HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-09-13 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting AgendaMEETING NOTICE
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, January 9, 2013 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
A. Agenda Review
B. Special Order of Business – Public Hearing Announcement – 2013 Community Development
Block Grant and Home Investment Partnership Program
C. Public Comment and Response from Committee Members (6:05 pm)
D. Announcements, Updates and Reports (6:25 pm)
1. Intermunicipal Planning Coordination
2. Collegetown Zoning
3. CIITAP application filed – Marriott on
South Aurora
4. Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission 2012 Annual Report
E. Action Items
1. MLK Sculpture Installation at Southside Community Center (6:35 pm)
(descriptions of proposed piece, BPW approval, resolution)
2. Corrections to June 2012 R-1 and R-2 parking ordinance changes (6:45 pm)
(proposed nonsubstantive ordinance changes)
3. Local Designation of the Henry St. John Historic District (6:50 pm)
(2 memos from staff, overview and map, resolution, ILPC environmental review
documents, Planning Board report and resolution, comments requesting changes, GML
letter, see also supplemental materials and letters available on the City web site)
F. Discussion Items
1. Downtown Density – Zoning Change (7:15 pm)
(comments from Planning Board and ILPC)
2. Elimination of Minimum Parking Requirements (7:30 pm)
(concept memo, draft ordinance revision)
3. Agenda Planning – potential upcoming items (7:55 pm)
Development of department and committee workplans for 2013
G. Approval of Minutes
H. Adjournment (8:00 pm)
Direct questions about the agenda to Jennifer Dotson, Chairperson, (jdotson@cityofithaca.org or 351-5458) or the
appropriate staff person at the Department of Planning & Development (274-6550). Back-up material is available in
the office of the Department of Planning & Development. The agenda order is tentative and subject to change.
If you have a disability and require accommodations in order to fully participate, please contact the City Clerk at
274-6570 by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, January 8, 2013.
Item # B
Public Hearing Announcement
2013 Community Development
Block Grant
and
Home Investment Partnership Program
****Please announce the following at the Planning Committee Meeting:
On behalf of the City of Ithaca, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency is announcing the
beginning of the 2013 Entitlement Grant round. Projects to be funded through the 2013
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnerships
(HOME) Program will be selected through this process. Approximately $515,000 in
CDBG and $567,000 in HOME funds are expected to be available. All funded projects
must meet HUD National Objectives and primarily benefit the City’s low-income
residents.
Application materials and more information can be found on the City web site at
www.cityofithaca.org, (click on ‘City Departments’ and ‘Ithaca Urban Renewal
Agency’). Applications are due at noon on March 1, 2013.
The first of two public hearings for the grant is now scheduled for March 21, 2013 at 8:30
a.m. in Common Council Chambers. The entire schedule of public meetings can be found
on the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency web page.
For more information, please contact:
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
108 East Green Street, 3rd floor
Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
Phone (607) 274-6553
E-mail: suek@cityofithaca.org
Thank you.
Sue Kittel
Deputy Director of Community Development
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
Item # D3
Public Service Announcement
On January 9, 2013, the City of Ithaca will hold a public information session for the
proposed Marriot Hotel, to be located at the east end of the Ithaca Commons on Aurora
Street. The public information session will begin at 5:00 PM, in the Common Council
Chambers of City Hall, 108 East Green Street. In accordance with the City of Ithaca’s
Community Investment Incentive Tax Abatement Program (CIITAP), the developer and
project team will present information about the project and answer questions from the
public.
The proposed hotel will have 160 guest rooms and a ground level restaurant on the
Commons-side of the building. The building will be approximately 96,075+/- sq. feet in
10 stories with a portion of the upper stories extending 12’ over the Green Street
Garage. The main (pedestrian) entrance is proposed to be on Aurora Street with
parking and additional entrances from the parking decks at the Green Street garage.
If you have questions or require additional information, please contact director of
Planning and Development for the City of Ithaca, JoAnn Cornish at
joannc@cityofithaca.org.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community
Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
Date: 12/31/12
Item # D4
To: Svante Myrick, Mayor
Cc: Ithaca Common Council
From: Lynn C. Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
Re.: 2012 Annual Report of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
As required by §73‐6 of the City Municipal Code, I am pleased to submit the following report
concerning the activities of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission for the period October
1, 2011 – September 30, 2012. This reporting period is stipulated by the New York State Office of
Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation for Certified Local Government programs.
During the period 10/1/11 through 9/30/12, the ILPC heard thirty‐seven cases requesting
Certificates of Appropriateness for exterior alternations to locally designated historic properties. Of
these, seventeen were approved as presented, twelve were approved with modifications, and eight
were denied. Four of these eight were revised and resubmitted by the applicant and ultimately
approved. These figures represent an 89% approval rate for applications received during the year.
Seventy‐three percent of the cases heard by the ILPC during this period involved minor alterations
to the property in question. Five percent involved major alterations or additions, and twenty‐two
percent involved new construction.
Changes During the Period
Revisions to the Landmarks Ordinance were enacted by Common Council in July 2012. Begun by
the previous Historic Preservation Planner, this revision process was intended to bring Ithaca’s
ordinance into greater conformance with the New York State Model Ordinance and current
preservation practice, and to address recurring design review problems that had been observed
over the years. Minor additional revisions are anticipated in 2013 to correct two oversights in the
original revisions, to add a fee system for Certificates of Appropriateness, to address Commission
review of “temporary” improvements, to allow for an evaluation of the “prudent and feasible”
nature of Commission requirements as the equivalent of a hardship test for City‐owned
improvements, and to directly address the question of self‐imposed hardships.
In December 2011, Christine O’Malley and Stephen Gibian were appointed to the ILPC to fill the
vacancies created by the departure of Commission members Susan Jones and Nancy Brcak, and in
August 2012, Ashima Krishna was appointed to fill a remaining vacant position. There are currently
no vacancies on the Commission. Ms. O’Malley holds a PhD in architectural history and teaches at
Cornell University. Mr. Gibian is a practicing architect who has extensive experience working with
older and historic properties. Ms. Krishna is a holds an MA in Historic Preservation Planning from
Cornell University and is currently a PhD candidate in that program.
Trainings and Workshops
Commission Chair, Sue Stein, attended the Landmarks Society of Western NY's Spring 2012
Preservation Boards Workshop entitled Cultural Landscapes 101: Types, Terminology, & History,
presented by Edward Olinger, PLA, FASLA. Commission member, Christine O'Malley, participated in
the following two webinars related to the preparation of National Historic Landmark nominations:
Understanding Cultural Landscapes: National Register of Historic Places and National Historic
Landmarks Program; and Writing Section 7 and Evaluating Integrity for Criteria 1, 2, 4 and 5.
Historic Inventory Work
In May, 2011, the City applied to the Preservation League of New York State for funds to support
the completion of a local historic district nomination for the Henry St. John neighborhood. Notice
of an award of funding was received in September 2011 and the completed nomination was
submitted by the City’s consultant, Historic Ithaca, Inc., in September 2012. The nomination was
reviewed and the district recommended for landmark designation by the ILPC in December 2012
(outside the period of reporting for this year). If approved by Common Council, the Henry St. John
Historic District will become the seventh designated historic district in the city, joining the DeWitt
Park, Clinton Block, East Hill, Cornell Heights, Cornell Arts Quad, and University Hill Historic Districts.
Significant support for designation of the district has been shown by neighborhood residents and
property owners.
In September 2010, the City applied to the Certified Local Government Program for funds to
support an intensive level survey of historic properties in the Collegetown area. Notice of an award
of funding was received in June 2011, and the completed survey was submitted by the City’s
consultant, Historic Ithaca, Inc., in September 2012. The project involved research, documentation,
and preparation of complete New York State Building‐Structure Inventory forms sufficient to serve
as the basis for local historic designation of 12 properties in the Collegetown area. These properties
will be considered for local designation by the ILPC in the coming year.
Other Major Projects Completed or in Progress
The ILPC webpage was completely revised. The new page provides a brief summary of the
landmarks program, contact information for preservation planning staff and the Building
Department, and ILPC meeting dates and times, with Commission member names listed in the
sidebar. It then provides links to the following:
• minutes and agendas from past meetings
• the complete Landmarks Preservation Ordinance
• detailed information about the landmarks program for owners of historic properties
• forms & guidelines for the use of applicants
• a list of all locally designated properties by address
• a list of individually designated landmarks
• maps & statements of significance for all historic districts
• information about the proposed new Henry St John Historic District
• and an Additional Resources section with links to other useful websites, and information
concerning the preservation of wood windows.
2
Additional revisions to the webpage are contemplated this year to continue to make it more user‐
friendly.
A stock postcard was printed and mailed to all owners of locally‐designated properties reminding
them of their property's status and directing them to the new ILPC web page for additional
information. We will mail this postcard annually in the hope of preventing work from occurring
without a Certificate of Appropriateness. As a result of this initial mailing, two owners who were
unaware of their property's historic status submitted projects for retroactive review (both were
approved with minor modifications).
The Historic District and Landmark Design Guidelines have been an ongoing project since the year
2000. Various drafts have been produced, by both paid consultants and interns, each of which have,
for various reasons, been thought inadequate for publication. This year, City staff took the project
in‐house and using some of the previous work, as well as model guidelines from other
municipalities, produced a complete draft that is now in the process of final revision. We anticipate
publication in 2013. The purpose of the Design Guidelines is to better explain the historic
designation process and the ramifications of historic designation to members of the public, and to
provide guidance to owners of designated historic properties for their use in planning repair,
restoration, and rehabilitation projects.
Controversial Cases
In April 2012, staff was alerted by a neighbor to the replacement of a large number of windows at a
home in the Cornell Heights Historic District that had been done without a Certificate of
Appropriateness or Building Permit. Building and Planning Department staff contacted the property
owner to request information about what had occurred. The property owner was highly
uncooperative. Eventually, the owner did provide sufficient information to obtain a retroactive
Building Permit, however they continued to be uncooperative with the (retroactive) C of A process.
In September 2012, after involving the City Attorney, the owner presented an incomplete C of A
application, in which they continued to refuse to identify the number or location of the windows
that had been replaced. The ILPC denied the C of A and referred the case to the City Attorney’s
office. Because a settlement had not been reached within 30 days of the public hearing, the owner
filed an Article 78 proceeding to protect their rights. The City Attorney has advised staff that a
settlement has been reached, but as of this date we have not received official notice of what that
settlement involved. Options discussed included a financial penalty and/or replacement of the
inappropriate replacement windows on the main facade of the house with appropriate
replacement windows.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynn C. Truame
ILPC Secretary
3
Item # E1a
Item # E1b
Celebrations
Sculpture and Kiosk Proposal for Southside Community Center, Ithaca, NY
Artist team: Annemarie Zwack and Rob Licht
Contact info:
Rob Licht : roblicht@earthlink.net, 607-342-0234, www.roblicht.com
Annemarie Zwack: zwack@zwackart.com, 607-589-7649 (h) 607 229-5268 (c)
http://zwackart.com/
Concept
This sculpture celebrates the advancement of equality and justice by honoring the roots of African
American culture and recognizing the African Diaspora induced during the period of slavery.
African American Culture is rich in colorful symbolism. The sculpture will incorporate
traditional symbols from different regions of Africa such as; the baobob tree, Kente Cloth, Mud
Cloth, iron, and the more recent traditions of Kwaanza and Juneteenth, as well as symbols of
local Ithaca African American history -the events that end up being commemorated on the
Freedom Walk.
Design
The base will be an untreated steel hemisphere with the etched image of Africa on one side and
the Americas on the other. The sinewy form of the Baobob tree will bridge the hemisphere with
seven roots reaching in all directions, representing the spread of the African Diaspora. Crowning
the tree will be the arc of a Kwaanza Kinara, holding seven solar powered LED lights with
colored glass globes. The untreated steel base will leave a rusty patina on the surrounding ground
surface, a subtle symbol of the blood shed over the years of struggle.
The tree will be of a ferro-cement (cement over steel armature) construction. The surface of the
tree will be tiled with alternating bands representing Kente cloth and mud cloth. Mixed in among
the tiles will be other shapes made from cut brass, steel or aluminum. The forms of the metal cut
outs can be representative of the seven symbols of Kwaanza, the Juneteeth flag, profiles of
famous leaders or contemporary symbols. The arc of the Kwaanza Kinara will be made of sheet
bronze. The lights and solar panels will be on the top surface.
The intent of using the tiled mosaic surface is to allow for community participation in the making
of the sculpture. Groups and individuals will be invited to tile-making workshops and will be
able help with many aspects of the construction. This process allows the final work of art to be a
collaboration of the community where it will live and to be made by the people who will see it.
They will have an opportunity to celebrate their own collective and individual creativity as well
as their history together.
The kiosk will be a separate element: a simple protected display board set behind and to the side
of the sculpture. It will be a steel tubular construction and framed with colorful tiles and include
signage, an area for postings and brochure racks. It can also include cell phone integrated audio
technology or be easily modified to include such at a future time. The MLK Freedom Walkway
logo will be on the kiosk.
The landscaping for the site will depend on the budget. At the very least the ground surface will
have a pea gravel base. A more desired plan would be a 12x12 foot area paved with a mix of
stone and cast colored concrete pavers, creating a pattern that radiates out from the sculpture.
Ideally, the entire 52x12ft area would be landscaped and include benches.
Item # E1c
Materials summary
Base: welded steel, tree element: ferro cement, Kinara arc: bronze sheet, LED lights, solar panel.
Surface of tree: mortar, tile, grout, metal cut shapes. Kiosk: painted steel, plywoods, cedar
shingles, mortar, tile, and grout
Budget
This only a rough proposal, therefore the budget is approximate. Upon acceptance the design will
be refined to reflect aesthetic, technical and budgetary considerations. At that time, a more
comprehensive budget will be developed.
