Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-14-14 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting Agenda
4.. PEDC Meeting DATE: May 14 2014 Planning and Economic Development Committee Y , Ithaca Common Council TIME: 6pm � E LOCATION: 3rd floor City Hall Council Chambers AGENDA ITEMS Item Voting Presenter(s) Time Item? Start 1) Call to Order/Agenda Review No Chair, Seph Murtagh 6:00 2) Special Order of Business 6:05 a) Public Hearing—Proposed 2014 Action Plan, Yes HUD Entitlement Grant b) Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development Yes Zoning District 3) Public Comment and Response from Committee No 6:15 Members 4) Announcements, Updates, Reports No 6:45 a) Noise Ordinance Reform b) Cornell Heights Neighborhood Tour 5) Action items—Voting to Send on to Council a) Public Art Commission Mural Yes Megan Wilson, Planning Staff 7:00 b) 2014 Action Plan, HUD Entitlement Grant Yes Nels Bohn, IURA 7:15 c) Disposition of City Property: 707 E. Seneca St. Yes Nels Bohn, IURA 7:30 d) Planned Unit Development Zoning District Yes Jennifer Kusznir, Planning Staff 7:45 e) Addition of Orchard Place to East Hill Historic Yes Lynn Truame, Planning Staff 8:15 District f) Ban on Outdoor Wood-Burning Furnaces Yes Cynthia Brock, Common Council 8:30 6) Action Items—Approval to Circulate a) Unified Solar Ordinance Yes JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director 8:45 7) Review and Approval of Minutes a) February 2014 Yes 9:00 b) April 2014 Yes 8) Adjournment Yes 9:05 If you have a disability and require accommodation in order to fully participate, please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 by 12:00 noon on Tuesday, May 13,2014. Affidavit ti State of New York ss: Tompkins County Notice of Availability and Public Comment Period an R. Stickel being duly sworn,deposes & Public Hearing Notice 4 and says that she is the Executive Assistant in city of Ithaca the City Clerk's Office,and that a notice,of 2014Action;Plan Development � HUD Entitlement Program which the annexed is a true copy,,Was The City of Ithaca's draft Action Plan will be made available for public comment until 3:00 p.m.on May 27,2014 at the fol- lowing locations: IURA office Ord floor Ithaca City Hall), Ithaca City Clerk's Office,`and on the IURA web site j published in The Ithaca Journal,the City of (www.ithacbura.org).This plan describes the proposed use of federal funds from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development(HUD)for projects benefiting the City's low-and moderate-income residents. Ithaca's O ial Newspaper,on The Planning and Economic Development Committee of the Ithaca Common Council will hold a Public Hearing at 6:00 p,m. on Wednesday,May 14,2014 in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall,108 E.'Green Street,Ithaca,NY.This is the second of two public hearings to gain public input on development of the City of Ithaca's 2014 Action Plan.Following is a summary list of proposed activities:. . and that t first publication of said notice was Activity sponsor Amount p Community Housing Trust New Construction . INHS $727,996.00 on 12"0 Homeowner Rehab 2014 INNS $ 123,259.60 Mini-Repair Program 2014 INNS $ 30,000.00 \ Security Deposit Assistance Program Catholic Charities $ '35,000.00 Housing Scholarships Leaming Web $ 58,947.60 Al Housing First TCA $ 30,000.00 Economic Development Loan Fund IURA $ 142,127.40 Sub cribed d sworn before Tile on Hospitality Employment Training Program GIAC $ 92,495.00 Community ReUse&Training Center Finger Lakes ReUse $ 105,000.00 Work Preserve Job Training Program Historic Ithaca $ 82,500.00 Lake Street Bridge Public Plaza Enhancement City of Ithaca $ 30,000.00 2-1=1 Tompkins Call Center Human Services Coalition $ 20,000,00 (o�, Learning by Doing Supported Employment Leaming Web $ 39,000.00 Immigraht Services Catholic Charities $ 16,000,00 ReSET Job training Finger Lakes ReUse $ 26,330.00. CDBG Administration IURA $ 135,108.00 _. . HOME Administration IURA $,44,177,40 _ Total $1,737,941,00 This list includes the allocation of$580,000.00 in Neighborhood Housing Initiative funds,Program Income of$142,127.00 from anticipated repayments of prior-year economic development loans,and anticipated CDBG and HOME awards in the t amounts of$701,820.00 and$441,994.00 respectively. SARAH l-,i\AYEVI�`� York Written comments may be submitted to the City Clerk,108 E.Green Street,Ithaca 14850 and must be received by 3:00 Notary Public,State of N W p.m,on May 27,2014,For more information,contact the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency at(607)274.6547. 74948 >The public hearing location is fully accessible.If you have a disability and require accommodations in order to fully partici- pate IStr�tlprl N07 pate at the public hearing please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Qualified in TpMptins Countyf\ 4/24/2014 Commission Expires NOV.26,20 I ' I I i i i j i i i CITY OF ITHACA Off° T `�Cti 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 � 1'ppRIa�� Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 TO: Planning&Economic Development Committee FROM: Megan Wilson,Planner DATE: May 6,2014 RE: Public Art Commission Recommendation on Mural Proposal from Brandon Lazore In 2010, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) created a mural and street art program to beautify blank walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to showcase their work. As part of this program, Onondaga Nation artist Brandon Lazore has submitted a proposal for a mural on City-owned property. The proposed mural, Women's Nomination,is proposed for installation on the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage. The mural would be located below the stairs leading to the upper stories of the garage. This location is among the potential sites that the Board of Public Works approved for future murals in May 2010. The PAC has sought public comment on the proposal through notification of adjacent property owners, neighborhood associations, and City staff. A public comment period was also held at the April 23rd PAC meeting to gather public input on the proposed design and location. The comments received were mostly supportive of the project. After reviewing public comments, the PAC voted unanimously to recommend the mural for selection by the Common Council. A description and sketch of the proposed mural as well as a photo of the proposed location are attached for your review. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 274-6560 or mwilson o,cityofithaca.org. Planning&Economic Development Committee Proposed Resolution May 14, 2014 Resolution to Select Artwork for a Mural Installation on the Snow Enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) has been established to, among other duties, review and advise the Common Council on proposals for the exhibition and display of public art in the City's public spaces, and WHEREAS, in 2010, the PAC created a mural and street art program to beautify blank walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to showcase their work, and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved several locations for future murals and street art, including walls in the City garages on Green Street and Seneca Street, by resolution on May 19, 2010, and WHEREAS, Onondaga Nation artist Brandon Lazore has submitted his proposal for a mural titled"Women's Nomination" as part of PAC's Mural and Street Art Program, and WHEREAS, the PAC discussed Mr. Lazore's mural proposal at its meeting on April 9, 2014 and, upon review of the potential mural sites pre-approved by the Board of Public Works, agreed that the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage would be an appropriate location for the proposed mural, and WHEREAS, the PAC held a public comment period on the mural design and location at its meeting on April 23, 2014 to gather input on the proposed installation, and the majority of the responses to the proposal have been positive, and WHEREAS, the artist will receive funding through the Downtown Ithaca Alliance's Art in the Heart program to install the mural, and the installation will be budget-neutral to the City, and WHEREAS, at its meeting on April 23, 2014, the Public Art Commission unanimously voted to recommend that the Common Council select Brandon Lazore's "Women's Nomination"mural to be installed on the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage; now, therefore,be it RESOLVED,that the City of Ithaca Common Council selects Brandon Lazore's "Women's Nomination" mural, as recommended by the Public Art Commission, to be installed on the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage and to be added to the City of Ithaca's public art collection; and be it further RESOLVED, that the selected artist may proceed with the installation of his mural upon the execution of an agreement with the City(as reviewed by the City Attorney). 318 Hawley Ave. Syracuse,NY 13203 (315) 466-1064 B randonl azore @ yahoo.c om My name is Brandon Lazore. I am Snipe clan from the Onondaga Nation. I graduated Magna Cum Laude from Onondaga Community college where I studied art. My work celebrates Haudenosaunee culture and serves as a learn- ing tool for passersby. I've been painting murals since the mid 90's in many NY cities,primarily my hometown Syra- cuse. Recently,I am becoming more and more well known for my paintings. As you may know,in the summer of 2013,I was chosen to paint a mural to honor of the 400 year anniversary of the Two row wampum. It can be seen there today on the south face of the Seneca street garage in Ithaca,NY. This summer,I will be painting a piece at the Iro- quois Indian museum in Howes Cave,NY. My mural proposal is called"Women's Nomination." It is dedicated to all woman of the Haudenosaunee.In the top right corner of the painting is a silhouette of"Skywoman" a woman falling from Sky World. In moments, she will be caught in the air by flying geese and put on turtles back- "Turtle Island." In her hands she holds roots of the three sis- ters - corn,beans, and squash.The elder woman in the green represents a Clan Mother,grandmother,elder. The woman in the purple blanket is her daughter and the baby is her daughter's daughter. The wampum belt is the Women's Nomi- nation Belt which represents among other things the right that Haudenosaunee woman have to give their child a clan,to chose the names given to the children,and to choose who will be the chiefs in the confederacy. Strawberries represent medicine like a mother's love is medicine to a child. The moon represents fertility and how it's cycle plays a huge role in every woman's life.The Sky Domes in the top left is inspired by traditional Haudenosaunee art decorating our cloth- ing for centuries. It represents the sky world and the plants that were given to us corn,beans, squash, and tobacco. I will be painting this piece mainly in acrylic paint with some details in spray paint. My first choice is the wall under the red steps of the snow enclosure on Green St. Of course I will adjust the shape of the painting to fit the space you choose. The timeline I have available is flexible. I am simultaneously turning this proposal in as a submission for Art in the Heart. As needed,I am happy to work with the Public Art Commission to ensure this project is successful. I feel this mural would be great for Ithaca because it is dedicated to the feminine side of the Haudenosaunee culture, and people can have a better understanding of how important the woman in our culture is to are society. Thank you for your time, Brandon Lazore �. 6 � t - s I Op- FPO, - ON n10,Oe s MALE FOAPAAKML nlAxsAx<r w � "Women's Nomination" o O- Brandon Lazore 318 Hawley Ave. Syracuse,NY 13203 (315) 466-1064 Brandonlazore CC yahoo.com IURA Recommended 2014 Action Plan HUD Entitlement Program, City of Ithaca, NY 4/23/14 FUNDING SOURCES Project Sponsor Match CDBG CDBG PI HOME NHI BOND Total Summary Description Funding $701,820 $140,000 $441,994 $580,000 $1,863,814 # Housing 1 Community Housing Trust New Construction Ithaca Neighborhood $1 487 824 $0.00 $0,00 $273,869.00 $454,127.00 $727,996.00 Construct 9 affordable homeowneship units on scattered sites at 402 S.Cayuga HousingServices(INHS) St.,314 S.Plain St.,214 Second St.,203 Third St.&305 First St. 2 Homeowner Housing Rehab.2014 INHS $32,175 $123,259.60 $0.00 $0.00 $123,259.60 Rehabilitation of 4 owner-occupied homes 3 Mini Repair Program 2014 INHS $55,500 $30,000.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 Small emergency repairs for 50 low-income seniors and people w/disabilities 4 Security Deposit Assistance Program Catholic Charities $7,018 $35,000.00 $35,000.00 70 security deposits for low-income tenants 5 Housing Scholarship Program Learning Web $43,000 $58,947.60 $58,947.60 Tenant-based rental assistance to 8 homeless youth 6 Housing First TCAction $0 $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Tenant-based rental assist.To 3 homeless households Economic Development 7 ED Loan Fund IURA $267,500 $107,127.40 $35,000.00 $1 42,1 2 7.40 New business loans creating at least eight(8)FTE jobs *8 Hospitality Employment Training Program Greater Ithaca ActivitiesCenter(GIAC) $20,373 $92,495.00 $0.00 $92,4 95.00 Job training and paid work experience for 20 individuals with employment barriers 11 Community Reuse&Training Center Finger Lakes ReUse $262,000 $0.00 $105,000.00 $1 05,00 0.00 Deferred loan creating three(3)FTE jobs in new retail and training center at 214 Elmira Rd. 12 Work Preserve Job Training Program* Historic Ithaca $71,750 $82,500.00 $0.00 $82,500.00 Entry level job training&employment experience for 20 young adults Public Facilities 13 Lake Street Bridge Public Plaza Enhancement City of Ithaca $165,000 $30,000.00 $0.00 $30,000.00 matching challenge grant:safety Improvements to Lake St.Bridge Public Plaza Public Services 14 2-1-1/I&R Service Human Services Coalition $201,041 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Supportforthe 2-1-1 call center 15 Learning by Doing Supported Employment Learning Web $9,000 $39,000.00 $39,0 00.00 Job placement&support of 10 young adults in unsubsidized employment; disbursement subject to meeting 1st program year performance outcomes 17 Immigrant Services Catholic Charities $21,171 $16,000.00 $1 6,000.00 Case management for 80 immigrants to access employment,services,legal aid, etc. 18 ReSET Job Training Finger Lakes ReUse $152,700 $26,330.00 $26,3 30.00 Training for 16 City residents in basic skills in technol.