Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-22-15 Planning and Development Board Meeting AgendaCITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558   NOTICE OF MEETING      APPLICANT OVERHEAD PROJECTOR NOTE:   The City only has a VGA plug/cable  available to connect to our overhead  projector.  If you need to connect another  way, you will need to provide your own  ADAPTOR.  (Macs & many newer, lighter  laptops may not have a VGA port.)  If you have a disability & would like specific  accommodation to participate,    please contact the City Clerk at 274‐6570 by  12:00 p.m., the day before the meeting. The regular meeting of the PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD will be held at 6:00 p.m. on SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2015 in COMMON  COUNCIL CHAMBERS, City Hall, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY.      AGENDA ITEM  Start Time 1.  Agenda Review  6:00 2.  Special Order of Business: Comprehensive Plan ― Phase 2 (Megan Wilson, Senior Planner) 6:01 3.  Privilege of the Floor (3‐minute maximum per person ― if you will be speaking about a project  with a scheduled PUBLIC HEARING below Ø, you are highly encouraged to speak at that time)  6:20 4.  Site Plan Review    A. Project: State Street Triangle Project (Mixed‐Use Housing & Retail)6:40   Location: 301 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd.    Applicant: Michael Orsak for Campus Advantage    Actions: ˆ PUBLIC HEARING  ˆ CEQR Discussion  ˆ Design Review Committee Meeting     Project Description:  The applicant proposes to redevelop the 0.759‐acre site with a mixed‐use building having  216,434 GFS (reduced from 288,845), with approximately 12,341 SF of new ground‐floor retail space, 2,029 SF  of which is anticipated to be a restaurant.  Upper floors will have a mix of unit types (1‐bedroom/1‐bath to 5‐ bedroom/4‐bath) for a total of 232 units with approximately 582 bedrooms (reduced from 240 units with 620  bedrooms).  Most of the building is 11 stories and 116’ tall; however, portions are stepped down to 95 and 85  feet in height.  The targeted market is primarily college students.  The ground level includes a loading/delivery  area with vehicular access provided from N. Aurora Street and the below‐grade level includes a trash area with  vehicular access from Green St.  35 parking spaces will be eliminated, with only limited on‐site temporary  parking proposed.  The project is in the CDB‐120 Zoning District.  This is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca  Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), §176‐4 B. (1) (h)[4], (k) and (n), and the State  Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), §617.4 (6.)(iv) and (11), and is subject to environmental review.   B. Project: Four Multi‐Family Dwellings ― “Pocket Neighborhood 7:40   Location: 215‐221 Spencer St.     Applicant: Noah Demarest, STREAM Collaborative, for PPM Homes     Actions: ˆ Determination of Environmental Significance & Recommendation to BZA  “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 2        Project Description:  The applicant proposes to build a new multi‐family “pocket neighborhood” on a hillside site  between W. Spencer St. and W. Cayuga St.   The project will include four buildings, each of which will be 3  stories tall and contain 3 units (12 units total).  A 12‐car parking area is proposed with access off W. Cayuga  Street.  Site circulation will be organized with a series of landscaped stairs and terraces connecting through the  site.  The project also includes lighting, retaining walls, and landscaping.  The project is in the R‐3b Zoning District  and requires a variance for parking.  This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality  Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and is subject to environmental review.     C. Project: Site Improvements 8:00   Location: 416 E. State St.    Applicant: Scott Whitham    Actions: ˆ Declaration of Lead Agency  ˆ PUBLIC HEARING      Project Description: The applicant proposes to convert the rear portion of the existing commercial space into a  bar, expand and renovate the existing office space, create one apartment, and provide storage.  Exterior  renovations include construction of rear deck and stairs connecting the back entrance to the adjacent parking  area, the addition of a curb‐cut on State St. and a circular drive, the addition of a 3‐car parking area, walkways,  landscaping, lighting, and signage.  The new bar, office spaces, and apartment require 40 off‐street parking  spaces.  The applicant states a Memorandum of Agreement is being signed with Gateway Plaza, located directly  south of 416‐418 E. State Street, so that 37 parking spaces would be allocated to the applicant under a shared  parking agreement.  The project is in the B‐4 Zoning District and the East Hill Historic District.  The project  requires variances for existing area deficiencies and a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Ithaca Landmarks  Preservation Commission (ILPC).  This is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review  Ordinance (“CEQRO”) §176‐4 (h) [4] and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 (11), and  is subject to environmental review.     D. Project: Hotel Ithaca Renovations                                     8:30    Location: 222 S. Cayuga St.    Applicant: David Hart    Actions: ˆ Amended Negative Declaration of Significance    Project Description: A project on this site was approved on 7/24/12.  The applicant has since redesigned the  project and now seeks Site Plan Approval for a new proposal.  The new proposal is for construction of a five‐ story wing with first‐ and second‐floor connections to the existing building.   These connections will create a  new pre‐function area on the north side of the existing ballroom, new break‐out rooms, and a new fitness  center.  Site improvements will include new landscaping, walkways, and site furnishings.  Vehicular circulation  will remain the same, but parking throughout the site will be reorganized, resulting in a reduction from 106 to  97 spaces.  Site Demolition will include removal of the north and west multi‐story wings, as well as paving and  some landscaping.  The project is in the CDB‐100 Zoning District and requires Design Review.  This is a Type I  Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), §176‐4 B.(1) (h.)(4) and (l)  and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), §617.4 (11).  The Lead Agency will amend the  Negative Declaration issued on 3/27/12.  This project requires a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).   E. SKETCH PLAN:  815 S. Aurora St. ― 87‐Unit Housing Project                    9:00  5. Zoning Appeals  9:20   • #2994, Area Variance, 215‐221 W. Spencer St.   • #2999, Area Variance,  1106 N. Cayuga St   • #3003, Area Variance, 209‐215 Dryden Rd.   • #3004, Area Variance, 701 & 705 N. Aurora St.    • #3005, Area Variance, 123‐127, 133, 135‐139 E. State St. (Harold’s Square)     6. Old/New Business   A. December 2015 Planning Board Schedule   B. Interim Design Guidelines for Collegetown & Downtown   C. Recommendation to Board of Public Works Re: Railing Height on Cascadilla Creek   9:30 7. Reports     A.  Planning Board Chair (verbal)  9:45  B.  Director of Planning & Development (verbal)    C.  Board of Public Works Liaison (verbal)     8. Approval of Minutes: 6/23/15, 6/30/15 (Special Meeting), &/or 7/28/15 (time permitting) 9:55     9. Adjournment 9:56   ACCESSING MEETING MATERIALS ONLINE    Site Plan Review & Subdivision Applications (and Related Documents)  Site Plan Review application documents are accessible electronically via the “Document Center” on the City web site  (www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter), under “Planning & Development” > “Site Plan Review Project Applications,” and in the relevant year/month  folder.  Subdivision application materials can be similarly located, but in the “Subdivision Applications” folder.    Zoning Appeal Materials are also accessible electronically via the “Document Center” on the City web site, under “Board of Zoning Appeals."    Agenda  You may access this agenda (which will include attachments) by going to the “Agenda Center” on the City web site  (www.cityofithaca.org/agendacenter), under “Planning & Development Board.”  For ease‐of‐access, a link to the most recent Planning Board agenda  will always be accessible on the Planning Board home page: http://www.cityofithaca.org/354/Planning‐Development‐Board.  “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 3 CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org   TO: Planning and Development Board FROM: Megan Wilson, Senior Planner DATE: September 16, 2015 RE: Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan will include more detailed neighborhood and thematic plans that build upon Plan Ithaca. There are numerous plans to be completed as part of Phase II; Plan Ithaca identifies several thematic plans and many neighborhoods are in need of updated plans. Work on Phase II will begin in early 2016, and Planning staff will focus on preparing two plans. Common Council will soon determine its top priorities for this next phase and will consider a recommendation from the Planning Board as it makes this decision. As its final task, the Comprehensive Plan Committee prepared a recommendation of its priorities for Phase II as well as the top 20 recommendations from Plan Ithaca that it believes are the most important for the City to implement. During its consideration of Phase II priorities, the Committee referenced the General Neighborhood Map, a list of thematic plans identified in Plan Ithaca, and a list of previous City plans. All of these materials are included for your review. Staff will attend the September 22nd Planning Board meeting to discuss priorities for Phase II. If you have any questions prior to the meeting, please contact me at mwilson@cityofithaca.org or 274- 6560. NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 DatumData Source: City of Ithaca Department of Public Works, 2013Map Prepared by: City of Ithaca GIS Program, June, 2015 TOWN OF ITHACA CITY OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA CITY OF ITHACA Treman Marina Newman Golf Course Fall Creek Gorge Linn Street Woods Cascadilla Gorge Six Mile Creek Valley Buttermilk Creek Gorge and Inlet Valley Slope South Hill Swamp Renwick Slope Palmer Woods Octopus Cliffs COLLEGETOWN WATERFRONT & INLET ISLAND SOUTH SIDE WASHINGTONPARK CORNELLHEIGHTS EASTHILL NORTH SIDE DOWNTOWN BRYANT PARK &BELLE SHERMAN FALLCREEK SOUTH HILL SOUTHWESTAREA WEST HILL CORNELL TOWN OF ITHACA CITY OF ITHACA UNIVERSITYHILL SPENCERROAD Stewart Park Cass Park Negundo Woods Allan Treman Marina Strawberry Fields Ithaca Falls Natural Area Wood Street Park McDaniels Park Dewitt Park Baker Park Bryant Park Conley Park Conway Park Brindley Park Thompson Park Maplewood Park Auburn Park Titus Triangle Dryden Road Park Cayuga Lake Cayuga Inlet Fall Creek Sixm ile C reek Cascadilla Creek ±1:7,000 General Neighborhood Map 0 3,0001,500 Feet Legend City Boundary Waterway Park/Natural Area 7/20/15 EXISTING CITY PLANS Plan Date Adopted/Endorsed Neighborhood Plans Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines 2009 Turning the Corner: A Vision for the Northside Neighborhood 2003 Gun Hill Area 2003 Southwest Area Land Use Plan 2001 Southwest Natural Area Master Plan 2001 West Hill Master Plan 1992 Report of the Inlet Island Land Use Committee 1992 Southside Neighborhood Plan Not completed Design Plans & Design Guidelines West End Urban Design Plan 1999 Design Guidelines for the Southwest Area and the Elmira Road-Meadow Street Corridor 2000 Northside Design Study 1998 Downtown Design Plan 1997 Inlet Island Urban Design Plan 2001 Thematic Plans New York State Local Waterfront Revitalization Program: Cayuga Lake Waterfront Plan 2006 Evaluation of Six Point Traffic Plan 2001 City Parks Inventory 1998 Update in Progress Ithaca Bicycle Plan (2001 Amendment) 1997 Draft Transportation Plan Not completed Draft Trails Master Plan Not completed PHASE II THEMATIC PLANS IDENTIFIED IN PLAN ITHACA 1. Housing Strategy 2. City Transportation Plan 3. Park System Plan 4. Natural Areas Management Plan 5. Trails Master Plan 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMITTEE August 17, 2015 PRIORITY PLANS FOR PHASE II Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan will consist of thematic plans, identified in Plan Ithaca, and more detailed neighborhood plans. After reviewing the lists of previously completed plans and plans identified in Plan Ithaca, the Comprehensive Plan Committee recommended the following plans to be top priorities in Phase II. The plans are listed in order, as ranked by the Committee. Thematic Plans 1. Housing Strategy a. Recommendation 5.1B: As part of Phase II of Plan Ithaca, prepare a housing strategy to identify specific ways to increase housing supply and decrease housing costs. b. All recommendations from Section 5.1 Housing should be considered as part of the housing strategy. 2. Transportation Plan a. Recommendation 6.2A: As part of Phase II of Plan Ithaca, complete, adopt, and implement a City Transportation Plan that addresses, at a minimum, the following points: i. Establishment of a street typology based on land use, transportation needs, and impacts to neighborhoods. ii. Identification of appropriate treatments (per complete streets standards) for each type of street to accommodate multiple modes, ensure long-term mobility, and protect the vitality of adjacent neighborhoods. iii. Recommendations for low-volume streets that could be narrowed and transformed into living streets. 3. Flood Management Plan a. Recommendation 8.2C: As part of Phase II of Plan Ithaca, develop a City floodplain management program that addresses, at a minimum, the following points: i. A method for determining whether flood-prone areas should be rebuilt or repurposed after a major flood; ii. Harmonization with flood-related portions of the Tompkins County Multi- Jurisdictional All-Hazards Mitigation Plan; and iii. Changes to the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Neighborhood Plans 1. Southside 2. Waterfront & Inlet Island 3. West Hill 2 TOP 20 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PLAN ITHACA The Comprehensive Plan Committee has identified the twenty recommendations from Plan Ithaca that it believes are the most important for the City to pursue. These twenty priority recommendations include a range of ongoing, short-, medium-, and long-term strategies. This list should not be interpreted as a summary of the plan’s recommendations, and all of the recommendations included in the document are important to the implementation of the plan. Note: The ordering of the recommendations does not imply any ranking. The top twenty recommendations are listed in the order in which they appear in Plan Ithaca. 1. Work with the public to identify the most effective ways of involving and communicating with the community and dedicate resources to these methods. (Public Participation & Communication M) 2. Explore flexible zoning options to achieve the identified land use goals and implement the Future Land Use Map. (Land Use B) 3. Implement design standards and policies that require sustainable building practices and technologies. (Land Use F) 4. Work with neighboring municipalities to explore mechanisms to preserve green space surrounding the city and prevent sprawl, such as a transfer of development rights program. Land Use G) 5. Encourage the return of tax-exempt properties to the tax roll. (Fiscal Health H) 6. Identify opportunities to share services and equipment with surrounding municipalities and through public-private partnerships. (Fiscal Health K) 7. Encourage infill and redevelopment that includes a range of housing types and employment opportunities, in coordination with the goals of the Land Use chapter. (Economic Development D, M) 8. Work with schools, community organizations, and existing programs to expand job training and placement, apprenticeship, and supported work opportunities. (Workforce Development A) 9. Fund municipal services in a way that fairly distributes the burden of their cost across all property owners, including tax-exempt properties, as a means of increasing affordability. (Housing J) 10. Allocate additional staff resources to historic preservation. (Historic Preservation A) 11. Reassess the current use and condition of City infrastructure and facilities to determine if some structures can be abandoned, deconstructed, demolished, sold, or consolidated. (Physical Infrastructure Q) 12. Investigate extended hours and programming at City facilities to provide additional recreational opportunities for youth. (Health, Wellness, & Support F) 13. Adopt complete streets principles as official City policy to ensure that Ithaca’s streets are well-designed, interconnected, and provide safe and convenient accommodations for all modes of transportation. (Increasing Transportation Choice A) 14. Work with the Town of Ithaca and Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC) to (1) provide seamless bicycle and pedestrian linkages, such as continuous sidewalks between destinations in the two municipalities, and (2) secure transportation connections along the west City line, so that traffic heading to and from new development in the town has alternatives to Route 79. (Increasing Transportation Choice B) 3 15. Promote participation in public and private transportation demand management (TDM) programs. The City should work in partnership with the private sector to find mutually beneficial solutions to accommodate employee commuting and other transportation needs, including bicycles. (Increasing Transportation Choice J) 16. Work with NYSDOT, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC), and other interested agencies to transform the Route 13 corridor — from the north end of its Fulton / Meadow split to its Fall Creek bridge — into a complete street / urban boulevard (with sidewalks, street trees, bike lanes and safe pedestrian crossings) for the purpose of reconnecting areas of the city (e.g., the lakefront) that have been separated by this functionally limited-access stretch of highway; conduct a feasibility analysis for this transformation within five years. Consider the merits of adding a new intersection in the vicinity of Carpenter Business Park. (Connecting Land Use & Transportation C) 17. Create and adopt an official City map (with input from both engineering and planning standpoints) showing all planned future multi-modal transportation corridors and future street connections. (Connecting Land Use & Transportation E) 18. Continue to work with property owners on a permanent easement for a trail connection through the properties to connect the South Hill Recreation Way and the Gateway Trail. (Natural Resources J) 19. Establish a permanent City Sustainability staff position(s) to coordinate the City’s sustainability-related initiatives. (Energy A) 20. Investigate ways to diversify and strengthen our local power grid through City-owned renewable energy systems including wind and hydropower, local energy production, and district energy systems. (Energy I) From:   Eric Hathaway   Sent:   Thursday, September 17, 2015 11:57 AM   To:   Lisa Nicholas   Subject:  Comments for 222 S Cayuga and 416 E State    Hello Lisa,    Below are my comments for 222 S Cayuga and 416 E State site plan reviews. Thanks.    222 S Cayuga:    A continuous sidewalk must be provided along the property frontage in the public right‐ of‐way that meets the US Access Board's PROWAG (http://www.access‐ board.gov/guidelines‐and‐standards/streets‐sidewalks/public‐rights‐of‐way/proposed‐ rights‐of‐way‐guidelines) standards, including:         No vertical discontinuities greater that 1/4"      No sidewalk widths under 5 feet      Sidewalks and curb ramps surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip resistant      No cross slopes in excess of 2 percent     Any curb ramps along the site frontage must be in accordance with NYSDOT standard  details (https://www.dot.ny.gov/main/business‐center/engineering/cadd‐ info/drawings/standard‐sheets‐us‐repository/608‐01.pdf)    416 E State Street:    A continuous sidewalk must be provided along the property frontage in the public right‐ of‐way that meets the US Access Board's PROWAG (http://www.access‐ board.gov/guidelines‐and‐standards/streets‐sidewalks/public‐rights‐of‐way/proposed‐ rights‐of‐way‐guidelines) standards, including:         No vertical discontinuities greater that 1/4"      No sidewalk widths under 5 feet      Sidewalks and curb ramps surfaces must be firm, stable, and slip resistant      No cross slopes in excess of 2 percent     Eric Hathaway  Sidewalk Program Manager  City of Ithaca  Planning and Development Boa  of Priorities for Phase II of the  Comprehens on Council  rd Recommendation m D   ive Plan to the Com RAFT RESOLUTION September 22, 2015    WHEREAS, the City is pursuing a two‐phased approach to its Comprehensive Plan, where Phase I  entailed the preparation of an “umbrella” plan that sets forth broad goals and principles to guide  uture policies throughout the city and where Phase II will include the preparation of specific  eighborho f n od and thematic plans, and     WHEREAS, in accordance with the City of Ithaca Municipal Code and New York State General City  Law, the Planning and Development Board is responsible for preparing and recommending a new  Comprehensive Plan to the Common Council for adoption, and     HEREAS, W Plan Ithaca was adopted as Phase I of the Comprehensive Plan by the Common Council  n Septembeor 2, 2015, and    HEREAS, work on Phase II will begin in early 2016, and Planning staff will focus on the  reparation W p  of two neighborhood and/or thematic plans to begin this second phase, and    WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan Committee recommended three thematic plans (a housing  strategy; a city‐wide transportation plan; and a floodplain management plan) and three  eighborhood plans (Southside; the Waterfront and Inlet Island; and West Hill) to be top priorities  or completio   n f n in Phase II, and    WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Board has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan  ommittee’s recommendation, the list of needed thematic plans identified by C Plan Ithaca, and the  ist of the Cit  l y’s existing plans; now, therefore, be it    RESOLVED, that the Planning and Development Board recommends that the Common Council  elect  _______________________ and _______________________ to be the first two plans completed as part of  hase II of the Comprehensive Plan.  s P     :     by:   Moved by  Seconded   In Favor:         Against:  Abstain:  Absent:    9-8-15 State Street Triangle - 301 E. State Street/MLK Blvd. PB Subcommittee Meeting In attendance: Planning Board Members: Schroeder, Elliot, and Blalock, Planning Staff: Cornish and Nicholas, Project Team Members: Demarest, Whitham, Duckett, Macejewski Three members of the Planning Board and staff met with the applicants to provide feedback on revised building massing concepts as illustrated in drawings titled “Option 2” and submitted on 9-3-15 (no date on drawings). The following issues were discussed: • Concerns about solar access.   NYC laws require that all buildings are designed to allow for direct  sunlight during some portion of the day.   It was requested that the shadow study be verified  because it did not appear to accurately depict the sun/shade angle.     • It was requested that the applicant demonstrate the evolution of the design process and how  the proposed floor plate was arrived at and show what other building configurations were  considered.  • Members generally supported the work done so far to break down the building mass – and  requested that the applicant continue to explore the following:  o The curved façade at the corner of State Street/MLK Blvd. and Aurora needs more  development as it will be the most visible and prominent façade.  It currently appears 2  dimensional and flat with no visible relief.   Several ideas were discussed including,  recessing the top floor, recessing and/or projecting the windows or columns‐  particularly on the largest column of windows on the corner, etc. etc  o Continue to develop the east façade – which will be highly visible on the descent of  State Street /MLK Blvd. from East Hill.     o Add windows at corners adjacent to recessed portions of building.  o Use high quality building materials on the entire building with the portion of the  building on the corner being mostly brick.  No dri‐vit should be used.    • Delivery entrance on Aurora should be located so that it is not directly across from the entrance  to the Marriott or designed to be compatible with the vibrant commercial streetscape  • Applicant needs to provide section from Carey Building through Green Street  Applicant needs to provide information regarding management of proposed rooftop terrace.  Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 1 September 17, 2015 Lisa Nicholas Senior Planner Department of Planning and Economic Development City of Ithaca 108 E. Green Street Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 Re: State Street Triangle—Site Plan Application: Resubmittal of Revised Proposal Dear Lisa: On behalf of the Applicant, Campus Advantage, attached please find the following revised documents as part of the Site Plan Application Package for the proposed State Street Triangle Project located at 301 E. MLK/E. State Street: 1. Updated Project Drawings: a. Proposed Project Site Plan / Landscape Plan (Revised) including dimensions, with and without Improvements b. Proposed Project Elevations and Perspectives; and Precedents (Revised) c. Proposed Project Section with Solar Diagram 2. Memo from T.G. Miller Engineers and Surveyors, dated 9/16/15 3. Memo from LeChase Construction, dated 9/16/15 4. Memo from Leap!Structures Engineers, dated 9/16/15 5. Memo from Alliance Engineers, dated 9/16/15 6. Memo from Campus Advantage, dated 9/16/15 7. Executive Summary of Market Study from Campus Advantage 8. New York Times Article titled “The Millennial Commune” http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/02/realestate/the-millennial-commune.html?_r=1, dated 7/31/15 9. Forbes Article titled “Why Millennials Love Renting” http://www.forbes.com/sites/trulia/2014/10/07/why-millennials-love-renting/, dated 10/7/14 10. Memo and Transportation Demand Management Plan from SRF Associates, dated 9/16/15 11. Memo from TCAT, dated 9/16/15 The proposal is 116’ tall, 11-story mixed-use building on a 0.759-acre site within the City of Ithaca’s Density District and the CBD-120 Central Business Zoning District. The building will have approximately 12,341 SF of new retail space on the ground floor, 2,029 of which is anticipated to be a restaurant, creating a commercial base of 5 new retail/restaurant spaces. Loading and delivery areas, which serve the building, are provided off-street and internally underneath the courtyard, with vehicular access from South Aurora Street. An off-street trash area is also provided internally, with truck access from East Green Street. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 2 The building’s tabulations have changed as a result of breaking up the mass of the previously proposed building into smaller buildings, which have been designed to emulate the surrounding historical district. The corner section of the building facing The Commons has been reduced in height, from 11 stories to 10 stories, resulting in a terrace with expansive views of the City, surrounding hills, and Cayuga Lake. The East State Street / MLK Jr. Street façade has also been broken up into different sections, which have been designed to relate to the neighboring historical district in terms of scale, materials, and styles. More specificity of these changes and relationships is provided in the drawing packet, pages 9-14. Along the East State Street / MLK Jr. Street façade, the center section of the building’s mass has been reduced, with shorter sections of the building which also set back. In this new scheme, “Building 3” changed from 11 stories to 8 stories, and “Building 2” from 11 stories to 9 stories. These changes have resulted in the following changes to square footage, and unit and bedroom counts: - The overall square footage of the building changed from 288,845 GSF to +/- 216,434 GSF. - The unit-count of the building changed from 240 units to 232 units. - The bedroom count of the building changed from 620 to 582 bedrooms. The proposal will help meet the goals of the draft Comprehensive Plan of the City by redeveloping a site where existing infrastructure already exists, creating greater tax revenue, and enriching the pedestrian and vehicular experience, particularly as visitors enter Ithaca. The project will have on-site amenities including ground floor retail and a fitness center, quiet rooms, and a 2nd floor courtyard for residents. There will be 24/7 on-site management with a fully staffed building, and programming provided for residents. The management team consists of a General Manager, Assistant General Manager, Leasing Manager, Resident Director (a live-in position), 7 Community Assistants, Maintenance Supervisor, Maintenance Technician, Porter, and Corporate Support including an assigned Regional Manager and Vice President of Operations. The proposed materials and mechanicals used in the building will meet or exceed the LEED standards, and the team is currently exploring the possibility of having the project be LEED certified. The following is a response from the Project Team to address concerns raised in the Part 3 Full Environmental Assessment Form: Impact on Land Information requested: - Confirmation that drilled piles (as opposed to driven piles) will be used - Details about temporary bracing Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 3 In a 9/16/15 memo from the Structural Engineers, Leap!Structures Engineers, they describe the following in regards to drilled piles being used, as opposed to driven piles, referencing the Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated June 2015 and prepared by Empire Geo Services, Inc.: The building will be supported by a deep foundation system. The piers are anticipated to be drilled caissons to the bearing substrata, supporting concrete column point loads. The caissons will need to be executed to the rock bearing stratum located approximately 50’ to 70’ from existing grade. The shallow foundation will be slab on grade with deepened exterior footings for frost protection. In a 9/16/15 memo from LeChase Construction, they describe the following details about temporary bracing: In order to protect the existing adjacent resources, both infrastructure and utilities, temporary excavation bracing may need to be employed. LeChase will provide temporary shoring along the exiting roadways, if required, so that none of the existing subbase or utilities are compromised. Along the East Green Street side of the building we plan to utilize sheet piling if necessary to help stabilize the cut in the existing bank and preserve the existing pedestrian stairway. LeChase will also employ sheet piling along the foundation wall while construction occurs until such a time that the permanent retaining wall can be established if required. Impact on Drainage Information requested: - More information is needed to understand stormwater management to ensure it does not affect Six Mile Creek. In a 9/16/15 memo from T.G. Miller Engineers and Surveyors, they provide the following details about stormwater management on Site: The total site disturbance will be approximately 1.2 acres, which will require the preparation of a Full Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). This SWPPP will include an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and will be developed in accordance with the current NYSDEC (GP-0-15-002) and City of Ithaca stormwater regulations prior to any earth disturbing construction activities. The SWPPP will outline procedures for temporary erosion controls during construction, including measures such as silt fence, inlet protection and construction entrances. Construction, operation and maintenance of permanent controls that will remain after construction is complete will also be detailed. A Notice-of- Intent and MS4 SWPPP acceptance form will be prepared as part of the SWPPP and filed with NYSDEC prior to commencing construction. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 4 There are no existing permanent stormwater controls on the project site. Stormwater runoff from approximately half of the project site generally runs in a northerly direction to the City storm sewer on East State Street. Runoff from the remainder of the site drains in a southerly direction to the City storm sewer on East Green Street. Both of the City storm sewers discharge into Six Mile Creek. Under current NYSDEC stormwater regulations large portions of the project will be considered “redevelopment.” The redevelopment regulations allow for exemptions from Stormwater Quantity controls provided that development activities result in no change to hydrology that increase the discharge rate from the project site. Impervious cover will not increase as a result of the project due to the construction of planting beds and lawn panels that will match existing pervious cover. New storm sewers will be installed on the site and the building plumbing will be designed to allow for roof runoff to be captured in a way that mimics the existing hydrology. Since the project will not increase impervious area and will maintain existing hydrologic patterns, the site will be exempt from installing Stormwater Quantity controls. However, a 25% reduction of impervious cover is required in order to qualify for an exemption from installing Stormwater Quality controls. Achieving a 25% reduction for this project is not realistic so stormwater planters, porous pavements and other measures will be utilized to meet the Stormwater Quality requirements. Standard storm sewer improvements will consist of catch basins located throughout the site as needed to support the site grading. Deep sumps and hoods will be part of the catch basin design to further improve water quality. HDPE pipe will connect the new catch basins to the existing City storm sewers. Impact on Air Information requested: - Information on dust-control measures / construction activity - Information on air-handling equipment and systems to address concerns of potential impacts such as noise, smell, and air flow As explained in the Site Logistics description and Diagrammatic Map provided by LeChase Construction on 8/17/15, the following dust-control measures will be employed: misting or fog spraying to minimize dust; maintaining crushed stone tracking pads at all entrances to the construction site and reseeding disturbed areas to minimize bare exposed soils; keeping roads clear of dust and debris, requiring trucks to be covered; and prohibiting the burning of debris. In a 9/16/15 memo from the MEP Engineers, Alliance Engineers, they provide documents detailing the air- equipment proposed to be used in the project, and describe the following in regards to air-handling equipment: Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 5 In order to prevent impacts, especially to pedestrians from smell and air flow from mechanical vents the following actions will be taken. The building dwelling units will be conditioned by water source heat pump (WSHP) units, with central boilers and roof mounted cooling towers. Common areas and corridors will be conditioned via roof mounted air handling units. All exhausts for the common areas will be taken to the roof, either to exhaust fans or energy recovery ventilators (ERVs). Restaurant exhaust will be taken to the roof through HVAC shafts. All dwelling unit exhaust will be taken to roof mounted energy recovery ventilators resulting in reduced energy usage. This method eliminates the majority of the brick vents required dwelling unit exhaust. Impact on Aesthetic Resources Information requested: - Need more information on the potential visibility of mechanical systems and vents - The Lead Agency has expressed concerns about the size, height, and massing of the building In a 9/16/15 memo from the MEP Engineers, Alliance Engineers, they provide documents detailing the mechanical systems and vents proposed to be used in the project, and describe the following in regards to the visibility of mechanical systems and vents: The use of roof-mounted exhaust/ERVs will eliminate brick vents, resulting in reduced energy usage. Limited mechanicals will be visible from users, pedestrians, or vehicles driving on E. State Street or S. Aurora Street. The following is a description of the current proposal for sidewalk and intersection changes, including details about sidewalk widths with and without changes. More detailed information addressing the size, height, and massing of the building can be found in the next section, under “Impact on Historic Resources”. The proposal, as it now stands, makes no change to the existing curb lines, with the exception of closing two existing curb cuts along E. State Street / MLK Jr. Street. However, we have presented an alternate proposal to both the Planning Board and the Board of Public Works, which is currently under review. This alternate scheme proposes the reconfiguration of the Aurora/State intersection and removal of the existing slip lane offers an opportunity for an expanded public amenity at the most prominent corner and most heavily used pedestrian area of the property. The proposed widened sidewalks, if realized, will create an entirely new pedestrian zone related to the new first floor commercial businesses. The space as shown in the Site Plan on pages 3 and 4 could be utilized for a significant amount of outdoor dining space with movable furniture, extending the function and character of the Commons across Aurora Street. This Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 6 change to the street intersection requires further coordination with the City Engineers and SRF Consulting Engineers to develop a final plan for the proposed work outside of the property boundaries and within the City ROW. Furthermore, with an interest in improving the pedestrian experience, the project team is in conversations with DOT to enhance the landscape along the Green Street slope by bringing in characteristics of the gorge across the street into the site. The current Site Plan, as it now stands, is to leave the slip lane in its current configuration, which will retain a sidewalk width ranging from 10+/- feet to 19 +/- feet. The alternate Proposal will increase the E. State/MLK Jr. Street sidewalk by 8.5 feet, providing a total sidewalk width of 22+/- feet. This is about 2 feet larger than the widest sidewalks along the “Restaurant Row” of Aurora Street. The additional width along E. State/MLK Jr. Street will provide for continuous outdoor dining and shopping along the entire North side of the building. Impact on Historic Resources Concerns Raised / Information Requested: - Project must demonstrate how it responds sympathetically to the historic district - Potential Mitigation: Step building down and vary massing to be more compatible to the height and rhythm of the historic district across East State Street. The attached revised drawing packet provides updated drawings and views of the current proposed building. In this drawing packet, pages 9-14 detail the ways in which the mass of the previous iteration of the building has been broken up into various different buildings. These pages also describe how architectural details from the surrounding historic district and neighborhood are being used as inspiration for the architecture of the proposed Project. The following is a description of the current proposal, and how the revisions to the project have been made to address the concerns raised about the size, height, and massing of the building. The concerns from City Historic Preservation Planner in terms of massing, size, scale, and proportions within close proximity to the Ithaca Downtown Historic District are being addressed in the following ways. The proposed building is a double loaded corridor apartment building with a limited range of cost effective configurations to provide each unit with natural daylight and access to egress stairs and elevators. The development team has looked at ways in which the overall massing could be broken up into separate individual buildings, which would require completely separate egress components and a significant increase in the exterior thermal envelop of the building. Completely separate buildings would reduce the number of apartment units, significantly increase the costs of construction, and make the project not financially feasible. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 7 However, there has been an effort made to reduce the apparent massing by breaking the block into six distinct buildings, all about 3-5 structural bays wide with a variety of materials and colors. Furthermore, the number of units along the E. State/MLK Street elevation has been reduced to further differentiate the individual buildings and also allow more direct and reflected daylight to penetrate onto the street. The current proposal breaks the previously submitted center facade section on the E. State/MLK Street into two distinct building masses separately articulated, to create the effect of four distinct buildings along the 300 block of E. State/MLK. These masses are more in keeping with the widths of individual buildings across the street and throughout downtown. The heights of these middle buildings are 85 ft and 95ft to be more sympathetic to the 83ft tall Carey Building. There is a loss of 38 bedrooms in this configuration. Changes to the block to establish the 6 building facades are summarized below: • Building 1 o Retains the 11-story height at the westernmost corner, where the building will be viewed from uphill, and where an iconic tower piece feels most appropriate and least impactful on the historic district. • Building 2 o Drops the easternmost, center building mass 2 stories, to 9 stories, in response to the desire for more light access to the street, and to distinguish it as a separate building from the westernmost center building mass. o Pushes the fourth through ninth floors about 8 feet away from the street to increase light access and further distinguish it as a separate building. o Creates a different third floor cornice expression to create a "base plinth" type building mass reminiscent of the Carey Building across the street, and to break up the continuous sheer wall above the third story. • Building 3 o Drops the westernmost, center building mass 3 stories, to 8 stories, more in keeping with the Carey building across the street, in response to the desire for more light access at the street level, and a greater variety in the massing. o Eliminates the cornice at the 3rd story of the westernmost center building mass and changes facade color, to emphasize the separate building. It retains the strong first story retail facade and sign band. • Building 4 o Drops the street facing half of the westernmost end of the building mass (curve on Aurora) one story, to 10 stories total, to lessen the height impact on the eastern end of the Commons. The roof area would become a controlled-access outdoor space for special events, with Cayuga Lake and Downtown views. • Building 5 and 6 o The massing of these two buildings along E. Green Street remain unchanged but details have been refined to include more recessed windows and greater shadow lines. • All new roof terraces may become usable outdoor spaces for tenants pending further consideration pertaining to liability and desirability on the part of the city. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 8 Impact on Transportation Concerns Raised / Information Requested: - A Transportation Demand Management Plan has been requested by the Lead Agency to address the concerns raised and potential impacts to transportation through various forms of mitigation - Construction impacts on transportation In a 9/16/15 memo from the Traffic Engineers, SRF Associates, they provide a Transportation Demand Management Plan, and describe the following in regards to transportation: Revised trip generation estimates were used for the Traffic Impact Study submitted in August 2015. The revised estimates refer to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data for the residential and commercial land uses. These estimates also take into account the revised trip generation reduction credits (e.g., transit, pedestrian, bicycle) used for the initial Traffic Assessment submitted in June 2015. Based on the Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Project, the existing transportation system can accommodate the added vehicle trips without significant adverse impacts to the study area intersections. As well, measurements of the existing sidewalk widths in areas with more than likely moderate to high levels of pedestrian activity throughout the Ithaca CBD reveal that five feet is standard, with minimum widths of six feet along Green Street nearby City Hall and along Seneca Street. The Commons has clear pedestrian zone widths of ten to twelve feet. Existing data and analysis should be presented from the concerned parties that allege the existing transportation facilities, including the pedestrian and bicycle facilities, are operating at capacity and will therefore be adversely impacted as a result of the Proposed Project. The existing 3 City owned and operated parking garages are each no greater than 0.25 mile, which on average takes 6 minutes to walk, are currently not operating at capacity. The expected increase in residents in the Project with vehicles would be able to be accommodated in these garages. Frank Nagy has verbally conformed this as of September 8, 2015. The Proposed Project is providing 27 bicycle parking spaces. The elevators will be large enough to fit a standard sized bicycle and accompanying person. In a 9/16/15 memo from the Developers, Campus Advantage, they describe the following in regards to transportation mitigation: An important component to traffic management is relying on the in-place transportation infrastructure and discouraging auto ownership by not providing on-site parking. As stated by TCAT (see attached letter from Doug Swarts, dated 9/16/15), this site is the best-located site in Ithaca in relation to public Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 9 transportation, especially to Cornell and Ithaca College, whose routes have ample capacity to serve to project. As explained in the Site Logistics description and Diagrammatic Map provided by LeChase Construction on 8/17/15, the following summarizes the description of construction routing and parking, and potential road and sidewalk closures: • Construction staging and deliveries – • The intent of the logistics plan is to utilize the proposed grade changes in order to create a staging and drop-off area along the East Green street side of the building. With aid of traffic flagmen, this will allow us to get construction deliveries out of the roadway along East Green Street and safely load and unload without excessively impacting the traffic. • This staging area will serve as our primary point of receiving material deliveries so that they can be distributed throughout the building as well as our dumpster locations. We will also need to have access along the State street side of the building so that we can stage and erect the exterior envelope of the building. • Material will be staged at an offsite location and brought in on an as needed basis. • Potential Road and sidewalk closures • In regards to sidewalk closures, we will need to close the sidewalks along all three sides of the site and re-route pedestrian traffic across the roadway, we intend on providing new crosswalk locations and associated sidewalks at these locations • Construction routing • We will encourage the subcontractors to access the construction site primarily along Rt. 79 reducing the traffic flow in and around the Commons. • Contractor parking • Parking will be offsite and workers will need to either be bused in with select parking onsite for transportation vehicles or we will work to negotiate a local parking lot where we can secure so many paid spots for workers to utilize Impact on Noise Information Requested: - Construction impacts on noise—foundation construction and construction periods - More information is needed about air-handling equipment and systems In a 9/16/15 memo from the Structural Engineers, Leap!Structures Engineers, they describe the following in regards to drilled piles being used and the construction period for this activity: Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 10 The foundation construction will most likely entail drilled caissons. The caissons will be drilled to a depth of approximately 75 feet. The anticipated pile drilling will be limited to 7:00 am to 4:00 pm weekdays. The drilling schedule will be coordinated by the contractor and their sub-contractors. In a 9/16/15 memo from LeChase Construction, they describe the following details about noise mitigation during construction: In order to prevent impacts from construction to pedestrians and surrounding users from noise from construction activities the following actions will be taken. Construction activities resulting in noises at and/or above (85 dB) decibels will be limited to 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM, Monday – Friday/Saturday. While there will be activities that result in noise above this 85dB threshold the intent is to begin this work after 8:00 am and conclude ahead of 6:00 in the evening so that the impact on the surrounding community is minimized. Additionally, in order to reduce the impact of noise on pedestrians and neighbors, the project will work to coordinate construction activities that produce excessive noise so that we can work to limit the amount of concurrent work with the adjacent downtown construction projects. Impact on Public Health Information Requested: - Applicant is required to work with NYSDEC and possible NYS Department of Health to address any issues In a 9/16/15 memo from the Structural Engineers, Leap!Structures Engineers, they describe the following in regards to working with other agencies to address public health concerns: As has been stated by the City, the project team will work with NYSDEC and when appropriate, NYS Department of Health, to ensure that all soils that are excavated and tested appropriately and disposed of as per the guidance and direction of the above-stated state agencies. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 11 Impact on Growth & Character of Community or Neighborhood Information Requested: - Pedestrian Circulation Diagram - Expected resident breakdown and description of how the building will be leased - Market analysis performed for project - TCAT service and capacity at downtown bus stops - Inventory of proximate services for residents - Additional emergency response services needed - Information on location and size of existing and required utilities and plans for extension or upgrades if needed - Clarification regarding cost burden of proposed street improvements - Transportation Demand Management Plan o Projected parking demand (documented with evidence) for residents and retail o Types of parking needed (storage, long-term, short-term, etc.) o Parking supply Downtown Garages Other types of parking that will be provided Whitham Planning & Design, LLC submitted a Proposed Circulation and Access Plan on 8/19/15, which identifies the Green Street Transit stop, Seneca Street transit stop, and the Aurora Street transit stop. The TCAT website only identifies an East State Street at Stewart Avenue transit stop. The project team will explore the suggested potential mitigations to the Green Street public sidewalk. As the vegetated slope to the north of Green Street is owned by the NYS DOT the team will meet with representatives to discuss relocating the sidewalk to allow for a treelawn and street trees. The project strives to be an extension of The Commons the design of the intersection at Aurora and E. State Street will improve the pedestrian and vehicular safety and experience. The team has been in conversation with the City of Ithaca Traffic Engineer about this intersection. This communication and collaboration will continue as the project design progresses. In a 9/16/15 memo from the Developer, Campus Advantage, they provide an attachment of charts, which detail the expected resident breakdown. The memo describes the following in regards to the expected resident breakdown of the project: 77.8% student, 22.2% non-student. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 12 78.4% of the students undergrad, 21.6% estimated to be graduate 64% from Cornell, 32% from IC, 4% from TC3 Parking demand is estimated to be 191 cars. All units will be rented “by the bedroom”. Given Efficiencies and one-bedroom units only have one bedroom, only one lease will need to be executed. On all other unit types, a potential resident will be able to execute multiple leases for multiple bedrooms. Unfortunately, Property Management software does not allow a mix of leasing types. Therefore, if a conventional renter would like to rent a two bedroom unit, then that individuals will be able to do so by signing a lease for each bedroom. This does occur with some regularity across our 40+ property portfolio. In the two articles provided as an attachment (New York Times article, “The Millennial Commune” and Forbed article, “Why Millennials Love Renting”) they describe how Millennials (defined as a person reaching young adulthood around the year 2000) are more and more looking for rentals that include amenities and utilities, and how renting by the bedroom to live in a shared space with others is becoming increasingly desirable. The demand in this market is expected to continue growing. In a 9/16/15 memo from the Developer, Campus Advantage, they provide an attachment of an Executive Summary of their Market Analysis. The following is a summary of the Market Analysis: “The Subject Development is located at 301 East State Street in Ithaca, NY, approximately 0.6 miles to Cornell University and 0.9 miles to Ithaca College. It sits at the gateway of the new downtown pedestrian corridor, known as Ithaca Commons. This area is a four-block pedestrian area populated with retail, restaurants, and nightlife that is frequented by Ithaca residents, as well as Cornell and IC students. The 0.76-acre site is proposed to be an 11-story building with the first floor containing retail, as well as the leasing office and common area amenities. Possible amenities include a 24-hour fitness center, a flex fitness space, media/game lounge, study rooms and an internet café. The city of Ithaca is in central New York and is the county seat of Tompkins County, as well as the largest community in the Ithaca-Tompkins County metropolitan area. This contains the municipalities of the Town of Ithaca, the village of Cayuga Heights, and other towns and villages in Tompkins County). The city of Ithaca is located on the southern shore of Cayuga Lake, in Central New York. Ithaca is home to three institutions of higher learning - Cornell University, Ithaca College and Tompkins Cortland Community College (TC3). In 2013, the city's estimated population was 30,515, and the metropolitan area had a population of 103,617. Of the three institutions of higher learning, two are Tier 1 investable markets and given their proximity to the Subject Site, it can be assumed that this development will target students from both. The site is within Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 13 one mile of both campuses and can be accessed via TCAT shuttle routes. Routes 10 & 11 provide express access to both Cornell and Ithaca College, respectively, every 10 minutes from 7am to 7pm, seven days a week. Additionally, late night routes also provide coverage from 8:00 to 2:30 am from downtown Ithaca to Cornell Monday through Saturday. Additionally, the site’s adjacency to downtown Ithaca provides residents with superb access to the entirety of Ithaca and Tompkins county given downtown Ithaca is the hub in the TCAT’s Hub and Spoke accessibility model. Cornell students are able to accesses TCAT via purchasing an OmniRide pass for $200 per year. Ithaca College students are also offered discounted passes for $265 for the year. In fall 2014, Cornell saw its highest enrollment yet, reaching 21,850, which is a 4.4% growth over the past five years, an increase of 911 students. Undergraduates at Cornell account for 66% of the total population, approximately 14,453 students, and graduates number 7,397. All students are attending this institution on a full-time basis. Out-of-state students make up 73% of the total population. Cornell currently houses approximately 7,463 students, which accounts for approximately 51.6% of the undergraduate students and 34.2% of the total population. There is no on-campus housing requirement. Ithaca College enrolls 6,587 students, of which 6,124 are undergraduates. 97% of students are attending IC full-time and 56% come from out of state. IC requires housing through junior year and houses approximately 4,395 students in 27 traditional residence halls and two apartment complexes. This accounts for 71.8% of the undergraduate population and 66.7% of the total enrollment.. The Mayor of Ithaca, Svante Myrick, and Tompkins Legislator, Martha Robertson, recently submitted an article to The Ithaca Voice stating Ithaca’s housing crisis1. They state the shortage of rental and for-sale housing is getting worse every year. The lack of housing causes people to live further out in the suburbs, causing traffic congestion, damage to the infrastructure, environmental issues, as well as putting a strain on public transit. The county’s 2006 assessment reported that Ithaca would need at least 2,127 new rental units by 2014 to meet the demand. During the 2006-2014 timeframe, only 657 new units have been completed in the city of Ithaca. During that time, Cornell added 2,400 new undergraduate and graduate students. What’s even more threatening to the housing crisis is Cornell’s plans to grow even more in the next fast year, predicting that they will add 1,300 undergraduate and graduate students. According to Nels Bohn, of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, Ithaca’s vacancy rate in 2014 was 1% with rental rates increase of 13% from 2013 to 2014. Per a April 2014 New York Times Article, Ithaca is America’s 11th least affordable housing market with residents spending on average 38.6% of their income on housing. This means Ithaca is more expensive than Napa, CA, Honolulu, Hi and Boulder, CO. General macroeconomics theory will illustrate that a market who’s supply and demand is so stretched, that new supply is needed in order to provide slack in the economy. The off-campus market can be mostly characterized by a collection of smaller apartment communities that offer very few amenities, are not professionally managed and do not resemble traditional purpose-built student product. The overall occupancy for the Ithaca market is strong at 99%, with many of the properties beginning lease up for the following year in early fall due to strong housing demand. The Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 14 Subject Development will bring a professional management team and residence life program unlike what is currently present in Ithaca. Additionally, it will offer residents a variety of amenities and apartment finishes that will be superior to the rest of the market.” In a 9/16/15 memo from Doug Swarts, Service Development Manager for TCAT, a description of TCAT’s service and capacity at downtown bus stops to serve the project is provided. The following is an inventory of proximate services for residents: Residents of the Project will be located in the downtown core, in one of the densest areas in the City. The following services are in close proximity. Emergency Services City of Ithaca Police Department City of Ithaca Fire Department Bangs Ambulance Cayuga Medical Center Municipal Services U.S. Post Office City of Ithaca City Hall Tompkins County Public Library Transportation Services East Seneca Street TCAT stop Green Street TCAT stop Aurora Street TCAT stop Big Red Bullet (proposed new bus to NYC to launch late September 2015, departing from Green Street TCAT stop) Food Services Greenstar DeWitt Cooperative Market Press Bay Alley Farmers Market DeWitt Park Farmers Market Restaurant Row The Commons Gateway Center Entertainment Services CSMA Cinamopolis State Theatre Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 15 The History Center Retail Services The Commons Gateway Center Aurora Street shops The following is a description of additional emergency response services, which is not anticipated to require any further additions to support the Project: The additional residents and businesses from this project would require no further additions to the City and County existing emergency response services as the tenants of the building are expected to be current residents already residing within Ithaca. We expect a vast majority of these tenants to be relocating to this building, rather than new residents from locations beyond the immediate region. In a 9/16/15 memo from T.G. Miller Engineers and Surveyors, they provide attachments of correspondence with various utility providers, and provide the following details about the location and size of existing and required utilities: General Capacity Statement Existing utilities that will need to be extended to the site, installed or modified as a result of the project include storm sewers, stormwater management systems, domestic and fire water, sanitary sewers, telecommunications and electric pathways and natural gas. The City confirmed in a letter to the Owner on April 30th, 2015 that their water system and sanitary and storm sewers have adequate capacity for the project to make connections. NYSEG and Verizon have also confirmed that they have capacity to serve the project. Domestic and Fire Water Water service to the building is located north of the site off of East State Street. In this area, a 16” main exists. The static pressure at hydrant G-102, near the intersection of South Aurora Street and East State Street, is 78 psi at an elevation of approximately 419.00’. To confirm available fire flows results from a flow test performed by the City of Ithaca in 2015 were reviewed. Hydrant G-114 (located near the South Aurora Street bridge) was used as the gauge hydrant and Hydrant G-102 was used as the flow hydrant. The flow test resulted in static and residual pressures of 78 and 72 psi, respectively, at hydrant G-114 while hydrant G-102 was flowing at 1,325 GPM. An 8” existing unused water service enters the property off of the 16” main along East State Street. This service will be utilized to feed the new building. Accordingly, a new 8” combined service will be extended Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 16 along the face of the building to the mechanical room where the service will split into new domestic and fire services. Sanitary Services An existing 20” plastic sanitary sewer main is located west of the project along South Aurora Street. A new 8” lateral will be installed in the southwest corner of the building to connect to the City main. Telecommunications Pathways An existing telecommunications service along East Green Street will be impacted by the project. Proposed changes to site elevations along Green Street will require rerouting and lowering a portion of the existing duct bank. Electric Pathways There currently exists a NYSEG transformer and switch gear on the property located at the southwest corner of the project. Both of these will have to be relocated into the NYSDOT right of way as part of this project. The switch gear will be relocated along East Green Street, while the transformer will repositioned along South Aurora Street. New pathways will be run from the relocated transformer to provide new service to the building. Gas The nearest available medium pressure gas is located south of East Green Street. Accordingly, the main will be tapped and a new service to the building will be extended under East Green Street. In clarification regarding the cost burden of proposed street improvements, Campus Advantage has stated they are open to discussing cost sharing of the public street improvements with the City. In a 9/16/15 memo from the Traffic Engineers, SRF Associates, they provide a Transportation Demand Management Plan, and describe the following in regards to vehicular parking: The users of the building would have varying parking needs that range from short-term to long-term and storage. It is estimated approximately 20 percent of the proposed residential component will require long- term parking with the remaining designated for short-term parking and guests. It is anticipated that retail customers who arrive by personal vehicle will predominately require short-term parking (less than 2 hours), while retail employees and building staff who arrive by personal vehicle will require long-term parking. Residents who have a vehicle that they do not need to access regularly will have the option of parking in an off-site storage lot. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 17 SRF Associates completed a Traffic Impact Study on August 14, 2015 for the State Street Triangle project. Using the Shared Parking Model, a total of 283 parking spaces are needed. A total of 57 parking spaces are required for customers, seven parking spaces for employees (commercial), and between 191 and 219 parking spaces are reserved for residents. The parking capacity for the proposed project will be provided primarily in the Cayuga Street Parking Garage via 250 reserved parking spaces. The 27 bicycle parking spaces provided on-site may reduce the need for vehicle parking spaces. Additionally, there were will be two to three carshare parking spaces which can equate to a reduction of approximately 15 personal automobiles per carshare vehicle. The deficit in parking spaces may need to be provided through the use of the City’s other public parking garages (e.g., Tioga Street and Green Street) or available onstreet parking. It should be noted that other parking adjustment factors may be considered to reduce the total demand for parking. Factors such as carsharing, demographics, nearby land use mix, employment density, transit accessibility, et al have the ability to affect parking demand and optimal parking supply. Truck deliveries are planned on-site during off-peak hours. A four-point parking program is being created for residents with private vehicles. The plan is being created in conjunction with the City of Ithaca’s parking facilities and will utilize vacant parking spaces in existing City garages and surface lots. It is conservatively anticipated that up to 40% of the residents may have personal vehicles. • Cayuga Garage - Campus Advantage is in the process of seeking a parking agreement with the non- profit ownership entity for Cayuga Garage to utilize vacant spaces in the upper levels of the garage. There are over 300 vacant parking spaces in the garage and parking revenues from residents of the project will help reduce the $960,000 in annual public subsidies currently needed to fund the garage debt. • Seneca Garage – Approximately 100 vacant spaces have been identified by City parking officials that could be reserved by residents of the State Street Triangle Project. • Green Street Garage – There are approximately 75 underutilized spaces in the Green Street Garage which is within a 2-3 minute walk from the site. Satellite Lots – Surface parking lots near the Cornell campus and others that are in the planning stage elsewhere throughout the City will be available for those residents that primarily use their vehicles on weekends and holidays. The lots can be easily accessed via public transit. Phone: 607.379.9175 Email: whitham@whithamdesign.com 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 18 We look forward to continuing to work with you and presenting the proposed project at the upcoming Planning Board meeting. If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Catherine De Almeida Hydrant Flow Test Log Request/Project: 404 Seneca Way Project No.: Challenge Industries Location: Int of E. State Street and Aurora Street Conducted By: D. Corwin, M. Sledjeski, S. Gibson Date: 1/4/12 Time: 13:50 Sketch: Pressure Gauged Hydrant Calc’s. & Comments: Number: G-102 54.0 20 54.0 20    − −=   − −= TRS ST TRS RSTR PP PQQPP PPQQ QR – Flow at Test Residual Pressure TR- gpm Q20 – Flow calculated @ 20-psi residual – gpm QT – Flow Test Result @ test residual – gpm PR(20) – Calculated Residual Pressure R(20)-psi Location: Aurora and State Streets Static, PS: 77 psi Residual, PTR: 69 psi Flowed Hydrant Number: G-105 Location: E. State Street Flow, QT: 1,067 gpm* Calculated Flow @ 20psi, Q20: 3,081 gpm Due to excessive hydraulic field conditions, hydrant was opened approximately ½ way. From: Matthew Sledjeski [mailto:MSledjeski@cityofithaca.org] Sent: Wednesday, July 01, 2015 8:57 AM To: Andrew Sciarabba Subject: Hydrant Test - State & Aurora Andy, Here is the information you requested. Please let me know if you need anything else. Flowed: G102 (E State & Aurora) Date: 5/8/2015 Gauged: G114 (S Aurora near bridge) Static: 78 psi Residual: 72 psi Field Flow: 1325 gpm Calculated Flow @ 20psi 4510 gpm Regards, Matt Sledjeski Civil Engineer City of Ithaca Department of Public Works Water & Sewer Division 510 First Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Ph: 607-272-1717 Fx: 607-277-5028 Cell: 607-279-7745 From: Kuhn, Dennis [mailto:DKuhn@nyseg.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 11:23 AM To: Ronnie Macejewski; Andrew Sciarabba Cc: Barker, John; Negus, Jennifer; Scott Whitham; Catherine Dealmeida; Zdimal, John; Foster, Lisa; Nart Shafagoj Subject: RE: State Street Triangle Capacity Letter and Easement Release Ronnie, Thank you for the load sheets. I have forwarded them on to our corporate systems engineering group. Corporate engineering will determine the scope of any modifications that need to be made in order to serve your buildings load. I am currently trying to determine a expected timeline for this review to be complete. As soon as I know I will let you know. Currently we have a 3phase underground circuit at 12.47 KV primary voltage adjacent to your proposed building. As soon as I hear, I will let you know the scope of any modifications that need to be made in order to serve this new load. Thanks, Dennis Dennis Kuhn Electric Field Planner Ithaca Division 1387 Dryden Road Ithaca, NY 14850 Telephone 607-347-2501 Fax 607-347-2949 dkuhn@nyseg.com Mr. Ronnie Macejewski Senior Vice President | Development Campus Advantage 110 Wild Basin Road, Suite 365 Austin, Texas 78746 Re: Verizon capacity for the State Street Triangle project To whom it may concern, It is anticipated that adequate Verizon facilities exist, within the immediate area, to provide service to the above noted location. This will include both standard copper and fiber optic based services. FiOS is currently unavailable for this location. Any questions or concerns regarding Verizon service can be directed to me at 607-734-0279. Thank you. Regards, David Comer Verizon Outside Plant Engineer September 16, 2015 Re: State Street Triangle Apartments FEAF Construction & Logistics Memo In regards to the FEAF Concerns we would like offer the following responses to the items posed to the construction team IMPACT ON LAND In order to protect the existing adjacent resources, both infrastructure and utilities, temporary excavation bracing will be employed. LeChase will provide temporary shoring along the exiting roadways, as required, so that none of the existing subbase or utilities are compromised. Along the East Green Street side of the building we plan to utilize sheet piling to help stabilize the cut in the existing bank and preserve the existing pedestrian stairway. LeChase will also employ sheet piling along the foundation wall while construction occurs until such a time that the permanent retaining wall can be established. IMPACT ON NOISE The foundation construction will most likely entail drilled caissons. The Caissons are anticipated to be drilled at a depth of approximately 75 feet. The anticipated pile drilling will be limited to 7:00 am to 4:00 pm on weekdays. The drilling schedule will be coordinated between the contractor and our subcontractors In order to prevent impacts from construction to pedestrians and surrounding users from noise from construction activities the following actions will be taken. Construction activities resulting in noises at and/or above (85 dB) decibels will be limited to 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM, Monday – Friday/Saturday. While there will be activities that result in noise above this 85dB threshold the intent is to begin this work after 8:00 am and conclude ahead of 6:00 in the evening so that the impact on the surrounding community is minimized. Additionally, in order to reduce the impact of noise on pedestrians and neighbors, the project will work to coordinate construction activities that produce excessive noise so that we can work to limit the amount of concurrent work with the adjacent downtown construction projects. IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH As has been stated by the City, the project team will work with NYSDEC and when appropriate, NYS Department of Health, to ensure that all soils that are excavated are tested appropriately and disposed of as per the guidance and direction of the above stated agencies Sincerely, Timothy Frost Sr. Project Manager CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, L.L.C. Corning Office 11849 East Corning Rd. Corning, NY 14830 Tel 607-937-5464 Fax 607-937-5452 Leap!Structures, PLLC • 3001 S. Lamar Blvd. #230 • Austin, TX 787 04-8863 • 512·298·3999 • leapstructures.com September 16, 2015 Catherine De Almeida Whitham Planning & Design, LLC 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 845-536-1296 Re: State Street Triangle Part 3 FEAF Catherine, The building will be supported by a deep foundation system. The piers are anticipated to be drilled caissons to the bearing substrata, supporting concrete column point loads. The caissons will need to be executed to the rock bearing stratum located approximately 50’ to 70’ from existing grade. The shallow foundation will be slab on grade with deepened exterior footings for frost protection. The anticipated pile drilling will be limited to 7:00 am to 4:00 pm weekdays. The drilling schedule will be coordinated by the contractor and their sub-contractors. The design of the foundation and required depths of the piers is based on a geotechnical engineering report prepared by Empire Geo Service, Inc. The geotechnical engineering report is attached for reference. As has been stated by the City, the project team will work with NYSDEC and when appropriate, NYS Department of Health, to ensure that all soils that are excavated and tested appropriately and disposed of as per the guidance and direction of the above-stated state agencies. Tatsuya Kiguchi, P.E., M.L.S.E. Bryant De La Cruz, P.E. Principal, Engineer of Record Project Manager 12355 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 220, Reston, VA 20191 • Tel: 703-749-7941 • Fax: 703-749-7942 • www.allianceengineers.com September 16, 2015 State Street Triangle HVAC Systems In order to prevent impacts, especially to pedestrians from smell and air flow from mechanical vents the following actions will be taken. The building dwelling units will be conditioned by water source heat pump (WSHP) units, with central boilers and roof mounted, low profile cooling towers. Common areas and corridors will be conditioned via roof mounted air handling units. All exhausts for the common areas will be taken to the roof, either to exhaust fans or energy recovery ventilators (ERVs). The use of roof-mounted exhaust/ERVs will eliminate brick vents, resulting in reduced energy usage. Limited mechanicals will be visible from users, pedestrians, or vehicles driving on E. State Street or S. Aurora Street. Restaurant exhaust will be taken to the roof through HVAC shafts. All dwelling unit exhaust will be taken to roof mounted energy recovery ventilators resulting in reduced energy usage. This method eliminates the majority of the brick vents required for dwelling unit exhaust. Included with this memo are examples of the proposed mechanical equipment which will be installed on the roof: 1. Enervex System for kitchen, toilet and dryer exhaust. 2. Daikin Rooftop units with capabilities to provide 100% outside air and energy recovery ventilation. 3. Evapco Low Profile Cooling Tower. Keith Leadbetter, P.E. Demand-Controlled Exhaust Systems for Dryers, Kitchens & Bathrooms TRUE GREEN SAVINGS 39 1 1 0 0 6 0 1 . 1 1 One of the biggest sources of energy loss in vertical subdivisions (apartments, condominiums, mixed­use buildings) is the exhaust system that ventilates the dryers, kitchens and baths. Regardless of how many appliances are in use, the exhaust system operates 24 hours a day. ENERVEX offers an alternative to 24/7 exhaust operation that’s both economical and “green.” Our demand­controlled ven­ tilation system adjusts the exhaust rate to meet the current demands, reducing operating costs and providing significant energy savings each year. No two buildings have exactly the same energy usage, which makes ENERVEX’s demand­controlled ventilation system the perfect solution. Apartments and hotels have high energy usage in the morning and the evening, while sporting arenas have low energy usage for several days and then high output over a short period of time. Rather than operate continuously, ENERVEX senses when the energy output needs to increase and adjusts its operation accordingly. ENERVEX Makes it Easy and Economical to be Green Energy Savings for Every Type of Building Schools/Colleges Apartments/ Condominiums Sports Arenas Most ventilation systems run at full speed regardless of the demand. Demand-Controlled Ventilation adjusts to meet the needs of the system. 3 6 9 12 100 75 50 25 3 6 9 123 Max. Fan Capacity Time AM PM % Use Hotels/Resorts Offices Hospitals 2 In a vertical subdivision (apartment, condominium, mixed­use building), the traditional exhaust system must operate at full speed 24/7, regardless of how many appliances are running at any given time. With demand­controlled ventilation, the system senses when no appliances are running and operates at a very low speed. Once the appliance starts, the internal appliance fan creates pressure inside the common duct. The system senses this pressure and begins increasing ventilation speed. The following illustration describes the components and operation of a demand­ controlled ventilation system: How Demand-Controlled Ventilation Works The variable speed ventilator features a quiet, low­profile design that is easily accessible for cleaning. The constant pressure controller modu­ lates the speed of single­phase and three­phase fans. It can be enclosed in a NEMA panel, if it’s installed outdoors and requires no maintenance. The subduct, which is 22­inches high, is located inside the main duct and points upwards toward termination. The control wire connects the controller to the pressure dif­ ferential sensor. Main duct (square or round) sheet metal can have off­sets The pressure­differential sensor monitors pressure inside the main duct through a duct probe. It is powered by the controller and provides the control signal to the controller. It can also be installed at the top of the main duct. The exhaust source can be a dryer, kitchen hood or bathroom vent. It emits the exhaust that must be ventilated out of the building. The duct probe connects the common duct to the pressure­ differential sensor. Annual Energy Cost Savings Demand­controlled ventilation provides substantial operat­ ing savings over a constant air volume system by reducing fan energy consumption by up to 90%. As a result, the cost of conditioned air being exhausted is reduced by up to 80%. The table shows typical operating savings from an eight­dryer system in a multi­story building. System Operation Constant Air Volume Demand- Controlled Ventilation Cost of Fan Operation $ 2,200 $ 260 Cost of Conditioned Air $ 11,630 $ 1,630 Total Annual Cost $ 13,830 $ 1,890 3 Savings and Sustainability Think you have to spend a lot of money and retrofit your building just to be “green?” Think again. At ENERVEX, we’ve been offering sustainable solutions long before it became trendy to do so. Consider the benefits of our demand­controlled ventilation system: Economical Over a 15 year period a typical demand­ controlled ventilation system serving eight dryers costs 55% less to operate a than a fixed speed system. In addition it saves 85% of the cost of exhausting conditioned air. Material and Labor Savings A demand­controlled exhaust system can take 100% advantage of diversity, reduc­ ing duct sizes and thus material and labor. In addition multiple main ducts can be exhausted by a single fan. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 4 8 10 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Diversity Dryers 3 6 9 12 3 6 9 12 100 75 50 25 % Use TimeAMPM Max. Fan Capacity Space Saving A typical dryer, kitchen or bathroom exhaust system operates less than 30% of the day. A demand­controlled exhaust system converts this into energy savings of 85% ­ this could amount to $500 per dryer or kitchen and $200 per bathroom. Using diversity saves floor space as smaller ducts add building open space. One square foot per floor in a 20 story building can save as much as $5­10,000 per duct riser. Energy Savings EXHAUSTO Demand Controlled Life Cycle Cost, (LCC) Loss from exhaust conditioned air $ 18,178 $ 10,125 $ 71,460 $ 41,775 Fixed Speed 4 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 Pressure (inWC)EXHAUSTO Other Seconds Quiet Performance A well­balanced demand­controlled system eliminates noise from speed variations or from fans running at full speed 24/7. Reliable With ENERVEX’s variable speed, direct­drive EFV exhaust fans, broken belts are a thing of the past. Other than periodic duct and fan cleaning, no maintenance is required. Architectural discharge vents, which collect grease, lint and dirt, are located on the wall, which makes them very difficult to clean. Because the demand­controlled system discharges on the roof, it eliminates this problem. Not only is the ENERVEX system fast in response to demand changes, it’s also able to maintain a +/­2% accuracy from setpoint. Alternative solutions only achieve a +/­20% accuracy, so their savings are over 20% less. Aesthetics Unmatched Performance EBV € $ 5 MDVS, Mechanical Dryer Venting System Ventilation: Multi-Story Clothes Dryer Diversity In applications with multiple dryers, it is possible to use diversity factors, which in statistics are a representation of how many dryers are likely to be operating at a given time. Using diversity factors will reduce main duct sizes but may not reduce the fan size and the amount of air exhausted. Local codes must be consulted to determine whether this is possible. ENERVEX’s demand­controlled ventilation systems can take full advantage of diversity. The fan may be larger than necessary but it will still only exhaust based on demand. Application The Mechanical Dryer Venting System (MDVS) is a demand­ controlled ventilation system designed specifically for multi­ story buildings that have dryers on each level. This illustration describes the system and its components. The exhaust from the dryers is ventilated through the termina­ tion fan, which is located on the roof. The controller can be installed on the roof in a NEMA enclosure or in the attic. This is an alternative location for the duct probe and the pressure differential sensor. MDVS is designed to work with both electric or gas clothes dryers. This is the common main duct that serves all dryers. The bottom of the duct is the optimal location of the probe and transducer. 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 4 8 10 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 Diversity Dryers EX H A U S T O SUSTA I N A B L E DESIGN L E E D EA, MR, EQ, ID QUALIFIED 6 Application The Mechanical Dryer Venting System (MDVS) is a demand­ controlled ventilation system designed specifically for multi­ story buildings that have a common dryer area, rather than dryers on each level. This illustration describes the system and its components. Supply of Make-up air In a laundry facility, traditional make­up air supply systems rely on gravity to supply outside air, regardless of how many appli­ ances are running at any given time. With a demand­controlled make­up air supply, the system senses when no appliances are running and operates at a very low speed, maintaining neutral pressure in the room. Once the appliance starts, it emits ex­ haust, which drives the room pressure towards negative. The fan senses this pressure and begins increasing air­supply fan speed. ENERVEX’s Modulating Air Supply System (MCAS) can be used in conjunction with a MDVS system. MDVS, Mechanical Dryer Venting System Ventilation: Central Clothes Dryer Facility The exhaust from the dryers is ven­ tilated through the termination fan, which is located on the roof. The common main duct serving all dryers is located inside the fire­rated chase. MDVS is designed to work with both electric and gas fired clothes dryers. The MEC 18 constant pressure controller can be installed in the laundry room close to the dryers. The common horizontal duct connects all dryers at a 45 degree angle. The forced air louver, located on the building envelope, is substantially smaller than a gravity louver. The intake fan supplies make­up air at a demand­ controlled rate. The duct brings supply air into the facility . The end of the duct is the optimal location of the probe and transducer. EX H A U S T O SUSTA I N A B L E DESIGN L E E D EA, MR, EQ, ID QUALIFIED 7 MBESV, Modulating Building Exhaust System Ventilation: Kitchens & Bathrooms ENERVEX’s MDVS and MBESV systems are extremely suitable for retrofitting. This is an example from Potomac, MD where 14 fixed­speed fans were replaced by 14 demand­controlled fan systems. The savings provide a simple ROI (5 years) of 632% and an 8 months payback! The variable speed ventilator direct­drive opens for easy cleaning. The main duct is located inside the fire­rated chase. This is an alternative location of duct probe and pressure differential sensor. The bottom of the duct is the optimal location of the probe and transducer. The bottom of the duct is the best location for the probe and transducer. One set is needed for each duct. A small logic controller monitors the pressure and submits the proper signal to the main controller. The subduct connects the kitchen hood or bathroom fan to the common duct. The bathroom fan connects to the subduct, which then connects to the common vent. The kitchen hood connects to the subduct, which then connects to the common vent. Application The Modulating Building Exhaust System (MBESV) is a demand­controlled ventilation system designed specifically for ventilating kitchen hoods and bathroom fans in multi­story buildings. This illustration describes the system and its components. Renovation The system can handle multiple main ducts, which provides substantial savings. Shaft NameNo. of shafts No. of Systems Est loss of conditioned air Est fan energy savings Total Annual Energy savings Replacement Cost + Labor Kitchen 14 87 $ 77,000 $ 10,600 $ 87,600$ 59,825 EX H A U S T O SUSTA I N A B L E DESIGN L E E D EA, MR, EQ, ID QUALIFIED The MEC 18 constant pressure controller can be installed on the roof in a NEMA enclosure or in the attic. 8 BESB Low Energy Fan • Compact design • High efficiency aluminum impeller guarantees • EXstream performance • Made from corrosion resistant material (indoor or outdoor installation) • Insulated housing and ultra-quiet operation • Variable-speed class A motor (inverter duty) • Access door with 180° opening angle and full duct access • Four sizes available, ETL and ETLc listed EFV Fan • Compact design • High efficiency aluminum impeller guarantees performance • Made from cast aluminum • Variable speed Class H motor • Five sizes available, ETL and ETLc listed MEC 18 Mechanical Exhaust Control • Provides a constant pressure by modulating fan speed • Used where constant pressure is needed in the exhaust duct for on-demand control • Offers extremely accurate PID loop for perfect performance • Easy to operate EXSTREAM P E R F O R M A N C E DEVELOPED AND MANUFACTURED BY EXHAUSTO BESB250BESB250BESB315BESB400BESB500 Power Supply VAC 1x1201x220­240 3x200­240/3x440­480 Amperage Amps5.8 2.9 3.1/1.76.5/2.99.0/4.0 Motor Output HP (kW)0.5 (0.35)1 (0.75)2 (1.5)3 (2.3) RPM 16001400 1720 Weight lbs (kg)110 (50)126 (57)167 (76)227 (103) Duct ConnectionsInch (mm)10 (250)12 (315)16 (400)20 (500) Max CapacityCFM (m3/h)1,500 (2,400)1,250 (2,000)2,400 (3,800)4,300 (6,800)5,800 (9,300) Power Supply VAC 1 x 120 (60 Hz) / 1 x 240 (50­60Hz) Amperage Amp 6.3 / 3.15 Operating Temperature °F / °C ­4 to 104 / ­20 to 50 Range of Operation inWC / Pa 0­0.6 / 0­150 Output VAC VDC 10­120 / 20­240 0­10 Weight Lbs (kg)3.0 (1.5) Quality Components EFV 200EFV 250EFV 315EFV 400EFV 450 Power Supply VAC 1x120 3x200­240/3x440­480 Amperage Amps 1.4 2.9 5.8 3.5/1.86.5/3.6 Motor Output HP(kW) 0.15 (0.1)0.2 (0.16)0.5 (0.35)1 (0.75)2 (1.5) RPM 1600 1720 Weight lbs (kg)47 (18) 60 (26) 88 (35)127 (58)155 (70) Duct ConnectionsInch (mm) 8 (200)10 (250)12 (315)16 (400)16 (400) Max. capacity*CFM (m3/h)600 (800)1,150 (1,600)2,000 (3,000)3,000 (4,500)4,000 (6,000) * Capacity in m3/h is based on 1,400 RPM for 220V/50Hz models. * Capacity in m3/h is based on 1,400 RPM for 220V/50Hz models. 9 Performance You Can Count On In recent years, ENERVEX has participated in a major development project initiated and financed by Enbridge Gas that has tested several dryer issues, including the effects of using the MDVS system vs. fixed speed fans. The project was managed by National Gas Technologies Center (NGTC) in Montreal. Based on more than 35,000 hours of monitoring some of the results were: • Using an MDVS control system has limited impact on drying time but can contribute to a decrease in dryer’s energy consumption by 3% while preventing up to 10 times more conditioned air than necessary from exhausting to the outside. • By using an MDVS system, which controls the speed depending on the number of dryers in use, the loss of conditioned air can be reduced from 288,000 cu.ft. (7,000 m3) per day per dryer to 40,000 cu.ft. (1,200 m3) per day per dryer in a typical 8­dryer system. • When a common exhaust strategy is retained, additional electrical savings can be achieved through the use of a MDVS system. Electricity savings can reach 8,800 kWh/year. • A rule of thumb formula has been developed to estimate heating and cooling savings based on cooling degree days and heating degree days. Performance documented by independent testing Conditioned Air Savings (cu.ft. per day per dryer) (based on 8­dryer dryer system located in Greater Toronto) Annual Energy Cost Associated with Dryer Type and Exhaust System (based on 8­dryer dryer system located in Greater Toronto) US Dollars Laundry Utilization Profile Conditioned Air Loss to the Outside (cu.ft. per day per dryer) % Dryers in Operation Laundry Profile (% per day) Laundry Profile (min per day)MDVS Fixed Speed Fan Savings 100 1.5 22 2,649 2,896 247 75 3.9 56 5,050 8,652 3,602 50 8.6 124 7,451 21,613 14,161 25 16.7 240 10,559 43,190 32,631 0 69.3 998 14,091 211,678 197,587 Total 100.0 1,440 39,800 288,029 248,229 Multiple Dryer Venting Savings Single Speed Fan SystemVariable Speed Fan System Loss of Conditioned Air 4,764 675 4,089 Fan Operation 1,105 127 978 Total 5,869 802 5,067 10 ENERVEX Success Stories Madrigal Lofts, Washington, DC Madrigal Lofts is a breathtaking new construction in Mount Vernon Place, one of the city’s hottest neighborhoods. This 12­story, loft­style condominium blends modern design and classic poetic form. It features 38 ENERVEX demand­controlled ventilation systems that exhaust the building’s dryers and bathrooms. Demand­control ventilation offers significant energy savings over traditional ventilation system, which has translated into lower operating costs. Park Potomac Place, Potomac, MD When the residents of this high­end, ten story condominium tower began complaining about noise, the developers realized that the exhaust fans that vented the kitchen hoods were running constantly, which caused a vibration in the ducts that could be heard all day long. The developer opted to install ENERVEX’s MBES demand­controlled ventilation system, which reduced the exhaust rate from 24 hours a day to just one. But the MBES system didn’t just reduce the noise; it reduced energy costs as well. By operating a variable speed fan instead of single­speed fan, Park Potomac Place would save almost $10,000 a year. By investing only $60,000 in labor and materials, Park Potomac Place realized a short eight­month project payback and a 5­year ROI of 623%. Americana-at-Brand, Glendale, CA Americana­at­Brand, an ambitious, mixed­use development project, combined upscale shopping with rich landscaping and a community­oriented environment. The developer, Caruso Affiliated, wanted to ensure optimal energy efficiency for the residences without com promising space or the architectural design of the building. The solution was a number of ENERVEX demand­controlled ven tilation systems that connected multiple dryers, kitchen hoods a nd bathroom fans to a single exhaust duct. The system also features 24­hour modulating operation, which reduces the introduction of makeup air and adjusts the exhaust rate to meet current demands. Preliminary figures indicate that this system can reduce energy consumption by at least 80% and reduce heating and cooling losses by at least 60%. 11 ENERVEX Inc. 1200 Northmeadow Pkwy. Suite 180 Roswell, GA 30076 USA P: 770.587.3238 F: 770.587.4731 T: 800.255.2923 info@enervex.com www.enervex.com ENERVEX combines quality components, superior technology and experienced personnel to deliver a system that is econo­ mical, environmentally sustainable, aesthetically pleasing and reliable. In addition, our custom engineering and space saving design ensure that the project meets code requirements, as well as the high standards of today’s builders. At ENERVEX, we don’t build a one­size­fits­all venting system. We understand that each project is unique and our three­step process allows us to design a venting system that meets the specific requirements of a given job. The ENERVEX Performance Guarantee Because ENERVEX designs the entire venting system, we take full responsibility for its operation. Contact ENERVEX for details. The FanCalc Difference One of the many things that set ENERVEX apart from our competitors is our proprietary design software, FanCalc. FanCalc allows our engineers to quickly and accurately design a venting system because it contains extensive clothes dryer data, such as operating and exhaust requirements, exhaust tempera­ tures, efficiency, ducts with k­values, resistance factors, insulation factors and more. Instead of spending days or weeks analyzing data, our engineers can enter the information into FanCalc and receive a report that provides the appropriate sizing information, code violation warnings and even design alternatives. ENERVEX – Made By Experience 1. Pre-sales analysis This phase allows us to gather require­ ments and create a customized sizing report. 2. System design Using our FanCalc software, our engi­ neers design a system that takes into consideration proper vent type applica­ tion, operating temperatures, pressure losses and the risk of condensation. It also provides specific wiring diagrams. 3. Engineering and installation support Every ENERVEX system comes complete with job­specific AutoCAD installation instructions and wiring diagrams. Our engineering support teams have access to these files and are available to answer any questions that come up during installation. The ENERVEX Process ENERVEX and LEED ENERVEX’s systems qualify for LEED points under the Energy & Atmosphere (EA), Mate­ rials & Resources (MR), Indoor Environmental Quality (EQ) and Innovation & Design Process (ID) sections. ENERVEX has actively promoted low­energy installations, energy savings, indoor air quality and recycling for decades – long before it became “in”. For years ENERVEX has been involved in the European legislation processes and has been a member of United States Green Building Council (USGBC) since 2005. Unlike most manufacturers we didn’t have to come up with ”new” GREEN solutions – we have made them for decades! 39 1 1 0 0 6 0 1 . 1 1 Maverick™ II Commercial Rooftop Systems 15 to 75 tons Maverick II Commercial Rooftop Systems System performance and reliability make Maverick II commercial packaged rooftop systems the ideal solution for new, retrofit or replacement applications on one to three-story buildings. Available in capacities from 15 to 70 tons, they combine the lower installation costs and interior space savings of a roof-mounted system with the operating and maintenance efficiencies of central heating and cooling systems. Applications range from offices and schools to libraries and strip malls. Arriving at your job site as a complete package, Maverick II commercial rooftop systems maximize your design and installed cost savings. They also can add to your building’s profit margins year after year with efficient, reliable performance. Maverick II rooftop systems are ideal for 100% dedicated outdoor air systems (DOAS). Units can be equipped with modulating hot gas reheat to increase occupant comfort and avoid over-cooling and units can incorporate an optional energy recovery wheel that can drastically improve operational costs. Also available is a 100° temperature-rise furnace for unit operation in cold-weather climates. Modulating Hot Gas Reheat Energy Recovery Wheel Gas Furnace Tubes Protecting the Environment & Your Investment Energy Savings & Efficiency Durable and Affordable Fully Featured Easy Maintenance & Service Hinged Access Doors Maverick II commercial rooftop systems are competitively priced, yet provide features that set them apart from systems offered by other manufacturers. These include: Standard low-leak dampers for superior resistance to air leakage and reduced energy costs. Scroll compressors for efficient cooling operation and dependability. Two-circuit refrigeration design for high reliability. Easy access to mechanical components, which promotes routine maintenance and can reduce service costs. Stainless steel, double-sloped drain pans per ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2004 for good indoor air quality. Standard low-leak dampers for superior resistance to air leakage and reduced energy costs. Maverick II rooftop systems are available with EERs that exceed ASHRAE 90.1-2007 requirements for the year 2010, which are approximately 6% more efficient than ASHRAE 90.1-2004 requirements. Hinged access doors with quarter-turn latches on both sides of the unit put all components within easy reach for maintenance and service. Maverick II rooftop systems are designed with energy savings and efficiency in mind. All use HFC-410A (R-410A) – a non- ozone-depleting refrigerant with no phase-out concerns. And all meet the requirements of ASHRAE 90.1 – 2007 Energy Standard for the year 2010. Many exceed this goal by as much as 15% (see chart below). Maverick II units over 20 tons provide five stages of capacity control—utilizing lower-horsepower compressor motors under part-load conditions. The result can be considerable energy savings (since most rooftop systems operate at full load only 3% of the time). LEED® credits Maverick II rooftop units utilize microchannel condensers, which require a charge of only 1.0 lb. of R-410A refrigerant or less per ton of cooling. This can earn you an extra LEED credit for Energy and Atmosphere in LEED for New Construction Version 2.2 (Credit EAc4 in LEED-NC v2.2). All Maverick II rooftop units are equipped with all-aluminum microchannel condenser coils, which are constructed of the following items, oven-brazed together: • Extruded flat tubes with many small flow channels arranged in a two-bypass configuration. These tubes provide better fluid-to-tube heat transfer than traditional round tubes and more heat transfer per square foot than traditional coils. They also require much less refrigerant charge per ton of cooling. • Aluminum fins brazed between the adjoining tubes. This arrangement protects the fins from the surface damage that is common in traditional coil arrangements which can inhibit cooling performance and is difficult to comb out. This all-aluminum construction eliminates galvanic corrosion (which occurs when dissimilar metals, such as copper and aluminum, are in contact with each other). As a result, all-aluminum condensers are more resistant to corrosion in any environment, including seacoast applications. Daikin Rooftop Units Flat aluminum tubes with many microchannels increase fluid-to- tube heat transfer and reduce refrigerant charge requirements. Aluminum fins brazed between adjoining tubes protect the fins from surface damage, which can inhibit cooling. Unique Features and Options Maverick II Commercial Rooftop Systems 2"/4" Combination Filter Track • Provides more flexibility to meet building filtration requirements • 2" MERV 6 filters shipped with unit, owner preference thereafter Economizer • CO2 control for building IAQ • DCV control for efficient operation when conditioning outdoor air Low Leak Outside Air Dampers • 4 cfm/ft2 to meet ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2004 • Double-wall blades • Blade edge and jamb seals Exhaust Fans with Building Pressure Control • Provide better building operations, higher customer satisfaction Hinged Access Doors • On both sides of unit for easy access to all components • Easy-open, quarter-turn latches • Double-wall construction protects insulation during maintenance Double-Sloped Drain Pan • Prevents corrosion • Avoids standing water for high IAQ Airfoil Plenum Fan • Energy efficient and quiet • 1" seismic spring isolators for superior vibration control • Class II construction • Premium efficiency motor is standard MicroTech® III Unit Controller • Open Choices™ feature provides interoperability with BACnet or LonMark certified communications for easy integration into your building automation system of choice. • Outdoor air and humidity control logic maintains minimum fresh air intake and optimum humidity levels. Gas Heat • Tubular heat exchanger for maximum heat transfer • Four-stage capacity control • Optional 4-to-1 modulation control on low heat • Optional 8-to-1 modulation control on high heat R410A Refrigerant • No ozone depletion potential or phase-out date • 10.0 EER, meets ASHRAE 90.1-2007 energy requirements for the year 2010 • Dual refrigerant circuits provide redundancy for high unit reliability Scroll Compressors • Provide maximum dependability, efficiency and quiet operation • Five stages of capacity control for efficient DAT control • Optional compressor isolation valves Microchannel Condenser Coils • Proven technology from the automotive industry • Suited for R-410A • All aluminum design • No corrosion between fins, tubes and header Durable Construction • Pre-painted exterior cabinet panels pass 750-hour ASTM B 117 Salt Spray Test for durability • Weather-resistant construction with capped seams and sloped top panels • Double-wall construction protects R-4 insulation and provides wipe-clean surface ™® The following are tradenames or registered trademarks of their respective companies: BACnet from ASHRAE; Modbus from Schneider Electric Ltd; MicroTech III, Open Choices, from Daikin; LONMARK, LonTalk, and LONWORKS are managed, granted and used by LONMARK International under a license granted by Echelon Corporation. ©2013 Daikin Applied A/SP 31-291 (10/13) Make it a Complete System for Optimum System Performance and Reliability Maverick™ II Commercial Rooftop Systems 15 to 75 tons Choose a Mavercik II for Stand-Alone or 100% OA ApplicationsSTEP 1 800.432.1342 www.DaikinApplied.com GS-07F-0377V For 100% OA Applications - Choose Terminal UnitsSTEP 2 Fan Coil Units VAVs Unit Ventilators SmartSource™ High Efficiency Water Source Heat Pumps Daikin VRVs with Cassettes Bulletin 701B 2 Since its founding in 1976, EVAPCO, Incorporated has become an industry leader in the engineering and manufacturing of quality heat transfer products around the world. EVAPCO’s mission is to provide first class service and quality products for the following markets: Commercial HVAC District Energy Industrial Process Industrial Refrigeration Power EVAPCO’s powerful combination of financial strength and technical expertise has established the company as a recog- nized manufacturer of market-leading products on a world- wide basis. EVAPCO is also recognized for the superior technology of their environmentally friendly product inno- vations in sound reduction and water management. EVAPCO is an employee owned company with a strong em- phasis on research & development and modern manufac- turing plants. EVAPCO has earned a reputation for technological innovation and superior product quality by featuring products that are designed to offer these oper- ating advantages: Higher System Efficiency Environmentally Friendly Lower Annual Operating Costs Reliable, Simple Operation and Maintenance With an ongoing commitment to Research & Development programs, EVAPCO provides the most advanced products in the industry–Technology for the Future, Available Today! EVAPCO products are manufactured in 17 locations in 8 countries around the world and supplied through a sales network consisting of over 170 offices. ©2011 EVAPCO, Inc. EXPERIENCE, INNOVATION, GUARANTEED PERFORMANCE EVAPCOengineers are credited as inventors on more than 45 U.S. Patents and their foreign counterparts. This engineering expertise speaks for itself and provides an exceptional foundation for various product develop- ment projects. This foundation is the catalyst for provid- ing customer driven features and benefits in an environmentally safe manner. The state of the art Research & Development Center, lo- cated at EVAPCO’s World Headquarters in Taneytown, Maryland USA, has over 60,000 square feet dedicated to thermal analysis and product development. Experienced R&D engineers perform product and application research year round in six environmental test chambers. The Research & Develop- ment Center features cus- tomized laboratories that are designed to conduct tests through a wide range of environmental conditions. The comput- erized data acquisition system records the data and graphically displays continuous results, thereby pro- viding the R&D engineers with valuable test information on a continuous basis. The Research & Development Center also has the indus- try’s largest Low Temperature Environmental Test Cham- ber. This test chamber was converted from ammonia to CO2 refrigerant in order to perform detailed thermal analysis on steel evaporators. In addition, the R&D Center also houses Evapco’s Water Analytical Services group which performs advanced chemical and water analysis in support of Pulse~Pure® and Smart Shield™Water Treatment Systems, an AMCA Fan Test Chamber for evaporator fan performance verification, and an ice thermal storage system with glycol chiller for developing charge and discharge performance ratings. Product sound ratings are measured on a dedicated Sound Test Pad located on the property. EVAPCO products are the result of extensive research and thermal testing. As a result, EVAPCO products deliver guaranteed performance in order to maximize system performance. 