Design: $2000
Sculpture, with tiled surface $30,000
Landscaping: pavers, 2 benches, and plantings $10,000
Kiosk $5000
About the team:
Rob Licht and Annemarie Zwack are both local artists who have each completed several Public
Art Projects. Rob's specialty is sculpture in steel, bronze, cement and other materials. Recent
projects include the MLK Commemorative Sculpture in Ithaca, Landforms sculpture at Griffiss
International Sculpture Park, Rome , NY and a second Landforms sculpture installation at
Cazenovia College.
Annemarie specializes in community art projects and has recently completed large-scale mosaic
projects in Ithaca such as Feels Like Home, on the Tioga Street Parking Garage, and Watershed
Wall, just off the Commons in Art Alley (between Cinemapolis and City Hall). Zwack is the Vice
President of the national Community Built Association.
Item # E1c
Previous work by the artists:
Rob Licht has completed several large-scale public projects, most notably the Martin Luther King
Commemorative Sculpture for the City of Ithaca and the MLK Freedom Walkway in 2012.
(Contact: Gary Ferguson, DIA). He has created two installations in his Landforms series, one for
Griffiss International Sculpture Park in Rome, NY, in 2010 (contact: Holly Flitcroft, Sculpture
Space, 315-724-8381, info@sculpturespace.org) and one for Cazenovia College in 2012 (contact:
Jen Pepper, Reisman Hall Gallery Director, jpepper@cazenovia.edu). In addition, he has created
many other temporary public sculptures. For more work view his website at www.roblicht.com
Rob Licht. Martin Luther King Commemorative Sculpture, Ithaca Commons. Installed June
2012. Bronze, stainless, steel, stone. Height :8 ft.
Rob Licht. Land Forms at Griffiss International Sculpture Park
Item # E1c
Rob Licht. Landforms. Commission for Griffiss International Sculpture Park, Rome NY,
completed November 2010. Powder coated and galvanized steel.
A grouping of three elements: 90x55x36", 48x48x30" and 40x34 x42"
Item # E1c
Rob Licht. Cazenovia Landforms, Sculpture Court at Cazenovia College art Gallery, installed
2012, Welded steel, Three elements: 48x54x40", 24x48x48", 48x48x36" One Year installation.
Item # E1c
Annemarie Zwack's colorful mosaic work graces several public spaces in Downtown Ithaca
including the Watershed Wall behind Center Ithaca and the recently completed Feels like
Home~Spirit of Ithaca mosaic mural on the Tioga Street Parking Garage. Contact: City of Ithaca
Planning dept. More of her work can be viewed at http://zwackart.com/
Feels Like Home~ Spirit of Ithaca
Commissioned by the Public Art Council of the City of Ithaca. Zwack designed and created this
mosaic mural and organized community involvement in the grouting process. It is mounted on the
exterior wall of the Tioga Street parking garage in downtown Ithaca. Zwack sculpted, glazed, and
fired all of the ceramic tiles. It was installed in October 2012. 6 x13ft
Community members
working on grouting
mural.
Item # E1c
Watershed Wall
Annemarie Zwack facilitated the creation of this mosaic mural that was contributed to by students
at every school in the Ithaca city school district. Ithaca Public Education Initiative and the Ithaca
Fine Arts Booster Group-who sponsored this work with the City of Ithaca-estimated at least 1000
people worked on this mural! It was completed and installed in 2010. 5.5 x 54ft
Item # E1c
Detail of Watershed Wall by Annemarie Zwack
Annemarie Zwack with helpers in front of Feels Like Home~ Spirit of Ithaca
Item # E1c
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-
6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
MEMO
Item # E1 d
Date: 11/26/12
To: Board of Public Works
Bill Gray, Superintendent of Public Works
From: Lynn C. Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
Re.: Requested approval of site for sculpture
The MLK Freedom Walkway Committee requests the BPW’s approval of the site for a public sculpture
that will anchor the Southside Loop of the MLK Freedom Walkway.
The proposed site is located in front of the Southside Community Center:
The Walkway Committee has discussed the site with the staff at Southside and they are supportive of the
proposal. The installation of the sculpture, and its exact placement within this general area, will be
coordinated with the renovation of the ADA ramp that provides access to Southside. This ramp will be
rebuilt as part of the overall renovations at Southside, which we understand are anticipated to occur
within the next year to 18 months.
The MLK Freedom Walkway is a physical trail celebrating the life and legacy of Dr. King in the context
of Ithaca's African American history. It traces local events and people whose efforts mirror the national
struggle for civil rights and social justice.
Two walking loops are planned, one on the Southside and one on the Northside, each of which will link
local history with the national stage. The self guided tour will include both written material and audio
interpretive aides. The newly installed sculpture of MLK Jr., located on the western end of the
Downtown Ithaca Commons, will serve as the central link between the two loops of the walkway.
The Southside loop runs the length of Cleveland Avenue between Plain and Corn Streets; the sculpture
proposed for the location in front of the community center will anchor the loop. In addition to the
sculpture itself, there will be a small kiosk for the provision of printed interpretive materials and an audio
tour component. The design of the sculpture and kiosk will be produced via a public competition. The
RFP for the sculpture has been released and responses are due back by December 14, 2012. The
Walkway Committee hopes to have an approved design for the sculpture by February 2013. A copy of
the RFP is attached for your information. It is anticipated that the sculpture and kiosk will occupy a base
area of no more than 5 feet by 5 feet, with a height not to exceed 8 feet.
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 2
Item # E1 e
January 9, 2013
RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO THE APPROVAL OF SCULPTURE ART
WHEREAS the MLK Freedom Walkway is a City project undertaken for the purpose of
illuminating the history of the local African American community, and
WHEREAS the development of the MLK Freedom Walkway is identified as a “Critical
Action” in the 2020 Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Plan, and
WHEREAS the Walkway is planned to consist of two loops, one on the Northside and
one on the Southside, each of which is to include works of public art, and
WHEREAS a Request for Proposals for a sculpture and interpretive materials kiosk was
released by the MLK Freedom Walkway Committee for the purpose of soliciting designs
for the sculpture that will anchor the Southside loop of the Walkway, and
WHEREAS four proposals were received in response to that RFP, each of which was
considered by the review committee of the MLK Freedom Walkway, with the
participation of two members of the Public Arts Commission, and
WHEREAS the review committee has selected the proposal submitted by the team of Rob
Licht and Anne Marie Zwack as best satisfying the selection criteria set forth in the RFP,
and
WHEREAS the MLK Freedom Walkway Committee will seek funding for the
production and installation of this new piece of outdoor sculpture and interpretive
materials kiosk at the BPW-approved site in front of the Southside Community Center,
including, but not limited to funding from the Tompkins County Strategic Tourism
Initiative, and
WHEREAS the acquisition and installation of outdoor public art to anchor the two
planned loops of the MLK Freedom Walkway represents an important goal for the MLK
Freedom Walkway Committee and the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS outdoor sculpture art enlivens public spaces, enhances the pedestrian
experience, serves to beautify and uplift the City, and in this case will help tell the story
of the African American community in Ithaca as part of the MLK Freedom Walkway,
and
WHEREAS The MLK Freedom Walkway Committee, in conjunction with
representatives of the Ithaca Public Arts Commission, has formally recommended
acceptance of the Rob Licht-Anne Marie Zwack proposal for this new outdoor sculpture
at their December 21, 2012 meeting, now
q:\planning\groups\public art commission\resolutions\donation of sculpture Rahn
Item # E1 e
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
1. That the City of Ithaca does hereby approve the proposal submitted by Rob Licht
and Anne Marie Zwack for the sculpture and interpretive materials kiosk that will
anchor the Southside loop of the MLK Freedom Walkway, and
2. The City will support the MLK Freedom Walkway Committee in seeking funding
for the production and installation of the sculpture and interpretive materials
kiosk, including, but not limited to, the submission of grant applications for
funding from the Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Initiative, and
3. The acceptance of this proposal will be formalized with a document between the
City and the artists that summarizes the City and artist’s rights and obligations
pertaining to the acceptance of the art. This document will make use of existing
language and terms utilized in prior public art acquisitions approved by Common
Council.
Record of Vote:
q:\planning\groups\public art commission\resolutions\donation of sculpture Rahn
Item # E2 a
Page 1 of 3
Corrections following June 2012 changes to R-1 and R-2 parking requirements
Phyllis Radke, December 20, 2012
§ 325-8. District regulations.
Changes to chart:
USE
DISTRICT PERMITTED ACCESSORY USES OFF-STREET PARKING
REQUIREMENT
R-1
Single
Family
Residential
1. Required off-street parking.
2. Private garage for not more than 3 cars.
2. Structures for const. purposes, not to remain over
two years.
3. Sign in connection with permitted use (see Sign
Ordinance, Ch. 272 City of Ithaca Municipal Code)
4. By Special Permit: Towers or structures for receipt
or transmission of electronic signals for
commercial purposes or for generation of
electricity to be used on the premises where
generated in any district (see § 325-9). Except for
personal wireless services facilities.
5. By Special Permit: An Accessory Apartment (see
§ 325-10). Permit required in all use districts.
6. Adult Day Care Home.
7. Home Occupations: Special Permits are required
in certain situations. See § 325-9C{i}.
1. Residence:
a. 1 space for first 3 bed or sleeping
rooms per dwlg. unit.
b. 2 spaces for 4 or 5 bed or sleeping
rooms per dwlg. unit.
c. 1 space for ea. add’l bed or sleeping
room in the dwlg. unit.
1. For each building or use, a maximum of
2 spaces.
2. Other Uses: See §325-20.
R-2
Two Family
Residential
1. Accessory uses as permitted in an R-1 district.
2. R-2c only: private garage for not more than six (6)
cars per building.
1. Same as R-1: For each building or use,
a maximum of 2 spaces (§325-20D.
2. Home occupation: 1 space.
3. Neighborhood commercial facility: 1
space per 500 gross SF of floor area.
R-3
Multi
Family
Residential
1. Any accessory uses as permitted in R-2.
2. Private garage for 4 or more cars.
3. Neighborhood parking area subject to regulations
of §325-20 (B).
1. Residence:
a. 1 space for first 3 bed or sleeping
rooms per dwlg. unit.
b. 2 spaces for 4 or 5 bed or sleeping
rooms per dwlg. unit.
c. 1 space for ea. add’l bed or sleeping
room in the dwlg. unit.
2. Same as R-2.
2. Rooming or boarding house: 1 space
per 3 persons housed.
3. Bed and Breakfast Homes and Inns: 1
space per bedroom.
4. Fraternity, sorority, group house,
cooperative household: 1 space per 2
persons housed.
5. Dormitory: 1 space per 4 persons
housed.
6. Hospital, nursing home, similar uses: 1
space per 5 beds.
See Requirements for Collegetown Parking
Overlay Zone.
Item # E2 a
Page 2 of 3
Item # E2 a
Page 3 of 3
§ 325-20. Off-street parking.
D. General requirements.
[Amended 2-4-2009 by Ord. No. 2009-03; 5-4-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-05; 7-6-2011 by Ord. No.
2011-10; 10-5-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-13; 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
(3) Maximum number of off-street parking spaces permitted in R-1 and R-2 districts and number
required for all other districts.
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, there are no requirements as to the
minimum number of off-street parking spaces in the following zoning districts: R-1, R-2,
WEDZ-1a, CBD-60, CBD-85, CBD-100, CBD-120, B-1b, and B-2c, WF-1 and WF-2.
(b) Parking spaces required for specific uses. Off-street parking spaces shall be provided and
maintained in accordance with § 325-20D(2) by the property owner for each use or building
which is newly established, erected or enlarged after the effective date of this section (June 6,
2012March 6, 1996), as specified in the chart below.
(c) Maximum number of parking spaces in R-1 or R-2 districts. For each building or use (including
parking) on a property within an R-1 or R-2 zoning district, which building or use is newly
established, erected or enlarged after the effective date of this section (June 6, 2012March 6,
1996), the maximum number of off-street parking spaces permitted shall be two. For buildings
that were not newly established, erected or enlarged after March 6, 1996, parking
requirements will be determined by review of the property history by the Building Department.
Item # E3 a
TO: Members of the Planning & Development Committee
FROM: Lynn Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
RE: Local Designation of the Henry St John Historic District
DATE: November 30, 2012
At the regular monthly meeting to be held on Tuesday December 11, 2012, at 5:30 p.m.
the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) will hold a public hearing to
consider local historic district designation of the Henry St John Historic District, (see
attached map). All interested parties are invited to speak for or against the designation
at the hearing, in person, by representative, or by written statement submitted to the ILPC
secretary.
Included in this packet are the SEAF, a map showing the district boundaries, a summary
of the building's historic and architectural significance, and a brief explanation of the
designation criteria and protections/restrictions conferred by the designation. Full
documentation of the historic and architectural significance of the district and its
individual properties is available for public review at the City of Ithaca Department of
Planning & Development, 3rd floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street during regular
business days between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
Immediately following the hearing, or at a later, properly noticed meeting, the ILPC will
decide by resolution whether or not to recommend designation of this district. Should the
ILPC vote to recommend designation, the Board of Planning and Development will be
asked to file a report to the Common Council with respect to relation of the designation
with the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any
plans for renewal of the site or area involved. The Common Council will then act to
approve, veto, or refer the designation back to the ILPC for modification.
Item # E3 b
TO: Members of the Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Lynn Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
RE: Local Designation of the Henry St John Historic District
DATE: December 17, 2012
At the regular monthly meeting on Tuesday December 11, 2012, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission (ILPC) held a public hearing after which they recommended
designation of the Henry St John survey area as a local historic district. Included in this
packet is a copy of the resolution adopted by the Commission. Full documentation of the
historic and architectural significance of the district and its individual properties is
available for public review at the City of Ithaca Department of Planning & Development,
3rd floor, City Hall, 108 East Green Street during regular business days between 8:30 a.m.
and 4:30 p.m.
As set forth in the Municipal Code, the Board of Planning and Development has filed a
report to the Common Council with respect to relation of the designation with the
comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any plans for
renewal of the site or area involved. The Common Council is now requested to act to
designate, veto, or refer the designation back to the ILPC for modification. A resolution
is included in this packet for the Committee’s consideration. Also included in this packet
are letters from Tompkins County (as required by GML §239-l–m), and from the
Conservation Advisory Council (as required by CEQR §176-3-J).