&construct.fields;3 trainees will go on to complete apprenticeships Administration 22 CDBG Administration IURA $0 $135,108.00 $0.00 $1 35,1 08.00 Planning,administration and monitoring of the CDBG program 23 HOME Administration IURA $0 $44,177.40 $44,177.40 Planning,administration and monitoring of the HOME program Totals: $2,796,052 $701,820.00 $140,000.00 $441,994.00 $454,127.00 $1,737,941.00 Funds Remaining: $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $125,873.00 $125,873.00 Minimum Required Set-aside of HOME funds for CHDO Activities: 66,266.10 Public Services Cap: $101,331 CDHO Set-aside Funding(INHS CHT new construction): 273,869.00 Public Service Funding: $101,330 CHDO Setaside compiance: YES Public Services Funding Remaining: $1 *Community Economic Development Activity carried out by a Community Based Development Organization(CBDO)-not subject to Public Service expenditure cap. CDBG=Community Developent Block Grant CDBG PI=CDBG Program Income(loan repayments) HOME=Home Investment Partnerships Program NHI Bond=Neighborhood Housing Initiative Bond Funding Applications Received 2014 HUD Entitlement Program, City of Ithaca, NY All Proposals Received created March 21,2014 Funding Project Sponsor Request Match CDBG HOME NHI BOND Total Summary Description $701,820 $441,994 $580,000 $1,723,814 # Housing Allow- 1 Community Housing Trust New Construction' Ithaca Neighborhood HousinServices INHS) $727,996 $1,487,824 Construct 9 permanently affordable homes for low-income buyers on 5 scattered sites 2 Homeowner Rehab 2014 INHS $150,000 $48,750 Rehabilitation of 6 owner-occupied homes 3 Mini Repair Program 2014 INHS $30,000 $55,500 Small emergency repairs for 50 low-income seniors and people w/disabilities 4 Security Deposit Assistance Program Catholic Charities $40,670 $7,018 70 security deposits($35,000)and delivery expenses($5,670)for low income tenants 5 Housing Scholarship Program Learning Web $64,800 $ 33,000 Tenant-based rental assistance to 8 homeless youth 6 Housing First TCAction $80,000 $0 Tenant-based rental assist.to 5 homeless HH($50K)&supported services($30K) Economic Developmen 7 ED Loan Fund(Program Income) ILIRA $142,000 $284,000 New loans creating at least nine(9)FTE jobs 8 Hospitality Employment Training Program Greater Ithaca ActivitiesCenter(GIAC) $92,495 $20,373 Job training and paid work experience for 20 individuals with employment barriers 9 Gateway to Local Diverse Suppliers GIAC $57,154 $11,800 Create clearinghouse to assist 3 micro-enterprises sell goods/services to local institutions 10 Business CENTS Alternatives Impact $29,260 $116,083 Provision of suite of professional business services to 24 micro-enterprises 11 Community ReLlse&Training Center Finger Lakes ReLlse $104,990 $73,837 Create 3 FTE jobs at a new retail and training center at 214 Elmira Rd. 12 Work Preserve Job Training Program Historic Ithaca $82,500 $71,750 Entry level job training&employment experience for 20 young adults Public Facilitie 13 Lake Street Bridge Public Plaza Enhancement City of Ithaca $195,000 $1,464.250 Safety improvements and aesthetic enhancement to Lake St.Bridge Public Plaza Public ServicesAL 14 2-1-1/I&R Service Human Services Coalition $20,000 $201,041 Support for the 2-1-1 call center 15 Learning by Doing Supported Employment Learning Web $52,994 $9,000 Job placement&support of 10 young adults in unsubsidized employment 16 Nurse Case Manager Ithaca Housing Authority $25,000 $29,000 Nurse case management services to 35 frail,elderly residents in public housing 17 Immigrant Services Catholic Charities $16,000 $21,171 Case management for 80 immigrants to access employment,services,legal aid,etc. 18 ReSET Job Training Expansion Finger Lakes ReLlse $44,247 $258,821 Training for 26 City residents in basic skills in technol.&construct.fields;4 trainees will go on to complete apprenticeships 19 Housing Stability Support Catholic Charities $16,640 $18,500 Tracking/support services for 50 security deposit recipients to retain stable housing 20 NLI Job Readiness Internship CCE-Tompkins $28,796 $7,769 Mentoring and paid internships to 4 un-and under-employed NLI program assistants Center for Transformative 7 Community Educator Organizors(CEO)increase their job readiness as they 21 Building Bridges Initiative Action $16,000 $6,480 organize in underserved communities&receive mentoring Administration 22 CDBG Admin. ILIRA $135,108 $0 $135,107.60 Planning,administration and monitoring for the CDBG program 23 HOME Admin. ILIRA $44,177 1 $0 1 $44,177.40 Planning,administration and monitoring for the HOME program Totals: $2,195,827 $4,235,967 $135,107.60 $44,177.40 $0.00 $179,285.00 •eligible CHDO set-aside activity Total Requests: $2,195,827 Public Services Requests: $255,347 DBG&HOME Available: $1,283,814 Public Services Cap: $101,331 Minimum to be trimmed: $154,016 Proposed Ordinance Planning & Economic Development Committee May 14, 2014 Ordinance_-2014 Authorize Disposition of City-Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of tax parcel #68.-2-9.2 located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY ("Property") for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) will act as agent for the City of Ithaca to market the Property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, pursuant to §695 of General Municipal Law, the City may dispose of real property at the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, the 2014 City budget includes projected revenues of$197,000 from the sale of surplus City properties, and WHEREAS, the Property is assessed at a value of$100,000, and WHEREAS, the Property is vacant except for abandoned playground equipment installed at the rear of the property prior to City acquisition in 1982, which equipment is only accessible only via an unsafe, crumbling set of concrete stairs, and WHEREAS, the approximately 7,128 square foot Property is a conforming lot located within the R-3a zoning district which permits single-family or multi-unit residential development, and WHEREAS, the Property is located in the East Hill Historic District, where any new construction requires a certificate of appropriateness issued by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, and WHEREAS, the Property is appropriate for in-fill residential development, which would enhance the residential character of the neighborhood, eliminate a City maintenance responsibility and increase City revenues, and WHEREAS, future use of the Property for a parking use without new residential development would not fully achieve public goals for use of the property, and WHEREAS, a deed restriction could prevent use of the Property for parking without new residential construction on the site, and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the Board of Public Works determined that the Property is surplus for public works purposes, and WHEREAS, the City Charter requires approval by 3/4s of the Common Council to authorize sale of real property, and WHEREAS, the City Charter further requires notice of a proposed sale to be published no less than once each week for three weeks, the first such notice being published no less than 30 days prior to the approval vote; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Findings of Fact. The Common Council makes the following findings of fact: a. The Property is surplus for municipal purposes. b. The Property is appropriate for in-fill residential development, which would enhance the residential character of the neighborhood, eliminate a City maintenance responsibility, and increase City revenues. Section 2. Authorization for Disposition. a. The Common Council authorizes disposition of the Property for the highest marketable price, subject to a restriction against use of the property for parking without new residential construction on the Property. The Mayor, subject to advice of the City Attorney, is authorized to execute agreements to implement this resolution, including but not limited to a real estate brokerage agreement, a purchase and sale agreement, and conveyance of deed. b. The Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) is authorized to act as agent for the City to market the Property for sale through a real estate broker. Expenses of the IURA directly associated with marketing and sale of the property shall be reimbursed from proceeds from the property disposition. Section 3. Effective Date.This ordinance shall take effect immediately. j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\ordinance p&ed 707 e seneca st disposition-action.doc Proposed Resolution Planning & Economic Development Committee May 14, 2014 Disposition of City-Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street— Declaration of Lead Agency WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of vacant property located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency will act as agent for the City of Ithaca to market the property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, the proposed sale of an approximately 7,128 square foot parcel of land is an Unlisted action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQRO), and WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176.6 of CEQRO require that a Lead Agency be established for conducting environmental review of proposed actions 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, no other agency has jurisdiction to fund, approve or undertake the proposed action; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED,that the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the proposed sale of vacant property located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price. j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\reso p&ed 707 a seneca disposition-lead agency.doc Proposed Resolution Planning& Economic Development Committee May 14, 2014 Disposition of City-Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street— Declaration of Lead Agency WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of vacant property located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency will act as agent for the City of Ithaca to market the property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest marketable price, and WHEREAS, as proposed, the IURA will solicit competitive proposals to purchase and develop the property for a residential use and develop a proposed property disposition for Common Council approval, and WHEREAS, on June 4, 2014, the City of Ithaca Common Council declared itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of this proposed action, and WHEREAS, such proposed action for the transfer or sale of less than 2.5 contiguous acres of land is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance ("CEQR") and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQR"), both of which require environmental review, and WHEREAS, the Short Environmental Assessment Form ("SEAF") and supporting information has been provided to the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council for review of the proposed action and no comments have been received to date, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council, acting as Lead Agency for the environmental review, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form, Part 1 and Part 2, prepared by Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby determines that the proposed sale of vacant City-owned property located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\reso p&ed 707 a seneca st-neg dec.doc CITY SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Project Information: To be completed by applicant or project sponsor. Date: 5/7/14 1. Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name: City of Ithaca Common Council Disposition of 707 E. Seneca Street for the highest marketable price 3. Project Location: 707 E. Seneca Street 4. Is Proposed Action: X New o Expansion o Modification/Alteration 5. Describe project briefly: Disposition of surplus City-owned vacant property located at 707 E.Seneca Street (tax map parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price 6. Precise Location (Road Intersections, Prominent Landmarks, etc. or provide map) 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Located between Stewart Avenue and Quarry Street 7. Amount of Land Affected: Initially 7,128 Sq. Ft. Ultimately 7,128 Sq. Ft. 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? X Yes o No If No, describe briefly: R-3a 9. What is present land use in vicinity of project: X Residential o Industrial o Agricultural o Parkland/Open Space o Commercial o Other Describe: Residential neighborhood in East Hill Historic District 10. Does action involve a permit/approval, or funding, now or ultimately, from governmental agency (Federal, State or Local): X Yes o No If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type: City of Ithaca Common Council approval for conveyance 11. Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? o Yes X No If Yes, List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type: 12. As a result of proposed action will existing permit/approval require modification? o Yes X No I certify that the information provided abov is true to the best of my knowledge. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: DATE: May 7, 2014 PREPARER'S TITLE: Nels Bohni IURA Pirector of Community Development REPRESENTING: City of Ithaca j:\community developmen6dispositions\707 e seneca\seaf part i-707 e seneca st.doc �J. �x �9 c�j N � o mY C) 'o 04 O C N N C n U o � E N a € 5w y N N o = a '� a a¢ w ii 0 i = 2i Ln v4 E m � NEB 2-o Z �v r � Z N w f f .� 5 i N(�� z Lh Q m C) o coo wCO W N cl 0 r , c - L A W m I O � o u 1 1 (p .00 OJ - O ® N W H e O OJ O i' I-'D CY e� i 1�l I - p� N N .~4 CO �. IL N (D 'I p +!� N b t!i I 1D �„I w � V AV H V hj'% N i n I tl 0 N 4}p v U Y'Y co •f N it p��I N �' 1 �1 1 N ti.7 0 (0 � �O SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Part II To Be Completed By Staff Name of Project: Disposition of Surplus City-Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street (tax map parcel #68.