3 D ELIVERING Q UALITY...FOCUSEDON P ERFECTION Features and Applications Guide EVAPCO offers an extensive selection of Open Cooling Towers and Closed Circuit Coolers for all types of applications. The below chart can help guide you to the selection of your next EVAPCO Unit! AT: A compact, low horsepower induced draft, axial fan solution for all outdoor applications. UT: All of the benefits of the AT plus EVAPCO’s Super Low Sound Fan for sound sensitive applications. USS:Suitable for high corrosion areas subject to salt- spray and other corrosive chemicals. •32 to 4,995 nominal tons. •Efficiently designed using counter- flow operation. •The UT utilizes Evapco’s state-of- the-art Super Low Sound Fan for the lowest sound levels. •The USS is an all-stainless steel unit with a Type 316 Stainless Steel cold water basin and a Type 304 Stainless Steel upper section for superior corrosion resistance. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. AT/UT/USS Hot Saturated Discharge Air Hot Water In Drift Eliminators Cooled Water Out Cool Dry Entering Air ooool DDrryy eerrinnggg AAiirr oo Low horsepower, low sound, forced draft unit suitable for outdoor applications. Perfect for centrifugal fan replacement projects and projects requiring low horsepower or directional sound. •105 to 1,304 nominal tons. •Super Low Sound Fans and man- sized access doors are standard on every model. •Individual fan drive systems are standard. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. PMTQ Hot Water In Drift Eliminators Cooled Water Out Hot Saturated Discharge Air CoolCoollCool dededed W Cool Dry Entering Air Low sound, centrifugal fan, forced draft unit suitable for both indoor and outdoor applications. Designed especially for indoor and ducted layouts. This classic design is also ideal for exact replacement projects. •156 to 1,349 nominal tons. •Optional sound attenuation can reduce sound levels even further. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. LSTE Hot Water In Hot Saturated Discharge Air Cooled Water Out Drift Eliminators Cool Dry Entering Air Low profile, low sound, centrifugal fan, forced draft unit suitable for both indoor and outdoor applications. Minimal height design allows for placement in height restricted areas. Provides a compact and versatile option for tight layouts. •38 to 333 nominal tons. •304 stainless steel cold water basin is standard. •Compact design allows for units to be shipped and rigged in one piece. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. LPT Hot Water In Cooled Water Out Cool Dry Entering Air CC D EEnnntt A Hot Saturated Discharge Air Drift Eliminators Closed Circuit Coolers Applications Features Principle of Operation A low horsepower induced draft, axial fan solution for all outdoor applications. Innovative design combining both fill and a closed circuit coil makes this unit ideal for wet cooling applications where thermal and energy efficiency is the utmost concern. •88 to 1,854 tons. •Utilizes both sensible and latent heat transfer for increased energy efficiency. •Sensi-Coil®technology provides increased surface area for additional heat transfer capability. •The coil is out of the air stream for reduced scaling potential, water noise, and winter heat loss. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. ESWA Cooled Fluid Out Hot Fluid In Hot Saturated Discharge Air Cool Dry Entering Air oool ryyy rriinnngg irr CCooo FFll OO HH ll (cont.) Cooling Towers Applications Features Principle of Operation 4 D ELIVERING Q UALITY...FOCUSEDON P ERFECTION Revolutionary reduced footprint, reduced horsepower, induced draft, axial fan solution for all outdoor applications. Perfect for tight layouts and projects focused on energy efficiency. •10 to 2,552 nominal tons. •Extended surface Ellipti-fin™coil provides the option to operate either wet or dry. •Available with optional Sage® water and energy saving control panel. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. eco-ATW Fan Hot Fluid In Hot Fluid In Cold Fluid Out Cold Fluid Out Spray Pump (On) Eliminators LouversLouvers Hot Saturated Discharge Air Cold Air InCold Air In EVAPORATIVE MODE CC u utt v CCooold AAAirr I d OOuu uvv Cooolldd Aiirr Inn The ground-breaking induced draft, axial fan solution for all outdoor applications where water savings is a primary concern. The design allows for three modes of operation: 100% wet, 100% dry, or a hybrid wet/dry mode for increased dry performance and water efficiency. •10 to 615 nominal tons. •Extended surface Ellipti-fin™coil and dual pumps provide the option to operate in a variety of modes. •Sage®water and energy saving control panel is standard with every unit. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. eco-ATWE Fan Hot Fluid In Hot Fluid In Hot Saturated Air Hot Dry Air Cold Fluid Out Cold Fluid Out Spray Pump A (On) Spray Pump B (Off) WATER EFFICIENT MODE Eliminators LouversLouvers Hot Discharge Air Water/AirWater/Air PartitionPartition Water/Air Partition d OOO oou CC uu uuttt er Cold Air InCold Air In The original induced draft, axial fan solution available for a broad range of outdoor cooling capacities. This unit is available in a wide selection of box sizes making it ideal for almost any layout including centrifugal unit replacement projects. •6 to 1,550 nominal tons. •Available with optional Super Low Sound Fan and stainless steel construction. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. ATWB Hot Water In Cooled Water Out Hot Saturated Discharge Air Cool Dry Entering Air oool ryyy rriinnngg irr ed D Low horsepower, low sound, axial fan, forced draft unit suitable for outdoor applications. Perfect for centrifugal fan replacement projects and projects requiring low horsepower or directional sound. •108 to 1,031 nominal tons. •Standard with Super Low Sound Fans. •Individual fan drive systems. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. Fluid In Fluid Out Cool Dry Entering Air Hot Saturated Discharge Air Low sound, centrifugal fan, forced draft unit suitable for both indoor and outdoor applications. Designed especially for indoor and ducted layouts. This classic design is also ideal for exact replacement projects. •15 to 848 tons. •Optional sound attenuation can reduce sound levels even further. •CTI certified, FM approved, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. LSWE Hot Saturated Discharge Air Entering Air Fluid In Drift Eliminators Water Distribution System Fan & Fan Motors Coil Fluid Out EEnnttee AAA PMWQ Low profile, low sound, centrifugal fan, forced draft unit suitable for both indoor and outdoor applications. Minimal height design allows for placement in height restricted areas. Provides a compact and versatile option for tight layouts. •9 to 223 tons. •Standard with 304 stainless steel cold water basin. •Compact design allows for units to be shipped from the factory and rigged in one piece. •CTI certified, IBC compliant, ASHRAE 90.1 compliant. LRWB Cool Dry Entering Air CCC DD EEnnntt AA Fluid In Drift Eliminators Water Distribution System Coil Fluid Out Hot Saturated Discharge Air Closed Circuit Coolers Applications Features Principle of Operation 5 D ELIVERING Q UALITY...FOCUSEDON P ERFECTION Design Features EVAPCO offers an extensive list of features on every single HVAC product sold to market. Since 1976, EVAPCO has continued its strive towards innovation. Below are many of the design features EVAPCO offers on its HVAC products. EVAPAK®Fill The EVAPAK®fill design used in all Cooling Towers and the ESWA Closed Circuit Cooler is specially designed to induce highly turbulent mixing of the air and water for superior heat transfer. Special drainage tips allow high water loadings without excessive pressure drop. The fill is constructed of inert polyvinyl chloride, (PVC), will not rot or decay, and is formulated to withstand water temperatures of 130˚F (55˚C). A higher temperature fill is available for water temperatures exceeding 130˚F (55˚C). Consult your EVAPCO representative for further details. Because of the unique way in which the crossfluted sheets are bonded together, and the bottom support of the fill section, the structural integrity of the fill is greatly enhanced, making the fill usable as a working platform. EVAPAK®has excellent fire resistant qualities, having a flame spread rating of 5 per ASTM-E84-81a. Optional Fill Types Evapco also offers alternate fills as an option on most cooling towers for special applications. Consult your Evapco representative for further details. Titan-Pak stainless steel fill is designed for corrosive and high temperature applications. The Titan-Pak fill is constructed completely of stainless steel and is fire retardant. If properly maintained this stainless steel fill will last the life of the cooling tower. Wide-Pak cross fluted fill is often used in dirty water applications. Wide-Pak fill has a lower surface area than EVAPAK®fill, therefore the tower will need to be sized appropriately to account for the change in available capacity. VERTICLEAN®vertical fluted fill is often used in dirty water applications and can handle oil or greases in the system up to 5 PPM. VERTICLEAN®fill has a lower surface area than the Wide-Pak fill, therefore the tower will need to be sized appropriately to account for the change in available capacity. Thermal-Pak®Cooling Coil All Evapco Closed Circuit Coolers utilize EVAPCO’s patented Thermal-Pak® coil design which assures greater operating efficiency. The elliptical tube design allows for closer tube spacing, resulting in greater surface area per plan area than round-tube coil designs. In addition, the Thermal-Pak® design has lower resistance to airflow and also permits greater water loading, making the Thermal-Pak®coil the most effective design available. Sensi-Coil®Technology (US Patent #7,296,620) The Sensi-Coil®, exclusive on the ESWA closed circuit cooler, features the maximum amount of Thermal-Pak elliptical tubes packed closely together in a coil arrangement designed with over 20% additional coil surface area. Evapco’s coils are manufac- tured within the most strin- gent of quality control procedures. Each circuit consists of high quality steel tubing formed into a continuous serpen- tine circuit. Each circuit is then inspected and tested prior to being welded into a framed coil assembly. The coil assembly is then pneumatically tested at 400 psig under water to en- sure its integrity. The entire coil assembly is then hot-dip galvanized for industrial strength corrosion protection. Titan Coil NOW Evapco offers the optional TITAN COIL. Manufac- tured from type 304L Stainless Steel, the TITAN COIL is manufactured using Evapco’s patented elliptical tube design upgraded to Xtra Tough construction featuring: Xtra Durability, Xtra Corrosion Resistance, and an Xtra long 5 YEAR coil warranty as standard. The TITAN COIL is avail- able in both the Thermal-Pak®and Sensi-Coil®designs Sensi-Coil® Thermal-Pak®Coil by EVAPCO Round Tube Coil by Others Ellipti–fin™Technology (Patent Pending) Featuring Elliptical Spiral Fin Coil Technology EVAPCO has developed the most efficient closed circuit cooling coil in the HVAC industry! All coil rows feature patent pending finned Thermal-Pak elliptical tube design. The Ellipti–fin™lowers airflow resistance more than typical finned round tubes. This design increases evaporative and dry cooling capacity thereby saving both energy and water. D ELIVERING Q UALITY...FOCUSEDON P ERFECTION 6 Pressurized Water Distribution System EVAPCO’s Induced Draft Cooling Tower water distribution system is made of schedule 40 PVC pipe and EvapJet™ABS plastic water diffusers for corrosion protection in this key area. The piping is easily removable for cleaning. The water diffusers have a 1 inch diameter (25mm) opening and are practically impossible to clog. They also have an anti-sludge ring extending into the headers to prevent sediment from building up in the diffuser opening. In addition, the spray branches have threaded end caps to allow easy debris removal. Closed circuit coolers, which have a different spray pattern requirement than cooling towers, use the ZM®II nozzle. These nozzles are threaded into the PVC header pipe at the proper orientation and have a large orifice to prevent clogging. CTI Certified-Standard 201 Every Evapco cooling tower and closed circuit cooler is independently certified by the Cooling Technology Institute (CTI). This certification guarantees that the unit will meet the rated capacities eliminating the necessity for costly field performance tests. † Patented Efficient Drift Eliminators An extremely efficient drift eliminator system is standard on all EVAPCO Cooling Towers and Closed Circuit Coolers. The system removes entrained water droplets from the air stream to limit the drift rate to less than 0.001% of the recirculating water rate. With a low drift rate, EVAPCO units can be located in areas where minimum water carryover is critical, such as parking lots or building walls. The drift eliminators are constructed of an inert polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic material which effectively eliminates corrosion of these vital components. They are assembled in sections to facilitate easy removal for inspection of the water distribution system. Exclusive Five (5) Year Motor & Drive Warranty Evapco provides each unit with a 5 year motor and drive warranty which covers the fan(s), bearings, pulleys, shafts, belts, gear reducer(s), drive shaft(s), drive couplings, electric fan motor(s) and mechanical equipment supports on both belt and gear drive units. International Building Code (IBC) Compliant Designs In its continuing commitment to be the leader in evaporative cooling equipment design and services, EVAPCO has Inde- pendently Certified its units to withstand Seismic and Wind Loads in ALL Geo- graphic Locations and Installations in ac- cordance with IBC 2006. MOT OR AND D R I V E W A RR A N T Y † Mark owned by the Cooling Technology Institute ZM®II Nozzle Stainless Steel Strainers The EVAPCO standard for many years, the stainless steel strainer is one component of the cooling tower subject to excessive wear and corrosion. With stainless steel construction, this component will last the life of the cooling tower. WST Air Inlet Louver Evapco’s water and sight tight (WST) louvers keep water in and sunlight out of induced draft products. The unique non-planar design is made from light-weight framed PVC sections which have no loose hardware, enabling easy unit access. The louver’s air channels are optimized to block all line-of-sight paths into the basin eliminating splash-out; even when the fans are off. Additionally, algae growth is minimized by blocking all sunlight. (U.S. Patent # 6,315,804) D ELIVERING Q UALITY...FOCUSEDON P ERFECTION 7 Clean Pan Design EVAPCO units feature a completely sloped basin from the upper to lower pan section. This “Clean Pan” design allows the water to be completely drained from the basin. The spray water will drain from the upper section to the depressed lower pan section where the dirt and debris can be easily flushed out through the drain. This design helps prevent buildup of sedimentary deposits, biological films and minimizes standing water. Note: on 4' wide units, the pan is sloped without the step. Easy Access The cold water basin section on Induced Draft Units is easily accessible from ground level by simply loosening the (2) two Quick Release Fasteners on the inlet louver assemblies surrounding the cooling tower and lifting out the lightweight louver. The basin can be accessed from all (4) four sides of the unit. This open basin design enables the unit to be easily cleaned. Louver Access Door To aid in basin maintenance, many Induced Draft models can be equipped with an optional louver access door. This feature allows easy access to perform routine maintenance and inspection of the makeup assembly, strainer screen and basin without removing an entire inlet louver. This feature is standard on models with 5’ and taller louver sizes. Low Sound Solutions Super Low Sound Fan (optional) The Super Low Sound Fan offered by EVAPCO utilizes an extremely wide chord blade design available for sound sensitive applications where the lowest sound levels are desired. The fan is one-piece molded heavy duty FRP construction utilizing a forward swept blade design. The Super Low Sound fan is capable of reducing the unit sound pressure levels 9 dB(A) to 15 dB(A), depending on specific unit selection and measurement location compared to the original EVAPCO fan. Easy Maintenance Basin Designs EVAPCO has designed their HVAC products with future maintenance in mind. The Cold Water Basin is the most important area of the product to maintain. Dirt and Debris collect in the basin and must be cleaned out regularly. EVAPCO has designed their Cold Water Basins to allow for quick and easy access. Some of our features are described below. Easy Maintenance Drive System All Evapco cooling towers and closed circuit coolers come standard with premium efficient, inverter-ready fan motors that can be used with variable frequency drive (VFD) systems for precise capacity control. The mechanical drive systems are easy to access and easy to maintain. Bearing lubrication and belt adjustment can be performed from outside the unit. All units with T.E.F.C. fan motors located outside of the unit are protected with a removable motor cover or fan screen. T.E.A.O. motors located inside the fan casing are mounted on a swing-out motor mount on an adjustable base for easy removal. Stainless Steel Options All Evapco cooling towers and closed circuit coolers are constructed of G235 Hot-Dip galvanized steel as standard. A variety of stainless steel construction upgrade options are available in both 304 and 316 stainless steel, including stainless steel cold water basins and complete stainless steel units. Forced Draft Sound Attenuation (optional) The centrifugal fan design of Evapco’s forced draft coolers and towers operates at lower sound levels which make these units preferable for installations where noise is a concern. For extremely noise sensitive applications, these centrifugal fan models may be supplied with various optional stages of intake and/or discharge attenuation packages, which greatly reduce sound levels even further. World Headquarters/ Research and Development Center EVAPCO Facilities W Re D E VAPCO P RODUCTSARE M ANUFACTURED W ORLDWIDE. EVAPCO...SPECIALISTSIN HEAT TRANSFER PRODUCTSAND SERVICES. Visit EVAPCO’s Website at:http://www.evapco.com EVAPCO, Inc.— World Headquarters & Research/Development Center EVAPCO, Inc.•P.O. Box 1300 •Westminster, MD 21158 USA PHONE: 410-756-2600 •FAX: 410-756-6450 •E-MAIL: marketing@evapco.com EVAPCO, Inc. World Headquarters P.O. Box 1300 Westminster, MD 21158 USA Phone: 410-756-2600 Fax: 410-756-6450 E-mail: marketing@evapco.com EVAPCOAsia/Pacific EVAPCO Asia/Pacific Headquarters 1159 Luoning Rd. Baoshan Industrial Zone Shanghai, P. R. China, Postal Code: 200949 Phone: (86) 21-6687-7786 Fax: (86) 21-6687-7008 E-mail: marketing@evapcochina.com EVAPCOEurope EVAPCO Europe, N.V. European Headquarters Industrieterrein Oost 4010 3700 Tongeren, Belgium Phone: (32) 12-395029 Fax: (32) 12-238527 E-mail: evapco.europe@evapco.be EVAPCO East 5151 Allendale Lane Taneytown, MD 21787 USA Phone: 410-756-2600 Fax: 410-756-6450 E-mail: marketing@evapco.com EVAPCO Midwest 1723 York Road Greenup, IL 62428 USA Phone: 217-923-3431 Fax: 217-923-3300 E-mail: evapcomw@evapcomw.com EVAPCO West 1900 West Almond Avenue Madera, CA 93637 USA Phone: 559-673-2207 Fax: 559-673-2378 E-mail: contact@evapcowest.com EVAPCO Iowa 925 Quality Drive Lake View, IA 51450 USA Phone: 712-657-3223 Fax: 712-657-3226 EVAPCO Iowa Sales & Engineering 215 1st Street, NE P.O. Box 88 Medford, MN 55049 USA Phone: 507-446-8005 Fax: 507-446-8239 E-mail: evapcomn@evapcomn.com EVAPCO Newton 701 East Jourdan Street Newton, IL 62448 USA Phone: 618-783-3433 Fax: 618-783-3499 E-mail: evapcomw@evapcomw.com EVAPCO-BLCT Dry Cooling, Inc. 981 US Highway 22 West Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 USA Phone: 1-908-379-2665 E-mail: info@evapco-blct.com Refrigeration Valves & Systems Corporation A wholly owned subsidiary of EVAPCO, Inc. 1520 Crosswind Dr. Bryan, TX 77808 USA Phone: 979-778-0095 Fax: 979-778-0030 E-mail: rvs@rvscorp.com McCormack Coil Company, Inc. A wholly owned subsidiary of EVAPCO, Inc. P.O. Box 1727 6333 S.W. Lakeview Boulevard Lake Oswego, OR 97035 USA Phone: 503-639-2137 Fax: 503-639-1800 E-mail: mail@mmccoil.com EvapTech, Inc. A wholly owned subsidiary of EVAPCO, Inc. 8331 Nieman Road Lenexa, KS 66214 USA Phone: 913-322-5165 Fax: 913-322-5166 E-mail: marketing@evaptech.com Tower Components, Inc. A wholly owned subsidiary of EVAPCO, Inc. 5960 US HWY 64E Ramseur, NC 27316 Phone: 336-824-2102 Fax: 336-824-2190 E-mail: mail@towercomponentsinc.com EVAPCO Europe, S.r.l. Via Ciro Menotti 10 I-20017 Passirana di Rho Milan, Italy Phone: (39) 02-939-9041 Fax: (39) 02-935-00840 E-mail: evapcoeurope@evapco.it EVAPCO Europe, S.r.l. Via Dosso 2 23020 Piateda Sondrio, Italy EVAPCO Europe, GmbH Bovert 22 D-40670 Meerbusch, Germany Phone: (49) 2159-69560 Fax: (49) 2159-695611 E-mail: info@evapco.de Flex coil a/s A wholly owned subsidiary of EVAPCO, Inc. Knøsgårdvej 115 DK-9440 Aabybro Denmark Phone: (45) 9824 4999 Fax: (45) 9824 4990 E-mail: info@flexcoil.dk EVAPCO S.A. (Pty.) Ltd. A licensed manufacturer of EVAPCO, Inc. 18 Quality Road Isando 1600 Republic of South Africa Phone: (27) 11-392-6630 Fax: (27) 11-392-6615 E-mail: evapco@evapco.co.za Evap Egypt Engineering Industries Co. A licensed manufacturer of EVAPCO, Inc. 5 El Nasr Road Nasr City, Cairo, Egypt Phone: 2 02 24022866 /2 0224044997 Fax: 2 02 24044667 /2 02 24044668 E-mail: Primacool@link.net / Shady@primacool.net EVAPCO (Shanghai) Refrigeration Equipment Co., Ltd. 1159 Louning Rd., Baoshan Industrial Zone Shanghai, P.R. China, Postal Code: 200949 Phone: (86) 21-6687-7786 Fax: (86) 21-6687-7008 E-mail: marketing@evapcochina.com Beijing EVAPCO Refrigeration Equipment Co., Ltd. Yan Qi Industrial Development District Huai Rou County Beijing, P.R. China, Postal Code: 101407 Phone: (86) 10 6166-7238 Fax: (86) 10 6166-7395 E-mail: evapcobj@evapcochina.com EVAPCO Australia (Pty.) Ltd. 34-42 Melbourne Road P.O. Box 436 Riverstone, N.S.W. Australia 2765 Phone: (61) 2 9627-3322 Fax: (61) 2 9627-1715 E-mail: sales@evapco.com.au EvapTech Asia Pacific Sdn. Bhd A wholly owned subsidiary of EvapTech, Inc. IOI Business Park, 2/F Unit 20 Persiaran Puchong Jaya Selatan Bandar Puchong Jaya, 47170 Puchong, Selangor, Malaysia Phone: (60-3) 8070 7255 Fax: (60-3) 8070 5731 E-mail: marketing-ap@evaptech.com EVAPCONorth America 3M/7-11/DGDBulletin 701B ©2011 EVAPCO, Inc. Pre l i m i n a r y EV A P C O , I N C . UN I T SH I P P I N G WE I G H T OP E R A T I N G WE I G H T HE A V I E S T S E C T I O N WE I G H T NO . O F S H I P P I N G S E C T I O N S MO D E L # DW G . # SERIAL # DA T E RE V . SC A L E NO T E S : 1 . M - F A N M O T O R L O C A T I O N 2. - A P P R O X I M A T E D I M E N S I O N S D O N O T U S E F O R P R E - F A B R I C A T I O N O F C O N N E C T I O N P I P I N G 3. M P T D E N O T E S M A L E P I P E T H R E A D F P T D E N O T E S F E M A L E P I P E T H R E A D B F W D E N O T E S B E V E L E D F O R W E L D I N G 4. U N I T W E I G H T D O E S N O T I N C L U D E A C C E S S O R I E S ( S E E S E P A R A T E D R A W I N G S F O R A C C E S S O R I E S ) 5. 3 / 4 " D I A . M O U N T I N G H O L E S . R E F E R T O R E C O M M E N D E D S T E E L S U P P O R T D R A W I N G 6. M A K E - U P W A T E R P R E S S U R E - 2 0 p s i M I N , 5 0 p s i M A X CL O S E D C I R C U I T C O O L E R 1 + lb s . + lb s . lb s . FA C E 1 FA C E 2 PLA N V IEW ACCESS DOOR MM NT S M FA C E 2 FA C E 1 * * AC C E S S DO O R * * 4 1 / 4 34 7' - 1 0 " 2 M P T DR A I N 2 5 / 8 8 3 / 4 36 1 / 4 20 1/879 3/4 3 M P T OV E R F L O W 5 1 / 4 24 1 / 2 44 7 / 8 * 13 7 3 / 4 18 ' - 2 5 / 8 " 13 1 / 2 75 2 MPT MAKE-UP 7' - 1 0 " 18 ' - 2 5 / 8 " 3 1 / 4 T Y P . (2 ) 4 B F W FL U I D I N (2 ) 4 B F W FL U I D O U T WV 0 8 1 2 1 2 - E R G - S T 14 8 0 0 2 3 0 1 0 1 4 8 0 0 4 2 6 9 3 / 4 8 ' - 1 0 " (2 ) 1 / 2 F P T V E N T LR W B 8 - 6 O 1 2 7/ 3 0 / 2 0 1 5 110 Wild Basin Rd.  Suite 365  Austin, TX 78746 v: 512.472.6222  f: 512.472.0982  www.CampusAdv.com September 16, 2015 Catherine De Almeida 123 S. Cayuga Street, Suite 201 2398 East Camelback Road Ithaca, NY Re: 301 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. ―-State Street Triangle Project: FEAF Part 3 Responses Catherine: Below are Campus Advantage to the inquiries from the City of Ithaca on our FEAF part 3 submission on the 301 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. Project. Regarding the IMPACT ON GROWTH & CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD:  Expected resident breakdown ― student/non-student ― and institution attending. How will the building be leased ― by bedroom of apartments? The applicant has provided the following information about resident breakdown: Campus Advantage Response is: The new unit mix is as follows: Unit Types# of Units # of Beds per  Unit # of Beds Efficiency50150 1  Bed/ 1  Bath30130 2  Bed/ 1  Bath40280 2  Bed/ 2  Bath20240 3 Bed/ 2 Bath6318 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Odds29 4116 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Even37 4148 5 Bed/ 4 Bath 20 5100 Total 2322.51582 The residential make-up of Project is estimated to be:  77.8% student (431), 22.2% non-student (123).  