Summary of Significance and Boundary Justification
The Henry St. John neighborhood takes its name from the local elementary school on West Clinton
Street, built in 1925. This predominantly-residential neighborhood developed in two distinct phases. The
area between West Green and West Clinton Streets was developed beginning in the first quarter of the
nineteenth century and contains some of the downtown area’s oldest homes in a mix of high style and
modest Federal and Greek Revival houses, with later homes in the Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second
Empire, Stick and Queen Anne styles. The area immediately south, between West Clinton Street and
North Titus Avenue, was originally too swampy for building construction and it was not until developer
Charles M. Titus drained and improved the area that a new, affluent middle class of Ithacans built homes
in the styles popular after 1870 including the Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, and Stick. Early
20th century infill construction added several homes in the Colonial Revival and Craftsman styles.
The district is significant for its association with several prominent businessmen and politicians in the
Village and early City of Ithaca and with developer Charles M. Titus. As this area developed as one of
Ithaca’s most fashionable neighborhoods close to downtown, it was home to several Village Presidents
and Trustees both north and south of West Clinton Street. Many of the high-style houses on the 200-400
blocks of South Albany Street are associated with a group of prominent families linked by business and
family relationships. Their construction was initiated by developer Charles M. Titus in 1871 when he
constructed the magnificent Sprague House on a large lot at the northwest corner of South Albany
Street and North Titus Avenue.
The district is also significant as a collection of intact nineteenth and early-twentieth century houses
representing a mix of high-style and modest iterations of the popular styles of the era, including Federal,
Greek Revival, Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Stick, Queen Anne, Craftsman and Colonial
Revival. Many of the properties retain original carriage houses displaying an overall high level of
integrity, conveying the status of their early owners and inhabitants; many others include early
automobile garages that are architecturally significant in their own right.
The period of significance for the district is 1830 through 1932. The first homes in the district were
constructed along West Green, South Geneva, and South Albany Streets in the 1830s, and the last
building in the district to be completed was 413 South Albany Street around 1932. The construction of
several Colonial Revival and Craftsman style homes (approximately 25% of the properties within the
district) in the early twentieth century essentially filled in parcels that were split off from double, triple,
or even larger lots. This pattern of development is seen throughout the country in established
nineteenth century neighborhoods.
The Henry St. John neighborhood presents a physical and social record of a fashionable nineteenth and
early-twentieth century neighborhood with a fine collection of period residences, carriage houses, and
early automobile garages. Despite its close proximity to Ithaca’s downtown business district, the
neighborhood as a whole retains its residential character.
Item # E3 c
The geographic boundaries of the proposed district are influenced by the historic and current patterns
of land use and development in and around the district; the topography and natural characteristics of
the district; and the orthogonal street grid designed by Simeon Dewitt and extended by Charles M. Titus.
West Green Street marks a clear transition from the Henry St. John residential neighborhood to the
commercial core of downtown Ithaca. The street is also New York State Route 79, and its scale and one-
way traffic pattern give it a very different quality than the narrower two-way streets to the south, in
addition to associating it with the one-way traffic patterns of the downtown area. The use, form,
massing, level of integrity, and date of construction of the buildings on the north side of Green Street
also mark a clear transition to the downtown area. These structures are of varied scale and varied
commercial uses and include large parking areas. On the eastern edge of the district, South Cayuga
Street marks a similar transition, with a gas station, parking lots, and a large hotel occupying the west
side of the street between Green and Clinton streets. Trees have been planted along much of the east
boundary of the district between West Green and West Clinton streets, providing an additional layer of
distinction between the district and the properties that occupy South Cayuga Street.
The regular grid pattern of the streets in the neighborhood was based on the Simeon DeWitt plan of
downtown Ithaca. The orthogonal street pattern and the flat topography of the neighborhood combine
to create a regularity and rhythm that is emphasized by the predictability of view and placement of
houses on lots, making the area comfortable to move through and pleasant to experience. This rhythm
is occasionally broken, but the few inconsistencies, like the former Henry St. John School, add to the
character of the neighborhood.
Along North Titus Avenue, the planned street grid, lot layout, and natural characteristics combine to
create a strong natural and visual boundary on the south side of the district. Six Mile Creek influenced
the design of North Titus Avenue, which was laid out parallel to the north side of the creek, breaking the
rigid grid of the district. The creek creates a physical boundary, limiting traffic with bridge crossings at
South Cayuga Street and South Albany Street, but not South Geneva Street. The banks of the creek are
densely lined with trees, creating a visual separation from the neighborhood to the south.
The west boundary of the district is defined by both the lot divisions drawn by Simeon DeWitt and
Charles M. Titus and the architectural character of the buildings in the district. The Second Empire-style
Sprague house defines the southwest corner of the district, and its irregular lot lines are the result of the
property’s development by Titus. The block of South Albany Street containing the Beechtree Care Center
is not included in the district, even as a non-contributing resource, because it occupies the entire block
and significantly impacts the character of Fayette Street immediately to the west. Fayette Street is not
included in the district because the houses are generally of more modest proportion and on smaller lots
than those within the boundaries of the Henry St. John district.
The four buildings anchoring the corners of the district further enforce the strong district boundaries
because they each retain a high level of architectural integrity while displaying the broad range of
architectural styles that fall within the district’s period of significance. Occupying the northwest corner
Item # E3 c
of the district, 309 West Green Street is a substantial stucco and shingle-clad Colonial Revival style
residence. In the northeast corner, 115 West Green Street is a transitional Federal-Greek Revival style
residence of stone construction and one of the oldest houses in the district. In the southeast corner, 110
North Titus Avenue is a highly intact Gothic Revival style residence and carriage barn. And in the
southwest corner, 412 South Titus Avenue is an impressive, elegant Second Empire style residence.
Buildings in the district are primarily one-and-a-half to two-and-a-half story detached residences with
consistent setbacks and small front lawns. Lot sizes are generally of consistent size; most are
approximately 45 to 70 feet wide and vary in depth from 65 to 100 feet. Lots are generally narrower
north of West Clinton Street, with some that are notably deep. Most buildings occupy the majority of
the square footage of their lots and only a few have substantial side or back yards, resulting in closely
spaced buildings. Streets in the district are narrow and lined with sidewalks. Mature trees are regularly
spaced between sidewalks and streets. In the summer months the trees densely shelter the buildings in
the neighborhood, and as a result the neighborhood is best viewed on foot. These elements combine to
create cohesive, comfortable, pedestrian-scale streetscapes within the district.
The district encompasses 82 individual properties, 78 of which contain contributing resources. Many
contributing properties contain more than one contributing resource due to the presence of carriage
houses, a hitching post, and early automobile garages. The four non-contributing parcels include a large
assisted living facility on South Geneva Street, a small concrete block building associated with the
facility, and two parking lot parcels.
Buildings in the district represent a range of residential building styles common from 1830-1932, the
district’s period of significance. A number of buildings are transitional in style or display features of
multiple styles as a result of expansions and remodeling. Two of the oldest buildings in the district were
constructed in a transitional Federal-Greek Revival style; these are located on West Green Street and
West Clinton Street. Approximately 25% of the buildings were constructed in the Greek Revival style; all
are north of or on West Clinton Street. Approximately 15% of the buildings were constructed in the
Italianate style; these are located throughout the district with a greater concentration south of West
Clinton Street. The Stick or Eastlake, Queen Anne, and Craftsman styles are each represented by
approximately 10% of the buildings in the district. Most Stick or Eastlake style houses are on South
Albany Street, both north and south of West Clinton Street. The Queen Anne-style buildings are
primarily north of Clinton Street; many replaced earlier structures. The majority of the Craftsman-style
buildings are south of West Clinton Street. Less than 10% of the buildings were constructed in the
Colonial Revival style; these are primarily located south of West Clinton Street. About 5% of the
buildings were constructed in the Gothic Revival style; most of these are located south of West Clinton
Street. The district also contains a single Second Empire-style house and a Collegiate Gothic-style school,
both south of West Clinton Street.
Item # E3 c
222
101
301
120
221
310-18
235
620-40
118
212
131-135210
408
171117
115
412
310-14
211
414-422
402 123-25
121-35
203
302
201
201
305
304-16
227
325
101
327
403
205
139
110
206
210
219
320
333
215-21
110
114
125
313
114
118
318
509
214
122
202
320
232
312
224
131
202
315
507
201
119
405
406
114
208
501
608
233
402
514
212
327
213
314-16
108
318
103339
516
401
505
209-17
301
110
327
329
334
204-208
222
330
323
218
319
401
116
110-12
512
124
139
406
415 413
220
419
310
132
419
213
109
214
504
307
120
104
126
332
129
317
308
121
411
322
135
409
141
107
401
121-23
232
125
336
205
405
224
128
223-303
316
212
312
216
201
111
413
216
216
515-17
410
210
205
130
211
317
108
510
506
214
411
231
212
315
320
328
324
117
322
402
517
404
513 123
318-22
119
510
107
124
132
301
210
203
402
311
112
108
224
502
137
401
234
409
105
119
407
519
126
223
221
116
222
302
121
511
107
306 225
502
128
130
606
214
228
213
209
134-38
309
314
333
207
311
510
309
307
328-30
334
226
209-11212
508
415
217-19
108
517
508
302
308
423-25
330
123
410
313
201
106
402
511
111
340
109
504
111
117
303
227
504
226
212
225
416
422
414
133135
412
208
418
410
122
202
206
131
136
202
119
205
326
515
111
118
109
107
420
503412
319-25
314
208
210
114
216
204
408
104
424
310
509
116
109205
506-08
150
127
406
227
513-15
123
209
421
306
115117
521
113
129
106
514-16
413-15507-09
519
301
204 104
114-18
326.5
505
102
206
206
111
204
135
411409
109-13
213
113
412
123-27
410
323
414
319
405
321
324
120
407
323
127-29
325
115
143
207-09
327
207205
508
407
107
407-09 329331
133
205
409
113-15
117-19
331
215-17307
206513
108
317 313
112
404
409
108106
106
137-39
220-222
114
140
213
110
207-09
120
110
307
119-21
115-17
506
505501
225.5
315
404
211
402
207
109
324-26
309
115-21107-09
206-08
106-12
310-12
110-12
401
114
207-09
121
407
144142
213
108
335
506-08
113-15
107
112
316-18
127 518
309-11
105-07
210-12
327-29
106-08
101
125
314
117
210
118
111 107
103
109
124
116
126-30
305
214-16 132
314.5
122-24
102
601129
138-40 114-18 102106
S
A
L
B
A
N
Y
S
T
S
P
L
A
I
N
S
T
S
C
A
Y
U
G
A
S
T
S TITUS
A
V
E
N TITUS
A
V
E
S
G
E
N
E
V
A
S
T
W GREEN ST
W CLINTON ST
FA
Y
E
T
T
E
S
T
CENTER ST
HYERS ST
SO
U
T
H
H
I
L
L
T
E
R
W STATE ST/ M. L. K. JR ST
E SP
E
N
C
E
R
S
T
E GREEN ST
W S
P
E
N
C
E
R
S
T
E CLINTON ST
E STATE ST / M.L.K. JR ST
S
P
L
A
I
N
S
T
S
G
E
N
E
V
A
S
T
NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 DatumMap Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-2012Data Source: City of Ithaca GIS Program, 2012Map Prepared by: Department of Planning, City of Ithaca, NY, August, 2012
Henry Saint John Historic District
0 250 500Feet ±
Item # E3 c
Item # E3 d
Common Council Meeting
2/6/13 - Resolution
RE: LOCAL HISTORIC DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF THE HENRY ST JOHN HISTORIC
DISTRICT
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission may recommend designation of individual landmarks and
districts of historic and cultural significance, and
WHEREAS, on December 11, 2012, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission conducted a
public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the Henry St
John survey area as a local historic district, and
WHEREAS, the proposal is a Type II Action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act
and an Unlisted Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and
after conducting appropriate environmental review the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, acting as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposal
will not have a significant environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the proposal meets criteria under the Landmarks
Preservation Ordinance and has voted to designate the Henry St John survey area as
a local historic district, and
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code states that the Council shall within ninety days
of said recommendation to designate, approve, disapprove or refer back to the
Commission for modification, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall file a
report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the
comprehensive plan, the zoning law, projected public improvements, and any plans
for the renewal of the site or area involved, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Planning Board's report and recommendation for approval of the
designation has been reviewed by the Common Council, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council finds that the designation will not conflict with the
comprehensive plan, existing zoning, projected public improvements, or any plans
for renewal of the site and area involved, and be it further
Item # E3 d
RESOLVED, that the Henry St John Historic District meets the definition of a local historic district
as set forth in the Municipal Code, as follows:
An area which contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the criteria
for designation as an individual landmark, namely:
1. Possessing special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as
part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality,
region, state, or nation; or
2. Being identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or
3. Embodying the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or
4. Being the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an
age; or
5. Representing an established and familiar visual feature of the community
by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics.
and is an area which constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of
possessing those qualities that would satisfy such criteria.
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council approves the designation of the Henry St John
Historic District as a Local Historic District under Section 228-3 of the Municipal
Code.
Item # E3 e
ILPC Meeting 12/11/12
Resolution - RB
RE: Local Historic District Designation of the Henry St John Historic District - Lead
Agency
RESOLUTION: Moved by E. Finegan, second by D. Kramer
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176.6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be
established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with
local and state environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental review, the
lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, the proposed designation of the Henry St John Historic District is a "Type II
Action" pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act and
is an "Unlisted Action" under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission does hereby declare itself
lead agency for the environmental review of the proposed designation of the
Henry St John Historic District.