-2-9.2) Yes No 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter ❑ ■ more than one acre of land? 2. Will there be a change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site or to any ❑ ■ site designated a unique natural area or critical environmental area by a local or state agency? 3. Will the project alter or have any effect on an existing waterway? ❑ 4. Will the project have an impact on groundwater quality? ❑ ■ 5. Will the project affect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ❑ ■ 6. Will the project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ❑ ■ 7. Will the project result in an adverse effect on air quality? ❑ ■ 8. Will the project have an effect on visual character of the community or scenic views ❑ or vistas known to be important to the community: 9. Will the project adversely impact any site or structure of historic, pre-historic, or ❑ ■ paleontological importance or any site designated a local landmark or in a landmark district? 10. Will the project have an effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ❑ ■ 11. Will the project result in traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing ❑ ■ transportation systems? 12. Will the project cause objectionable odors,noise, glare,vibration, or electrical ❑ ■ disturbance as a result of the project's operation during construction or after completion? 13. Will the project have any impact on public health or safety? ❑ ■ 14. Will the project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in ❑ permanent populations of more than 5 percent over a one-year period OR have a negative effect on the character of the community or neighborhood? 15. Is there public controversy concerning the project? ❑ ■ If any question has been answered YES,a completed Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) is necessary. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: , DATE: 5/7/14 PREPARER'S TITLE: Nels Bohn, IU A Director of Community Development REPRESENTING: City of Ithaca j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\seaf part ii-707 e. seneca street.doc CITY OF ITHACA $-1�7�x9 108 East Green Street—3rd Floor Ithaca,New York 14850-5690 Q ►�, ' `7 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT JOANN CORNISH,DIRECTOR OF PLANNING&DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A.DeSARNO,DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BATEp���� 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 To: Svante Myrick, Mayor Ray Benjamin, Acting Superintendent of Public Works Common Council Conservation Advisory Council Julie Holcomb, City Clerk Planning&Development Board Aaron Lavine, City Attorney Phyllis Radke,Director of Zoning Administration Mike Niechwiadowicz,Acting Building Commissioner JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning, Building, and Development Edward Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner Date: May 6, 2014 RE: Proposal to Create a Planned Unit Development Floating District The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to create a Planned Unit Development (PUD) floating zoning district. Enclosed for your consideration is a draft ordinance. A PUD is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within the City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by the Common Council. The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while through the process of review, discussion and law change, ensures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest. A property owner or developer wishing to have their project considered for a PUD will have to complete an application and work with staff, Common Council and the Planning Board to be considered. The PUD can be placed in any location within the City, however, no property is automatically eligible for a PUD. Common Council will make the final decision on whether to accept the application. Enclosed is a draft application for a PUD. An environmental review of this action has been completed and the draft full environmental review form is enclosed, along with the draft ordinances. A public hearing for this action will be held on May 14, 2014. Your comments are respectfully requested prior to May 14, 2013. Common Council will consider this proposal on June 4, 2014. If you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 274-6410. City of Ithaca Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zone agPDRATF9 The City of Ithaca is committed to creating a work environment and community that values and supports diversity and inclusion and to developing laws,policies and procedures that are mindful and inclusive of our diverse community. The Planned Unit Development Zone is a floating zone, which is intended to allow flexibility in zoning regulations for projects that are found to be beneficial to the community and that are expected to further the goals of the Citv Comprehensive Plan. L Objective A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within the City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by the Common Council. The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while through the process of review, discussion and law change, ensures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest. II. Requirements With the approval of the City Common Council, a PUD may be established in any zone within the City boundary. The establishment of any such zone shall lie in the sole discretion of the Common Council, as a legislative body. It shall be established by amending the Zoning Ordinance to permit such establishment. The enactment and establishment of such a zone shall be a legislative act. No owner of land or other person having an interest in land shall be entitled as a matter of right to the enactment or establishment of any such zone. In a PUD, buildings and land may be used for any lawful purpose permitted in the zone where it is located, plus any other uses which the Common Council may authorize upon findings that such additional uses: • Further the health and welfare of the community; and • Are in accordance with the City Comprehensive Plan. All development restrictions, including, but not limited to, yard size, height restriction, building coverage, and lot size, shall be as set forth in the legislation rezoning the area to a PUD established by the City Common Council. In addition, the Common Council may impose any conditions or limitations that are determined to be necessary or desirable to ensure that the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of the development. No structure shall be erected or placed within a PUD, no building permit shall be issued for a building or structure within a PUD, and no existing building, structure or use in a PUD shall be changed, unless the proposed building and/or use is in accordance with a site plan approval. III.Application Process A developer proposing a development that does not conform with the existing zoning requirements may apply for a planned development zone to be placed on their property. The application process is as follows: 1. Staff/Developer Pre-Application Meeting. A developer seeking alternate zoning for their property must first contact the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development for a pre-application meeting. Staff will explain the requirements, the application process, the timeline, and the fees associated with a PDZ request. 2. Application Submission. Developer must submit a completed PDZ application along with the required fee. The Application must include a conceptual development plan, and an explanation of the request for alternate zoning. 3. Planning Committee. The Planning Committee of the Common Council will consider the application for completion and review comments received at the public information session. The developer will be expected to be present at this meeting. The Planning Committee may also request additional information from the developer at this time. The Planning Committee will schedule a legal public hearing and authorize circulation of the proposal for review and comment from City Boards/Committees, the Tompkins County Planning Department, and any neighboring property owners. 4. Circulation. City staff will circulate the proposed PDZ materials for review and comment and will forward comments and concerns to the developer and to the Common Council. 5. Public Information Session. Within 30 days of receiving a completed application the City will schedule a Public Information Session, at which the developer will be responsible for presenting information about the project and answering questions from the public. The City will advertise the public information session with a press release to the local media. The developer is responsible for posting the property at least 5 days prior to the Public Information Session, with the date, time, and location of the meeting. 6. Committee Recommendation. Once the comments have been received the Planning Committee will consider the proposal along with the comments and will make a recommendation to the Common Council. The recommendation may include additional requirements or limitations to either mitigate undesirable impacts or to ensure that the development conforms with the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. 2 7. Conditional Approval. The Common Council will consider the request and may pass a resolution granting a conditional approval subject to further site plan review approval and instructing staff to take the project through the environmental review process. 8. Site Plan Review Application—Applicant submits a site plan review application and begins the environmental review process 9. Declaration of Intent to Act as Lead Agency—Planning Board declares its intent to be the lead agency for the environmental review of the project and the PUD and notifies all other involved agencies, including the Common Council. 10. Common Council Involvement—As a part of the environmental review process for the project and the PUD, the Planning Board will update the Common Council after each Planning Board meeting where the project is considered and will request ongoing written comments from the Common Council. 11. Environmental Review/Site Plan Review—The Planning Board will be the lead agency for the environmental review and site plan review of the project. The project will undergo the normal site plan review process 12. Common Council Consideration of the PUD—When and if the project has received a negative declaration of environmental significance and site plan approval, it will return to the Common Council for final consideration of the adoption of the PUD. Final Council approval, if any, shall be granted via ordinance. IV.Expiration A developer who receives PUD approval will have 24 months to begin construction of their project. If construction on the property has not been developed in accordance with the approved plan after 24 months, the PUD will automatically be revoked, unless otherwise stated by the Common Council, and the property will return to the previously approved zoning restrictions. In the case of extenuating circumstances the developer may apply to the Common Council for an extension of PUD approval. If the site plan changes significantly, as determined by the Director of Planning and Development, it may require re-consideration by the Common Council. The Director of Planning and Development may determine that the changes are minor and do not require re-approval. V. Application and Processing Fees A developer wishing to apply for a PUD will pay a flat fee of $1,200 (twelve hundred dollars). This fee will cover all advertising costs, as well as staff processing time. The application fee is due at the time that the full application is submitted. 3 4 City of Ithaca M©n Application for Planned Unit Development Zone �PUDZ� AI Part 1.—Applicant Information Application Date: 1. Applicant Information Applicant Name: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: Property Owner (If different from applicant): Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Email: 2. Property Information Property Street Address: Tax Parcel Number: Legal description of Property: Zoning District : Area: Width: Depth: Current Uses: 3. Project Information Project Name: Project Description: 5 Project Narrative: Project Location: Property Size (acres)— both existing & proposed: Building Size (square feet)—both existing & proposed: Proposed Project Start & Completion Dates: 6 Part 4. —Proiect Costs Value of Land to Be Acquired (if any): Value of Buildings to Be Acquired (if any): Cost of New Construction: % subject to local sales tax Value of Improvements: % subject to local sales tax Value of Equipment to Be Acquired: % subject to local sales tax Other: % subject to local sales tax Total: Part 5. —Criteria Will the proposed project result in an increase to the tax roll value of new real property by at least $500,000? Does this project contain at least three occupiable stories? Proposed Height (in stories and feet): Does the project include a rehab of an existing structure? Is the project located in the City of Ithaca Density District? Does the project contain the redevelopment of a Brownfield site? 7 VIII. Certification deposes that he/she is the (name of'chief executive officer of company submitting application) (title) of , the corporation named in the attached application; that he/she has (company n am e) read the foregoing application and knows the contents thereof, that the same is true to his/her knowledge. Deponent further says that the reason this verification is made by the deponent and not by is because the said company is a corporation. (company name) The grounds of deponent's belief relative to all matters in the said application, which are not stated upon his own personal knowledge, are investigations which deponent has caused to be made concerning the subject matter of this application, as well as information acquired by deponent in the course of his duties as an officer of and from the books and papers of said corporation. As an officer of said corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant"), deponent acknowledges and agrees that applicant shall be and is responsible for all costs incurred by the non-profit Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency (hereinafter referred to as the "Agency") acting on behalf of the attached application, whether or not the application, the project it describes, the attendant negotiations, and ultimately the necessary issue of