78.4% of the students undergrad (338), 21.6% estimated to be graduate (93)  64% from Cornell (276), 32% from IC (138), 4% from TC3 (17) See attached worksheet titled: State Street Triangle Project: Estimated Resident Breakdown. All units will be rented “by the bedroom”. Given efficiencies and one bedroom units only have one bedroom, only one lease will need to be executed. On all other unit types, a potential resident will be able to execute multiple leases for multiple bedrooms. Unfortunately, student housing Property Management software does not allow a mix of leasing types. Therefore, if a conventional renter (non-student) would like to rent a two bedroom unit, then that individual will be able to do so by signing a lease for each bedroom. This does occur with some regularity across our Page 2 40+ property portfolio. A sampling of over 16,000 residents June of 2015 showed 14.3% of residents we 25 & older, with 7.6% of our residents being 28 or older. Due to Fair Housing, we do not require tenants to state whether they are a student or not, as our apartments are open to rent to anyone. Regarding the IMPACT ON GROWTH & CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD:  Market analysis performed for project Campus Advantage Response is: The Subject Development is located at 301 East State Street in Ithaca, NY, approximately 0.6 miles to Cornell University and 0.9 miles to Ithaca College. It sits at the gateway of the new downtown pedestrian corridor, known as Ithaca Commons. This area is a four-block pedestrian area populated with retail, restaurants, and nightlife that is frequented by Ithaca residents, as well as Cornell and IC students. The 0.76-acre site is proposed to be an 11-story building with the first floor containing retail, as well as the leasing office and common area amenities. Possible amenities include a 24-hour fitness center, a flex fitness space, media/game lounge, study rooms and an internet café. The city of Ithaca is in central New York and is the county seat of Tompkins County, as well as the largest community in the Ithaca-Tompkins County metropolitan area. This contains the municipalities of the Town of Ithaca, the village of Cayuga Heights, and other towns and villages in Tompkins County). The city of Ithaca is located on the southern shore of Cayuga Lake, in Central New York. Ithaca is home to three institutions of higher learning - Cornell University, Ithaca College and Tompkins Cortland Community College (TC3). In 2013, the city's estimated population was 30,515, and the metropolitan area had a population of 103,617. Of the three institutions of higher learning, two are Tier 1 investable markets and given their proximity to the Subject Site, it can be assumed that this development will attract students from both. The site is within one mile of both campuses and can be accessed via TCAT shuttle routes. Routes 10 & 11 provide express access to both Cornell and Ithaca College, respectively, every 10 minutes from 7am to 7pm, seven days a week. Additionally, late night routes also provide coverage from 8:00 to 2:30 am from downtown Ithaca to Cornell Monday through Saturday. Additionally, the site’s adjacency to downtown Ithaca provides residents with superb access to the entirety of Ithaca and Tompkins county given downtown Ithaca is the hub in the TCAT’s Hub and Spoke accessibility model. Cornell students are able to accesses TCAT via purchasing an OmniRide pass for $200 per year. Ithaca College students are also offered discounted passes for $265 for the year. In fall 2014, Cornell saw its highest enrollment yet, reaching 21,850, which is a 4.4% growth over the past five years, an increase of 911 students. Undergraduates at Cornell account for 66% of the total population, approximately 14,453 students, and graduates number 7,397. All students are attending this institution on a full-time basis. Out-of-state students make up 73% of the total population. Cornell currently houses approximately 7,463 students, which accounts for approximately 51.6% of the undergraduate students and 34.2% of the total population. There is no on-campus housing requirement. Ithaca College enrolls 6,587 students, of which 6,124 are undergraduates. 97% of students are attending IC full-time and 56% come from out of state. IC requires housing through junior year and houses approximately 4,395 students in 27 traditional residence halls and two apartment complexes. This accounts for 71.8% of the undergraduate population and 66.7% of the total enrollment. The Mayor of Ithaca, Svante Myrick, and Tompkins Legislator, Martha Robertson, recently submitted an article to The Ithaca Voice stating Ithaca’s housing crisis. They state the shortage of rental and for-sale housing is getting worse every year. The lack of housing causes people to live further out in the suburbs, causing traffic congestion, damage to the infrastructure, environmental issues, as well as putting a strain on public transit. The county’s 2006 assessment reported that Ithaca would need at least 2,127 new rental units by 2014 to meet the demand. During the 2006-2014 timeframe, only 657 new units have been completed in the city of Ithaca, leaving a 1,470 unit shortage of Page 3 rental units. What was not accounted for in the 2006 Demand Study, was the 2,400 new undergraduate and graduate students added at Cornell with zero (0) new beds added on-campus. Further compounding the on-going housing shortage will be the estimated 1,300 students projected at Cornell over the next 5 years along with the closing of Maplewood Apartments in the summer of 2016, leaving 480 graduate students without housing. This is a net increase of unmet demand of 1,780 students. See attached articles: The case for more housing in Tompkins County, Cornell plans closure of Maplewood Park Apartments, Opinion: Ithaca's housing crisis, economic justice and the path forward. According to Nels Bohn, of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, Ithaca’s vacancy rate in 2014 was 1% with rental rates increase of 13% from 2013 to 2014. In April 2014, the New York Times named Ithaca America’s 11th least affordable housing market with residents spending on average 38.6% of their income on housing. This means Ithaca is more expensive than Napa, CA, Honolulu, Hi and Boulder, CO. General macroeconomics theory will illustrate that a market whose supply and demand is so stretched, that new supply is needed in order to provide slack in the economy. See attached articles: Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? and In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class. The off-campus market can be mostly characterized by a collection of smaller apartment communities that offer very few amenities, are not professionally managed and do not resemble traditional purpose-built student product. The overall occupancy for the Ithaca market is strong at 99%, with many of the properties beginning lease up for the following year on October 1st due to strong housing demand. The Subject Development will bring a professional management team and residence life program unlike what is currently present in Ithaca. Additionally, it will offer residents a variety of amenities and apartment finishes that will be superior to the rest of the market. See attached article: In Housing Rush, Cornellians Weather Collegetown Line for Hours. The proposed project presents the Ithaca with the ability to close the 1,470 unit rental housing unit shortage by 232 units, nearly an entire third of the units the market was able to provide over an eight year period. This 15.7% reduction in the shortfall should provide added relief to a severely strained rental housing market. Though some might think the Project to be too large in scale, when the demand generators from the types of units that are being delivered are examined, the parts are easily digestible: 338 Undergraduate students represent 3.3% of the off-campus undergraduate student demand (Ithaca College and Cornell only) 93 Graduate students represent 1.4% of the off-campus graduate student demand (Ithaca College and Cornell only) 123 Conventional renters (93 units) represent a mere 0.4% of the Ithaca population and marginally more than the 82 housing units delivered on average from 2006-2014. Regarding the IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION: Potential transportation mitigations:  Shuttle Service  Incorporating parking into the project  Green Street public sidewalk ― rebuild and add 5’ treelawn and street trees  Design and installation of intersection improvements Campus Advantage Response is: Campus Advantage deliberated the use of a private shuttle service to and from Cornell, Ithaca and TC3. Upon careful examination of the extensive public transportation system and the subsidized bus passes to students, running a private shuttle would provide minimal positive impact to transportation convenience while at the same time adding to traffic to the site and a need for lanes to pick up passengers. An important component to traffic management is relying on the in-place transportation infrastructure and discouraging auto ownership by not providing on-site parking, in combination with providing on-site car sharing and bicycle sharing. Campus Advantage is in dialogue with Ithaca Car Share to provide at least one (1) car on-site, as well as obtained a proposal from Zagster for 10 bike Page 4 share bicycles. As stated by TCAT, this site is the best-located site in Ithaca in relation to public transportation, especially to Cornell and Ithaca College, whose routes have ample capacity to serve to project. See attached letter from TCAT. Related to on-site parking, as illustrated in the 2012 Parking Study performed by Upstate Research Group, we believe the best deterrent of auto ownership is not providing on-site parking. According to this study of more than 330 individuals, auto ownership rates among individuals whose housing accommodation did not provide on-site parking was half of that of individuals whose housing accommodations provided on-site parking, 16.7% versus 34%. See attached Collegetown Parking Study. We believe the parking demand of 191 cars can be met in a mutually beneficial relationship the Cayuga Garage, providing the garage much needed income to meet its debt service obligations currently unmet by approximately $960,000 per year. See attached worksheet titled State Street Triangle project – Projected Parking Demand. We trust that our responses to your inquiries are acceptable. Please let us know if more information is required. Regards, ______________________________ By: Michael C. Orsak Senior Vice President Campus Advantage State Street Triangle Project Estimated Resident Breakdown Estimated Residential Make‐up Unit Types# of Units # of Beds per  Unit # of BedsOcc PercTenants% Students# Students %  Professionals #  Professionals Efficiency 50 1 50 95%48 25%12 75%36 1 Bed/ 1 Bath 30 1 30 95%29 25%7 75%22 2 Bed/ 1 Bath 40 2 80 95%76 50%38 50%38 2 Bed/ 2 Bath 20 2 40 95%38 50%19 50%19 3 Bed/ 2 Bath 6 3 18 95%17 50%9 50%8 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Odds29 4 11695%110 100%110 0%0 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Even37 4 14895%141 100%141 0%0 5 Bed/ 4 Bath 20 5 10095%95 100%95 0%0 Total 232 2.5158295%55477.8%43122.2%123 Estimated Classification Make‐Up of Student Residents Unit Types# Students% UG# UG% Grad# Grad Efficiency 12 5.0%195.0%11 1 Bed/ 1 Bath 7 10.0%190.0%6 2 Bed/ 1 Bath 38 25.0%1075.0%28 2 Bed/ 2 Bath 19 25.0%575.0%14 3 Bed/ 2 Bath 9 50.0%550.0%4 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Odds110 90.0%9910.0%11 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Even141 90.0%12710.0%14 5 Bed/ 4 Bath 95 95.0%905.0%5 Total 43178.4%33821.6%93 Estimated Source of Student Residents Undergraduate Graduate Total College %#%#%# Cornell 65.0%220 60.0%5664.0%276 Ithaca College 30.0%101 40.0%3732.0%138 TC3 5.0%17 0.0%0 3.9%17 Total 100.0%338100.0%93100.0%431 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...1/6 The case for  more housing in  Tompkins County AFFORDABLE  HOUSING  CRISIS, STORIES JULY  8, 2015BY  BRIAN  CRANDALL ITHACA, N.Y. — Last week, Ithaca Mayor Svante Myrick and county Legislator Martha Robertson issued an opinion piece on the need for more housing, and especially affordable housing, in the city and county. There were two, fairly simple reactions to the article - readers believed it and agreed there was a housing issue, or they thought it was bunch of lies. Having some data-driven writers on staff at the Ithaca Voice, we decided to delve a little deeper into the numbers behind Myrick and Robertson's claims. Let's start with the 2006 housing study that was cited in the article. According to that study, performed by Vermont-based Economic & Policy Resources Inc. (EPR), 2,127 rental units and 1,767 owner-occupied units would be needed by the end of 2014, for a total of 3,894. These numbers were determined using the 2005 housing deficit (871 units), economic trends and population/demographic trends.  Some readers may remember the quote of "4,000 units of housing" cited in news pieces back in the mid- 2000s, and this is where it comes from. 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...2/6 Using data from the U.S. Housing and Urban Development's State Of the Cities Systems (SOCDS) Database, new housing permits were pulled for the same time period as the study's projection, 2006 to 2014. From 2006 to 2014, Tompkins County added 1,124 single-family homes and 910 multi-family housing units (apartments and maybe a few co-ops or condos), for a total of 2,034 housing units. In what is a surprise to no one, the majority of multi-family housing was built in the city of Ithaca, and the majority of single-family homes were built in surrounding towns. The county had 40,069 housing units in 2006, so in that nine-year span there was about 5.1% growth in housing units, to 42,103. 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...3/6 The EPR study stated that 3,894 housing units would be required. With 2,034 units actually built, that means only 52% of the housing needs identified by the study were met. Breaking it down further, homeowners, occupying mostly single-family properties, fared a little better - with 1,124 built of the 1,767, that meant 63.6% of the homes that were needed based on 2006-2014 projection were built. However, for rental units, which are mostly multi-family housing, it was only 910 of the 2,127 needed - 42.8%. Not even half. This wouldn't be a problem if the economy slowed down or population growth level off, but neither of those occurred. Even with the recession a few years ago, job totals have increased quite a bit, with over 6,000 jobs have been added to the county since 2006. The population has also increased - Tompkins County had 99,997 residents in 2006, and in 2014 it was estimated to be 104,691. Rather oddly, the county added 3,049 housing units from 1997-2005, the previous nine-year period, but only 3,482 residents. Population growth has climbed even as new housing permits have dropped. Perhaps most importantly, the 2006 EPR study never accounted for changes in student population. It assumed net zero change for the purpose of the study, which focused on permanent residents. Unfortunately for the housing situation, there's been a huge growth in student population. Cornell added 2,040 students from 2006 to 2014. Ithaca Collegeadded a more manageable 178 students. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the average rental unit in Tompkins County houses 2.14 people. The county's staring down 1,036 units it didn't plan for, and as noted in the opinion article, Cornell plans on increasing its enrollment further. 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...4/6 For the record, IC has added student housing in the period from 2006 to 2014 - anaddition to the Circle Apartments south of campus, which opened in 2012 and increased campus housing capacity by 138 beds. While South Hill students are driving up housing demand, the overall impact is minor. In contrast, when Cornell rebuilt its West Campus Housing during the 2006-2014 time period, there was no net increase in the total number of beds. The Big Red has had no gain in student housing since new dorms opened on North Campus in 2001. With the impending closure of the 480-bed Maplewood Park student housing complex, the situation may get worse. No one can force Cornell to build new housing, but their burgeoning student population does add a substantial strain to the market. 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...5/6 Given the numbers above, Tompkins County fell 1,860 units short of its 2014 housing goal; add in the unexpected influx of college students, and the number rises to 2,832. It wasn't good to have some affordability problems when the county was 871 units short of a balanced market in 2005; at the 2014 deficit of 2,832 units, the impacts become much 9/16/2015 The case for more housing in Tompkins County data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...6/6 more severe, which is why housing affordability has become such a big issue. Myrick and Robertson's column might be an opinion, but the statistics give their opinion a lot of weight. 9/16/2015 Cornell plans closure of Maplewood Park Apartments data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...1/3 Cornell plans closure of Maplewood  Park Apartments NEWS, STORIES MAY  27, 2015BY  BRIAN  CRANDALL Ithaca, N.Y. — Grad students living in Ithaca will have one fewer option come Fall 2016: The Maplewood Park Apartments, a complex owned by Cornell University, will shut down after the 2015-2016 academic year. According to a press release from the university, KyuJung Whang, the university's vice president for Infrastructure, Properties and Planning, stated that “While Maplewood has Downtown  Ithaca Bingo Shop, Dine, & Play  To  Win SPONSORED 9/16/2015 Cornell plans closure of Maplewood Park Apartments data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...2/3 served our community for more than 25 years, we have been aware that maintaining the complex was not sustainable, as the structures have just about reached the end of their useful life.” Maplewood Park is a 394-unit, 480-bedroom facility off of Maple Avenue in the town of Ithaca. The complex was built in 1988/1989, replacing the "Vetsburg" home development that Cornell laid out after World War II to house the families of soldiers who came in on the G.I. Bill. The 122,000 square-foot complex not only includes apartments for grad and professional students, but also the Maplewood Park Community Center. It should be noted that the closure of Maplewood Park has nothing to do with a lack of demand. Cornell's student population has increased by nearly 2500 students since 9/16/2015 Cornell plans closure of Maplewood Park Apartments data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...3/3 2005, most of those being graduate and professional students. So why would the university close the facility? Possibly because Cornell has been intending on redeveloping the property for almost a decade. “We are committed to both the students and the local community to create living spaces in areas beyond central campus and promote multiple strategies to add housing to the market,” said Whang in the Cornell press release. “These include the development of both the East Hill Plaza area and the Maplewood site.” ​The Voice has touched on the East Hill plans previously. As for Maplewood Park, the property was reviewed in the Cornell Master Plan, noting that "the redevelopment of Maplewood Park in the short term is anticipated". Guidelines from the plan call for demolition of the current complex as well as the Cornell-owned Ithaca East (formerly Maple Hill) apartments next door, and replacing the properties with hundreds of university-owned rental units. However, there are no clear plans for the site development at this time; only that it is likely to occur. In the short term, the closure of 394 units tightens an already-tight Ithaca housing market. something that Cornell is cognizant of. In the longer term, residents of Belle Sherman and East Hill in general can expect a lot of Cornell-funded construction heading their way in the next couple of years. 9/16/2015 Opinion: Ithaca not building nearly fast enough to meet demand data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...1/5 Opinion: Ithaca's housing crisis, economic justice and  the path  forward NEWS, OPINION JULY  1, 2015BY  JEFF  STEIN Editor's Note: The following letter  was written by Tompkins Legislator  Martha Robertson and Mayor  Svante Myrick. To submit a  guest column, contact me anytime at jstein@ithacavoice.com. TCAT Bus  To  Nature: Route 22 SPONSORED 9/16/2015 Opinion: Ithaca not building nearly fast enough to meet demand data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...2/5 We have a housing crisis in our community. It affects every one of us, not just people trying to move here for work, school, or retirement. This crisis — a dire shortage of rental and for-sale housing at all price points — is getting worse every year. This crisis drives costs up for everyone. It pushes our assessments up, and therefore our taxes. People are forced to live far from their jobs, creating costly congestion and damage to our infrastructure. Public transit is over-stretched to serve the 15,000 in- commuters daily, as well as those within the county who live outside TCAT's range. Anyone concerned about economic justice should be extremely upset about this crisis. People are really hurting. Unfortunately, the people most hurt don't have the time to lobby for more housing; they're busy working just to pay the bills — often more than one job — and commuting. They're invisible. In particular, low-to-moderate income renters face a desperate and growing affordability gap. HUD defines housing as "affordable" if a household spends no more than 30 percent of its income on housing costs. Unfortunately, data show that almost a third of all non-student renters in Tompkins County pay more than 50 percent of their income for rent. They manage by scrimping everywhere else: health care, clothing, even food. Demand on our food pantries keeps growing, as families struggle to keep their housing at the expense of life's other necessities. Unstable, unsafe, unaffordable housing adds to 9/16/2015 Opinion: Ithaca not building nearly fast enough to meet demand data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...3/5 mental health and substance abuse challenges, hurts children's school performance, and keeps renters from saving to become homeowners. Concerned about environmental sustainability? You should be very disturbed by this crisis. Study after study shows that denser living has a lower carbon footprint than sprawl. If more housing is not built in the already-developed parts of our county, it will be built elsewhere —increasingly along our rural roads, swallowing up productive farmland and cherished green spaces, and forcing people to drive more. Sprawl increases other public costs as well, for schools, roads, emergency services, and more. But people ask: "There's been so much construction lately! Don't we have enough housing in the works?" No. The county's 2006 needs assessment projected that countywide, we'd need at least 2,127 new rental units by 2014 to meet the documented demand. We have built nowhere near that number. In fact, all the new construction is not keeping up with existing demand. Between 2005 and 2014, Cornell University added 2,400 new graduate students and undergrads. During almost that same period — 2006 to 2014 — there have only been 657 new units completed in the City of Ithaca. The gap is widening. But that's not all. Cornell's plans are to grow even faster in the next five years, adding 1,300 undergrad and graduate students. 9/16/2015 Opinion: Ithaca not building nearly fast enough to meet demand data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...4/5 Learn more about Ithaca's affordable housing crisis by clicking on the box above. This is not to criticize Cornell. Their policy is that off-campus housing pays taxes and supports the community directly, while on-campus dorms are exempt from property taxes. Even if Cornell were to decide tomorrow to build new on-campus housing, that would take years. It takes more than three years from start to finish for new housing projects. For our neighbors who are hurting, for the sake of the environment, we have no time to lose. Housing demand is so strong because ours is a special community, including our culture that values social equity and environmental sustainability. We must make the most of this enviable position, welcoming new people and becoming an even more inclusive community, and preserving the community we cherish. 9/16/2015 Opinion: Ithaca not building nearly fast enough to meet demand data:text/html;charset=utf-8,%3Cdiv%20class%3D%22s_header_wraper%22%20style%3D%22box-sizing%3A%20border-box%3B%20margin-top%3A%2028...5/5 — Martha  Robertson  is a  Tompkins County legislator  and Housing Fund chairwoman. — Svante Myrick is mayor  of the City of Ithaca. 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 1/9 Welcome!Login|Signup SuMoTuWeThFrSa 12345 6789101112 131415 16 171819 20212223242526 27282930 Submit Your News! 76° ClearSearch this site...  HOME NEWS SPORTS LIVING A & E REAL ESTATE SPECIAL SECTIONS CLASSIFIEDS Home News Story Comments  (14)Image (2) Tweet 26 1 52 Print Font Size: Why  Is  Ithaca  One  of  the  Least Affordable  US  Cities? Posted: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 12:00 am By Michael Nocella | 14 comments When thinking of cities likely to have the least affordable rental housing, New York City is a good bet. It only makes sense that the financial capital of the United States would be an expensive place to live. So when the New York Times recently published a list of the top 20 cities where rents are highest relative to median gross income, it was a bit of a surprise to find Ithaca ranked 11, just one spot below the Big Apple.  The list, derived from an analysis conducted by the real estate website Zillow, found 90 cities where the median rent—not including utilities—was more than 30 percent of the median gross income. Conventional wisdom suggests an individual’s rent should be somewhere around 30 percent of his or her income. Zillow found Ithacans, on average, spend 38.6 percent.  According to the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD), the average two-bedroom apartment in Ithaca—including utilities—costs $1,130 per month. To afford such an apartment without spending more than the traditional 30 percent of one’s income on rent, the household would need to earn $49,000 a year. The median household income in the City of Ithaca is $29,230 and two-thirds of the city’s households earn less than $50,000 a year, according to the 2008-2012 estimate from the American Community Survey (of the U.S. Census Bureau). “The cost of housing is increasing at a faster rate than the increase in median household income,” said Nels Bohn, Director of Community Development, Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA). “Between 2013 and 2014 the cost of rental housing in Ithaca increased 13 percent,” he said, “yet household incomes are largely stagnant. We have a growing housing affordability problem in Ithaca.” Why  is  rent  so expensive in Ithaca? Several cities found on the New York Times' least affordable rents list were to be expected. Los Angeles (topping the list at 47 percent), Miami (43.2 percent), San Diego (41.4 percent) and San Francisco (40.7 percent) are sought after destinations for employment. It’s easy to fathom why living in those cities year round would be costly.  