RECORD OF VOTE: 7-0-0
Yes
E. Finegan
D. Kramer
S. Gibian
A. Krishna
M. McGandy
C. O’Malley
S. Stein
No
0
Abstain
0
Item # E3 f
Item # E3 f
Item # E3 g
ILPC Meeting – 12/11/12
Resolution - RD
RE: Local Designation of the Henry St John Historic District
RESOLUTION: Moved by M. McGandy, seconded by E. Finegan
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission may designate landmarks and districts of historic and
cultural significance, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the Henry St
John area, which boundaries are shown on the attached map, as a local historic
district has been concluded, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted by the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission acting as Lead Agency and it has been determined that the
proposal will not have a significant environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines a HISTORIC DISTRICT as
follows:
A group of properties which:
1. Contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the
criteria for designation as an individual landmark; and
2. Constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of possessing those
qualities that would satisfy such criteria.
and,
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines the criteria for designation of an
individual landmark as follows:
1. Possessing special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as
part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality,
region, state, or nation; or
2. Being identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or
3. Embodying the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or
4. Being the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an
age; or
5. Representing an established and familiar visual feature of the community
by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics.
Item # E3 g
and,
WHEREAS, the Commission has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposed
designation:
1. The Henry St John Historic District is an area which contains primarily
properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as an
individual landmark.
Per criterion #1, the Henry St John Historic District possesses a special character,
historical interest, and aesthetic interest and value as part of the cultural,
political, economic, and social history of the city by virtue of its association
with several prominent businessmen and politicians in the Village and early City
of Ithaca and with developer Charles M. Titus. As this area developed as one of
Ithaca’s most fashionable neighborhoods close to downtown, it was home to
several Village Presidents and Trustees both north and south of West Clinton
Street. Many of the high-style houses on the 200-400 blocks of South Albany
Street are associated with a group of prominent families linked by business and
family relationships. Their construction was initiated by developer Charles M.
Titus in 1871 when he constructed the magnificent Sprague House on a large lot
at the northwest corner of South Albany Street and North Titus Avenue.
The district derives special character as well as special historical and
aesthetical interest and value as the home of several early Village of Ithaca
Presidents, including Wait Talcot Huntington (1834, 1855), Jacob
McCormick (1840), Benjamin G. Ferris (1841, 1852), John James Speed
(1843), Timothy Shaler Williams (1844-46), Horace Mack (1851), Joseph
Sprague (1877), Phillip Frank Sisson (1881), Charles Rumsey (1883-85), and
Collingwood Brown (1886). The 100 block of West Green Street was once
known as “Presidents’ Row” for the several village presidents who resided
there.
The district derives special character as well as special historical and
aesthetical interest and value as the home of several prominent local
businessmen whose activities greatly impacted the early development of the
Village and City of Ithaca, including Jacob M. McCormick (also a Village
President), who owned oil, grist and plaster mills, large farms, a foundry,
and a hardware store, as well as the Ithaca Hotel and the stage route from
Owego to New York City; Timothy Shaler Williams (also a Village
President) who owned a canal boat business in Ithaca, ferrying goods
produced near Ithaca to Albany, as well as the Merchant and Farmers
Bank; Horace Mack (also a Village President) who operated mercantile
businesses both independently and in partnership with other prominent
village residents, including Jeremiah S. Beebe, Steven B. Munn, and
Daniel T. Tillotson; Phillip Frank Sisson (also a Village President), who,
with Roger B. Williams (also a resident of the Henry St John district)
owned a sash and blind factory that was later converted to produce organs
Item # E3 g
and pianos and became the county’s largest industrial plant at the time;
Charles Rumsey (also a Village President) who owned the C.J. Rumsey
Hardware store and was director of the Remington Salt Plant; Charles
Hardy, one of the incorporators of the Ithaca Water Works Company;
William L. Bostwick, who was a business partner of Charles Titus, Roger
B. Williams, and P. Frank Sisson; Roger B. Williams, president of the
Ithaca Savings Bank, and owner and partner in the Williams Bros.
foundry; John Northrup, owner of Northrup & Sons, which began as a
carriage trimming business and later sold spring beds, mattresses, and
Singer sewing machines; and William O. Wyckoff, owner of a Remington
Typewriter sales and repair facility that sold typewriters worldwide, and
father of Edward G. Wyckoff, who was a partner in the Cornell Heights
Land Co..
The district derives special character as well as special historical and
aesthetical interest and value from its association with developer, Charles M.
Titus, who laid out the southern portion of the district ditched and drained
the formerly swampy land, planted street trees, and constructed Titus
Avenue along the north and south banks of the newly-channelized Six
Mile Creek. Titus constructed and sold several large homes in the
district, including the Sprague House, and 315, 319, 323 and 327 South
Albany Street.
Per criterion #3, the district is also significant as a collection of intact nineteenth
and early-twentieth century houses embodying the distinguishing
characteristics of the popular architectural styles of the era, including
Federal, Greek Revival, Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Stick, Queen
Anne, Craftsman and Colonial Revival. Many of the properties retain original
carriage houses displaying an overall high level of integrity, conveying the status
of their early owners and inhabitants; many others include early automobile
garages that are architecturally significant in their own right.
The Commission has received expert opinion concerning the significance of
the building types and styles of architecture that include both high-style and
representative vernacular examples that were typical in the period between
1830, the approximate date of the earliest extant building in the district, and
1932, the date of the latest extant building.
Buildings in the district represent the range of residential building styles
that were popular during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A
number of buildings are transitional in style or display features of multiple
styles as a result of expansions and remodeling. Two of the oldest
buildings in the district were constructed in a transitional Federal-Greek
Revival style. Approximately 25% of the buildings in the district were
constructed in the Greek Revival style, 15% in the Italianate style, 10% in
the Stick or Eastlake style, 10% in the Queen Anne style, 10% in the
Craftsman style, less than 10% in the Colonial Revival style, and
Item # E3 g
approximately 5% in the Gothic Revival style. The district also contains a
single Second Empire style house, a single American Foursquare style
house, and a single Collegiate Gothic-style school.
Notable architectural examples in the district include 115 W. Green and 201
W. Clinton (transitional Federal-Greek Revival); 205 W. Green and 214 S.
Albany (Greek Revival); 125 W. Green, 401 S. Albany, and 232 S. Geneva
(Italianate); 412 S. Albany (Second Empire); 212, 218, and 219 S. Albany
(Queen Anne); 233 S. Albany, 327 S. Albany, 405 S. Albany, and 328 S.
Geneva (Stick style); 309 W. Green (Colonial Revival); 207 W. Clinton and
327 S. Geneva (Dutch Colonial Revival); 340 S. Geneva (American
Foursquare); 301 S. Geneva (Collegiate Gothic); and 409 S. Albany, 336 S.
Geneva, and 206 N. Titus (Craftsman bungalow).
2. The Henry St John Historic District constitutes a distinct section of the
city by reason of possessing those qualities that would satisfy the
criteria for designation as an individual landmark.
The Henry St. John Historic District encompasses eighty-two contiguous
properties southwest of the downtown commercial core on the flats north of Six
Mile Creek. The geographic boundaries are influenced by the historic and current
patterns of land use and development in and around the district; the topography
and natural characteristics of the district; and the orthogonal street grid designed
by Simeon Dewitt and extended by Charles M. Titus.
The first homes in the district were constructed along West Green, South Geneva,
and South Albany Streets in the 1830s, and the last building in the district to be
completed was 413 South Albany Street around 1932. The construction of several
Colonial Revival and Craftsman style homes (approximately 25% of the
properties within the district) in the early twentieth century essentially filled in
parcels that were split off from double, triple, or even larger lots. This pattern of
development is seen throughout the country in established nineteenth century
neighborhoods.
West Green Street forms the northern boundary of the district. The use, form,
massing, level of integrity, and date of construction of the buildings on the north
side of Green Street differ from those in the Henry St. John residential
neighborhood, marking a clear transition to the downtown commercial area.
On the eastern edge of the district, South Cayuga Street marks a similar transition,
with a gas station, parking lots, and a large hotel occupying the west side of the
street between West Green and West Clinton Streets.
North Titus Avenue, constructed by developer Charles M. Titus, marks the
southern boundary of the district. The residential area south of Six Mile Creek
was developed at a later date and contains smaller lots and more modest
Item # E3 g
residences than the area north of the creek within the district which was laid out
and developed by Titus.
The west boundary of the district is defined by the lot lines and architectural
character of the buildings in the district. The Second Empire-style Sprague house
defines the southwest corner of the district, and its irregular lot lines are the result
of the property’s development by Titus. Fayette Street is not included in the
district because the houses are of more modest proportions and on smaller lots
than those within the boundaries of the Henry St. John district. The block of
South Albany Street between West Clinton and Center Streets is excluded from
the district due to the presence of the Beechtree Care Center, which replaced a
large Bostwick family residence (later converted for use as the Reconstruction
Home for Infantile Paralysis) that had been part of the district’s historic
development and period of significance.
And,
WHEREAS, the Commission adopts as its own the documentation and information more fully set
forth in the report titled Henry St John Local Historic District Nomination, prepared
by Sara Johnson and Kristen Olson of Historic Ithaca, Inc, dated 2012, now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, determines that the Henry St
John Historic District meets the definition of an historic district as set forth in Section
228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby recommends designation of the Henry St John survey
area, which boundaries are shown on the attached map, as a local historic district.
RECORD OF VOTE: 7-0-0
Yes
M. McGandy
E. Finegan
S. Gibian
D. Kramer
A. Krishna
C. O’Malley
S. Stein
No
Abstain
Item # E3 h
ILPC Meeting 12/11/12
Resolution - RC
RE: Proposed Local Designation of the Henry St John Historic District - Environmental
Determination
RESOLUTION: Moved by A. Krishna, second by M. McGandy
WHEREAS, residents within the proposed boundary of the Henry St John Historic
District have requested consideration by the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission of local historic district landmark designation of
the Henry St John Historic District, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review for the designation of the Henry St John
Historic District has been conducted including the preparation of a Short
Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), and submitted for review to the
Conservation Advisory Council, and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is a "Type II Action" under the New York State
Environmental Quality Review Act (Sec. 617.5(C)(30) and an "Unlisted
Action" under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, (CEQR
Sec. 176-2), and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, acting as Lead Agency,
has reviewed the SEAF, dated November 30, 2012 and supplemental
information, and has determined that designation of the historic district
will not have a significant effect on the environment and that further
environmental review is unnecessary, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that
the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with
any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any
other parties as required by law.
RECORD OF VOTE: 7-0-0
Yes
A. Krishna
M. McGandy
E. Finegan
S. Gibian
D. Kramer
C. O’Malley
S. Stein
No
Abstain
Proposed Local Designation, Henry St. John Historic District
Planning and Development Board, meeting held December 18, 2012
At the regular monthly meeting on Tuesday, December 11, 2012, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission by unanimous vote recommended designation of the Henry St.
John survey area as a local historic district. A map showing the boundary of the district
and a summary of its historic and architectural significance are attached to this report.
As set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation,
“The Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the
relation of such designation to the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected
public improvements, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved.”
The following report has been prepared to address these considerations.
1. Relation to the Comprehensive Plan
There is nothing in the Ithaca, N.Y.: A General Plan, 1971 as amended that
conflicts with the proposed designation of the Henry St. John survey area as a
local historic district. There are no recommendations to change or intensify
current appearance or use of the area.
2. Relation to Zoning Laws
The zoning classification in the area proposed for local historic district
designation includes R-3aa, R-3b, R-2b, B-1a and P-1 areas. Local designation
will not affect building uses permitted under the Zoning Ordinance. Commission
review is limited to the visual compatibility of proposed exterior alterations,
additions or demolition.
3. Relation to Projected Public Improvements
There are no plans for public improvements in the area involved. Local landmark
designation requires that any future public improvements in the area undergo
review and approval by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission before
work commences.
4. Relation to Plans for Renewal of the Site or the Area
There are no plans in the City’s Community Development Block Grant program
or by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for renewal of this site or the nearby
area. Local landmark designation requires that any private proposal for material
change of the exterior of the building or site undergo review and approval by the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission before work commences.
Item # E3 i
Planning and Development Board
Resolution – December 18, 2012
Re: Henry St. John Historic District Designation
WHEREAS: on December 11, 2012, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
voted to recommend designation of the Henry St. John survey area as a local historic district, and
WHEREAS: Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, stipulates that the
Planning and Development Board shall file a report with Common Council with respect to the
relation of such designation to the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public
improvements, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board supports McGraw House and the benefits it provides to the
community, and believes the boundaries of this historic district as recommended by the ILPC
provide ample opportunities for future McGraw House expansion, either to the north (where
there is a surface-level parking area and a lot with a one-story concrete block building that is
“non-contributing” to the historic district), or to the south by demonstrating to the ILPC that
demolition of 116 W. Clinton St. is necessary for McGraw House to carry out its chartered
purpose, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board suggests there be future discussion by the Planning Board and
Common Council on whether minimum parking requirements should be removed in historic
districts, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning Board shall file the attached report with respect to the issues
stipulated in the Municipal Code, and be it further
RESOLVED: that the Planning Board supports the local designation of the Henry St. John
Historic District.
Moved by: Schroeder
Seconded by: Jones-Rounds
In Favor: Acharya, Blalock, Demarest, Marcham, Jones-Rounds, Rudan, Schroeder
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: 0
Item # E3 j
Item # E3 k
Item # E3 k
McGraw House
700 McGraw House
Ithaca, New York 14850-5468
January 3,2013
Lynn Traume, Historic Preservation Planner
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
City of Ithaca - Department of Planning and Development
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
RE: Henry St. John Historic District Nomination
Dear Lynn:
I'm writing to add information to a letter from the McGraw House Board of
Directors, dated December 5, 2012, requesting the removal of 116 West Clinton
Street from the nomination of a proposed Henry St. John (HSJ) historic district.
Described by some as a "cornerstone of the district," I do not believe this one
house at 116 West Clinton will make or break the value of the entire historic
district. However, the unavailability of this one property will essentially eliminate
the ability of McGraw House to ever expand its services.