bonds or transfer of title are ever carried to successful conclusion. If, for any reason whatsoever, the Applicant fails to conclude or consummate necessary negotiations or fails to act within a reasonable or specified period of time to take reasonable, proper, or requested action, or withdraws, abandons, cancels, or neglects the application, or if the Agency or Applicant are unable to find buyers willing to purchase the total bond issue required or financing for the project, then, upon presentation of invoice, the Applicant shall pay to the Agency, its agents, or assigns all actual costs involved in conduct of the application, up to that date and time, including but not limited to fees of bond counsel for the Agency and fees of general counsel for the Agency. Upon successful conclusion and sale of the required bond issue or transfer of title, the Applicant shall pay to the Agency an administrative fee set by the Agency, not to exceed 8 an amount equal to 1% of the total project cost. The cost incurred by the Agency and paid by the Applicant, including bond counsel, the Agency's general counsel's fees and the Agency's administrative fees, may be considered as a cost of the project and included as part of the resultant bond issue. (signature of chief officer of company submitting application) NOTARY Sworn to before me this day of , 20 IX. Completion Status (to be completed by staff) ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Size: Density: Location: Additional Documentation Submitted: Staff Review Date: Mayor's Endorsement Date: 9 0 CITY OF ITHACA FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF) Purpose: The Full Environmental Assessment Form(FEAF) is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner,whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently there are aspects of a proposed action that are subjective or immeasurable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The FEAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly,comprehensive in nature,yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. FEAF Components: Part 1: Provide objective data and information about a given action and its site. By identifying basic project data,it assists in a review of the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focus on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. THIS AREA IS FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—TYPE I AND UNLISTED ACTIONS Identify the Portions of FEAF completed for this action: ® Part 1 ❑Part 2 ❑ Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this FEAF(Parts,2,and 3,if appropriate),and any other supporting information,and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact,it is reasonably determined by the Lead Agency that: ®A. The Proposed Action will not result in any large and important impact(s)an is one that will not have a significant impact on the environment;therefore,A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. ❑ B. Although the proposed action could have a significant impact on the environment,there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required;therefore,A CONDITIONED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.* ❑ C. The proposed action may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment;therefore,A POSITIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. *A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action: Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development(PLTD)Floating Zone District Name of Lead Agency: City of Ithaca Name and Title of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: Mayor Svante Myrick Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: �' - Name and Title of Preparer: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner Signature of Preparer: -��g — Date: 5/6/14 FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF) PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the Full Environmental Assessment Form(FEAF) will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. �ame of Action: Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development(PUD) Floating Zone District Location of Action: City of Ithaca rame of Applicant/Sponsor: City of Ithaca lAddress: 108 E. Green St. (City Hall) City/Town/Village: Ithaca State: NY ZIP: 14850 Business Phone: 607-274-6550 rame of Owner(if different): n/a lAddress: n/a City/Town/Village: n/a State: n/a ZIP: n/a Business Phone: n/a Description of Action: Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development(PUD)Floating Zone District: A PUD is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by Common Council. The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while, through the process of review, discussion, and law change, ensures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest. Page 2 Please Complete Each Question--Indicate N/A if not applicable A. SITE DESCRIPTION (Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present Land Use: ❑® Urban ©Industrial O Commercial [3 Public 0 Forest ©Agricultural ®Other: 2. Total area of project area: --6.1 s . mi. (Chosen units apply to following section also) Approximate Area (Units in question 2 apply to this section) Currently After Completion 2a. Meadow or Brushland(non-agricultural) 2b. Forested 2c. Agricultural 2d. Wetland [as per Articles 24 of Environmental Conservation Law(ECL)] e. Water Surface Area 2f. Public 2 . Water Surface Area 2h. Unve etated(rock, earth or fill i. Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces —6.1 s . mi.1 —6.1 s . mi. 2'. Other(indicatetype) 1 a. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site (e.g. HdB, silty loam, etc.): rr/a 3b. Soil Drainage: n/a L Well-Drained % of Site ❑ Moderately Well Drained % of Site Poorly Drained % of Site 4a. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? LJYes o ❑N/A 4b. What is depth of bedrock?a a (feet) 4c. What is depth to the water table? r a (feet) 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site 0-10% % L 10-15% % with slopes: _Wa 15% or greater % 6a. Is project substantially contiguous to, or does it contain a building, site or district, listed on or Lyes ❑No �/A eligible for the National or State Register of Historic Places? 6b. Or designated a local landmark or in a local es X o ❑N/A landmark district? 7. Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? es ®No ❑N/A If yes, identify each species: Page 3 SITE DESCRIPTION (Concluded) 8. Does project site contain any species of plant or es ❑XNo []N/A animal life that is identified as threatened or According to: endangered? Identify each Species: 9. Are there any unique or unusual landforms on the es X]No ❑N/A project site? (i.e., cliffs, other geological formations) Describe: 10. Is the project site presently used by the es ❑X No ❑N/A community or neighborhood as an open space or If yes, explain: recreation area? 11. Does the present site offer or include scenic views es ❑XNo ❑N/A known to be important to the community? Describe: 12. Is project within or contiguous to a site es ❑X No ❑N/A designated a Unique Natural Area(UNA) or critical environmental area by a local or state Describe: agency? 13. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Names of stream or name of river to which it is a tributary: NA 14. Lakes,ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous a. Name: to project area: . Size (in acres): 15. Has the site been used for land disposal of solid es [SNo []N/A or hazardous wastes? Describe: 16. Is the site served by existing public utilities? X]Yes ❑No ❑N/A a. If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? es ❑No ON/A b. If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? es ❑No ❑X N/A B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project fill in dimensions as appropriate) la. Total contiguous area owned by project sponsor in acres: lb. Project acreage developed: 26.1 s . mi. initially —6.1 s . mi.ultimately Ile. Project acreage to remain undeveloped: NA ld. Length of project in miles: if appropriate) NA or feet: NA Ile. If project is an expansion, indicate percent of change proposed: NA IL Number of off-street parking spaces existing. NA ro osed: NA 1 .Maximum vehicular trips generated(upon completion ofproject)per day: NA and per hour: NA Page 4 lh. Height of tallest proposed structure: feet. No structures are proposed,the proposed amendment could allow for the construction of structures up to 140' in height in some sections of the CBD districts. 1'. Linear feet of frontage along a public street or thoroughfare that the project will occupy? NA 2. Specify what type of natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) and how much will be removed from the site: NA or added to the site: NA 3. Specify what type of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground cover) and how much will be removed from the site: acres: NA type of vegetation: NA 4. Will any mature trees or other locally important vegetation be removed by this project? NA 5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? NA 6. If single phase project, anticipated period of construction NAmonths, (including demolition 7. If multi-phased project, anticipated period of construction NA months, (including demolition 7a. Total number of phases anticipated: NA 7b. Anticipated date of commencement for first phase NA month ear, (including demolition 7c. Approximate completion date of final phase NA month ear. 17d. Is phase one financially dependent on subsequent phases? ©Yes ©No /A 18. Will blasting occur during construction? [ Yes ©No L�/A; if yes, explain: 9. Number of jobsgenerated: during construction 0 after project is completed 0 10.Number of jobs eliminated by this project: 0 Explain: 11.Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities?13Yes E o[3N/A; if yes, explain: 12a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved?Byes ao[3N/A; if yes, explain: 12b. If#12a is yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc): NA 12c. If surface disposal, where specifically will effluent be discharged?NA 13.Will surface area of existing lakes,ponds, streams, or other surface waterways be increased or decreased by proposal?[3Yes LX o M/A; if yes, explain: r14a. Will project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to the 100 year flood plain? Mes [3No E /A 14b. Does project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to: Cayuga Inlet Fall Creek, Cascadilla Creek, Cayuga Lake, Six Mile Creek, Silver Creek? Circle all that apply)NA 14c. Does project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to wetlands as described in Article 24 Of the ECL?13yes MNo ON/A; 14d. If#14a, b or c is yes, explain: NA 15a. Does project involve disposal or solid waste?13Yes © o M/A 15b. If#15a is yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? Byes ONo a/A 15c. If#15b is yes, give name of disposal facility: NA and its location: 15d. Will there be any wastes that will not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Page 5 Oyes CNo A /A; if yes, explain: 115e. Will any solid waste be disposed of on site? ©Yes [3No &/A; if yes,explain: 116. Will project use herbicides or pesticides?Byes [3No ® /A; if yes, specify: 17. Will project affect a building or site listed on or eligible for the National or State Register of Historic Places or a local landmark or in a landmark district? 13I'es Mo [E]N/A; if yes, explain: 18. Will project produce odors? Dyes Mo F[AFA, if yes, explain: r Will project product operating noise exceed the local ambient noise level during construction? Dyes [3No ] /A; After construction?13I'es [3No FEJ /A 120. Will project result in an increase of energy use?©Yes CNo ® /A; if yes, indicate types) NA 1. Total anticipated water usage per day: gals/day. NA Source of water C. ZONING AND PLANNING INFORMATION 1. Does the proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ® es Mo CNVA; if yes, indicate the decision required: Zoning Amendment 13zoning Variance FDNew/revision of master plan Subdivision © Site Plan Special Use Permit [3Resource Management Plan ©Other: 2. What is the current zoning classification of site? City-wide 3. If the site is developed as permitted by the rp esent zoning, what is the maximum potential development? NA 14. Is proposed use consistent with present zoning?13Yes Mo E] /A 5. If#4 is no, indicate desired zoning: 6. If the site is developed by the proposed zoning, what is the maximum potential development of the site? NA r Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land-use plans? es [3No[3NUA; If no, explain: 8. What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a I/4 mile radius of the project? NA 9. Is the proposed action compatible with adjacent land uses? ® es Mo [3NUA Explain: 10a. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? NA Page 6 lob. What is the minimum lot size proposed? NA 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community-provided services? (recreation, education, police, fire protection, etc.) ? 13Yes &o [3NUA Explain: If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? ©Yes Mo &/A Explain: NA 12. Will the gNo osed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ]Yes o []N/A If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? 13Yes [3NVA Explain: A APPROVALS 1. Approvals: Common Council Adoption 2a. Is any Federal permit required? 13yes ao M/A; Specify: kb. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing?©Yes ao M/A; If Yes, Specify: 2c. Local and Regional approvals: Type of Submittal Approval Agency Yes or No Approval Required Date Date Common Council Yes Adoption Board of Zoning Appeals BZA No Planning &Development Board No Ithaca Landmarks Preservation No Commission (ILPC) Board of Public Works BPW No Fire Department No Police Department No Building Commissioner No Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency No IURA E. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal,please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. F. VERIFICATION I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name: City of Ithaca Signature: � _ " Title: Economic Development Planner Page 7 TO: Members of the Planning & Economic Development Committee FROM: Lynn Truame, Historic Preservation Planner RE: Expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include Orchard Place DATE: April 9, 2014 At the regular monthly meeting on Tuesday April 8, 2014, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)held a public hearing after which they recommended expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include the properties at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place. Included in this packet is a copy of the resolution adopted by the Commission. Full documentation of the historic and architectural significance of Orchard Place 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 been requested to file a report to the Common Council with respect to relation of the designation of these five properties 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 is the letter from Tompkins County(as required by GML §239-1—m). No reply was received from the Conservation Advisory Council in response to our request(as required by CEQR §176-3-J) for their comment on the proposal. ILPC Meeting—April 8, 2014 Resolution-RE RE: Expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place RESOLUTION: Moved by D.Kramer, seconded by C. O'Malley 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 has been concluded for the purpose of considering a proposal to expand the existing East Hill Historic District to include the five properties along Orchard Place that are not currently included within the district, the boundaries of which are shown on the attached map, 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. and, WHEREAS, the Commission has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposed designation: Two portions of the East Hill neighborhood were first designated as local historic districts in 1974 (the Fountain Place Historic District) and 1976 (the East Hill Historic District). In 1986, the much larger present-day East Hill Historic District was surveyed and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1988, the boundaries of the local East Hill Historic District were expanded to match those of the National Register District, subsuming the two earlier local districts. The period of significance for the East Hill Historic District is 1830-1932. The district derives its greatest significance from the broad collection of architecturally and historically significant 19th and early 20th century residential, commercial, and institutional buildings contained within it. The district includes many of Ithaca's best and most intact examples of popular American architectural styles and modes, including Greek Revival, Gothic Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Shingle, Queen Anne, Renaissance Revival, Colonial Revival, and Arts and Crafts (or Craftsman). The architectural styles employed reflect the neighborhood's prestige and influence and the prominence Ithaca gained after the founding of Cornell University and the New York State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Constructed roughly between the 1830s and 1930s, this building stock reflects Ithaca's growth from a small industrial community to its 20th century role as an internationally known, distinguished educational center. The significance of the Orchard Place properties, which were constructed between 1907 and 1913 in the Colonial Revival and Craftsman styles, is consistent with that of the East Hill Historic District as a whole. In keeping with Section 228-3 C.1 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the Orchard Place properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more appropriately define an area that contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the criteria for designation as an individual landmark. Per criterion #1 of Section 228-3 B, the Orchard Place properties possess a special character, historical interest, and aesthetic interest and value as part of the cultural, political, economic, and social history of the city. The five properties at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place (as well the two at 101 Orchard Place and 115 Eddy, which are already included within the historic district) are significant for their association with the residential growth of East Hill in the decades following the granting of a City Charter to Ithaca in 1888. Planned as single-family residential building lots that were sold to buyers who then contracted with architects or builders to erect a house, the street initially attracted non-Cornell affiliated middle-class business people and professionals, and later, Cornell University faculty and staff. Though planned as a distinct residential enclave, Orchard Place now blends seamlessly into the larger East Hill neighborhood and helps define the district's edge where it abuts the more heavily student-oriented development of the Collegetown neighborhood. Per criterion#3 of Section 228-3 B, Orchard Place is also significant as a collection of early-twentieth century houses embodying the distinguishing characteristics of the popular architectural styles of the era, including Craftsman and Colonial Revival. The Commission has received expert opinion concerning the significance of the Orchard Place buildings as a coherent early twentieth century architectural grouping in the Craftsman and Colonial Revival styles. Two of the five Orchard Place houses (#s 114 and 115) were constructed in the Craftsman style, two (#s 109 and 112) feature elements of both the Craftsman and Colonial Revival styles, and one (#111) is an excellent example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style. 111 Orchard Place gains additional significance for its association with the regionally prominent architectural firm of Pierce &Bickford, Elmira,NY. In keeping with Section 228-3 C.2 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the Orchard Place properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more appropriately define an area that 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 eastern boundary of the East Hill National Register district was established at Eddy Street on the basis of that street having been the 1887 Village boundary. However, the selection of Eddy Street as the eastern boundary was not consistent with the intent stated within the nomination of delineating that part of the East Hill neighborhood that "retained the architectural integrity of the 1870-1920 period". Recent research has revealed that when Eddy Street was selected as the eastern boundary for the National Register district an historically unified, early-twentieth century planned residential development on Orchard Place was bisected, placing two of its seven architecturally and historically related components within the district and the remaining five outside the district. This created an inappropriate artificial distinction between these related historic resources. And, WIIEREAS, the Commission adopts as its own the documentation and information more fully set forth in the report titled Proposed Expansion of the Local East Hill Historic District, prepared by Secretary to the Commission, Lynn C. Truame, based upon material submitted to the ILPC in 2012 by Sara Johnson and Kristen Olson of Historic Ithaca, Inc, and reviewed by Mary Raddant Tomlan,City Historian,now,therefore,be it RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place meet criteria for inclusion within the local East Hill 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 expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place, altering the eastern boundary of the local historic district as shown on the attached map. RECORD OF VOTE: 7-0-0 Yes No Abstain S. Gibian S. Stein E. Finegan D. Kramer M. McGandy C. O'Malley K. Olson AT-- CITY OF ITHACA Ct 108 East Green Street—3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT t L7 r: Division of Planning& Economic Development JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING &ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning&Development—607-274-6550 Community Development/lURA—607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Lisa Nicholas, AICP, Senior Planner Date: May 8, 2014 RE: Planning Board Report Regarding the Proposed Expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place On April 8, 2014, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission recommended expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include the properties at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place. As set forth in the Municipal Code, the Board of Planning and Development must file a report to the Common Council with respect to the relation of the designation of these five properties with the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any plans for renewal of the site or area involved. The Planning and Development Board will finalize this report at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 27, 2014, and forward it to Common Council before the June 4th 2014 meeting. Common Council Meeting June 4,2014-Resolution RE: EXPANSION OF THE LOCAL EAST HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT TO INCLUDE 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 ORCHARD PLACE 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 April 8,2014,the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission conducted a public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to expand the local East Hill Historic District to include the five above-referenced properties on Orchard Place, 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 expand the local East Hill Historic District to include these five properties, 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 of these five properties 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 RESOLVED, that the East Hill Historic District, as expanded by the addition of these five properties, continues to meet 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 expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include the properties located at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place under Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code. i Tompkins:County DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING 121 East Court Street Ithaca,New York 14850 Edward C.Marx,AICP Telephone(607)274-5560 Commissioner of Planning Fax(607)274-5578 March 28, 2014 Lynn C. Truame,Historic Preservation Planner Department of Planning and Development City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca,NY 14850 Re: Review Pursuant to §239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action: Proposal to expand the East Hill Historic District to include properties on Orchard Place Dear Ms. Truame: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to §239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The Department has reviewed the proposal,as submitted,and has determined that it has no negative inter- community, or county-wide impacts. Please inform us of your decision so that we can make it a part of the record. Sincerely, I Edward C.Marx,AICP Commissioner of Planning Inc(usion through Diversity �•� � CITY OF ITHACA Q. `" •,Cti 108 East Green Street—3rd Floor Ithaca,New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING,BUILDING,ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT H U '4 JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR � FOkATE9t��� Telephone: Planning—607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA—607-274-6559 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org E-Mail: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 To: Svante Myrick, Mayor Ari Lavine, City Attorney Common Council JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning, Building, Zoning, &Economic Development Michael Niechwiadowicz, Director of Code Enforcement Phyllis Radke, Director of Zoning Administration Michael Thorne, Superintendent of Public Works Julie Holcomb, City Clerk Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) Planning & Development Board Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) Rental Housing Advisory Commission(RHAC) Edward Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning From: Cynthia Brock, First Ward Alderperson Date: April 22, 2014 RE: Ordinance to Amend Chapter 178 of City Code to Impose Total Ban on Installation & Operation of Outdoor Wood Boilers/Hydronic Heaters in All City Zones The Nuisance Smoke Working Group (composed of Fire Chief Tom Parsons, Director of Code Enforcement Mike Niechwiadowicz, Intern Lee Ann Hill, and me) recommends for passage a total ban on the installation and operation of outdoor wood boilers (OWBs), officially known as hydronic heaters. The City Administration Committee discussed and supported the creation of this legislation at its September 25, 2013 meeting, and expressed the desire this legislation be put in place prior to the installation of the first OWB within the City. OWBs are large stand-alone wood-burning units installed for the purpose of creating hot water radiant heat for buildings or homes. While considered an inexpensive heating method, OWBs' design promotes a cooler, slow-burning fire that does not achieve peak combustion — resulting in high levels of smoke and creosote emissions, as well as nuisance smells.' Owners of OWBs sometimes burn trash, plastic, and other inappropriate materials in their units, which increases smoke and pollutant levels. It is estimated that when used properly OWBs produce 4 times the particulate pollution as conventional wood stoves and 12 times that of EPA-certified wood stoves.2 1 ho://www.woodheat.orL,/outdoor-boilers.htm](accessed April 26,2013) 2"Smoke Gets in Your Lungs:Outdoor Wood Boilers in New York State,"NY State Office of Attorney General(August 2005) hLip://www.health.state.mn.us/asthma/documents/O5Usmokeyourlungs.pdf(accessed April 26,2013) Outdoor wood boilers are becoming increasingly popular regionally and nationwide, and it is the position of the Working Group that the City should proactively prohibit the installation and operation of outdoor wood boilers in an effort to protect and enhance Ithaca's air quality in our urban environment.3 While NYSDEC regulations for outdoor wood boilers require that residential OWBs not be less than 100 feet from the nearest property line4, there are several undeveloped properties within the City of an acre or more where OWBs could be installed under NYSDEC regulations, necessitating the proposed legislation to ensure protection against OWB installations. Please find enclosed the draft ordinance. The Planning and Economic Development Committee will consider this proposed ordinance at its regularly scheduled meeting on WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 2014. Your comments are respectfully requested by that date. 3 Dean Solomon,"Should local governments regulate outdoor wood boilers?