or a specific proposal since his initial designs were aired in 2002. We also note that while we very much appreciate Mr. Diehl's willingness to engage in discussion about these issues and his intentions, in fact the public statements he has made do not have the force of law, as far as we know, and further changes in conditions could presumably result in further changes in the plans and intentions for the site. Comments: The comments agreed upon by the NAC at its meeting on 7/14/03 can be summarized as follows: 1. The NAC was surprised to learn that the area being considered for rezoning includes not just the land which we understand Fall Creek Redevelopment/Wally Diehl intends to purchase from State Street Associates/Mark Finkelstein, but also a larger parcel to the west, running to Lake Street at the bottom of the hill and now including parking areas for Gun Hill Apartments and an undeveloped slope,which we understand will be retained by State Street Associates. The"concept memo"we reviewed did nto even mention this aspect of the rezoning. The NAC does not support rezoning this entire area to B2-a. 2. The NAC is concerned that the maximum development allowed as of right in a B2-a zone could have negative effects on the adjacent natural area, as a result of the greater allowed height(70 feet versus 40 feet), the greater allowed lot coverage (up to 75%versus 50%)and the types of uses that are likely to be included once the industrial zoning (which prohibits residential and thus makes any redevelopment, including mixed-use, less feasible) is lifted. We believe development to the maximum scale allowed by B2-a could have a major visual impact on the natural area (as well as important views of the natural area from outside its borders)and on the quality of the experience one could have inside the natural area. The Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF)does not provide adequate information or documentation for evaluating these potential impacts. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES The CAC has called for consideration of alternative, preferred approaches to modifying the land use Sarah Myers - Rezoning of Ithaca Gun Co. site Page 3 controls now in place for the Ithaca Gun Company site, rather than simply applying B2-a classification, as currently defined, to the entire area . The 3 alternatives set forth by the CAC at its 7/14/03 meeting are as follows: 1. Require full site plan submission and public review at this time, so that the potential impacts of both the rezoning and the proposed project can be considered simultaneously, thus avoiding any"segmentation"of environmental review. (It should be noted that the"concept memo"acknowledges that the developer has been reviewing plans for this site with the Planning Department for almost two years; thus, sharing the plans with the public so that actual impacts can be evaluated together with any proposed zoning change would seem logical at this point.) 2. Leave the current zoning designation in place but encourage the developer to apply for a use variance. This would initiate site plan review(thus allowing decision-makers to weigh all the potential impacts of the actual development and eliminating the need to consider theoretical "worst case" impacts that could occur under rezoning). Also, a variance could be accompanied by site-specific conditions, thus offering more appropriate and enforceable site control of whatever project(s) is/are actually proposed. 3. Consider a new zoning classification (or overlay)tailored to the needs of a site which overlooks Fall Creek gorge, is adjacent to several P-1 zoned parcels, includes very steep slopes, etc. The special classification could specify height, lot coverage and buffer requirements appropriate for this special situation. Since the 7/14/03 meeting, some new information has been received (about an existing Gorge Protection overlay zone)and discussions with Deputy City Planner JoAnn Cornish have indicated the possibility of another approach. Therefore, I would now add the following options to the above list: 4. Rezone the parcels to be retained by State Street Associates (ie., those which will not be part of the Fall Creek Redevelopment project)from Industrial to R2, the same classification applied to the adjacent Fall Creek neighborhood. Any redevelopment proposed by State Street Associates which does not meet the criteria for R2 would then require a variance (in addition to its own site plan review and environmental review). 