In drawing the HSJ historic district lines, the State of New York may not have
been aware of either the interest or the need for expanding services for the
vulnerable population served by McGraw House. The State depends on the input
and insight of local leaders to modify the proposed district in light of significant
issues such as this.
McGraw House is unique in Tompkins County and throughout the country for
many reasons, and especially because there is a dining program. You will not find
another affordable, independent Senior housing facility in the county or in New
York State that also includes this service. Adult children are often very relieved to
learn that when their frail and aging parent moves into McGraw House, six days a
week they will have access to a hot nutritious meal, prepared on site, and served in
our dining room in the companionship of their peers.
607-272-7054 FAX: 607-272-3614
E-mail: Carol@mcgrawhouse.org Web site: http://www.mcgrawhouse.org
Street address (not for mailing): 221 South Geneva Street
Item # E3 l
When people ask why we do not build in another neighborhood, it's because in
another location, this vital service and the interior space in which to provide it will
not be approved by funding sources for affordable Senior housing. The significant
advantage of adding onto the existing building allows McGraw House to continue
providing all our services, on site, to an additional population of low and moderate-
income Senior citizens.
McGraw House currently has 105 apartments. The number of low and moderate-
income Seniors in their 60s living in McGraw House doubled from 10 to 20 in just
the past four years. The Baby Boomers are coming and they want affordable
housing in the downtown core. Their current options are limited. While protecting
the rich history of the HSJ neighborhood, you can also protect the potential options
in high quality, affordable housing for low and moderate-income Seniors.
As our community's leaders, we are depending on you to consider, plan for and
protect the future needs of this growing population. Please support density and the
availability of affordable Senior housing in the downtown core by not including
116 West Clinton Street, and its non-contributing neighbor at 120 West Clinton,
in the nomination of the proposed HSJ historic district.
Thank you so much for your consideration of this request and let me know if any
further information would be helpful.
Sincerely,
Carol Mallison
Executive Director
xc: McGraw House Board of Directors
Item # E3 l
Item # E3 m
Item # E3 m
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-
6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
MEMO
Item # F1 a
Date: January 2, 2013
To: JoAnn Cornish, City of Ithaca Director of Planning and Development
From: Lynn C. Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
Re.: Proposed CBD Zoning Changes
I would like to request that the proposed zoning changes in the CBD be moved off the January Planning
Committee agenda and a meeting of a working group on the topic be convened instead. The impact of the
proposed changes on historic resources has not been adequately considered, and at this point I myself do
not even have a comprehensive enough understanding of the proposal to provide any informed comments.
Two areas of proposed zoning change lie within the DeWitt Park Historic District. Height and lot
coverage are very significant issues in determining the compatibility of a new building with its historic
environment. Putting in place zoning changes that would allow new construction of a type that is
incompatible with the historic environment (and that therefore could not be approved by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission) would really send the wrong signal about what the City wants.
Certainly, we should encourage appropriate new development, but we need to first look at typical front-,
side-, and rear-yard setbacks, as well as heights, in the DeWitt Park district to determine what would be
appropriate before we consider any changes.
We also need to look at existing historic resources that are not yet designated in the State Street corridor.
Mary Tomlan pointed out at the Planning Board meeting in December that the DIA’s 2020 Strategic Plan
includes the following under the "Historic Preservation" subsection of the "Goals, Objectives, and
Recommendations" section: "conduct an inventory of downtown buildings and spaces to identify and
document outstanding historic elements that should be preserved." Mary has volunteered to do that and
I'd like to give her time to complete that work before moving forward with any proposal for zoning
changes in that area. Once we have that information we can have an informed discussion about what
would and would not be appropriate changes to make.
I don't think this background work will result in a long delay in moving the proposal forward, but it may
very well result in revisions. For that reason, I think the issue should be moved off the January agenda
for Planning Committee and brought back at a later date, after the necessary work has been done to assess
the impacts of the proposal on historic resources in the area.
CC: City of Ithaca Planning Committee
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
Item # F1 b
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: JoAnn Cornish, on behalf of the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
Date: December 31, 2012 - Revision Date January 4, 2013
RE: Proposal to Amend Downtown Zoning
The proposal to amend downtown zoning was discussed by the Planning and Development Board at its
meeting on December 18, 2012. Several concerns were expressed by Board members, and there was general
agreement that this proposal needed more analysis and discussion.
Below are the comments that were expressed, in no particular order:
• It makes sense to encourage appropriately scaled and designed new development on non-contributing
properties within the DeWitt Park Historic District, but nothing should be done to increase economic
incentives for developers to seek the demolition of buildings that are contributing historic resources
within this district.
• Furthermore, lots within the DeWitt Park Historic District that are entirely filled with historic resources,
and therefore devoid of any redevelopment potential that would not damage those resources, should be
removed entirely from the proposed rezoning. For example, remove the historic Boardman House, the
Episcopal Church and the latter’s Parish House from the area to be rezoned.
• There should be a survey of all buildings in the areas proposed for rezoning to identify those that may
have historic significance and that would be worthy of protection from demolition. Examples of these
include, but are not limited to, Immaculate Conception Church, and the Community School of Music and
Art. (Mary Tomlan has volunteered to do a “windshield survey” of properties in these areas — outside the
DeWitt Park Historic District — and provide an annotated list of notable historic resources for review by
the ILPC and other bodies as part of the rezoning discussion. This would not involve the level of research
for a landmarks designation, since that is not its purpose, but it could at least inform ongoing discussions
with the potential of refining proposed legislation.)
• There are several noteworthy buildings within the proposed CBD-100 in the triangular block bound by E.
State, Seneca Way, and N. Aurora, specifically the Carey Building on E. State, among others that may be
contributing buildings. Perhaps the whole block should be highlighted.
• There is great potential for the proposed CBD-100 on the Trebloc corner across the street, on the block
bound by E. State, S. Aurora, and Six Mile Creek. The Trebloc building is non-contributing and the
remainder of the block is undeveloped, surface parking. The proposed rezoning here would actually be
fairly easy and desirable.
• West State Street from Meadow Street east to Geneva Street is an ideal corridor on which to focus
increased development density, due to (a) its existing role as connector between the West End and the
Commons, and its potential to be an enhanced future transit corridor; (b) the generally non-descript or
poor quality of its current urban and architectural fabric, which, for example, includes numerous street-
side parking lots; (c) its separation from established residential neighborhoods to the north and south; and
(d) the special character that has already been given to the street infrastructure (e.g., red brick pavement
and decorative streetlights).
• However, the proposed CBD-T zone does a poor job of promoting such increased density from Meadow
to Albany Streets because (a) it actually decreases maximum building height (from 50 feet to 40 feet)
along the street edges of West State Street and most of the 100 blocks of N. and S. Corn, Plain and
Albany Streets, thereby decreasing development potential where it makes sense to increase it; (b) then,
after decreasing maximum building height along the above street edges, CBD-T increases maximum
building height in the middle of the adjacent blocks, effectively pushing potential negative visual impacts
closer to established neighborhoods to the north and south; (c) the above system results, on each affected
block, in a pyramidal development envelope, rising from 40-foot to 55-foot to 80-foot and then dipping
from 80-foot to 55-foot to 40-foot maximum building heights in both north-south and east-west cross-
sections, all of which is likely to result, block to block, in a confusing and incoherent urban form; and (d)
the triangular diagram (on the third page of the proposed CBD-T zoning ordinance), which purports to
demonstrate that 80-foot-tall buildings in the middle of blocks would not be visible from W. Green and
W. State Streets, does not accurately depict potential visual impacts, since no rezoning of the B-2d zone
adjacent to the north side of W. Green Street is proposed in the first place, and since people view
buildings most frequently from the sides, as they walk/bike/drive up and down streets, rather than from
directly in front.
• Each of the above problems could be avoided, and the goal of substantially increasing development
potential along W. State Street achieved, by discarding CBD-T and simply up-zoning the entire current B-
2c zone along W. State St. to CBD-60, thereby increasing maximum building height and lot coverage in a
consistent manner throughout the entire zone. This would be much easier to understand than the complex
CBD-T, provide just as much new development potential, and result in a much more consistent and
pleasing future urban form along all affected streets.
• The view from the newly-designated Henry St. John’s Historic District to the area proposed to be rezoned
needs to be analyzed.
• A 3-D model of the downtown area should be created to analyze impacts of the proposed rezoning.
• In the current zoning ordinance, when a parcel is in two zoning districts, the regulations for the less
restrictive portion of the zone can extend 30 feet into the more-restrictive zone. This should not apply for
the proposed CBD-T Zone, if it is retained, as it will have major implications for the abutting residential
areas.
• It would be helpful to have a chart showing the areas of proposed change and the rationale for the
changes.
• The Planning Board requests that two of its members be added to the committee looking at the downtown
rezoning, and asks that — after the issues presented in this memo have been addressed — a revised
downtown rezoning proposal be resubmitted to the Planning Board for its comments.
Item # F1 c
To: City of Ithaca Common Council Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council
Re: Proposed CBD-T Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Date: January 3, 2013
The Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) applauds the Common Council's efforts to increase the
density of the City by maximizing the development potential of the Central Business District. The
CBD-T zone will allow increased density while maintaining the human scale of the streetscape.
However, the CAC has a few concerns that we would like to share with you regarding this new zone..
100% Building Lot Coverage
The resolution adopting the new zoning ordinance states, "WHEREAS the City of Ithaca is also
committed to preserving the active pedestrian experience along the street frontage, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes the importance of maintaining a human scale..."
Shade trees and landscaping, even in small amounts, are key components to an active and healthy
pedestrian design. In consideration of the Building Lot coverage allowance for this new zone, which
will be raised from 85% and 75% for B-2c and B-2d Zones, respectively, to a 100% Building Lot
coverage with no front yard set back requirements, there appears to be no wording to support or give
incentive to preserve or provide trees, mature growth, grass, garden beds, etc. This could allow
vegetation free designs which will greatly degrade the active pedestrian experience and amplify other
issues with storm water runoff and increasing the heat island effect in the City's urban core.
There are mature trees along State, Green, and Seneca Streets that can and should be preserved as land
uses change in the new zone.
Off-Street Parking Requirements
Parking is an allowed Use in the CBD Zone. While there is no minimum requirement the City should
go further and limit the development of parking. Simply removing the parking requirement does not
actually guide the development of parking. Parking provisions need to be managed and designed
according to regulated criteria outlined specifically for the CBD-T and all other zones. An urban core
that has designed an active pedestrian access therefore needs a balanced transit strategy and one not
oriented to personal auto use. In particular, we recommend a Parking Maximum and permitted Use
through an Application for Parking Spaces. This system would ensure maximize density and walk
ability, foster the use of alternative modes of transportation, and improve the sustainability of the City.
Respectfully submitted,
Jesse Hill
Conservation Advisory Council
Item # F2 a
FROM Jennifer Dotson, Planning Committee Chair
TO Planning Committee Members
DATE January 4, 2012
RE Elimination of Minimum Parking Requirements
During the summer of 2012, at the request of the Planning and Economic Development
committee and following a discussion where members of the committee expressed
support for the concept, I formed a working group to develop a proposal to eliminate
minimum parking requirements, and potentially institute maximum parking limits.
That group met several times throughout the late summer and early fall, and charged a
subgroup (Planning Board chair Govind Acharya, Alderperson Graham Kerslick, and
myself) with developing specific language to reflect discussions, which we did.
As you are aware, this issue was mentioned by Svante in his State of the City address
as a priority policy objective for 2013. Following discussion with Svante and several
working group members, I am bringing a draft of this proposal forward to the committee.
Please be aware that while this draft has addressed many concerns, a few still remain.
The working group's efforts will be more effective and efficient if they are informed by
our committee's review of possible directions.
There are three remaining significant issues:
- How to handle coordination of zoning and parking requirement changes in the
Collegetown area, specifically with respect to the proposal for a new form based code
for this area.
- Whether to institute limits on maximum allowed parking spaces or simply remove the
minimum parking requirements. Note that, while maximums are included in the attached
draft language, more work would be required to outline how to handle variance appeals
and changes to (what would become) nonconforming parcels. Removing the The
working group will address this based on the sense of the committee and other
comments received.
- The impact of removing minimum parking requirements on life safety (related to
occupancy limits) has not been specifically identified. The Building and Fire
Item # F2 a
Departments may develop suggested amendments to this or other chapters in the code
to address this concern.
Both the Planning and Development Board and the working group will be discussing this
issue later in January, and these discussions will benefit from the response of our
committee to this proposal.
If the Planning Committee is comfortable, this proposal could be circulated following our
January meeting. Otherwise it will return (possibly with changes) to our February
meeting for approval to circulate.
Item # F2 b
ELIMINATION OF MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS
DRAFT January 4, 2012 Jennifer Dotson
§ 210-62. Parking spaces.
No more than two paved parking spaces shall be provided for each mobile home lot off the
street. Each parking space shall have 153 square feet.
§ 325-8. District regulations.
[Amended 9-7-1988 by Ord. No. 88-7]
A. The District Regulations Chart is hereby made a part of this chapter. Editor's Note: The District
Regulations Chart is located at the end of this chapter. Column heads on the District Regulations Chart
are defined as follows:
(4) Column 4: Off-Street Parking Allowed. The number of spaces listed in this column are the
maximum number allowed for each building hereafter erected or altered. In addition, see
Article IV and § 325-20.
§ 325-9. Standards for special conditions and special permits.
A. Intent. The intent of this section is to set forth additional regulations and conditions which
shall apply to certain land uses and activities which are incongruous or sufficiently unique in
terms of their nature, location and effect on the surrounding environment and the quality of
the community to warrant special evaluation of each individual case.
B. Special conditions. Director of Zoning Administration shall approve the following uses only
when the special conditions specified in this subsection have been met:
C. Special permits.
(1) Applicability. The uses listed under the district regulations in § 325-8 which require a special permit from the
Board of Appeals are as follows:
(m) Parking beyond the number of spaces allowed in § 325-20.