-Part 1,"Michigan State Extension(February 28,2013), http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/should_local governments_regulate_outdoor_wood_boilers part 1(accessed April 26,2013) 4 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation,Part 247.5:Outdoor Wood Boilers,htt 2://www.dec.ny og v/regs/71720.htm] (accessed January 2,2014) "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." April 22, 2014 An Ordinance to Amend City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 178 in Order to Impose Total Ban of Outdoor Wood-Burning Furnaces within the City WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that outdoor wood-burning furnaces can provide an alternative to conventional heating systems, generating hot water heat through the use of on-site wood fires rather than coal or gas, and WHEREAS, the Common Council also finds that smoke from these outdoor furnaces often contains unhealthy levels of particulate matter, dioxins, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde, and other toxic pollutants, and WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that exposure to smoke from these furnaces can cause adverse effects to respiratory and cardiovascular systems and exacerbate existing asthmatic sensitivity and lung illness, especially among children and the elderly, and WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that outdoor furnaces are intended to burn only natural wood, but homeowners sometimes add other materials, which can produce toxic air pollutants when burned, and WHEREAS, the Common Council has determined the most effective way to ensure the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City in this instance is to prevent the construction and operation of outdoor wood-burning furnaces, therefore BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council as follows: Section 1. Chapter 178-2, entitled"Definitions," of the City of Ithaca Code, is hereby amended to include an additional definition: "Outdoor Wood-Burning Furnace: an exterior device or structure, designed or intended, through the burning of wood, for the purpose of heating the principal structure, or any other structure on the premises." Section 2. Chapter 178-4, entitled"Standards for exterior structures," of the City Code is hereby amended through the addition of a new subsection E, to be read as follows: "E.No outdoor wood-burning burning furnace be installed, constructed, maintained or operated on the exterior property of premises within the City." Section 3. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,phrase, or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. lloffkpld s GCounty DEPARTMENT OF PLC ISIING ----------- - ------ -- - - 121 East Court Street Ithaca,New York 14850 Edward C.Marx,AICP Telephone(607) 274-5560 Commissioner of Planning Fax (607) 274-5578 April 25, 2014 Charles Pyott, Office Assistant Department of Planning&Economic Development City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca,NY 14850 Re: Review Pursuant to §239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action: Proposed Ordinance to Ban the Installation& Operation of Outdoor Wood Boilers/Hydronic Heaters in All City Zones Dear Mr. Pyott: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to §239-1 and-m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The Department has reviewed the proposal,as submitted, and has determined that it has no negative inter- community, or county-wide impacts. Please inform us of your decision so that we can make it a part of the record. Sincerely, Edward C. Marx,AICP Commissioner of Planning Inc(usion through.Diversity City of Ithaca Planning & Economic Development Committee Wednesday, February 12, 2014 — 6:00 p.m. Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street Minutes Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Graham Kerslick, Vice Chair; Ellen McCollister, Cynthia Brock, and Josephine Martell Committee Members Absent: None Other Elected Officials Attending: Mayor Svante Myrick, Alderpersons Donna Fleming, George McGonigal, and Stephen Smith Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Department of Planning, Building, and Development; Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Planner, Planning, Building, and Development; Megan Wilson, Planner, Department of Planning, Building, and Development; Mike Niechwiadowicz, Director of Code Enforcement; and Debbie Grunder, Executive Assistant, Department of Planning and Development Others Attending: Michael Kuo, Commons Project Manager; Tom West, Director, Engineering Department Chair Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. 1. Agenda Review Chair Murtagh stated the Cornell Heights Rezoning would be discussed at the end of the meeting. 2. Special Order of Business Presentation: Tompkins County Housing Market Trends 2. Public Hearing — Collegetown Area Form Districts (CAFD) Alderperson Kerslick motioned to open the public hearing; seconded by Alderperson McCollister. Passed Unanimously. John Graves, 319 Pleasant Street, and Sheila Squier, 110 Columbia Street spoke on the Collegetown Area Form Districts proposal. Mr. Graves read his comments to the group regarding affordable housing in the Collegetown Area Form Districts. He stated a Collegetown design review board is essential. Members would be chosen by the Mayor and would consist of those who live in the Collegetown area. Theresa Alt, 206 Eddy Street, Go ahead and adopt the form-based zoning. It's a step in the right direction. It removes the very ridiculous option of minimum parking requirements. The Collegetown area is pedestrian friendly. Minimum off-street parking should be lifted from other residential areas within the City especially in the historic districts. Wayles Brown, 206 Eddy Street, seconds Theresa Alt's comments on minimum parking requirements. He would like to see more public transportation. He thinks the proposal should be voted on. Don't modify it now—vote now and modify after. Nathan Lyman, 1322 E. State Street, spoke on behalf of Jason Fane who is in favor of the new Collegetown plan. New buildings will be code compliant, safer, and more comfortable. This will provide environmental pluses since it's close to Cornell and will encourage walking. New buildings will create new jobs which will increase spending and the increase in sales tax is also a plus. It's time for the City to adapt this ordinance. Jane Marcham, 414 East Buffalo Street, spoke on the parking situation in Collegetown. Her impression is the City has received numerous transportation plans. Rezoning will increase growth which will increase parking demands. Where will overnight parking go? The parking requirements need a further look. Max Weisbrod, 207 Fall Creek, He encouraged the eight (8)parcels on Linden Street be changed from CR4 to MU2. This would not derail the proposed rezoning on the table. Ann Sullivan, 109 Irving Place, congratulated JoAnn Cornish for her recent award. She is not in love with the plan, but does think it should be voted on. She doesn't agree with Weisbrod's comments. The transition is crucial for this proposed zoning change. Don't tinker with it. She further spoke that affordable housing should be a focus rather than focusing it on high-end development. That is only used eight(8)months out of the year by privileged students. Tessa Rudan, 226 Bryant Avenue, spoke on the Collegetown Rezoning proposal. Affordable housing should be kept separate from the proposed Collegetown Area Form Districts (CAFD)plan. She would like this to be looked at holistically and to include all neighborhoods. John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue, Apt. F., Ithaca,New York spoke on the history of the Collegetown Plan. No one will be completely happy. That's not a reason to delay the vote on this tonight. The commercial development suggested on Linden Avenue as a MU zone is not a good idea. He encourages us to move this forward. Wendy Wallitt, 209 Valley Road, fully supports to the CAFD plan but the transportation issues have not been sufficiently looked at. If developers are not required to provide parking, whom does it benefit? Does it make the living arrangements better or does a developer benefit? Jan Rhodes Norman, 425 N. Aurora Street, spoke in favor of Collegetown Crossing development which would include Green Star Markets. Joanie Mackowski, 516 Dryden Road, ha§i re concerns of the plan. (1) LEAD standards, architecturally sustainability, (2) affordable` n 'ng is "r sd, and(3) the form is great, but it lacks . . Gail Patrice Lockert Anthony, 104 N. Cayuga Street, spoke in favor of Josh Lower's Collegetown project which includes the Green Star Market. Green Star will educate those who shop there. The money stays here in Ithaca. The transition will allow Lower's project to move forward. Seph Murtagh, read three (3) letters into the record that are attached to these minutes from Alphonse Pieper, Mary Tomlan, and John Novarr. Alderperson McCollister moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Alderperson Brock. The public hearing was closed. 3. Public Comment. John Schroeder, spoke in favor of RU rezoning in the Cornell Heights Historic District. He urges the committee to do this. 4. Announcements, Updates, and Reports Transition Regulations and Extension of Waterfront Zoning will return next month. 5. Action Items—Votin2 to Send on to Council a) Collegetown Area Form Districts An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled "Zoning," to Establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and Rezone Portions of the R-lb, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 Districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU) — Declaration of Lead Agency for Environmental Review Moved by Alderperson McCollister; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed Unanimously. 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 envi '' , ental 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 zoning amendment is a "Type I" Action pursuant to the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review under CEQR; now, therefore,be it RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the adoption of an ordinance to amend the Municipal Zoning Code to establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and to rezone portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, 13-2b, and U-1 districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU). An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled "Zoning," to Establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and Rezone Portions of the R-lb, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 Districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU) — Determination of Environmental Significance WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering an amendment to Chapter 325 of the Municipal Code in order to (1) establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and (2) rezone portions of the R-lb, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU), and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form(FEAF), dated January 8, 2014, and WHEREAS, these zoning amendments have been reviewed by the Tompkins County Planning Department Pursuant to §239-1—m of the New York State General Municipal Law, which requires that all actions within 500 feet of a county or state facility, including county and state highways, be reviewed by the County Planning Department, and have also been reviewed by the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council and the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, and WHEREAS, the proposed action is a "Type I" Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the FEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth in the Full Environmental Assessment Form, dated January 8, 2014, and be it further RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary, and be it further 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. An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled "Zoning" To Establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and Rezone Portions of the R-1 b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, 13-2b, and U-1 Districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU) Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson McCollister. Passed Unanimously. WHEREAS, the "2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines" was endorsed by the Common Council on August 5, 2009, and the adoption of a form-based code has been considered to be a critical implementation measure, and WHEREAS, based on the advice of a consultant, the City has decided to pursue a hybrid code rather than a true form-based code because (1) the hybrid code includes regulations of density and use that are not included in true form-based codes and density continues to be a critical issue in the Collegetown area and (2) this type of zoning is new to the City and the hybrid code would ease the transition from traditional zoning, and WHEREAS, a working group consisting of Common Council members, a Planning Board member, and City staff has revised a previous zoning proposal for Collegetown to create a clarified proposal that reflects the goals of the "2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines;" now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: ORDINANCE NO. Section 1. Declaration of Legislative Findings and Purpose The "2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines" identifies several goals for future development in Collegetown. These goals include: • To encourage exceptional urban design and high-quality construction; • To regulate elements of building form to ensure a consistent transition between districts; • To concentrate development in the central areas of Collegetown and protect the character of the established residential neighborhoods; • To preserve and enhance green space that is a vital ecological, recreational, and aesthetic component of the urban environment; and • To promote attractive, walkable neighborhoods that prioritize accommodation of alternate modes of transportation The "2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines" recommends the adoption of a form-based code to regulate elements of building form that are not addressed under traditional zoning. The Collegetown Area Form Districts is a hybrid code that combines regulations of physical form with regulations of use and density. The Common Council finds that the establishment of the Collegetown Area Form Districts will advance the City's goals for future development in Collegetown as specified in the "2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines." Section 2. Chapter 325, Sections 325-4 and 325-5 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca are hereby amended to establish and add the Collegetown Area Form Districts which include the following zoning districts: Collegetown Residential 1 (CR-1), Collegetown Residential 2 (CR-2), Collegetown Residential (CR-3), Collegetown Residential (CR-4), Mixed Use 1 (MU-1), and Mixed Use 2 (MU-2). Section 3. Chapter 325 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to add a new Article to be inserted as Article IX, entitled "Collegetown Zoning," and all subsequent articles and sections shall be hereby renumbered accordingly. "§325-45 Collegetown Area Form Districts," dated January 6, 2014, shall be inserted in its entirety into said Article IX as §325-45. Section 4. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-1 b, and R-3a to CR-1 for the following tax parcels: 64.-6-1; 64.-6-2.2; 64.-6-3; 64.-7-1; 64.-7-2; 64.-7-3; 64.-7-4; 64.-7-5; 64.-7-6; 65.-2-1; 65.-2-2; 65.-2-3; 65.-2-4; 65.-2-5; 67.-2-8; 67.-2-9; 67.-2-10; 67.-2-11; 67.-3-18; 67.-3-19; 67.- 3-20; 67.-3-21; 67.-3-22; 83.-6-2; and 84.-1-1. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 5. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-2a, R-2b, and R-3a to CR-2 for the following tax parcels: 64.-1-1; 64.- 1-2; 64.-1-4; 64.-3-1; 64.-3-2; 64.-3-3; 64.-3-4; 64.-3-5; 64.-3-6; 64.-3-7; 64.-3-8; 64.4-1; 64.-4-2; 64.4-3; 64.4-4; 64.-4-5; 64.-5-1; 64.-5-2; 64.-5-3; 64.-5-4; 64.-8-7; 64.-8-8; 64.-8- 9; 64.-8-10; 65.-1-1; 65.-1-2; 65.-1-3; 65.-1-4; 65.-1-5; 68.-6-12; 68.-6-13; 68.-6-14; 68.-6- 15; 68.-7-2; 68.-7-3; 68.-7-4; 68.-7-5; 68.-7-6; 68.-7-7; 68.-7-8; 68.-8-6; 68.-8-9; 83.-3-2; 83.-3-3; 83.-3-4; 83.-3-5; 83.-3-6.1; 83.-3-6.2; 83.-3-7; 83.-3-8; 83.-3-9; 83.-4-1; 83.-4-3; 83.-4-4; 83.4-5; 83.4-6; 83.-6-1; and 83.-6-3. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 6. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, and R-3b to CR-3 for the following tax parcels: 64.-2-7; 64.-2-8; 64.-2-9; 64.-2-11; 64.-2-13; 64.-8-1; 64.-8-2; 64.-8-3; 64.-8-4; 64.-8-5; 64.-8-6; 64.-8-11; 64.-9-3; 64.-9-4; 64.-9-5; 64.-9-7; 64.-9-8; 64.-9-9; 67.-2-3; 67.-2-4; 67.-2-5; 67.-3-2; 67.-3-3; 67.-3-23; 67.-3-24; 67.-3-25; 67.-3-26; 68.-5-14; 68.-5-15; 68.-5-16; 68.-5-17; 68.-5-18; 68.-5-19; 68.-6-1; 68.-6-16; 68.-6-17; 68.-6-18; and 68.-6- 19. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 7. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-1 b, R-3a, and R-3b to CR-4 for the following tax parcels: 64.-2-2; 64.-2-4; 64.-2-5; 64.-2-6; 64.-2-14; 64.-2-15; 64.-2-17; 64.-2-18; 64.-2-19; 64.-2-20; 64.-2-22; 64.-9-1; 64.-9-2; 64.-9-6; 64.-9-10; 64.-10-7; 64.-10-8; 64.-10-9; 64.-10-10; 64.-10-11; 64.-10-13; 67.-1-4; 67.-1-5; 67.-1-6; 67.-1-7; 67.-1-8; 67.-2-1; 67.-2-2; 67.-2-12; 67.-2-13; 67.-2-14; 67.-2-15; 67.-2-16; 67.-2-17; 67.-2-18; 67.-3-1; 67.-3-29; 67.-3-30; 67.-3-31; 68.-4-3; 68.4-9; 68.4-10; 68.-4-11; 68.4-12; 68.4-13; 68.-4-14; 68.4-15; 68.-5-2; 68.-5-3; 68.-5-4; 68.-5-5; 68.-5-6; 68.- 5-7; 68.-5-8; 68.-5-9; 68.-6-2; 68.-6-3; 68.-6-4; 68.-6-5; 68.-6-6; 68.-6-7; 68.-6-8; 68.-6- 9; 68.-6-10; 68.-6-11; 83.-4-2; and portions of 64.-10-15; 67.-1-1; and 67.-1-3. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 8. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-3b to MU-1 for the following tax parcels: 67.-1-9; 67.-1-10; 67.- 1-11; 67.-1-12; 68.-5-10; 68.-5-11; 68.-5-12; 68.-5-13; and a portion of 67.-1-3. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 9. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the designation from R-3a, R-3b, U-1 and B-2b to MU-2 for the following tax parcels: 63.-5-2; 63.-5-3; 63.-5-5; 63.-5-7; 63.-5-8; 63.-5-9; 63.-6-1; 63.-6-2; 63.-6-3; 63.-6-4; 63.-6-5; 63.-6-8; 63.-6-14; 63.-6-17; 63.-6-19; 63.-6-20; 63.-6-21; 63.-6-23; 63.-6-24; 63.-6-25; 63.-6-26; 64.-2-1; 64.-2-23; 64.-2-24; 64.-2-26; 64.-2-27; 64.-2-28; 64.-2-29; 64.-2-30; 64.-2-31; 64.-2-32; 64.-10-1; 64.-10-2; 64.-10-3; 64.-10-4; 64.-10-5; 64.-10-6; 64.-10-17.2; 64.-10-18; 64.-10-19; 64.-10-20; 64.-10-21; 68.-4-6; 68.-4-7; 68.-4-8; and portions of 64.-10-15; and 67.-1-1. The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled "Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014," a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk's office. Section 10. All applicable sections within the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca shall be updated in accordance with the amendments made herewith. Section 11 . Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 12. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. b) Amendment to Capital Project 724—Ithaca Commons Repair and Upgrade Project Amendment to Capital Project 724-Ithaca Commons Repair and Upgrade Protect - Resolution Moved by Alderperson Martell; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Passed Unanimously. 1. WHEREAS, in 2007, the Common Council authorized, as a part of the 2008 capital budget, $250,000 to begin preliminary design on repairs and upgrades to the Ithaca Commons, and Capital project 724, Ithaca Commons Design and Construction, was established, and 2. WHEREAS, in June of 2009, the City hired Sasaki Associates, a Boston based planning, design, and architectural firm, to design upgrades and repairs for the Commons, and 3. WHEREAS, after extensive analysis it was determined that due to the necessary repairs to the surfaces and the underground utilities the entire Commons would need to be reconstructed, and °88888$80. 4. WHEREAS, in October of 2010, the Common Council authorized, as part of the 2011 capital budget an amendment to capital project 724, to add an additional $800,000 to complete the full design and preparation of construction drawings for the full redesign of the Commons, and 5. WHEREAS, in March of 2012, the Common Council passed a resolution authorizing staff to apply for a federal grant to fund the reconstruction of the Commons and confirmed its intent to commit the City to matching funds of$3,500,000 towards this project, and 6. WHEREAS, in July of 2012, the City was notified that the US Federal Transit Administration(FTA) was awarding the City a $4,500,000 grant towards the reconstruction of the Ithaca Commons, and 7. WHEREAS, in November of 2012, Common Council authorized, as part of the 2013 capital budget, an amendment to capital project 724 to cover the upfront costs of the reconstruction, including the $3,500,000 that the Common Council had pledged to commit to this project and the $4,500,000 in funds to be reimbursed by the FTA at the completion of the project, and 8. WHEREAS, in July of 2012, the City submitted a Consolidated Funding Application to the New York State Southern Tier Regional Council for additional funding assistance for the reconstruction of the Commons, and in December was notified that the they would be receiving $1,800,000, in reimbursable funds to be used towards the reconstruction of the Commons, and 9. WHEREAS, on February 6, 2013, the City received one bid on the general construction contract for the Commons with a cost that was significantly higher than the budget estimates that were prepared by the City' s design firm, and 10. WHEREAS, if the City chooses to execute all of the contract deducts, which include, the removal of the fountain, the pavilion, the two gateway structures, a reduction in the amount of structural soil, a substitution of concrete pavers in place of granite pavers, the removal of movable planters, the substitution of the semi-movable chairs with movable chairs, and the removal of the play structure, the cost will still exceed the budget by nearly$2,000,000, and 11. WHEREAS, in order to award the general construction contract, the City must elect to execute all of the bid deducts and must also amend capital project 724, by adding an additional $3,800,000, to include the upfront cost of the CFA funds, and the $2,000,000, in additional expenses, and ,AMb, 12. WHEREAS, once the City awards a contract for the general construction there may be an opportunity to negotiate some additional savings for the project in order to recoup the additional expenses or to reincorporate some of the removed elements, and 13. WHEREAS, in order to complete construction in 2013, the contractor must be given notice to proceed by March 7, 2013, and therefore now be it .. 14. RESOLVED, that the Common Council approves an addition to Capital Project 724 in an amount not to exceed $3,800,000, for a total authorization of$13,850,000. .oSS�8S�888S8��S"oa•. 6. Action Items—Voting to Send to Council a) Planned Development Zones Legislation Moved By Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Passed Unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ITHACA, CHAPTER 325, ENTITLED "ZONING" IN ORDER TO CREATE A SEOITINGD,RLNMEANDEVNACCPMBNWyZOXMNGoDMSTRTCTiacil of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325, of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca be amended in as follows : Section 1. Chapter 325 ( "Zoning" ) , Article IV is hereby amended to change the title from "Cluster Subdivision Development" to "Cluster Sub-division, Floating Zones and Planned Development Zones" and to be re-numbered to read as follows : Article IV. Cluster Subdivision Development, Floating Zones and Planned Development Zones § 325-11. Cluster Subdivisions A. Purpose and intent. This article authorizes the Planning and Development Board, during the process of subdivision plat approval pursuant to Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the Code, to make reasonable changes in the existing zoning regulations for the property affected so as to enable the development of a cluster subdivision. This authorization permits deviations in the district regulations applicable to the affected property, subject to the limitations contained in this section. Cluster subdivisions may be approved in order to promote the following purposes: (L) The preservation and enhancement of open� �'lp watercourses,wetlands and areas designated as critical environmental areas. (2.) The development of active and passive recreation areas. (3.) The development of residential dwelling units in forms which are consistent with the public welfare and which provide reasonable safeguards to the appropriate use of adjoining land. al, (4.) Efficient and cost-effective development of roads, sidewalks, utilities, water-and sewer lines and other forms of public and private infrastructure. (5.) The development of housing that is more affordable than that normally developed under conventional zoning regulations. B. Authorization and Minimum Requirements. The Planning and Development Board is authorized, upon petition by an applicant for subdivision approval, to approve a cluster subdivision that includes reasonable deviations from the existing regulations of that zoning district in which the subdivision is located in accordance with the following limitations: (L) Cluster subdivisions may only be permitted in the R-la, R-lb, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a and R-3b Zoning Districts. (2.) Cluster subdivisions shall contain only those primary uses and accessory uses which are permitted in the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed, except as permitted by Subsection 325-11B.(3). (3.) The following types of deviations from the zoning regulations of the district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed are permitted: Building type for residential uses, provided that, in the R-la and R-lb Districts, only one-family detached dwellings are permitted as primary uses, and in the R-2a and R- 2b Districts, no more than two dwelling units may be attached to form a single building,provided that each dwelling unit shall have a separate ground-level entrance. Lot area. Lot width at street line. Maximum percentage of land coverage by buildings on any individual lot within the cluster subdivision, provided that the total percentage of land coverage by all buildings in the cluster subdivision shall not exceed the following percentages for the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is located: Maximum Land Coverage District(percent) fffN R-l a 20 R-lb 25 R-2a 30 R-2b 35 R-3a 35 R-3b 40 e. Front, side and rear yard dimensions, provided that all buildings in a cluster subdivision shall have a front yard of at least 25 feet in the R-la, R-lb, and R-2a Zones and 10 feet in the R-2b, R-3a and R-3b Zones, and further provided that all buildings in a cluster subdivision shall be at least the following number of feet from the boundary of a cluster subdivision where it abuts land, other than a public right-of- way, that is not part of the cluster subdivision: [1] In the R-1 Districts: 40 feet. [2] In the R-2 and R-3 Districts: 20 feet. (4.) The maximum number of dwelling units permitted in a cluster subdivision shall not exceed the number of dwelling units that would be permitted on the site in a conventional subdivision under the conventional zoning regulations for the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed, subject to all applicable development regulations applying to the property in question plus any other restriction which the Planning and Development Board has the authority to impose pursuant to Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the Code. (5.) Any reduction in the lot area for buildings in a cluster subdivision beyond the minimum allowed in the zoning district in which the subdivision is located shall require the reservation of an equivalent amount of land as open space,passive recreation area or active recreation area. Wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes or other areas not normally appropriate for building construction