5. Regardless of whether and how the site in question is rezoned, apply the Gorge Protection Area (GPA) overlay zone which Council established in 1998 (see§325-16 D of the Code)to all or part of the area now proposed for rezoning. At present, the GPA overlay extends along Fall Creek from Beebe Lake to Stewart Avenue, within the U-1 zone (and along part of Cascadilla Creek gorge). There are 3 sub-classifications to the GPA overlay, one of which (A)prohibits all new buildings (this being the most extensively applied sub-classification),while the others (B&C) limit the height of new buildings to 50 feet and 75 feet, respectively. I see no reason that the definition of this overlay classification could not be modified slightly to make it applicable in other zones. If it were so modified, it could then be applied for the full length of the gorge, so as to extend the protections it offers to the entire gorge area, not just those parts now owned by Cornell. Because of the close proximity of the former Ithaca Gun Company site to the Fall Creek gorge and its most famous feature- Ithaca Falls- I would strongly suggest that it should be wholly or at least partially within the Gorge Protection Area previously created by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Before determining what the most appropriate land use controls are for this immensely important site, would ask that you heed the concern of both the NAC and the CAC -that the environmental review(ie, the LEAF)now before the lead agency for this action (ie., Common Council) is neither adequate nor complete. (Please see NAC member Sarah Steuteville's more detailed analysis of the LEAF.) A site this important to the City- because of its immediate proximity to one of Ithaca's premier natural wonders, because of the long history of contamination that is only now being addressed, and because of its importance to the quality of life for two nearby neighborhoods -deserves a far more rigorous evaluation than you or the public have seen to date. ,Sarah Myers - Rezoning of Ithaca Gun Co. site Page 4 I hope you will not approve a negative declaration on the basis of this LEAF and that you will require a more thorough review that will provide the information and documentation necessary to evaluate all your options. Please remember that the decisions you make now about what controls will apply to this site are going to determine what it will look like and be like and how it will affect the Ithaca Falls area-for many generations to come. Past decisions left us with a legacy of contamination affecting the public's pocketbook and possibly its health, and will now require the destruction of a great deal of the vegetation within this fragile natural area in the course of a necessary clean-up. It is crucial that your decisions about this area be made more carefully and with more foresight. cc: JoAnn Cornish CAC NAC CONTACT: Dan Hoffman, 273-6933 (h)or 273-2202 (w), dan@Isss-law.com CC: "Jack Elliott" <jre15@cornell.edu>, "Judy Jones"<jwj2@cornell.edu>, "Dan Cogan" <dcogan@cityofithaca.org>, "Michael Culotta" <michael@alternatives.org>, "Paul Salon" <prsalon@yahoo.com>, "Dan Hoffman"<dan@Isss-law.com>, "Barbara Ebert" <beel @cornell.edu>, "Greg Thomas" <gthomas@psdconsulting.com>, "D Hoffman" <creekwalker97@aol.com>, "Robert Wesley" <frw2@cornell.edu>, "Andy Hillman" <andyh@cityofithaca.org>, "Carolyn Peterson" <carolynp@cityofithaca.org>, "Harry Littell" <harrylittell@yahoo.com>, "Jon Meigs" <joncml@aol.com>, "Kate Mance" <kathrynm@cityofithaca.org>, "Linda Buttel" <lab6@cornell.edu>, "Nancy Ostman" <nlo1 @cornell.edu>, "Roxy Johnston" <roxanaj@cityofithaca.org>, "Sarah Myers" <sarahm@cityofithaca.org>, "sarah steuteville" <sarah@newurbannews.com>, "Wendy Wallitt" <wwallitt@twcny.rr.com>, "Zev Ross" <zev.ross@cornell.edu> .Sarah Myers -TEXT.htm Page 1 Dear Members of Common Council and the Planning Board: Attached in RTF(and pasted in below,probably with much loss of format),please find comments regarding the proposed rezoning of the Ithaca Gun Company site, on behalf of the Natural Areas Commission and Conservation Advisory Council,together with some personal additions based on later developments since both of those groups met to discuss this issue. I don't have email addresses for all members of the Planning Board, so by copy of this message to JoAnn Cornish, I am asking her to forward this message to them and to provide hard copies of the attachment for your meeting on July 22,2003. I apologize for the length and lateness of these comments,but I will also note that the CAC's first knowledge of the rezoning concept came about with receipt of the concept memo a few days prior to our 7/14 meeting. The NAC received no direct notice at all- because I happen to be on the CAC as well, I shared the materials I received as a CAC member with the NAC. Also,this issue is a complex one, and new information has been emerging over the past week as a result of discussions between NAC members and JoAnn and with the Building Commissioner regarding the Gorge Protection Area designation. I will try to attend the meeting of Council's Planning&Econmomic Development Committee on 7/23,to answer questions or to explain anything in these comments,but I have another meeting on 7/22 which will probably prevent me from appearing at the Planning Board meeting. Thank you for your attention to this important matter. Sincerely,Dan Hoffman --------- MEMO TO: Members of Planning&Development Board Members of Common Council Mayor Alan J.Cohen FROM:Daniel Hoffman DATE:July 21,2003 RE: PROPOSED REZONING OF ITHACA GUN COMPANY SITE As most or all of you know,I chair the City's Natural Areas Commission(NAC)and am a member of the City's Conservation Advisory Council(CAC). Each of these groups had its regular monthly