(4) Specific standards applicable to certain uses requiring special permits. Certain uses listed in the district
regulations in § 325-8 as requiring a special permit must conform to the applicable conditions set forth in this
subsection.
(i) Parking in the Waterfront Zone. Parking areas will be permitted as a primary use in the Waterfront Zone
WF-1 and WF-2 districts by special permit and only if they are open to the public or if they are intended
to serve the needs of multiple businesses.
[Added 10-5-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-13]
(j) Parking beyond the number of spaces allowed in any district. [POSSIBLE CONDITIONS FOR A
SPECIAL PERMIT MAY NEED TO BE DEVELOPED.]
§ 325-3. Definitions and word usage.
Formatted: Highlight
Deleted: a minimum of
Deleted: Two
Deleted: Requirement
Deleted: off-street parking
Deleted: shall be provided
Deleted: The Building Commissioner
Item # F2 b
B. Specific terms or words. For the purpose of this chapter, certain terms or words herein, unless the context or
subject matter otherwise requires, shall be interpreted or defined as follows. These definitions apply to this chapter;
and, in order to retain conformity, they are applied also to the Housing Code and Building Code of the City. Editor's
Note: See Ch. 210, Housing Standards, and Ch. 146, Building Construction. Some of the definitions, therefore, will
not appear in this chapter. Amendments or changes to this section shall also be made in the definitions sections in
the other heretofore mentioned chapters in order to retain conformity.
NONCONFORMING BUILDING, STRUCTURE OR LOT
A building, structure or lot of record legally existing at the time of enactment of this chapter, or any
subsequent amendment, which does not conform to the requirements for the district in which it is located.
§ 325-20. Off-street parking. [Amended 2-4-1987 by Ord. No. 87-6; 8-13-1987 by Ord. No. 87-13; 4-6-
1988 by Ord. No. 88-4; 7-11-1990 by Ord. No. 90-5; 9-5-1990 by Ord. No. 90-10; 1-2-1991 by Ord. No. 91-4; 8-
5-1992 by L.L. No. 3-1992; 9-6-1995 by Ord. No. 95-10; 3-6-1996 by Ord. No. 96-3; 6-5-1996 by Ord. No. 96-9;
2-4-1998 by Ord. No. 98-5; 5-5-1999 by Ord. No. 99-5; 3-1-2000 by Ord. No. 2000-2; 8-2-2000 by Ord. No.
2000-7; 10-4-2000 by Ord. No. 2000-9; 12-3-2003 by Ord. No. 2003-21; 3-26-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-3; 1-10-
2007 by Ord. No. 2007-2; 11-5-2008 by Ord. No. 2008-5]
A. Purpose and intent. The intent of this section is to regulate uniformly the development and maintenance of off-
street parking for both public and private uses. The following regulations are designed to minimize any
detrimental effects to adjacent properties, to surrounding neighborhoods and to the environment.
B. Applicability. Except as specified in § 325-8, the District Regulations Chart, which is available in the City Clerk's
office, § 325-20 shall, after the effective date, govern the creation, alteration or expansion of all off-street
parking areas. Section 325-20 shall also govern the maintenance of all off-street parking areas.
C. Nonconforming uses. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this section or in the District
Regulations Chart, the amount of off-street parking permitted on a property containing a nonconforming use
shall not exceed the amount of parking determined to have existed on said property at the time it became a
nonconforming use, and shall not be extended onto or relocated to a different part of the lot or parcel in question
or elsewhere, unless a use variance is granted for such additional parking.
[Added 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03 Editor's Note: This ordinance also provided for the redesignation of
former Subsections C through I as Subsections D through J, respectively. ]
D. General requirements.
[Amended 2-4-2009 by Ord. No. 2009-03; 5-4-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-05; 7-6-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-10; 10-
5-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-13; 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
(1) Required submissions and approvals.
(a) Site plans and building permit. In all zoning districts, no parking area or driveway may be constructed,
added to, altered, or resurfaced (except for routine repairs in kind or other minor alterations of an existing
parking area, other than resurfacing, that do not change the parking area or driveway's size, capacity,
configuration, or drainage characteristics) until a building permit has been issued. All such building
permits shall be in accordance with this chapter's requirements. Prior to obtaining a building permit, the
applicant must submit two dimensioned plans, drawn to scale, one indicating the existing conditions, and
one that indicates the proposed conditions, including the locations of all of the green areas, parking areas,
associated maneuvering areas and driveways, any required screening, direction of ground slope, and
drainage provisions, and includes a calculation in square feet of the area of paving and the area of the yard
in which paving already exists or is proposed to be constructed.
(b) Certificate of appropriateness. Any proposed parking development in areas under the jurisdiction of the
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission must obtain a certificate of appropriateness from the
Commission before a building permit can be issued.
(c) Site plan review. The creation or expansion of off-street parking areas is also subject to site plan review,
unless such development falls below the applicability thresholds set forth in Chapter 276 of this Code.
(See Chapter 276 for the applicability of site plan review which, if required, must be completed before a
building permit can be issued.)
(d) Neighborhood parking area. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this chapter, and in
addition to any other generally applicable requirements, the creation or expansion of a neighborhood
Deleted: minimum parking or
dimension
Deleted:
Deleted: provide adequate parking and
safe vehicle movements while
Deleted: ing
Deleted: therefor
Deleted: by the Building
Commissioner.
Item # F2 b
parking area (as defined in § 325-3, under "parking area") in an R-3 or R-U district shall require a special
permit.
(e) Street permits. No curb cut, driveway entrance and/or drain pipe in the street right-of-way shall be built or
installed unless a street permit has first been obtained from the City Engineer.
(f) City tree removal. There shall be no removal of any tree located on City property unless approval has first
been granted by the City Forester.
(2) General standards for all off-street parking areas, driveways and curb cuts.
(a) Parking. All off-street parking must occur in approved parking spaces, parking areas or parking lots
meeting the general standards for all off-street parking areas in § 325-20D(2). Parking is specifically not
permitted on lawns, sidewalks, or other spaces not developed as a parking space.
(b) Clear boundaries. All parking areas, including associated driveways and vehicle maneuvering areas, shall
have clearly defined boundaries. A "clearly defined boundary" shall mean, at a minimum, the existence of
a distinct edge to the material used to pave the parking area, such that the yard area where parking is
permitted is clearly distinguished from the yard area where parking is not permitted. Where approved
parking areas are contiguous with sidewalks or other paved areas, there shall be a minimum four-inch-
high curb or other equivalent continuous permanent barrier separating the parking area from other paving,
except as required to allow for accessibility.
(c) Physical character of parking spaces. Each parking space shall be even-surfaced and internally
unobstructed by structures, walls, landscape elements or other obstructing features, except that low curbs
or wheel stops may be located within or adjoining a space if they do not impede vehicular access to or
egress from the parking space. The surface of the parking area and that portion of the access driveway
which is not included in Subsection D(2)(e)[1] below shall conform to standards and specifications
available at the office of the City Engineer and shall at a minimum be a maintainable surface which will
support the sustained loads. Acceptable surface materials include crushed stone, brick, concrete, asphalt,
permeable pavement, or similar materials.
(d) Drainage. All newly constructed or enlarged parking areas, including associated driveways and vehicle
maneuvering areas, shall have adequate provisions to prevent surface or runoff water from draining to or
across adjoining properties, sidewalks or streets during, at a minimum, a two-year storm event, and shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 282, Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control.
In the event of inconsistency, the provisions of Chapter 282 shall prevail. Stormwater runoff shall not be
designed to flow across any public sidewalk as a primary method of delivering the runoff to a stormwater
facility. All drainage systems in existing parking areas shall be maintained in good working order. For
more detailed requirements for parking areas with the capacity for three or more parking spaces on lots
within residential zoning districts, see also Subsection F, and for parking areas on lots in nonresidential
zoning districts, see also Subsection G.
(e) Access requirements. All parking spaces shall have access to the street by way of a driveway.
[1] The portion of access driveways extending from the street to the sidewalk, or to the property line if no
sidewalk exists, must be hard-surfaced with concrete, brick, asphalt or other approved material, as
required by the City Engineer.
[2] Driveways must be at least eight feet wide in residential zoning districts and at least 10 feet wide in
nonresidential zoning districts, and must have clear visibility to the street. Any required screening must
be so designed that it shall not interfere with sight lines necessary for pedestrian and driver safety.
[a] Maximum driveway grades. Driveways to areas containing parking spaces for three or more
vehicles shall be graded to form a street entry with a maximum grade of 8% for a distance of 25
feet from the curbline.
[b] Adjacent driveways and combined curb cuts. Driveways on adjacent lots may be side by side or
may be combined.
[3] Driveway aisles. Where permitted, one-way driveway aisles shall have a minimum width of 10 feet
and a maximum width of 12 feet. Two-way driveway aisles shall have a minimum width of 20 feet and
a maximum width of 24 feet.
(f) Required maintenance. So long as they remain in use as such, all parking areas and associated driveways
and vehicle maneuvering areas as well as any required screening, plantings and drainage systems must be
maintained to preserve their intended function and to prevent nuisances or hazards to people, surrounding
properties and public ways. Any planting required by the provisions of this section (such as planting for
the purpose of screening or shading) that dies or, in the opinion of the City Forester, becomes too
I don’t
understand this.
Item # F2 b
unhealthy to serve its intended function shall be replaced at the earliest occurring suitable planting season
by healthy planting that satisfies the provisions of this section.
(g) No refuse or litter. All parking areas, including associated driveways, vehicle maneuvering areas and
interior or peripheral planting areas, must be kept free of refuse or litter.
(3) Maximum number of off-street parking spaces permitted, number temporarily required in the Collegetown
Parking Overlay District. [WORDING COULD SHIFT DEPENDING ON APPROACH TO
COORDINATION WITH NEW COLLEGETOWN ZONING CODE.]
(a) Parking spaces for specific uses. Off-street parking spaces may be provided and shall be maintained in
accordance with § 325-20D(2) by the property owner for each use or building which is newly established,
erected or enlarged after the effective date of this section (June 6, 2012), and limited to the number
specified in the chart below.
(b) Maximum number of parking spaces in R-1 or R-2 districts. For each building or use (including parking)
on a property within an R-1 or R-2 zoning district, which building or use is newly established, erected or
enlarged after the effective date of this section (June 6, 2012), the maximum number of off-street parking
spaces permitted shall be two.
EITHER THIS CHART OR
(c) Maximum number of parking spaces in B-1, B-2, B-4, B-5, I-1, SW-1, SW-2, SW-3, WF-1, and WF-2
districts. In the B-1, B-2, B-4, B-5, I-1, SW-1, SW-2, SW-3, WF-1, and WF-2 districts, the maximum
number of off-street parking spaces permitted shall be one per 500 square feet of net assignable floor area,
or one per two employees on maximum shift, whichever is larger.
Use1 Maximum Spaces Allowed
Adult day-care home or group adult
day-care facility
1 for client use, plus 1 per 2 supervisory staff or employees not
residing on the premises
Dormitory 1 per 4 persons housed
Dwelling unit 1 per 3 bedrooms or sleeping rooms, plus 1 per2 additional bedrooms
or sleeping rooms, plus 1 per additional bedroom or sleeping room in
excess of 5 such rooms
Fraternity, sorority or group house 1 per 2 persons housed
Rooming or boarding house 1 per 3 sleeping rooms
Auditorium or theater 1 per 5 seats
Bar, tavern or restaurant 1 per 50 square feet of net floor area of the assembly space
Bed-and-breakfast home or bed-and-
breakfast inn
1 per guest room1,2
Bowling alley 2 per bowling lane
Church, funeral home or mortuary 1 per 10 seating spaces
Fitness center or health club 1 per 5 persons allowed as determined by the maximum occupancy
load
Home occupation requiring special
permit
1 space2
Hospital or nursing or convalescent
home
1 per 5 patient beds
Hotel or motel 1 per guest room
Medical or dental office 1 per 250 square feet of net assignable floor area
Nursery school, child day-care center
or private elementary or secondary
school
1 per 2 employees plus 1 per 15 pupils enrolled
Office or bank 1 per 250 square feet of net assignable floor area
Retail store or neighborhood
commercial facility
1 per 500 square feet of net assignable floor area
Wholesale or industry 1 per 2 employees on maximum work shift
Deleted: in R-1 and R-2 districts and
number required for all other districts
Deleted: (a) Notwithstanding anything
contained herein to the contrary, there are
no requirements as to the minimum
number of off-street parking spaces in the
following zoning districts:
Deleted: R-1, R-2,
Deleted: WEDZ-1a, CBD-60, CBD-85,
CBD-100, CBD-120, B-1b, and B-2c,
WF-1 and WF-2. ¶
Deleted: b
Deleted: required
Deleted: shall
Deleted: as
Deleted: c
Deleted: Required
Deleted: 2
Deleted: 3
Deleted: 3
Item # F2 b
Use1 Maximum Spaces Allowed
Boat launch 8 per ramp2
Boat storage or repair 1 per 2 employees on maximum shift
Boatel 1 per 2 sleeping rooms
Marina 1 per 4 berths
Yacht club 1 per 4 member families
Human service agencies and centers 1 per 250 square feet of floor area
NOTES:
1 In the case of mixed use of a building or property, the space requirements shall be computed for each
use, and potential shared use taken into account, following § 325-20D(3)f,to compute a total maximum
number of spaces allowed.
2 Boat-launching ramps shall maintain 75% of their parking spaces at a size of 10 feet by 40 feet to
accommodate boat trailers. Consult the New York State Parks and Recreation Department on space
requirements for maneuvering.
(c) Parking spaces required in the Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone, temporarily.
[1] Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, in the CPOZ, required off-street parking
for residential uses in the R-3a and R-3b Zoning Districts (Residential) and the B-2a and B-2b Zoning
Districts (Business) shall be one space for every two resident occupants in the areas designated CPOZ
on the map entitled "Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone," dated June 2000, a copy of which is on file
in the Ithaca City Clerk's office, until DATE (six months after other MPRs are eliminated) OR until
new zoning code is adopted for that area, at which time this exception to the other requirements of
§ 325-20 shall expire.