shall not account for more than 50% of the land area reserved. (6.) All open space or recreation areas reserved in accordance with Subsection 3251113. (5) shall be dedicated as common land for the benefit of the members of the subdivision. The development, operation and maintenance of this property shall be in accordance with the approved site development plan and in a manner that is consistent with the public welfare C. Approval; information to be submitted. (1.) The Planning and Development Board may consider a developer's request for approval of a cluster subdivision or may require that a developer prepare and submit plans for a cluster subdivision that contain no greater number of dwelling units than that proposed by the developer. The Board shall adopt rules and regulations setting forth the criteria pursuant to which such an application may be required. The approval of a cluster subdivision shall follow the rules and procedures contained in Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the City of Ithaca Code. (2.) Developers submitting a cluster subdivision plan shall submit two subdivision plans, one showing the land developed under the conventional zoning regulations and the other showing development under the cluster option. In addition to the requirements of Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the Code, the developer shall submit the following information on or with the cluster subdivision plan: An area plan showing the proposed cluster subdivision and all existing land use and major natural features of the land within 500 feet of the project site. A site development plan showing the location, size, use and physical features of all proposed buildings and accessory uses, the location and design of vehicular and pedestrian access and the location of proposed parking areas. A landscaping plan showing the type and location of all existing trees, vegetation and natural features on the site; the identification of all existing vegetation to be preserved; the identification of all new vegetation to be added; and the location and type of fences,berms or buffer areas. A plan showing the boundaries of common areas to be reserved and the proposed use, development and maintenance of those spaces. Elevations of typical dwelling units to be constructed in the cluster subdivision. Environmental review of the project at a level deemed appropriate by the Planning and Development Board. Any other information that the Planning and Development Board may reasonably require. (3.) The approval of a cluster subdivision shall constitute the approval of a site development plan for the affected area. No development shall occur on the site that is not in strict conformance with the elements of the approved site development plan, nor shall the plan be modified without the approval of the Planning and Development Board. (4.) A cluster subdivision shall not be approved unless the Planning and Development Board makes the following affirmative findings and states, in writing, the facts that support those findings: a$8888888885�' ............. That the development is found to be compatible in terms of appearance, character and overall density with both the existing and potential development in the surrounding area. hh hhk. That the development will not place an unreasonable burden on the public roads or utilities that will service the project. That the development will promote the preservation of open space and natural resources within the neighborhood to a greater degree than would conventional development ° `Ili; That the development is consistent with the public welfare and at the appropriate use of adjoining land is reasonably safeguarded. That the development will not have an undue adverse impact on the critical area listed in § 176-5(B)(1)(a) of the Code. That the development complies with the approved Street Plan and Master Plan, if any, for the area. Section 2 Chapter 32 li ' mng ), ion § 325-12, is hereby amended to replace all existing text with the following n� N garding Planned Development Zones: Section §325-12 Planned Development Zones (PDZ) A. Declaration of Legislative Authority. This Planned Development Zone (PDZ) being established pursuant to the authority established in the New York State general City Law § 81-f. B. Purpose and Intent.A PDZ is a floating overlay zone,which may be placed within the City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by the Common Council. The PDZ is a tool intended to be used to encourage mixed-use or unique single use projects that require more creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PDZ allows for flexibility in planning and design,while through the process of review and discussion, insures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest. A PDZ should be used only when long-term community benefits will be achieved through high quality development, including,but not limited to,reduced traffic demands, greater quality and quantity of public and/or private open space, community recreational amenities, needed housing types and/or mix, innovative designs; and for the protection and/or preservation of natural resources. This article is intended to relate to both residential and nonresidential development, as well as mixed forms of development. There may be uses, now or in the future, which are not expressly permitted by the other terms of this chapter but which uses would not contravene the long range Comprehensive Plan objectives if they adhere to certain predetermined performance and design conditions. The PDZ is intended to be used to enable these developments to occur even though they may not be specifically authorized by the City Zoning District Regulations. Areas may be zoned as a PDZ by the Common Council, all in accordance with the normal rezoning procedures. The enactment and establishment of such a zone shall be a legislative act. No owner of land or other person having an interest in land shall be entitled as a matter of right to the enactment or establishment of any such zone. C. Establishment and location. Because the intention is to create self-contained, architecturally consistent and compatible buildings, many times with diverse but related uses, and because the creation of a PDZ will entail sufficient review to assure the uses within the zone will have negligible or no adverse effects upon properties surrounding the zone, a PDZ may be created in any zone within the City. In reaching its decision on whether to rezone to a PDZ, the Common Council shall consider the general criteria set forth in this chapter, the most current Comprehensive Plan for the City, and this statement of purpose D. Permitted principal and accessory uses. In a PDZ buildings and land may be used for any lawful purpose permitted in the zone where it is located, plus any other uses which the Common Council may authorize. All development restrictions, including, but not limited to, yard size, height restriction, building coverage, and lot size, shall be as set forth in the legislation rezoning the area to a PDZ established by the Common Council. In addition, the Common Council may impose any conditions or limitations that are determined to be necessary or desirable to insure that the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, requiring acoustical or visual screening, construction sequencing, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of the development. E. Site Plan Approval.No structure shall be erected or placed within a PDZ,no building permit shall be issued for a building or structure within a PDZ, and no existing building, structure or use in a PDZ be changed,unless the proposed building and/or use is in accordance with a site plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 276 of the City of Ithaca Code. F. Criteria. Common Council will consider an application for PDZ on the following criteria: •Is the p�oaect in es ccordan ce wit iee 1 G. Appl' ocess. An applicant proposing a development that does not conform with the existing nFequirements may apply for a PDZ to be placed on their property. The application p s is as follows: erm seen . [1] Stevleoper Pre-Application Meeting. A developer seeking alternate zoning for ���Y ene i their p operty must first contact the City Planning Division for a pre-application meeting. Staff will explain the requirements, the application process, the timeline, and the fees associated with a PDZ request. [2] Application Submission. Developer must submit a completed PDZ Application along with the required fee. The Application must include a conceptual development plan and an explanation of the request for alternate zoning. [3] Public Information Session. Within 30 days of receiving a completed application the City will schedule a public information session, at which the developer will be responsible for presenting information about the project and answering questions from the public. The City will advertise the public information session with a press release to the local media. The developer is responsible for posting the property at least 5 days prior to the public information session, with the date, time, and location of the meeting. '@$$,$,9&888 [4] Planning Committee. The Planning Committee of the Common Council will consider the application for a planned development zone, will schedule a legal public hearing and authorize circulation of the proposal for review and comment from City Boards/Committees, the Tompkins County Planning Department, and any neighboring property owners located within 200 feet of the property requesting the PDZ. [5] Circulation. City staff will circulate the proposed PDZ materials for review and comment and will forward comments and concerns to the developer and to the Common Council. [6] Committee Recommendation. Once the comments have been received the Planning Committee will consider the proposal along with the comments and will make a recommendation to the Common Council. The recommendation may include additional requirements or limitations to either mitigate undesirable impacts or to ensure that the development conforms with the goals of the City's Comprehensive Plan. [7] Conditional Approval. The Common Council will consider the request and may grant a conditional approval subject to further site plan review approval. Unless otherwise stated in the resolution,the developer will not be required to return to the Common Council for further approval, if they meet all of the requirements of the Planning Board during the site plan review process. [8] Final Approval.Upon receiving final site plan approval, the Planning Board will also grant the project a final PDZ designation. The Planning Board will notify the Planning Division to update the Official City Zoning Map,by designating the proposed area as "Planned Development Zone District Number " and the zoning requirements will stand as established by the Common Council ordinance, unless the PDZ designation is revoked for failure to comply with the requirements also established by the Common Council ordinance. H. Additional Requirements. In any rezoning to a PDZ the Common Council may impose such conditions or limitations that the Council,-in its legislative discretion, may determine to be necessary or desirable to insure the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of the development. 1. Expiration. A developer who receives PDZ approval will have 18 months from the time that they receive final site plan approval to begin construction of their project. If construction on the property has not begun in accordance with the approved plan after 18 months, the Common Council may revoke the PDZ status and the property will return to the previously approved zoning restrictions. In the ease of extenuating circumstances the developer may apply to the Common Council for an extension of PDZ approval. i$hl If the site plan changes significantly, as determined by the Director of Planning and Development, it may require re-consideration by the Common Council. The Director of Planning and Development may determine that the changes are minor and do not require re- approval. Section 3 . Chapter 325 . ("Zoning") , Section § 325-13 , is hereby amended to delete all existing text, which has been relocated to 325-11 C. Approval; Information to be submitted. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. 7) Review and Approval of Minutes a) December 2013 - Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Minutes were approved. 8) Adjournment Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson McCollister. The meeting was adjourned at 9:02 p.m. 111�1 liiiiilo ���i����i��i��� • III �� .n � a Section 5 . Effective date . This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. Recommended Guidelines for Consideration of a PDZ Application l. In considering an application for a Planned Unit Development district,particularly as regards the intensity of land use, Common Council shall consider the following questions: a) What are the proposed land uses in the proposed location?b) Is the PUD a desirable way to regulate the development of the proposed site? c) What are the heights of buildings? How do building masses and locations compare to each other and to other structures in the vicinity? d) Are there available and adequate transportation systems within the PUD for pedestrians,bicycles, and motor vehicles, including transit? What is the impact on the external transportation network? e) What is the character of the neighborhood in which the PUD is being proposed? Are there safeguards provided to minimize possible detrimental effects of the proposed use on adjacent properties and the neighborhood in general? f)How do the proposed open space and recreational systems function within the PUD and in relation to the City's overall open space and recreational systems? g)What is the general ability of the land to support the development, including such factors as slope, depth to bedrock, depth to water table and soil type?h)What potential impacts are there on environmental,historical, and architectural resources?Does the proposed PUD serve to protect these resources? i)What potential impacts are there on local government services?j) Is there available and adequate water service?k)Is there available and adequate sewer service? 1) Other questions as may be deemed appropriate by the Common Council.