meeting on July 14,2003,and both groups discussed and decided to comment on the"concept memo"and/or the Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared to support the possible rezoning of the so-called"Ithaca Gun Company site"from"Industrial"(I-1)to commercial(B2-a). I hope that each of you received a copy of the CAC's written comments. The purpose of this memo is to convey the NAC's comments,to amplify the CAC's comments,and,where noted,to add my personal comments and recommendations to the extent that further review has occurred or additional information has been received since the July 14th meetings. NATURAL AREAS COMMISSION COMMENTS Background: It is the NAC's understanding that land acquired by the City several years ago,in the vicinity of Ithaca Falls,as"substitute parkland,"is considered by the City to be primarily or entirely a"natural area"and as such is within the jurisdiction of the NAC,with regard to oversight and advisory opinions to the City.(In fact,the impetus for converting the former Six Mile Creek Advisory Committee into the NAC came primarily from the City's desire to induce Cornell to convey Ithaca Falls to the City, and both the authorizing legislation for the NAC,in the City Code,and the agreement between the City and Cornell specify a role for the NAC with regard to the Ithaca Falls area.) You may recall that in 2002 the NAC(after consulting with the Planning Department and the Board of Public Works)initiated a community"charette"intended to solicit concerns and ideas about how the Ithaca Falls area could best be"designed"and maintained as a natural area and community asset. It so happens that a preliminary design of the project spearheaded by Wally Diehl for the Ithaca Gun factory site became available at that time and part of the charette was devoted to community reactions to that concept.There appeared to be a shared concern that Mr.Diehl's project,which then involved retrofitting of the existing factory and construction of an inn and restaurant on the so-called"island"overlooking the gorge,should not preclude public access to and along the"island"and that the"island"was not an appropriate site for development of the type and scale than envisioned by Mr.Diehl. Since that time,Mr.Diehl has met with the NAC(in 2002)and has stated on several occasions that he has heard the community concerns about his proposed development,that he will take them into account,that he wants to provide public access to the portion of the"island"he will own and that he wants his final plans to be acceptable to the community. We understand that since our initial meeting with Mr.Diehl his intentions for the old factory have changed .Sarah Myers-TEXT.htm Page 2 substantially,and that he now wishes to demolish most of it and replace it with a multi-story building(or buildings) that would include residential units,parking and possibly a restaurant and retail. His exact plans for the"island"are unknown to us. Also,we have not seen drawings or a specific proposal since his initial designs were aired in 2002. We also note that while we very much appreciate Mr.Diehl's willingness to engage in discussion about these issues and his intentions,in fact the public statements he has made do not have the force of law,as far as we know,and further changes in conditions could presumably result in further changes in the plans and intentions for the site. Comments: The comments agreed upon by the NAC at its meeting on 7/14/03 can be summarized as follows: 1. The NAC was surprised to learn that the area being considered for rezoning includes not just the land which we understand Fall Creek Redevelopment/Wally Diehl intends to purchase from State Street Associates/Mark Finkelstein,but also a larger parcel to the west,running to Lake Street at the bottom of the hill and now including parking areas for Gun Hill Apartments and an undeveloped slope,which we understand will be retained by State Street Associates. The"concept memo"we reviewed did nto even mention this aspect of the rezoning. The NAC does not support rezoning this entire area to B2-a. 2.The NAC is concerned that the maximum development allowed as of right in a B2-a zone could have negative effects on the adjacent natural area,as a result of the greater allowed height(70 feet versus 40 feet),the greater allowed lot coverage(up to 75%versus 50%)and the types of uses that are likely to be included once the industrial zoning(which prohibits residential and thus makes any redevelopment,including mixed-use,less feasible)is lifted. We believe development to the maximum scale allowed by B2-a could have a major visual impact on the natural area(as well as important views of the natural area from outside its borders)and on the quality of the experience one could have inside the natural area. The Long Environmental Assessment Form(LEAF)does not provide adequate information or documentation for evaluating these potential impacts. ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES The CAC has called for consideration of alternative, preferred approaches to modifying the land use controls now in place for the Ithaca Gun Company site,rather than simply applying B2-a classification,as currently defined,to the entire area. The 3 alternatives set forth by the CAC at its 7/14/03 meeting are as follows: 1.Require full site plan submission and public review at this time,so that the potential impacts of both the rezoning and the proposed project can be considered simultaneously,thus avoiding any "segmentation"of environmental review. (It should be noted that the"concept memo"acknowledges that the developer has been reviewing plans for this site with the Planning Department for almost two years;thus,sharing the plans with the public so that actual impacts can be evaluated together with any proposed zoning change would seem logical at this point.) 2.Leave the current zoning designation in place but encourage the developer to apply for a use variance. This would initiate site plan review(thus allowing decision-makers to weigh all the potential impacts of the actual development and eliminating the need to consider theoretical"worst case"impacts that could occur under rezoning). Also,a variance could be accompanied by site-specific conditions,thus offering more appropriate and enforceable site control of whatever project(s)is/are actually proposed. 3.Consider a new zoning classification (or overlay)tailored to the needs of a site which overlooks Fall Creek gorge,is adjacent to several P-1 zoned parcels, includes very steep slopes,etc. The special classification could specify height,lot coverage and buffer requirements appropriate for this special situation. Since the 7/14/03 meeting,some new information has been received(about an existing Gorge Protection overlay zone)and discussions with Deputy City Planner JoAnn Cornish have indicated the possibility of another approach. Therefore,I would now add the following options to the above list: 4.Rezone the parcels to be retained by State Street Associates(ie.,those which will not be part of the Fall Creek Redevelopment project)from Industrial to R2,the same classification applied to the adjacent Fall Creek neighborhood. Any redevelopment proposed by State Street Associates which does not meet the criteria for R2 would then require a variance(in addition to its own site plan review and environmental review). 5.Regardless of whether and how the site in question is rezoned,apply the Gorge Protection Area(GPA)overlay zone which Council established in 1998 (see§325-16 D of the Code)to all or part of the area now proposed for rezoning. At present,the GPA overlay extends along Fall Creek from Beebe Lake to Stewart Avenue,within the U-1 zone(and along part of Cascadilla Creek gorge). There are 3 sub-classifications to the GPA overlay,one of which(A)prohibits all new buildings(this being the most extensively applied sub-classification),while the others(B&C)limit the height of new buildings to 50 feet and 75 feet,respectively. I see no reason that the definition of this overlay classification could not be modified slightly to make it applicable in other zones. If it were so modified,it could then be applied for the full length of the gorge,so as to extend the protections it offers to the entire gorge area,not just those parts now owned by Cornell. Because of the close proximity of the former Ithaca Gun Company site to the Fall Creek gorge and its most famous feature-Ithaca Falls-I would strongly suggest that it should be wholly or at least partially within the Gorge Sarah Myers-TEXT.htm Page 3 Protection Area previously created by the City. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Before determining what the most appropriate land use controls are for this immensely important site,I would ask that you heed the concern of both the NAC and the CAC -that the environmental review(ie,the LEAF)now before the lead agency for this action(ie.,Common Council)is neither adequate nor complete. (Please see NAC member Sarah Steuteville's more detailed analysis of the LEAF.) A site this important to the City-because of its immediate proximity to one of Ithaca's premier natural wonders,because of the long history of contamination that is only now being addressed,and because of its importance to the quality of life for two nearby neighborhoods-deserves a far more rigorous evaluation than you or the public have seen to date. I hope you will not approve a negative declaration on the basis of this LEAF and that you will require a more thorough review that will provide the information and documentation necessary to evaluate all your options. Please remember that the decisions you make now about what controls will apply to this site are going to determine what it will look like and be like and how it will affect the Ithaca Falls area-for many generations to come. Past decisions left us with a legacy of contamination affecting the public's pocketbook and possibly its health, and will now require the destruction of a great deal of the vegetation within this fragile natural area in the course of a necessary clean-up. It is crucial that your decisions about this area be made more carefully and with more foresight. cc: JoAnn Cornish CAC NAC CONTACT: Dan Hoffman,273-6933(h)or 273-2202(w),dan@Isss-law.com