(d) Enclosed parking spaces that meet the size requirements shall be counted toward the allowed number of
parking spaces.
(e) Counting of end-to-end parking spaces. When determining the number of off-street parking spaces
provided, no more than one pair of end-to-end parking spaces shall be counted, unless all spaces have
adequate maneuvering space or direct street access. This is not to prevent the use of a parking area for
more than a single pair of end-to-end parking spaces if conditions warrant.
(f) Shared parking. In a case where two or more establishments on the same lot have substantially different
operating times, the Director of Zoning Administration(or, in the case of a project subject to site
development plan review, the Planning and Development Board) shall, in consultation with the
Superintendent of Public Works, reasonably estimate the joint use of parking spaces, provided that
Director of Zoning Administration or the Board finds that the intent of the requirements of § 325-20 is
fulfilled by reason of lack of variation in the probable time of maximum use by patrons and employees
among such establishments. Seems like this could be reworded to make it easier to understand
(5) Parking space, driveway, and driveway aisle size requirements. For purposes of computing number, spaces
shall not vary more than 15% above or below the dimensions outlined.
(a) Parking space size requirements for parking areas with 10 or fewer parking spaces. For such parking
areas, a parking space shall have a dimension of eight feet by 18 feet, exclusive of pedestrianways,
maneuvering space and driveways appurtenant thereto and giving access thereto. The edge of the parking
space pavement may be up to two feet inside the outermost line of the parking space where unobstructed
vehicle overhang is available. All parking spaces shall have adequate access.
(b) Parking space size requirements for parking areas with 11 or more parking spaces.
[1] Perpendicular parking. For parking perpendicular to the driveway aisle, parking spaces shall be eight
feet six inches by 18 feet. The edge of the parking space pavement may be up to two feet inside the
outermost line of the parking space where unobstructed vehicle overhang is available.
[2] Parallel parking. For parking parallel to the driveway aisle, parking spaces shall be eight feet six inches
by 20 feet.
[3] Angle parking. For angle parking, a standard parking space shall have an area of 255 square feet, the
length of which shall be measured, at the same angle of parking, from the center of the outermost edge
of the parking space to the center line of the driveway aisle giving access to the parking space. The
Not sure this makes sense either way.
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Field Code Changed
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Highlight
Formatted: Font: Italic
Formatted: Font: Italic
Deleted: Required
Deleted: 2
Deleted: 4
Deleted: and the total requirements for
all uses shall be provided in accordance
with this section
Deleted: 2
Deleted: See also the District
Regulations Chart Editor's Note: A copy
of the District Regulations Chart is on file
in the City Clerk's office. for districts in
which off-street parking is not required.
Deleted: 3
Deleted: Unless the Zoning Board of
Appeals, upon consideration of all
relevant factors, including but not limited
to the easy availability of on-street
parking or the expectation that a lesser
parking requirement will meet the
parking needs of the use, determines
during consideration of the special permit
that a lesser off-street parking
requirement is appropriate and will not
have a negative impact on the
Deleted: 4
Deleted: d
Deleted: [2]The requirements
Deleted: e
Deleted: minimum parking space
Deleted: meeting
Deleted: required
Deleted: f
Deleted: to fulfill the number of off-
Deleted: g
Deleted: , or on lots meeting the
Deleted: Building Commissioner
Deleted: may approve
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: (4) Location requirements;
Deleted: minimum
Deleted: minimum
... [3]
... [4]
... [5]
... [1]
... [2]
Item # F2 b
edge of the parking space pavement may be up to two feet inside the outermost line of the parking
space where unobstructed vehicle overhang is available.
(c) Possible variation from above standards under site plan review. The Planning and Development Board
may, at its discretion, allow parking space sizes that vary from the above standards in those instances
where Chapter 276, Site Plan Review, applies.
(d) Parking for people with disabilities. For parking for people with disabilities, the combined width of
parking and access aisle shall be in compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and
Building Code. Signage as required by the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code
shall be provided for all accessible parking spaces and associated access aisles.
E. Parking in front yards.
[Amended 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
(1) In all residential districts, all front yard parking within 15 feet of the front property line is restricted to a
motor vehicle orientation that is within 10° of perpendicular to the street.
(2) In all residential districts, parking in the front yard of lots which have a width at the street line of 50 feet or
less shall be restricted to parking within a driveway that is perpendicular to the street or that is within 10° of
perpendicular to the street. Such driveway shall not be more than 12 feet wide for the portion that passes
through the front yard.
(3) In all residential districts, parking in the front yard of lots which have a width at the street line of more than
50 feet shall be restricted to an area not greater than 25% of the total area of the front yard, including
turnaround and other vehicle maneuvering areas and driveways leading to garages and parking areas. The
setback for any such parking area must meet the minimum front yard setback dimensions specified in § 325-
8, District Regulations Chart, Editor's Note: A copy of the District Regulations Chart is on file in the City
Clerk's office. for the zoning district in which the parking area is to be constructed.
(4) In all residential districts, on corner lots with more than one front yard as defined in this Code, front yard
parking according to the above provisions shall only be permitted on one of the front yards.
(5) In all residential districts, where a parking area will use a front yard, the use of the front yard for parking and
associated maneuvering space shall not exceed the amounts permitted by this section nor the amounts
permitted by any other applicable provisions of this Code, including § 325-20D(3)(c). Any permitted front
yard parking area shall have a clearly defined boundary as required by § 325-20D(2)(b), and the remainder of
the front yard shall be landscaped as a green area in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood.
(6) In all districts, when a parking area is established on a lot that does not contain a building, an area equivalent
to the front yard that would be required if a building did stand on the site shall be kept free of parking (except
for an access drive to the parking area). The area equivalent to the front yard that would be required if a
building did stand on the site shall be landscaped in keeping with the surrounding neighborhood and shall be
separated and protected from the parking area by a suitable fence or safe barrier. (See the more detailed
screening requirements described below for parking areas within residential zoning districts.)
F. Requirements for new or enlarged parking areas with the capacity for three or more parking spaces on lots within
residential zoning districts but only insofar as otherwise permitted in any given district.
[Amended 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
(1) Required permits. A new or enlarged parking area, with the capacity for three or more parking spaces, on a
lot within a residential zoning district requires site plan approval (see Chapter 276) and a building permit.
Plans submitted must include a site plan drawn to scale with all existing and proposed green areas, parking
areas, associated maneuvering areas and driveways clearly indicated and dimensioned, must indicate required
screening, ground slope and drainage provisions and must include a calculation in square feet of the area of
paving and the area of the yards in which paving already exists or is proposed to be constructed. No building
permit shall be issued unless the requirements of § 325-20D(1) are met.
(2) Screening. The entire parking area, except entrances and exits, shall be screened from public ways and
adjacent properties. Screening devices shall be at least four feet high, except where they are within 10 feet of
the entrance or exit, or within 20 feet of a property lot corner at a street intersection. Screening may consist of
hedge planting, walls, fences, trellises or a compatible combination of these elements. Screening is not
required where the parking area is screened from the view of adjoining properties by buildings or other
accessory structures, or sufficiently dense vegetation located on the same parcel as the parking area.
Similarly, screening is not required where buildings or accessory structures without windows or other
openings facing the parking area or other such screening devices exist on neighboring parcels and effectively
screen the parking area. However, upon removal of said building, accessory structure or other such screening
device by the adjoining property owner, the required screening shall be installed within one year.
Item # F2 b
(a) Planting for the purpose of screening. Planting for the purpose of screening shall form a year-round dense
screen at least four feet high within two years of the initial planting. Planting areas shall be curbed or
otherwise protected from vehicle damage on the parking area sides, be at least eight feet wide and have a
minimum three-foot-deep excavation prior to planting.
(b) Fences and walls for the purpose of screening. Fences for the purpose of screening must be sufficiently
opaque, whether alone or in combination with planting or other design elements, to function as an
effective visual barrier. Walls for the purpose of screening must be compatible in scale, texture and color
with surrounding structures.
(3) Maximum parking area coverage. In order to protect the character of residential areas, plans for parking areas
with the capacity of three or more cars within residential zoning districts that permit three or more cars must
conform to either the setback compliance method or the landscaping compliance method described
respectively in § 325-20F(3)(a) and (b) below. Before applying for a variance from this requirement, an
applicant must show that neither method is feasible. Such plans must also comply with all other general and
specific standards of § 325-20 and with the District Regulations Chart. Editor's Note: A copy of the District
Regulations Chart is on file in the City Clerk's office. Where turnarounds or other maneuvering spaces not
required for access to parking spaces are provided that meet minimum size for a parking space, they shall be
counted as a parking space for the purpose of this Subsection F(3).
[Amended 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03 Editor's Note: This ordinance also provided for the redesignation
of this subsection, which was formerly Subsection F(5), as Subsection F(3), and for the redesignation of
former Subsection F(3) and (4) as Subsection F(4) and (5). ]
(a) Setback compliance method. Parking areas using the setback compliance method shall conform to the
following standards:
[1] Setbacks. The parking area shall not be located within the required minimum side or rear yard setback
areas established for the applicable zoning district by the District Regulations Chart. These setbacks
shall not apply to any driveway up to 12 feet in width that provides access for vehicles.
[2] Maximum yard coverage. The parking area, excluding any driveway up to 12 feet in width that
provides vehicle access to a street, but including all other turnaround and vehicle maneuvering areas
associated with parking, shall not cover more than 50% of any remaining side or rear yard, as such
percentage is calculated after excluding the required minimum side or rear yard setback areas specified
for the applicable zoning district by the District Regulations Chart. For the purposes of this calculation,
the area of a side or rear yard shall not include the building area of any building or accessory structure
located in the yard.
(b) Landscaping compliance method.
[1] A plan for a parking area using the landscaping compliance method shall be submitted to the Planning
and Development Board for review. The required building permit shall not be issued until a plan
approved by the Board or the Board's designee (and a certificate of appropriateness is on file with the
Building Department where applicable; see below) is on file in the Building Department.
[2] The Planning and Development Board may, at its discretion, approve a parking area that covers more
than 50% of any side or rear yard (as calculated after excluding the minimum setback areas specified
for the applicable zoning district, per the District Regulations Chart), if the Board finds that mitigating
factors such as, but not limited to, the following exist:
[a] Natural land forms or tall vegetation provide significant shielding of views toward the parking area
from the street and/or adjacent properties.
[b] The configuration of the parking area protects and preserves existing healthy and mature
vegetation, especially trees over eight-inch DBH (diameter at breast height).
[c] One or more curbed and landscaped planting areas are provided within the parking area. Any such
interior planting area shall be a minimum of 80 square feet with no dimension being less than eight
feet.
[d] The parking area will be substantially shaded by existing woodland or canopy trees, or the parking
area plans call for the planting of trees of a species that, at maturity, will provide canopy shading.
Trees currently or prospectively providing such shade may be located around the periphery of the
parking area or in interior planting areas. Any such interior planting area accommodating such
canopy trees shall be a minimum of 80 square feet with no dimension being less than eight feet.
Such interior planting areas shall be curbed and have a minimum three-foot-deep excavation prior
to planting.
Item # F2 b
[3] All property owners using the landscaping compliance method must notify surrounding property
owners by placing a notice at the project site in a form prescribed by the Planning and Development
Board.
[4] The Board shall be under no obligation to approve a parking area using the landscaping compliance
method; any such approval is discretionary.
[5] In the event that the proposed parking area is under the jurisdiction of the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, the proposed plan shall also be submitted to the Commission for its review.
The role of the Commission shall be limited to ruling on the appropriateness of the plan in relation to
any adverse impact on the aesthetic, historical or architectural significance or value of the landmark or
site in question. A building permit shall not be issued for a plan that has not received a certificate of
appropriateness by the Commission, where such a certificate is required.
(4) Drainage. Surface or runoff water must be collected and transmitted or piped to the nearest storm sewer or, if
a storm sewer is not available, then through underground piping to the street gutter, or provisions shall be
made for stormwater retention or recharge. Stormwater drainage systems, including their connections to
public stormwater facilities, shall be in accordance with this Code and with the provisions of Chapter 282,
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control, and shall be subject to approval by the City
Engineer. The applicant must provide runoff calculations for the parking area for a two-year storm event and
must calculate the appropriate pipe sizes and additional collection devices necessary to carry the water to the
public stormwater system. When conditions warrant, the City Engineer may require installation of a sump in
the last structure in a parking area runoff collection system prior to the delivery of stormwater to a public
stormwater facility. Installation, maintenance and repair of any pipe delivering stormwater to a public
stormwater facility shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Such installation, maintenance and repair
within a public right-of-way shall only be performed with the written permission of the City Engineer.
(5) Maintenance. The landscaping or other elements used to comply with § 325-20F shall be maintained,
replaced or pruned as required to fulfill this section's standards, including provision of the required screening
and compatibility with the surrounding residential neighborhood.
G. Parking areas on lots in nonresidential zoning districts. Plans complying with the requirements of this section
shall be submitted for any employee, customer and/or public parking area on a lot in a nonresidential zoning
district, or for a residential parking area with the capacity for three or more cars on a lot in a nonresidential
zoning district, for the required building permit. Plans submitted must include a site plan drawn to scale with all
existing and proposed parking areas, associated maneuvering areas and driveways clearly indicated and
dimensioned, and must indicate required screening, ground slope and drainage provisions. The plans shall
conform to the following regulations and standards, in addition to all other applicable portions of § 325-20:
(1) Access. The portion of access drives extending from the street to the sidewalk, or to the property line, if no
sidewalk exists, must be hard-surfaced with concrete, brick, asphalt or other approved material as required by
the City Engineer. Drives must be at least 10 feet wide and have clear visibility to the street. Edges of access
drives shall be readily visible, and divisions between lanes on multilane access drives shall be marked.
(2) Drainage. Surface or runoff water must be collected and transmitted or piped to the nearest storm sewer or, if
a storm sewer is not available, then through underground piping to the street gutter, or provisions shall be
made for stormwater retention or recharge. Stormwater drainage systems, including their connections to
public stormwater facilities, shall be in accordance with this Code and with the provisions of Chapter 282,
Stormwater Management and Erosion and Sediment Control, and shall be subject to approval by the City
Engineer. The applicant must provide runoff calculations for the parking area for a two-year storm event and
must calculate the appropriate pipe sizes and additional collection devices necessary to carry the water to the
public stormwater system. When conditions warrant, the City Engineer may require installation of a sump in
the last structure in a parking area runoff collection system prior to the delivery of stormwater to a public
stormwater facility. Installation, maintenance and repair of any pipe delivering stormwater to a public
stormwater facility shall be the responsibility of the property owner. Such installation, maintenance and repair
within a public right-of-way shall only be performed with the written permission of the City Engineer.
(3) Parking areas on nonresidential zoning district lots when such lots are contiguous to residential zoning district
lots. A parking area on a nonresidential zoning district lot when such lot is contiguous to a residential zoning
district lot shall be screened from the residential zoning district lot by a solid fence or wall at least six feet
high, except within 10 feet of the parking area's entrance or exit. Such fence or wall shall be protected by
wheel stops that prevent cars from damaging the fence or wall. Such screening is not required where the
parking area is screened from the view of the adjoining residential property by a building or other accessory
structure located on the same parcel as the parking area. Similarly, such screening is not required where a
Item # F2 b
building or accessory structure without windows or other openings facing the parking area or other such
screening device exist on adjoining residential parcels and effectively screen the parking area. However, upon
removal of said building, accessory structure or other such screening device by the adjoining property owner,
the required screening shall be installed within one year.
H. Parking in WEDZ-1 District. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, where off-street parking
abuts the sidewalk in the WEDZ-1a or WEDZ-1b District, the two areas must be separated by a low wall, with or
without plantings, or a planted hedge. The setback of the wall or hedge must meet the fifteen-foot minimum,
twenty-foot maximum setback requirement for new buildings. The area of the setback shall include a minimum
eight-foot-wide tree lawn, a minimum five-foot-wide sidewalk and an additional two-foot distance between the
sidewalk and the wall or hedge. Where a fifteen-foot setback is not feasible, the Planning and Development
Board may approve a minimum eleven-foot-wide sidewalk between the curb and the building facade. If parking
and sidewalk are separated by a low wall, the wall must be no less than three feet and no greater than four feet
high. A hedge planting may be substituted if the planting area is at least four feet wide. The hedge shall be no
less than three feet and no greater than four feet high.
[Amended 2-4-2009 by Ord. No. 2009-03]
I. Parking in the Southwest Area. Parking areas are not permitted in the first 100 feet measured from the nearest curb
of a public street, unless the minimum setback requirements for the Southwest Area Zoning District have been
met in accordance with § 325-29.2B(1) through (3).
J. Parking for the U-1 Zoning District.
(1) For the purpose of this section, "main campus" shall be defined as the area outlined on the map entitled
"Main Campus Parking Inventory, Cornell University Planning Office, March 2006," or on any updated map
as provided for in § 325-20I(7) below, a copy of which map is on file in the Ithaca City Clerk's office.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, the overall required parking spaces for the U-1
Zoning District shall be the difference between the basic required number of parking spaces and the number
of credited spaces for participation in the Cornell University Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Program.
(a) The basic required number of parking spaces shall be calculated using the following ratios derived from
the Travers Associates' Ithaca/Cornell Parking Study of February 1998:
[1] One parking space for each seven undergraduate students; and
[2] One parking space for each two graduate students; and
[3] Three parking spaces for each four employees; and
[4] One additional parking space for each 25 undergraduate students, graduate students and employees
combined.
(b) The number of credited parking spaces for participation in the TDM Program shall be calculated using the
same ratios derived from the Travers Associates' Study of February 1998, to wit:
[1] One credited parking space for each seven participating undergraduate students; and
[2] One credited parking space for each two participating graduate students; and
[3] Three credited parking spaces for each four participating employees; and
[4] One additional credited parking space for each 25 participating undergraduate students, graduate
students and employees combined.
(3) Only full-time undergraduate and graduate students, full-time employees and the full-time equivalents of
each who are assigned to or have their primary place of study or work on the main campus shall be included
in the above calculations. For the purpose of this section, "full-time undergraduate and graduate students" are
defined as students enrolled in 12 credits or more per semester; "full-time employees" are defined as
employees who are employed at least 35 hours per week; and "full-time equivalents" are defined as the
number of part-time students or employees whose combined credit enrollment equals 12 credits per semester
or whose combined hours of employment totals 35 hours per week.
(4) It is the purpose of the requirement in Subsection J(2)(a)[4] and (b)[4] above to account for parking required
for visitors, vehicles with handicapped permits, service vehicles, off-street loading, occasional parkers, and
other miscellaneous parking demands.
(5) Parking spaces need not be specifically designated or used as set forth in Subsection J(2) above so long as the
total number of spaces is available.
(6) Parking spaces required above may be provided at any place or places located on the main campus or any
other locations within Tompkins County which are owned, rented or otherwise utilized for parking purposes
by the institution or its affiliated institutions, without regard to municipal boundary. To be so counted, any
parking spaces located outside the main campus must be utilized for parking by persons who are going to the
Deleted: I
Deleted: I
Item # F2 b
main campus and must be connected by bus service to, or be within a reasonable walking distance of, the
main campus. Any spaces located outside the main campus shall not be considered to satisfy the parking
requirements established herein if they are being counted to satisfy the parking requirements of any other
section of this chapter, or the parking requirements of any zoning ordinance of any other municipality, for
uses other than those located on the main campus.
(7) Parking spaces on the main campus shall be identified on the map, "Main Campus Parking Inventory, Cornell
University Planning Office, March 2006." The map shall provide the names of prominent buildings and roads
for the sake of geographical reference, and shall provide inventory control numbers for parking areas along
with the number of parking spaces in each of the control areas. The Main Campus Parking Inventory map
shall be updated every five years following its original date in 2006 and shall be submitted to Director of
Zoning Administration by April 15 of the year that an update is required.
(8) The parking areas identified on the Main Campus Parking Inventory map shall also be listed on a parking
inventory spreadsheet, which shall give the inventory control number and the number of spaces in each
control area and shall also provide the total number of parking spaces on the main campus. The spreadsheet
shall be updated every year and shall be submitted to Director of Zoning Administration by April 15 of each
year. Accompanying the spreadsheet shall be a summary of the parking changes that occurred in the
preceding year.
(9) If the parking spaces in any given control area are not delineated by striping, then the total number of spaces
shall be determined by using the parking space requirements outlined under § 325-20D(5) of the City of
Ithaca Parking Ordinance.
[Amended 2-4-2009 by Ord. No. 2009-03]
(10) Every year, by no later than April 15, Cornell University shall submit to Director of Zoning Administration
a parking report that shall include:
(a) The annual parking inventory spreadsheet and summary;
(b) A count of full-time undergraduate and graduate students, full-time employees and the full-time
equivalents of each who are enrolled or working at Cornell; and
(c) A count of full-time undergraduate and graduate students, full-time employees and the full-time
equivalents of each who are enrolled or working at Cornell and who are enrolled in the TDM Program.
(11) Whenever 25 or more parking spaces on the main campus have been permanently deleted after the last
report to Director of Zoning Administration, Cornell shall provide Director of Zoning Administration with a
report stating where the spaces were removed as well as provide a statement indicating the total number of
parking spaces remaining on the main campus.
(12) Upon receipt of this parking report, Director of Zoning Administration shall make a determination of
compliance with regard to the requirements of this Subsection I, and shall submit the University's report and
her/his determination to the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board for discussion and comment.
Copies of the report and Director of Zoning Administration's determination shall also be provided to the
Director of Planning, Town of Ithaca, and the Zoning Officer, Village of Cayuga Heights, for their
information.
§ 325-32. Repair, changes in use, extension or enlargement of nonconforming uses or structures.
[Amended 3-1-1989 by Ord. No. 89-5; 8-5-1992 by Ord. No. 92-8]
A. Repair of nonconforming uses or structures. Necessary or desired repair of any nonconforming structure, or of
any structure housing a nonconforming use, declared unsafe by proper authority shall be accomplished in
accordance with all applicable regulations.
B. Changes in nonconforming use. A nonconforming use may be changed only to a use permitted in the district in
which it is located. Once changed to a conforming use, no building or land shall be permitted to revert to a
nonconforming use.
C. Extension or enlargement of nonconforming uses or structures.
[Amended 7-1-1998 by Ord. No. 98-10; 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
(1) A nonconforming use may not be extended or enlarged within or in association with the structure where it is
located, nor may a nonconforming use be extended or enlarged to all or part of a structure or structures not
already legally devoted to such use or to other land not already legally devoted to such use, except by means
of a use variance granted by the Board of Appeals.
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: C
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Deleted: the Building Commissioner
Item # F2 b
(2) A nonconforming structure which is used as permitted, and will continue to be used as permitted, in the
district in which it is located, but does not comply with the lot size requirement and/or parking requirements
applicable in the district, may not be extended or enlarged except by means of an area variance granted by the
Board of Appeals; however, a nonconforming structure may be enlarged without the necessity of obtaining
such a variance, provided that:
(a) The enlargement does not create a new, greater or additional nonconformity;
(b) The enlargement does not increase the occupancy previously permitted for the structure unless the
structure is, and will continue to be, a one- or a two-family dwelling; and
(c) The property is, and will continue to be, in compliance with the lot size and parking requirements
(whether minimum or maximum) of the district in which it is located.
(3) A nonconforming structure which is used as permitted by this Code in the district in which it is located
cannot be extended or enlarged by increasing the numbers of unrelated individuals residing within such
structures or by increasing the number of dwelling units contained within such structure except by means of
an area variance granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals; however, such a nonconforming structure may be
extended or enlarged without the necessity of obtaining such a variance if the property, in the enlarged or
extended condition, will comply with the parking and the lot size regulations of this chapter for the particular
district in which it is located.
(4) In all districts any legal nonconforming use or structure existing at the time of enactment of this chapter, as
amended, or subsequently constructed in compliance with a variance, shall not be extended or enlarged
except in compliance with the regulations of this chapter, as amended for each particular district.
Deleted: minimum
Deleted: minimum
Page 5: [1] Deleted Jennifer 12/23/2012 3:53:00 PM
Unless the Zoning Board of Appeals, upon consideration of all relevant factors, including but not limited to
the easy availability of on-street parking or the expectation that a lesser parking requirement will meet the
parking needs of the use, determines during consideration of the special permit that a lesser off-street
parking requirement is appropriate and will not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
Page 5: [2] Deleted Jennifer 12/23/2012 3:58:00 PM
[2] The requirements contained in § 325-20D(3)(c) shall not apply to buildings existing within
the designated areas, as of October 4, 2000. Parking requirements for such buildings within
these areas shall remain as specified in the chart in § 325-20D(3)(b), provided that there is no
increase in the number of resident occupants. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary
contained in this Code, in cases where the number of resident occupants is increased, the
parking requirements of the Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone shall be applied only to the
additional resident occupants.
Page 5: [3] Deleted Jennifer 12/23/2012 3:59:00 PM
to fulfill the number of off-street parking spaces required for a use
Page 5: [4] Deleted Jennifer 12/23/2012 4:04:00 PM
, or on lots meeting the distance requirements found in § 325-20D(4)(d) of this section,
Page 5: [5] Deleted Jennifer 12/23/2012 4:05:00 PM
(4) Location requirements; off-street parking areas. All required parking spaces provided pursuant to
this section shall be on the same lot as the building, use or activity that they serve, or may be located
off site on another lot or parcel other than the lot or parcel on which the use is located or conducted,
provided that such off-site parking meets the distance and use district limitations as established
below, is not located in an R-1 or R-2 zoning district, and receives a special permit pursuant to
Article III.
(a) The lot or parcel containing the off-site parking area must be connected to and accessible by
vehicular traffic from a public street. Off-site parking cannot also be counted toward compliance
with the parking requirement for any other use except for those uses for which the Building
Commissioner has determined that shared parking is appropriate, as provided for in § 325-
20D(3)(g).
(b) Use district. An off-site parking area must be located on a lot or parcel located in the zoning
district in which the use which requires the off-street parking is also a permitted use as a matter
of right. Any off-site parking which is required for compliance with the parking requirement for a
use which is permitted by use variance from the district regulations must also obtain a use
variance for the off-site parking area; in these instances the notice requirements of this chapter
shall apply to all lots involved. The notice requirements of this chapter shall apply to all lots if a
use variance is required.
(c) Pedestrianway required. A pedestrianway, which in this case may be private or public, must
connect the lots or parcels of both the use and the off-site parking area. The pedestrianway must
meet the standards of a public sidewalk or as otherwise approved by the Board of Public Works.
(d) Distance from use. The distance from the lot or parcel containing the off-site parking area and the
lot or parcel containing the use which requires the off-site parking shall be measured from parcel
to parcel following and along the pedestrianway that connects the off-site parking area to the use.
Except where no public sidewalk exists or where no crosswalks or corner-curb aprons exist
within 125 feet of the lot or parcel which requires the off-site parking, pedestrianways that cross
a public street shall be measured in a way that only crosses such streets at crosswalks or corner-
curb aprons. The maximum distances of the pedestrianway shall vary by use and shall be no
longer than as follows:
[1] For mercantile uses, off-site parking lots or parcels must be within 250 feet of the lot or parcel
on which the use is conducted.
[2] For all other uses, off-site parking lots or parcels must be within 500 feet of the lot or parcel
on which the use is conducted.
(e) All land which is used to provide off-site parking must be restricted to that use only, for as long
as the building is occupied by the use which requires off-street parking or until substitute
parking, approved by the Building Commissioner, is provided. Evidence of such off-site parking
shall be provided in the form of a recorded covenant, long-term lease or comparable document
that is approved by the Building Commissioner.