It is less apparent why the rental housing market in Ithaca is so competitive. Even when compared to other 1.3kRecommend th Events Calendar September 2015        We're always  interested in hearing about news in our community. Let us know what's going on! Submit  news Previous  Next photo: Justin  Zoll For  Rent 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 2/9 Food  Trucks  and  Carts Why  Is  Ithaca One  of  the  Least  Affordable  US Cities? Dryden  Burglary  Suspects Nabbed Memorial  Watchfire  to be  Lit  at  Myers Point Ithaca Commons Cameras  Watching  You college towns in the Northeast, Ithaca is expensive. According to Apartmentratings.com, the average two- bedroom apartment—$1,165 in Ithaca—is cheaper in Burlington, VT ($999), Charlottesville, VA ($1,139), Amherst, MA ($1,074), and New Brunswick, NJ ($1,066). All of the aforementioned college towns have median household incomes greater than Ithaca, with Burlington ($33,070) the only one not north of $40,000. The simplest explanation for why Ithaca’s rental housing market is skewed is supply and demand. “The New York Times article that just came out that looked at all of these market areas had, to me, really surprising results,” said Paul Mazzarella, Executive Director of Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS). “I knew Ithaca was expensive. I’ve also known New York City was very expensive. One of things that makes rentals expensive in Ithaca is that the supply of rental units is really limited.” Thanks to a constant stream of renters supplied by Ithaca College and Cornell University students, landlords in Ithaca find themselves with very few vacancies. According to Bohn of IURA, the current rental market in Ithaca has a vacancy rate of less than 1 percent. A desirable vacancy rate in a real estate market is typically 5 percent. In addition to increasing rent, a housing market that prioritizes a student population leaves the rest of Ithaca’s rental market in the dark.  “It is important to note that increasing the supply of housing aimed at only one price range or targeted to a single age niche will not result in the benefits of increased competition for the entire market,” Bohn said. “For instance, increasing the amount of housing near campuses that are targeted for college students has minimal impact on the rents for households seeking housing elsewhere throughout the community. Likewise, increasing the supply of high-end housing is not expected to trickle down to offer more choice for lower-income households. We need an across-the-board increase in the rental housing supply as well as other types of housing, such as condominiums,” he added. Not only is the presence of Ithaca College and Cornell University dictating the city’s housing trends, the institutions also create jobs. This brings new faces to Ithaca looking for a place to live, and more times than not, to rent. While a thriving job market is a good thing, Ithaca Mayor Svante Myrick said it factors into why affordable apartments are so hard to find. “I think it’s because there’s a lot of jobs here, and there’s not a lot of apartments here,” Myrick said. “It’s that dynamic. We have not grown the housing market as fast as the job market. So that while we’re adding more jobs, the people coming in to take the jobs are now competing with the people that were already here.” Even Myrick, with a yearly salary of $50,000, flirts with paying more than 30 percent of his gross income on rent. Living with a roommate in a two-bedroom apartment on Linden Avenue with a monthly rent of $750 per person, Myrick estimates spending close to $12,000 a year on rent and utilities. He said, after taxes, he clears a little more than $35,000 in income. That puts him right around spending a third of his income on rent, and that’s with a paycheck well above the city’s median income. Myrick noted that the job he had before being mayor paid him $26,000 a year, and that those days included missed meals and “a lot of Ramen.” “I can’t complain about my paycheck at all,” he said. “I’m a single guy with no overhead, that’s pretty good. But the rent is killer.”  Myrick said the first step to creating a more affordable housing market is keeping up with the population growth; the second step is keeping up with the local job growth. However, even if those two conditions are met, a new trend of national household size shrinking is creating a need for more households, Myrick said.  “Fifty years ago, someone my age would be married and have three kids,” he said. “Four people would live in one house. Now, whomever it is I’m going to marry is out in an apartment on her own. And I’m in an apartment. So it’s double the number of apartments you would need before.” You Don’t  Pay  for  What  You Get Anyone who was surprised to find Ithaca among the least affordable places to live probably doesn’t rent in Ithaca. Whether you’re the mayor, a student, or just a longtime resident, it is a known concern.   Cornell graduate student Amanda Costello, who lives in a four-bedroom house on South Quarry Street, pays a monthly rent of $625 per person, which only includes water. Before that, she lived on Dryden Road.  “So far this is the cheapest place I have lived in Collegetown,” she said. “Rent increases between $25 and $50 per person every year no matter who your landlord is. Collegetown—its housing at least—is basically a glorified slum. I would never pay what I do if I didn’t need to be within walking distance of campus. The [building at the] intersection of Dryden Road and College Ave. now sits half empty because of the outrageously high rents. Who that is working out well for, I can’t say. It is horrifically overpriced. The landlords must pay off the inspectors to get these houses passed.” Cornell graduate student Owen Rickey—who like Costello also attended Cornell as an undergraduate—echoed Costello’s frustration. He pays a monthly rent of $850 for his share of a two-bedroom apartment on Oak Ave. Angered by the year-to-year increases in his rent, he claimed that eight major landlords cornered the market in Collegetown.  “They work together to keep prices high on their properties despite each one being a piece of crap,” he said. Most Popular Most Commented 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 3/9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 What Do You Think? Do you buy  used goods? Find  Local  Businesses Search    Popular Searches | Browse By Category “Each year a house or two is closed for the removal of asbestos from the walls and ceilings. Houses sag to the point of almost collapsing. It is insane. These are $200-300 per person a month places that are going for $700- 900, and all the way up to $1200 or more. All because they are close to Cornell University.” Landlords Association of Tompkins County President Herb Dwyer said there is no such rent collaboration between the eight major landlords of Collegetown, or any landlords in Ithaca for that matter. He added that the landlords association holds roundtable meetings to make sure “those types of meetings don’t happen.” “I’ve never heard of that,” he said. “It would only be a monopoly if there it was just one guy. If they really are meeting to discuss rents, that’s price fixing and that’s illegal. That’s straight out of a Hollywood movie. I can’t imagine that’s the case. Increases in rents are purely market driven.” Overpaying for mediocre living arrangements is not exclusive to Collegetown. Myrick estimated that his $750 rent per person apartment looks and feels like “what $400 per person should get you,” adding, “if $750 a month gets you this, then what do you get for $400? It’s brutal.” Ithaca Times staff photographer Justin Zoll has rented in Ithaca for seven years. He said he pays $465 (heat included) for his half of a two-bedroom apartment in Fall Creek. Even though this would qualify as cheaper than the average, Zoll said it still takes its toll. “I’ve always paid about this much, so I can’t comment as to whether or not it’s reasonable,” Zoll said. “I can say that as someone who has worked a number of different jobs in Ithaca, it does take a considerably large portion of my income.” Raising rents  to “tread water” With the cost of rental housing in Ithaca up 13 percent in the last year (according to the IURA), it might seem like landlords are taking advantage of a situation where there is more demand than supply. However, owning property in Ithaca is an expensive endeavor in its own right. “It’s very expensive to own property in the city of Ithaca,” said Ithaca landlord Monica Moll. “Property taxes are 22 cents of every dollar. Utilities and water is very expensive. I have a high turnover rate, so that’s very expensive. Every year, I turn over 75 percent of my property. So that costs money. So I can see why rents are so much above the median income in Ithaca because there are so many factors in keeping up property that is very expensive. It’s really hard. I can’t raise rents fast enough at this point to cover the increase in property taxes.” Warren Real Estate broker Mark Mecenas been in the real estate industry in Ithaca for nearly 30 years. He is also a landlord and a developer. No matter what hat he’s wearing, he said the cost of doing business in Ithaca—or anywhere in New York State—is high. He pointed to the area’s high taxes and long heating season as to why owning and renting property is more expensive in Ithaca, than say, Virginia or Georgia. “My whole reason for investing in real estate is to be a hedge for inflation,” he said. “Because every day I’m losing buying power through inflation. I’m not trying to raise rents. For the most part, I’m treading water. I’m not getting ahead. I’m not making any real gain. I’m just saying ‘Ok, what are my expenses this year? Oh, I have to increase rent.’ It’s a vicious cycle.” As taxes rise, so will rent.  “On the cost side, homeowners and renters struggle with high property taxes due to the high percentage of tax- exempt property in the city, which is over 60 percent,” Bohn said. “It is not unusual now for a homeowner to pay more in taxes than mortgage payments. One solution to alleviate this problem is to increase the tax base. A new market-rate condominium housing project downtown or student housing project in Collegetown may not lead directly to more affordable housing, but the property taxes they pay will reduce the tax rate for the rest of the community, including housing developers of moderate income rental housing,” he added.  Can anything be done? One solution to stabilizing the rental housing market in Ithaca would be to increase the supply. However, as Bohn noted, simply adding housing options is not guaranteed to have any impact. A new apartment complex near Collegetown isn’t likely to lower the cost of living in downtown. Options must be added across the board. Unfortunately, developing new housing is a huge challenge anywhere, let alone Ithaca. “We run into such a firestorm of opposition at every turn any time we have affordable housing projects proposed,” Myrick said. “People wonder why it’s so hard to build affordable housing in the city. The people who like it generally don’t show up. I mean, they just don’t show up at city council meetings. You’ll never have 100 people show up (to support an affordable housing project).” He also pointed out that a lot of people who would be in favor of the project don’t actually live in the city yet, making it even less likely that they would attend a council meeting. Landlords Association of Tompkins County President Herb Dwyer said adding new housing options in Ithaca is a challenge because there are few places left to build.  “It all comes down to supply and demand,” he said. “It’s not like there’s giant lots of land that aren’t being Yes No Vote GO View Results Asthma & Allergy  Ass... Ithaca, NY 14850 [Map] 607-257-6563 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 4/9 Tweet 26 1 52 Discuss Print Similar  Stories Ithaca Falls Park On Pace For Completion Labored Breath New Design Breaks Up Triangle Volume Tompkins County Legislator Kathy Luz Herrera Resigns Dunkin' Donuts On Commons A No Go Most  Read Food Trucks and Carts Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? Dryden Burglary Suspects Nabbed Memorial Watchfire to be Lit at Myers Point Ithaca Commons Cameras Watching You touched. But we need to be careful and find an intelligent approach to building density. The notion of increased density … people want more density but they don’t want it in their backyards, so it’s tough.” One affordable housing project that did make it through city council meetings is INHS’s Breckingridge Place, the 50-unit apartment building in the heart of downtown Ithaca that opened in January. Its rents range from about $616-$1,100 a month, plus electricity. These apartments are only available to families and individuals that meet the income criteria for the project. Income eligibility depends on the size of the family. Single person incomes up to about $48,000, two-person incomes up to about $55,000, and three-person incomes up to about $62,000 were eligible for the lottery. Breckingridge Place filled up in less than six weeks, Mazzarella said.  “The economic theory is if you increase the supply, that’s going to make rents go down,” Mazzarella said. “That’s not going to happen here. But I do think we need more rental units. Development of more rental units could slow down the rate of increase in rent prices. We’re always looking at different sites and the possibility of building new housing, and we’ve got a couple places in mind. But it literally takes years to develop a project and get it under construction.” As for rents going down in Ithaca anytime soon, don’t hold your breath.  “You look at the Ithaca City School District, and they’re about to pass a budget that will increase property tax by more than 8 percent,” Dwyer said. “So I can already tell you rents will be more expensive again next year.” • More about Rental  Property ARTICLE: A Quiet Home in Danby More about Collegetown ARTICLE: City Says No to Cornell Students’ Billboard Trash Bin Pitch ARTICLE: Collegetown Form Based Zoning District ARTICLE: New Collegetown Zoning Nixes Transition Zones ARTICLE: New draft of Collegetown area form-based districts Posted in News, Ithaca on Wednesday, April 23, 2014 12:00 am. | Tags:  Rental Property,  Collegetown 14 comments: 1.3kRecommend Forgot? Screen  Name or Email Password Welcome to  the discussion. Login Need an account? Create one now. 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 5/9 Posts: 3 bobohut posted at 11:12 am on Tue, Apr 29, 2014. @taxestoomuch property taxes are "38 cents of every dollar"? What dollar? I pay about 20%. Log In to report. Link   Posts: 3 bobohut posted at 11:10 am on Tue, Apr 29, 2014. Well first, I'm pretty sure that the 30% of income spent on housing figure refers to GROSS income, so the bit about the mayor spending close to 30% is misleading. Apartments in collegetown ARE trashy. It's the reality. I looked at some apartments there once, and I asked some landlords how they could justify renting places in such poor condition. The answer was always the same - the college students will rent them. Finally, Ithaca is a really desirable place to live... what are the factors that limit population growth here? Maybe high rent is an important control? If housing were cheaper, would there be an influx of people? Do we want our city to grow, grow, grow? Or can we seek some kind of equilibrium? Log In to report. Link   Posts: 1 taxestoomuch posted at 11:45 am on Mon, Apr 28, 2014. “Property taxes are 22 cents of every dollar."How did he get that number? I looked my record again. It is 38 cents of every dollar, include School, City & County taxes. Ge does not pay School tax for his age? Log In to report. Link   Posts: 1 TBruce posted at 6:53 pm on Sun, Apr  27, 2014. The article mentions, but does not emphasize, an unhealthily low vacancy rate. That would indicate that there is simply too little housing supply available for the demand. I may be missing the point made by those who claim that increasing the supply for any particular group of renters would not lower the price, although after so many years of successful efforts to keep development outside the city limits that might well be true. Still, isn't a large part of the problem the fact that there is just not enough to go around? Log In to report. Link   Posts: 1 laurarontwo posted at 12:31 am on Sun, Apr 27, 2014. Just another cheap shot at landlords. They wonder why developers don't build more housing in Ithaca are you kidding me have you ever tried to do something in Ithaca it is close to impossible to do anything. Log In to report. Link   Posts: 35 STAFF Managing_Editor posted at 6:17 pm on Sat, Apr  26, 2014. You can draw concentric bands around the Cornell campus and rents will become gradually lower as you move further and further away in Tompkins County and then out of the county. Collegetown's housing is all over the place in quality. Anyone who walks around in the neighborhood can see that. The strange thing is that quality has little correspondence to prince. Everything is expensive if it is close to Cornell. (We shouldn't ignore Ithaca College altogether; the situation on South Hill is a smaller scale version of the same phenomenon.) Ithaca has only had one Socialist mayor. Myrick and Peterson are Democrats and Cohen is an independent. I have it from first-hand accounts of people now in their late 40s and 50s that Ithaca was a less expensive place to live in the 1980s. It was then possible to live on a   9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 6/9 service economy income. That is a tougher row to hoe now, even accounting for inflation (regardless of how you figure inflation). The census data may be artificially decreasing the median income by including Log In to report. Link read more (about 6 more lines) Posts: 3 TellMeWhy  posted at 2:06 pm on Sat, Apr 26, 2014. @Staff -- looks like I need to seek out that past article. Many readers may have also missed it, so some reference to it would have been helpful. Someone should look into the details of the NYT/Zillow study -- what geography did they use for Ithaca (Tompkins County? the City?). More importantly, what did they use for income? If they are using household income (without any correction/acknowledgement for the students), that will be watered down a lot by students who are making very little/no income and exacerbate the statistics to make Ithaca look worse than it really is. @TTerpening – I am not sure why you need to resort to name calling; it does nothing to promote your points (many of which are legitimate). This obviously is a sensitive subject for you; a more respectful approach will further your cause a lot more than name calling.  Log In to report. Link   Posts: 7 TTerpening posted at 10:26 am on Sat, Apr  26, 2014. While your article asks why housing is so expensive in Tompkins County, it goes right to Collegetown and attacks landlords. It suggests Collegetown housing is trashy and over priced and it goes on to suggest ways to get the prices to come down. It also suggests that this high cost in Tompkins County is a new thing, suddenly coming onto us and now we have to take some actions to correct the trend. Sorry, but I think the article was just another cheap shot at landlords and was probably researched by its author while sitting in a bar with the Mayor. The last couple of times this sort of thing has come up, it was another socialist Mayor trying to establish a rental housing room tax on the backs of the landlords (and renters) by fabricating lies over security deposit abuse. Before that, it was an attempt to impose rent control. This smells of the same kind of political inventiveness as has been used before to foment discord and justify some new revenue generating legislation or provide fodder for political endearment. As for past times, you are right about Ithaca having factories, but you are wrong to suggest these very good paying jobs made Ithaca any more affordable. Tompkins County has always been at the top of the price range for housing compared to Log In to report. Link   read more (about 3 more lines) Posts: 35 STAFF Managing_Editor posted at 5:10 pm on Fri, Apr 25, 2014. TellMeWhy wishes that we had mentioned the effect of the presence of the university and the college in this article. We didn't because that was a primary focus of our April 2 cover story about the recent hike in the assessed value of Collegetown rental properties. The other point, that the size of the student population versus the non-student population is large, is a very important one. It not approximated in very many other college towns. TTerpening asks a good question in his first email: What should we be doing to improve the economic conditions of our city/region so that more people can better afford to live here. The recent growth of the tech industry (with GiveGab—subject of our Feb. 19 cover story—being a prominent example) and the creation of the Downtown Incubator are perhaps early signs of a revival of the commercial sector in this area. You don't have to be that old to remember when Ithaca was a factory town and thousands of people worked at Emerson Power Transmission, National Cash Register, and (a bit further back) Ithaca Gun, along with a number of smaller manufacturers, all of which are now   9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 7/9 Log In to report. Link read more (1 more line) Posts: 7 TTerpening posted at 3:48 pm on Fri, Apr 25, 2014. TellMeWhy, you write in the language of the progressive panderer. You probably don’t even recognize it as pandering because it’s so completely in sync with your society. Well, I’ve never learned that language because to do so one needs to be in agreement with the ideology of the progressives, socialists, and statists — pretty much the whole Left-leaning political establishment. I’m not in agreement with them and I can’t speak that language. It’s all hogwash and gobblygook. Sorry. Your few words drip with your agreement, however, because this “language” is all about framing the argument to suit your agenda. You say “sustainable for landlords.” Is there anyone else for whom sustainable rents are sustainable? Sure there are — people who can afford to pay the higher price. Yet, you imply that everyone should be able to afford the higher prices of Collegetown. Sorry, but I don’t agree to that. You say productivity has gone up while wages have been flat. I think you believe that lie because your agenda requires agreement on it. Really? Productivity UP over the last 30 years? I bet you also believe that the unemployment rate is only 6.7%. I suggest you take another closer look at the GDP. What is the GDP and how is it figured? You’ll soon see that the king has no clothes. He’s fanning the wind, my friend. Log In to report. Link   read more (about 5 more lines) Posts: 40 Franklins  Ghost posted at 8:51 am on Fri, Apr 25, 2014. Using gauges like cost against "median income" is a skewed method of measuring affordability. A lot of Ithaca incomes are in the service industry because the transplanted liberals and NYs tax laws have driven good-paying manufacturing jobs out of the area. I went to a town meeting recently that focused largely on the fracking issue. One of the main anti-fracking speakers said Tompkins County can survive on tourism agriculture and education. Well, no, it can't, because everything we use on a daily basis has to be made somewhere, and those career fields tend to be lower paid jobs. So...one reason the median income is so low is because we've driven the good jobs away. Secondly, we've imported a lot of lower income people into the area. We are building all of these low income complexes like West Village, West Hill Overlook, Linderman Creek, Poets Landing etc. Going all the way back to the building of West Village, there weren't enough local low income people to fill the place, so the owners were forced to advertise for low income renters as far away as NYC. Third, we have a city government that's historically been hostile to job growth, hostile to development, hostile to landlords of existing properties. You mix all of that in and you have a higher cost of operating a business, and the fees charged ( rent ) will reflect that reality. Log In to report. Link   Posts: 3 TellMeWhy  posted at 6:56 pm on Thu, Apr 24, 2014. TTerpening, there are some very nice places in Collegetown, but more than not a lot of crappy looking places (and I can only guess that they are charging the market level rent). You bring up an interesting perspective that the problem may be less the high rents (and it is sustainable for landlords) and more an issue with people's compensation. Salaries are not going up because businesses are not directing the money toward salaries. Productivity over the past 30 years has increased while median wages have been flat. Companies are more profitable, squeezing more work from fewer people but they have not been sharing that profitability with their employees. There is a problem when rents are going up faster than salaries -- that is not sustainable and something will eventually have to give. All bubbles will burst. Log In to report. Link   9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 8/9 Sections Home News Opinion Sports Arts  & Entertainment Dining Visit  Ithaca Photos Family and  Health Special  Sections Weather Services About  Us Contact  Us Advertise Place  An  Ad Subscription  Services Site  Index Add  Search  Toolbar Privacy  Policy Contact  us Ithaca.com Ithaca  Times   Phone  number: (607) 277-7000 Address: 109  N Cayuga Street Ithaca  , NY  14850  All    News    Opinion    Sports    Arts  And  Entertainment    Dining   Search Search Search  in: Ithaca.com  is  home  to  the following  newspapers: Ithaca  Times Lansing  Ledger Groton  Independent Dryden  Courier Newfield  News Candor  Chronicle Spencer  Random  Harvest Trumansburg  Free  Press Interlaken  Review Ovid  Gazette Print comments Posts: 7 TTerpening posted at 4:57 pm on Thu, Apr 24, 2014. The framing of your arguments for this article is designed to incite anger and resentment toward landlords who happen to be renting apartments in a healthy market. It rings of the class war mindset that seems so prevalent in the talk of pandering politicians. That is unfortunate because it doesn’t help your cause. The proper and constructive framing of this issue is this: what needs to happen to improve the economic conditions of our community (country) to make our housing economy sustainable and put Mr. Mazzarella out of a job? That's a rhetorical statement and no offense was intended, but it’s true that INHS was created to address something nobody likes — neighborhood and housing blight. So why is everyone bellyaching about so-called high rents? They’re not high rents. They’re SUSTAINABLE rents. And what Mr. Mazzarella and Mayor Myrick seem to want is to spread downtown’s unsustainably low rent problem to the rest of the community. Really? You want to spread the blight to Collegetown, too? I can’t speak for other landlords and don’t intend to. I know that not everyone reinvests in their properties at the level I do. But maybe that’s because they have mortgages. When I had mortgages apartment house improvements were not so affordable for me,Log In to report. Link   read more (about 21 more lines) Posts: 3 TellMeWhy  posted at 3:56 pm on Thu, Apr 24, 2014. Interesting this article should come out just a few days after this story which shows Tompkins County as the 96th most expensive county (out of 3,144 counties) for housing (the wage needed for renting a one-bedroom apartment). http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/04/22/what-youd-need-to- make-in-every-county-in-america-to-afford-a-decent-one-bedroom/ (be sure to check out the interactive map and the original National Low Income Housing Coalition report). By the way, “Ithaca” in the New York Times article reference may really be Tompkins County (I tried to find out whether that was the case, but was unable). The latter is the official geography of the Ithaca metropolitan area and frequently the basis for many stats on “Ithaca”. According to the NLIHC report, Tompkins County is the most expensive of ANY upstate NY county. The next closest NY counties with higher rankings are downstate (Dutchess and Orange). Tompkins County is even higher than the counties in the booming oil fields of North Dakota. In Tompkins County, it takes a wage of more than $18 an hour (about $36,000 a year) to afford a one-bedroom apartment.Log In to report. Link   read more (about 12 more lines) 9/16/2015 Why Is Ithaca One of the Least Affordable US Cities? - Ithaca Times : News http://www.ithaca.com/news/why-is-ithaca-one-of-the-least-affordable-us-cities/article_e67f68f4-cb0e-11e3-9571-001a4bcf887a.html 9/9 Classifieds  Visit  Ithaca    Family And  Health    Photo  Galleries    Video   © Copyright  2015, Ithaca Times , Ithaca , NY. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. [Terms of Use | Privacy Policy] ; 9/16/2015 In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class - The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/business/more-renters-find-30-affordability-ratio-unattainable.html 1/5 http://nyti.ms/1jEQEDl BUSINESS  DAY In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class By SHAILA DEWAN APRIL 14, 2014 MIAMI — For rent and utilities to be considered affordable, they are supposed to take up no more than 30 percent of a household’s income. But that goal is increasingly unattainable for middle­income families as a tightening market pushes up rents ever faster, outrunning modest rises in pay. The strain is not limited to the usual high­cost cities like New York and San Francisco. An analysis for The New York Times by Zillow, the real estate website, found 90 cities where the median rent — not including utilities — was more than 30 percent of the median gross income. In Chicago, rent as a percentage of income has risen to 31 percent, from a historical average of 21 percent. In New Orleans, it has more than doubled, to 35 percent from 14 percent. Zillow calculated the historical average using data from 1985 to 2000. Nationally, half of all renters are now spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing, according to a comprehensive Harvard study, up from 38 percent of renters in 2000. In December, Housing Secretary Shaun 9/16/2015 In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class - The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/business/more-renters-find-30-affordability-ratio-unattainable.html 2/5 Donovan declared “the worst rental affordability crisis that this country has ever known.” Apartment vacancy rates have dropped so low that forecasters at Capital Economics, a research firm, said rents could rise, on average, as much as 4 percent this year, compared with 2.8 percent last year. But rents are rising faster than that in many cities even as overall inflation is running at little more than 1 percent annually. One of the most expensive cities for renters is Miami, where rents, on average, consume 43 percent of the typical household income, up from a historical average of just over a quarter. Stella Santamaria, a divorced 40­year­old math teacher, has been looking for an apartment in Miami for more than six months. “We’re kind of sick of talking about it,” she said of herself and fellow teachers in the same boat. “It’s like, are you still living with your mom? Yeah, are you? Yeah.” After 11 years as a teacher, Ms. Santamaria makes $41,000, considerably less than the city’s median income, which is $48,000, according to Zillow. Even dual­income professional couples are being priced out of the walkable urban­core neighborhoods where many of them want to live. Stuart Kennedy, 29, a senior program officer at a nonprofit group, said he and his girlfriend, a lawyer, will be losing their $2,300 a month rental house in Buena Vista in June. Since they found the place a year ago, rents in the area have increased sharply. “If you go by a third of your income, that formula, even with how comfortable our incomes are, it looks like it’s going to be impossible,” Mr. Kennedy said. Part of the reason for the squeeze on renters is simple demand — between 2007 and 2013 the United States added, on net, about 6.2 million tenants, compared with 208,000 homeowners, said Stan Humphries, the chief 9/16/2015 In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class - The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/business/more-renters-find-30-affordability-ratio-unattainable.html 3/5 economist of Zillow. That trend is continuing as young people and doubled­up families move out on their own. “They’re creating a lot of incremental demand,” Mr. Humphries said. But new households rarely plunge straight into homeownership, especially given that mortgages are much harder to obtain than they were before the financial crisis. “The expectation is that when they strike out into their own units they’ll be moving into rental as opposed to the owner side,” he said. And as rents head higher in the tightest markets, many are discovering that living on their own is proving unaffordable, forcing them to double up again. Arturo Breton, a 37­year­old waiter in Miami Beach, said that after years living on his own, he was joining forces with a roommate who works as a manager at J. C. Penney. “I’ve come down to the conclusion that in this country, it’s easier for two people to pay the rent than for one person,” he said. For many middle­ and lower­income people, high rents choke spending on other goods and services, impeding the economic recovery. Low­income families that spend more than half their income on housing spend about a third less on food, 50 percent less on clothing, and 80 percent less on medical care compared with low­income families with affordable rents, according to a new report by the National Low Income Housing Coalition. And renters amass less wealth, even non­housing wealth, than homeowners do. The problem threatens to get worse before it gets better. Apartment builders have raced to build more units, creating a wave of supply that is beginning to crest. Miami added 2,500 rental apartments last year, and 7,500 more are expected in the next two years, according to the CoStar Group, a real estate research firm. But demand has shown no signs of slackening. And as long as there are plenty of upper­income renters looking for apartments, there is little incentive to build anything other than expensive units. As a result, there are in effect two 9/16/2015 In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class - The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/business/more-renters-find-30-affordability-ratio-unattainable.html 4/5 separate rental markets that are so far apart in price that they have little impact on each other. In one extreme case, a glut of new luxury apartments in Washington has pushed high­end rents down, even while midrange rents continue to rise. “Increasing the supply is not going to increase the number of affordable units; that is a complete and utter fallacy,” said Jaimie Ross, the president of the Florida Housing Coalition. “People say if there really was a great need, the market would provide it; the market would correct itself. Well, the market has never corrected itself and it’s only getting worse.” Money for affordable housing has dried up at a time when it is needed most. Federal housing funds, in a form now known as HOME grants, have been cut in half over the last decade. The percentage of eligible families who receive rental subsidies has shrunk, to 23.8 percent from 27.4 percent, the Harvard study found. And Florida, which like other states faced large budget shortfalls after the financial crisis, has raided its housing trust fund, funded by a real estate transfer tax, for several years running. This year, the Legislature has proposed restoring at least part of the money. Cities have been left to address the problem on their own, with some granting exceptions to their own zoning laws to allow for things like micro­ apartments. Miami has allowed some variances to its urban plan for projects like Brickell View Terrace, which will have 176 units in a prime location near a Metrorail station. Ninety of the units will be affordable for people making 60 percent of the median income, 10 for people making less, and the rest will be market rate. But a seemingly insatiable demand for luxury condos in Miami, created in part by wealthy Latin Americans, has caused land prices to soar, making affordable housing projects harder to build anywhere close to downtown. Moving farther out is cheaper, but the cost savings on housing can be quickly wiped out by transportation costs. A 2012 study by the Center for Housing 9/16/2015 In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class - The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/business/more-renters-find-30-affordability-ratio-unattainable.html 5/5 Policy found that Miami was the most expensive metropolitan area in the country when housing and transportation costs were combined. In many markets, buying a home is considerably cheaper than renting, and Miami is no exception. But many people are shut out of buying because their income is too low, they don’t qualify for a mortgage or they are burdened by other debt. In 2008, a quarter of rental applicants were still paying off student loans, according to CoreLogic, but as of last fall half of them were doing so. Steve Gunn, 25, the marketing director for a Miami real estate brokerage firm, said he could certainly afford an apartment on his salary of $52,500 — if he weren’t paying more than $800 a month in student loan debt. Instead, he commutes 90 minutes to work. From his mother’s house. Correction: April 19, 2014  A chart on Tuesday with the continuation of an article about rising rents that are out of the reach of the middle class misstated the time span of the data shown. The chart tracked the rise of median rent in various cities from the first quarter of 2000 through the fourth quarter of 2013, not the third. A version of this article appears in print on April 15, 2014, on page A1 of the New  York  edition with the headline: In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class. © 2015 The New York Times Company 9/16/2015 Cornell Daily Sun http://cornellsun.com/blog/2014/10/03/cornellians-weather-collegetown-housing-line-for-hours/1/6 Wednesday, September 16th About Advertise The Spot Contact Us News  Opinion  Sports  Arts  Science  Dining  Multimedia  Blogs You are here: Home » News » In Housing Rush, Cornellians Weather Collegetown Line for Hours In  Housing Rush, Cornellians Weather  Collegetown  Line for  Hours October 3, 2014 1:06 am0 comments By SLOANE  GRINSPOON In what has become an annual spectacle, students camped out outside the Ithaca Renting Company Wednesday evening in the hopes of signing a lease for an apartment in Collegetown for the upcoming year. While this trend has become a tradition in recent years, some students claim it is possible social media could have played a factor in more students getting in line earlier than past years. Students wait in line outside the Ithaca Renting Company Tuesday aiming to secure housing for the 2015-16 academic year. (KK Yu / Sun Staff Photographer) Get The Sun's latest stories, right in your inbox every morning.  Your email 9/16/2015 Cornell Daily Sun http://cornellsun.com/blog/2014/10/03/cornellians-weather-collegetown-housing-line-for-hours/2/6 Share this:81Like Tweet 4 Share 0 Lisa Everts ’92, the rental manager for the Ithaca Renting Company, estimates that the first group arrived at about 9 a.m. Tuesday — 24 hours before leases became available for signing. In total, 156 people signed a lease on Wednesday, waiting in the line for different amounts of time. “We’ve had variations of lines every year for many years,” Evert said. “It can be anywhere from 20 groups waiting for two or three hours to 40 groups waiting for 24 hours or more.” The reason Ithaca Renting Company waits to allow tenants to sign leases until Oct. 1 — when many other landlords and renting companies allow prospective tenants to sign early in September — is to allow current tenants the chance to resign, Evert said. 3 “We wait until Oct. 1 to give our 624 current residents the opportunity to renew their own apartments,” Evert said. “We feel that that is fair to our current residents who have just moved in, sometimes just three or four weeks before and are still trying to get organized. We like to keep our current tenants.” This year, according to Charlie Miller ’17, social media may have played a role in persuading more students to get in line earlier. “Two guys posted a Facebook status Monday night saying they started camping, which many people believed, so they came out early,” Miller said. The students in the picture, which was posted in the Facebook group “Overheard at Cornell,” were waiting in line on Monday because they were signing a lease agreement on Tuesday, a day before everyone else. According to Siddharth Panchanathan ’16, one of the students pictured, they were eligible for preferential signing because they had already rented from the Ithaca Renting Company. Students in the line also governed themselves during the wait and a leader of the line was unofficially elected, according to Miller. “By the time my group started at 5 p.m. on Tuesday, a sophomore named Rohit Jha had taken control of the line and made a list of the order everyone showed up in before him. After that he became the ‘leader’ of the group, having newcomers sign the list and get in order,” Miller said. “When Rohit took charge and made the list, everyone started trusting him and he settled any minor conflicts.” Rohit Jha ’17 took initiative to be a leader in line because he was scared that chaos would break out. “I was nervous that the order would break down and I would not be left a place to live for next year. The most difficult aspect of being the leader was trying to earn the trust of my peers waiting in line and maintaining a calm presence within the line,” Jha said. Gina LoMastro ’17, who waited in line overnight from 3 to 6 a.m. on Wednesday, said she chose to rent from the Ithaca Renting Company because of the later start date and relatively less expensive pricing despite knowing she would have to wait in the line. “I wanted to room with five other people and we started the process a little bit late. By the time we started really looking at housing there wasn’t that much left and everything left was really expensive,” LoMastro said. LoMastro said that camping out was not entirely a bad experience. “Some of my friends brought tarps and set up blankets to sleep in line,” she said. Panchanathan, who also camped out overnight, agreed that the experience had enjoyable moments. “If you have company as I did, it’s not as bad,” Panchanathan said. “We just played card games and practiced algorithmic interview questions.” Colleen Price ’98, a realtor at Ithaca Renting Co., came to the office to let students wait inside when it was pouring rain. “They’re all generally very polite … and they were all studying,” Price said. Though Price said she was pleased that students want to rent from Ithaca Renting Company, she says that she does not want renting to be a stressful process. “They’re welcome to wait, but this is not something that we ask them to do. This is its own phenomenon that was not started by us,” Price said. “It’s great that the apartments are popular, and we’re happy that they’re popular, but this is completely student-initiated.” Author: Sloane Grinspoon Sloane Grinspoon is a Sun Staff Writer in The Sun's News Department. She can be reached at sgrinspoon@cornellsun.com. Email Subscribe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vWPSGEPVSEHWLEWFIIRGMVGYPEXIHF]XLI2I[=SVO 7XEXI%WWIQFP]ERHXLI1EV]PERH(ITEVXQIRXSJXLI)RZMVSRQIRX7LI[EWE7YWXEMREFMPMX] 'SRWSVXMYQ)RIVK]*IPPS[MRERHGYVVIRXP]WIVZIWSRXLI'MX]SJ-XLEGE'SRWIVZEXMSR %HZMWSV]'SYRGMP'.MWGYVVIRXP][VMXMRKEFSSOSRIRIVK]MRRSZEXMSRWHIZIPSTIHMRYTWXEXI 2I[=SVO7LILEWE1EWXIVv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vWKVSYRHFVIEOMRK7YWXEMREFPI(IWMKRERH4PERRMRK+YMHIPMRIWVIZMI[MRKTIHIWXVMER WEJIX]EX4SVXPERH36vW8VM1IXPMKLXVEMPWXEXMSRWERHHIZIPSTMRKETEVGIPTVMSVMXM^EXMSRWXYH] JSVXLI'IRXVEP-RHMERE0ERH8VYWX,IMWGYVVIRXP][SVOMRKSREWYVZI]TVSNIGXJYRHIHF]XLI 97(%XLEXMRZSPZIWMRXIVZMI[MRKJEVQIVWHMWXVMFYXSVWERHGYWXSQIVWSJEVIKMSREPJSSHLYF 9TWXEXI6IWIEVGL+VSYT ;IWX+VIIR7XVIIX -X LEGE2I[=SVO   GXVIWIEVGLJSVGXVIWI RXMEPIGSRSQMGERHRXMEPIGSRS IRGMVGYPEXIHF]XLI2I[=IRGMVGYPEXIHF]X )RZMVSRQIRX7LI[EWE7YWXE)RZMVSRQIRX7LI[EW WIVZIWSRXLI'MX]SJ-XLEGE'WIVZIWSRXLI'MX]SJ-XLEGE' SOSRIRIVK]MRRSZEXMSRWHIZSOSRIRIVK]MRRSZEXMSRWHIZ ERRMRKJVSQ'SVRIPP9RMZIVWMKJVSQ'SVR HTPERRIV[MXLEJSGYWSRWYWXHTPERRIV[MXLEJSGYW SR,IWXYHMIH4PERRMRKEX'SR,IWXYHMIH4PERRMRKEX QIRXSJ'MX]ERH6IKMSREP4PERRXSJ'MX]ERH6IKMSREP4PER R'SRRIGXETVSFSRSHIWMKRIGXETVSFSRSHIWMKR EVGLHIWMKRERHTYFPMGSYXVIEEVGLHIWMKRERHTYF PSGEPMRMXMEXMZIW(EZMHTVIZMSPSGEPMRMXMEXMZIW(EZMHTVIZ ]8E\%WWIWWQIRX %HQ]8E\%WWIWWQIRX % KE^MRIKE^MRIERH2I[92I[9 LEWGSRWYPXIHLEWGSRWYPXIH IEOMRKIEOMRK  )<)'98-:)7911%6= ERW[IVIHXLVSYKLEWYVZI]SJVIWMHIRXW ;LEXTIVGIRXEKISJ'SPPIKIXS[RVIWMHIRXWLEZIGEVWMR-XLEGE# ,S[QER]SJXLIVIWMHIRXW[LSGYVVIRXP]OIITEGEVMR-XLEGE[SYPHGSRXMRYI GVIHMXW# +MZIREVERKISJTVMGIW[LEXTIVGIRXEKISJWXYHIRXWHIGMHIRSXXSOIITEGEVMR -XLEGEEXIEGLTVMGIVERKI# ;LEXMWXLITVMGIVERKIERHEZEMPEFMPMX]SJTEVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[R# -RWIIOMRKERW[IVWXSXLIWIUYIWXMSRW[ILEZIJSYRHXLIJSPPS[MRK VEXISJGEVS[RIVWLMTE 'SPPIKIXS[RVIWMHI WEMHXLIMVFYMPHMR &EWIHSRX TVSZMHM WXVSRKIWXQMXMKEXMSRQIEWYVI GSVVIPEXIH[MXLVIHYGIHTEVOMRK HIQ %TTVS\MQEXIP] SJ 'SPPIKIXS[RETEVXQIRX VIWMHIRXW[MXLEGEVMR-XLEGE WEMHXLEXXLI][SYPHKMZI YTXLIMVGEVMRI\GLERKI JSVIMXLIVEJVIIFYWTEWW MRGEVWLEVIGVIHMXWSVFSXL %TTVS\MQEXIP] SJVIWTSRHIRXW [MXLGEVWWXEXIHXLEXXLIQE\MQYQ TVMGIXLI][SYPHTE]JSVTEVOMRK[EWSVPIWWTIVQSRXL;MXLSRP]  SJTEVOIVW[MPPMRKXSTE]SZIVTIVQSRXLMXMWGPIEVXLEXXLIVIMWZIV] &639+,8%'%6 (-(238&6-2+%'%6 4EVOMRK(IQERH+IRIVEXMSR &EWIHSRVIWMHIRXTIVGITXMSRSJTEVOMRKEZEMPEFMPMX] 4%6/-2+238 3**)6)(  4%6/-2+ 3**)6)(  FYMPHMRKEVIQYGLQSVIPMOIP]XSFVMRKEGEV ;390(+-:)94'%6 ;390(238+-:)94'%6 'EV3[RIVW;MPPMRKXS+MZI9T'EV -RI\GLERKIJSVFYWTEWWERHSVGEVWLEVIGVIHMX *MKYVI SJVIWMHIRXW[LSFVSYKLXEGEVXS-XLEGEWE] XLI][SYPHKMZIMXYTMRI\GLERKIJSVEFYWTEWWERH SVMRGEVWLEVIGVIHMX MR-XLEGE#MR-XLE GEVMR-XLEGE[SYPHGGEVMR-XLEGE SJWXYHIRXWHIGMHIRSXXSOIITSJWXYHIRXWHIGMHIRSXXSOII FMPMX]SJTEVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[JTEVOMRKMR SRW[ILEZIJSYRHXLIJSPPS[RW[ILEZIJSYRHXLIJS MTEQSRKMTEQSRK MHIRXW[LSMHIRXW[LS PHMRKHMHRSXPHMRKHMHRSX SRXLMWWYVZI]RSXXLMWWYVZI]RSX ZMHMRKTEVOMRKMWXLIMHMRKTEVOMRKMWXLI XVSRKIWXQMXMKEXMSRQIEWYVIXVSRKIWXQMXMKEXMSRQIEWYVI GSVVIPEXIH[MXLVIHYGIHTEVGSVVIPEXIH[MXLVIHYGIHTEV IQERHIQERH MQEXIP] MQEXIP] [RET[RET 4EVO &EWIHSRVI&  PMXXPIQEVOIXJSVTEVOMRK TVMGIHEXXLIXLISVIXMGEP GSWXSJTVSZMHMRKMXEX 'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRK :MGXSVME8VERWTSVXEXMSR 4SPMG]-RWXMXYXI   IWXMQEXIWEQSRXLP]GSWX SJJSVGSRWXVYGXMSR ERHQEMRXIRERGISJER YRHIVKVSYRHTEVOMRKWTEGI MRERSR'&(YVFEREVIE 4VMGIWTEMHJSVTEVOMRK ZEVMIH[MHIP]JVSQYRHIV TIVQSRXLXSSZIV JSVEPPVIWTSRHIRXW[EW TIVQSRXL 8IRTIVGIRXSJTEVOIVW [LSWEMHXLIMVFYMPHMRK SRXLIWXVIIXJSVJVIIXLIW VIWMHIRXWVITSVXIHTE] QIHMERTVMGISJ TIVQSRXL%PPT WEMHXLIMVFYM WTEGIWI EQI  &EWIHSRXLIPS[TIVGIRXEKISJ VIWMHIRXW[LSFVMRKGEVWMXMWGPIEV XLIVIMWYRQIXHIQERHJSVGEV JVIIHIZIPSTQIRXMR'SPPIKIXS[R ;LEXMWXLIQE\MQYQTVMGI]SY[SYPHTE]JSVTEVOMRK# 6IWTSRHIRXW[LSOIITEGEVMR-XLEGE %ZIVEKIGSWXSJHIZIPSTMRKYRHIVKVSYRHTEVOMRK           4IVGIRXSJVIWTSRHIRXW[LSWXEXIHXLIQE\TVMGIXLI][SYPHTE] [EWMRXLMWVERKISVQSVI HIRXWEVI[MPPMRKXS ;LIVIHS]SYTEVO# 6IWTSRHIRXW[LSOIITEGEVMR-XLEGE 6IWMHIRXW[LSWEMHXLIMV 6IWMHIRXW[LSWEMHXLIMV FYMPHMRKHSIWRSX 3RXLIWXVIIX %XQ]FYMPHMRK (V]HIR6HKEVEKI +EVEKISVPSXRSXEXQ]FYMPHMRK 3R'EQTYW EVITVSTSVXMSREPXSXLIRYQFIVSJVIWTSRWIWMRIEGL KVSYT 4EVOMRKTVMGIWEVIFIPS[XLIQEVOIXGSWXSJGVIEXMRKRI[WXVYGXYVIHWTEGIW]IXEFSZI HMWXSVXWXLIQEVOIXERHIRGSYVEKIWVIWMHIRXWERHGSQQYXIVWXSFVMRKGEVWMRXSXLI XLIVIUYMVIHWYTTP]MWLMKLIVXLERXLIHIQERHJVSQSRWMXIVIWMHIRXW(IZIPSTQIRXW '&(VIJIVWXSEGMX]v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zVEXLIVXLER -RXLIJSPPS[MRKTEKIW[II\TPSVIXLIVIWYPXWSJXLIWYVZI]MRKVIEXIVHIXEMPERHTYPP PIWWSRWJVSQXLIQSWXGYVVIRXVIWIEVGL[MXLXLILSTIXLEXMXQE]MRJSVQERHKYMHIXLI 4PERRMRK (IZIPSTQIRX&SEVHXLI&SEVHSJ>SRMRK%TTIEPW'SQQSR'SYRGMPERH XLIMRXIVIWXIHTYFPMGMREWWIWWMRKXLITSXIRXMEPJSVRIMKLFSVLSSHTEVOMRKMQTEGXWJVSQ 'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRKvWHIZIPSTQIRXEWTVSTSWIH RJRJ 'SQQS'SQQ SSHTEVOMRKMSSHT  )<-78-2+'32(-8-327 XLEXEVIYVFERMRGLEVEGXIV)EGLSJXLIFYMPHMRKWWYVZI]IHLEWE;EPO7GSVIFIX[IIR ERHSREWGEPISJMRHMGEXMRKEu:IV ];EPOEFPIvPSGEXMSR-XLEGEvWEZIVEKI ;EPO7GSVIMW1MHXS[R1ERLEXXERJSVGSQTEVMWSRLEWE;EPO7GSVISJ 6IGIRXWXYHMIWSJTEVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[RMRGPYHIXLI8VEZIVW%WWSGMEXIW   ERH+VIMK  VITSVXW'SQTPEMRXWRSXIHMRXLIWIVITSVXWMRGPYHITEVOMRKJIIWXLI TIVQMXW]WXIQEXXLI(V]HIR6SEHKEVEKIPEGOSJIRJSVGIQIRXSJTEVOMRKPE[WERH uWTMPPSZIVv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‹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v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vFYMPHMRKX]TI+VIMK   HMWXMRKYMWLIHXLVIIFYMPHMRKX]TIWWMRKPIJEQMP]LSQIWQYPXMTPIH[IPPMRKWERH ETEVXQIRXFYMPHMRKW7LIJSYRHHMWXMRGXTEVOMRKFILEZMSVWMRIEGLKVSYT8SFIWX TVIHMGXXLIFILEZMSVSJJYXYVI'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRKVIWMHIRXW[IJSGYWIHSYVWYVZI] SXLIVFYMPHMRKWMRXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHGSYPHFIMRXIVTVIXIHEWwETEVXQIRXWx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v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wFEWIHSRGEVS[RIVWLMT VEXIWHIVMZIHJVSQXLIVIWMHIRXMEPWYVZI]x +VIMK %GGSQTER]MRKXLMW VIGSQQIRHEXMSR+VIMKRSXIHXLEXTEVOMRKMWEH]REQMGIRXMX]ERHXLIVIJSVIWLSYPHFI WYFNIGXXSXM 8SXLEXIRHSYVWYVZI]SJ'SPPIKIXS[R GSQTEVIHXSXLIPEWXWXYH]SJXLIEVIEvWTEVOMRK MWWYIW-R+VIMKVITSVXIHXLEX SJ ETEVXQIRXVIWMHIRXWS[RIHGEVW3YVWXYH] WLS[WXLEXMRPIWWXLER SJETEVXQIRX WXEXMWXMGWQE]FIXLITVSHYGXSJEZEVMIX]SJ JEGXSVW EHQMRMWXIVIH+VIMKvWWYVZI ]EWOIHVIWMHIRXWMJXLI]S[RIHEGEV[LMPISYVWXYH]EWOIH VIWMHIRXWMJXLI]OIITEGEVMR-XLEGE-RERIMKLFSVLSSH[LIVIETTVS\MQEXIP] SJ VIWMHIRXWEVIXVERWMIRXWXYHIRXW[MXLEwLSQIxWSQI[LIVIIPWIXLMWMWERMQTSVXERX LMWLMW SGSQTYXIE[SVWXGEWIWGISGSQTYXIE[SVW OMRKKIRIVEXMSR[IGERWXEVXMRKKIRIVEXMSR IRXWJSV^SRI&F'SPPIKIXS[V^SRI&F RKWTEGIW8SIZEPYEXIXLIZEPMHRKWTEGIW8SIZEPYE MWLIPTJYPXSYRHIVWXERHXLIQLIPTJYPXSYRHIVWXERH IXSRIMKLFSVLSSHTIVGITXMSRFSVLSSHTIVGITXMS KIXS[RLEHVIWYPXIHMRI\GIWWKIXS[RLEHVIWYPXIHMR IJVSQWTEGITIVVIWMHIRXWIJVSQWTEGITIVVIWMHIR WIHTEVOMRKVEXMSWMR^SRMRKWLTEVOMRKVEXMSWMR^SRMRKWL VSQXLIVIWMHIRXMEPWYVZI]x +QXLIVIWMHIRXMEPWYVZI]x + HEXMSR+VIMKRSXIHXLEXTEVOMRHEXMSR+VIMKRSXIHXL SXMQIP]VIIZEPYEXMSRSXMQIP]VIIZEPYEXMSR IRHSYVWYVZI]SJ'SPIRHSYVWYVZI]SJ LIPEWXWXYH]LIPEWXWXYH] VIMKVVIMKV  XSFVMRKXLIMVGEVJVSQ[LIVIZIVXLI]GEPPLSQI JSVI\EQTPIwLSQIx[EWIMXLIVMR 'EPMJSVRMESVSYXWMHISJXLIGSYRXV ] -JXLIWIVIWMHIRXWLEHFIIREWOIHMJXLI]S[R EGEVEW[EWHSRIMRXLI+VIMKWXYH]XLIERW[IV[SYPHLEZIFIIR]IWLS[IZIVGEVW +VIMKWTIGYPEXIHXLEXXLILMKLVEXISJGEVS[RIVWLMTJSYRHMR[EWPMOIP]E VIWYPXSJXLIIGSRSQMGFSSQERHWLIWYKKIWXIHXLEXS[RIVWLMTVEXIW[IVIPMOIP] XSJEPPEWXLI]LEZI[LIRIGSRSQMGKVS[XLHIGPMRIH7LIEPWSRSXIHXLEXXLIVEXI WIIQIHWYVTVMWMRKP]LMKLKMZIRXLIJEGXXLEX SJXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHv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zMREHHMXMSRXSXLIMWWYIW [MXLXLIWXYH]vWQIEWYVISJGEVS[RIVWLMTERHXLIGLERKIMRHIQSKVETLMGW WMRGIXLEXXMQIz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v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vW[EPOEFMPMX]ERHTVIQMYQPSGEXMSRzMREHHMXMSRXSXLII\XVIQI WLSVXEKISJLSYWMRKMR-XLEGEMRKIRIVEPERHXVIRHWMRGEVS[RIVWLMTz[II\TIGX ETEVXQIRXVIWMHIRXW -REHHMXMSRXSRSXTVSZMHMRKTEVOMRKMJ'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRKYWIWQEVOIXMRKERH FVERHMRKXSGPIEVP]WXEXIXLEXMXMWEGEVJVIIHIZIPSTQIRXMXMWYRPMOIP]XLEXMX[MPP EXXVEGXVIWMHIRXWPSSOMRKXSFVMRKEGEV7MRGIQER]PERHPSVHWMRXLIEVIELEZIEPVIEH] YRFYRHPIHTEVOMRKJVSQXLIGSWXSJERETEVXQIRXVIRXEPVEXIWEX'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRK MRGPYHIHEWQMXMKEXMSRQIEWYVIWMXMWTSWWMFPIXLEXXLI]GSYPHEGXYEPP]MRGVIEWIXLI JVIIFYWTEWWIWGEVWLEVIWYFWMHMIWFMOIWXSVEKIIXG WWMFMPMX]SJRI[VIWMHIRXWWWMFMPMX]SJRI[VI ETEVXQIRXFYMPHMRKW[MXLSYETEVXQIRXFYMPHM HMHRSXSXXX HHHH GIWXLEXVIWMHIRXWTEMHJSVTEVOGIWXLEXVIWMHIRXWTEMHJ HMRKHMRKHMHRSXHX JSYRHGLIETIVEPXIVREXMZIPSXWYRHGLIETIVEPXIVREXMZIPSXW LIEHNEGIRXFYMPHMRK IRXFYMPH \MQEXIP] SJGYVVIRXETEVX\MQEXIP] SJGYVVIRXETE RXVIWMHIRXWXSLEZI^IVSRXVIWMHIRXWXSLEZI VLSSHvW[EPOEFMPMXVLSSHvW[EPOEFMP YWMRKMR-XLEYWMRKMR-XLE  3YVWXYH]JSYRHXLEX SJVIWMHIRXW[LSHMHRSXFVMRKEGEVXS-XLEGE[SYPHTVIJIV XLEXXLIXEVKIXQEVOIX[SYPHPMOIP]FIEXXVEGXIHXS'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRK-RLMRHWMKLX MX[SYPHLEZIFIIRFIXXIVXSEWOXLMWUYIWXMSRSJFSXLVIWMHIRXW[MXLERH[MXLSYXGEVW -XMWRSXE FPILS[IZIVXLEX SJVIWMHIRXW[LSHMHRSXFVMRKEGEVXS-XLEGEWEMHXLEX FYMPHMRKW %TTVS\MQEXIP] SJ'SPPIKIXS[RETEVXQIRXVIWMHIRXW[LSHSOIITEGEVMR-XLEGE WEMHXLEXXLI][SYPHKMZIYTXLIMVGEVMRI\GLERKIJSVIMXLIVEJVIIFYWTEWWMR GEVWLEVIGVIHMXWSVFSXL SJVIWMHIRXW[LSWEMHXLIMVFYMPHMRKHMHRSXTVSZMHI TEVOMRKWXEXIHXLEXXLI][SYPHKMZIYTXLIMVGEVMRI\GLERKIJSVEJVIIXVERWMXTEWW SVGEVWLEVIGVIHMXW-J[IEKEMREWWYQIXLEXFVERHMRKERHQEVOIXMRKSJXLIFYMPHMRK GEVWLEVIGVIHMXGERFII\TIGXIHXSVIHYGIXLIRYQFIVSJGEVW'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRK FVMRKWXSXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHF] JVSQEFSYX (YIXSXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHv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v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vXTE]QSVIXLER ;LEXMWXLIQE\MQYQTVMGI]SY[SYPHTE]JSVTEVOMRK# 6IWTSRHIRXW[LSOIITEGEVMR-XLEGE %ZIVEKIGSWXSJHIZIPSTMRKYRHIVKVSYRHTEVOMRK           4IVGIRXSJVIWTSRHIRXW[LSWXEXIHXLIQE\TVMGIXLI][SYPHTE] [EWMRXLMWVERKISVQSVI ]IEVVEXL]IEVVE ]SJTEVOMRKGS]SJTE XIVSV]IEVVEXLIVXLEXIVSV]IEVV QSRXLP]GSWXJSVYWIMRSYQSRXLP]GSWXJSV TE]WYKKIWXMRKXLEXXLI]HSRSTE]WYKKIWXMRKXLEXXLI]HSR LITEVOMRKTEVO QWSVRSXTE]MRKEXEPPHMWXSVXQWSVRSXTE]MRKEX VIQIRXEPGSWXSJGEVXVMTW8SIQIRXEPGSWXSJGEVXVMTW SVXEXMSRQSHIGLSMGIHVMZIVWSRQSHIGLSMGIHVMZIV HMRWYVERGITE]QIRXWEW[IPPHMRWYVERGITE]QIRXW ISJXLMWWMXYEXMSRIZIV]GEVXLISJXLMWWMXYEXMSRIZIV]GEV RXIRHIHSVVIUYMVIHYWIMWPMORHIHSVVIUYMVIHYWIMWPMO MSRMQTEGXWMRMSRMQTEGXW XSXEOMRKYTPERHJSVXSXEOMRKYTPERHJ KK 8VERWTSVXEXMSR8VERWTSVXEXMSR I  I   LP]GSLP]GS ;LEXMWXL;   [SYPHRvXTE]QSVIXLER [SYPHRvXTE]QSVIXLER [SYPHRvX TE]QSVIXLER;MXLEVITSVXIHQIHMERTVMGITEMHSJFIX[IIRERHMX SRP] SJTEVOIVW[MPPMRKXSTE]SZIVTIVQSRXLMXMWGPIEVXLEXXLIVIMWZIV ] PMXXPIMJER]QEVOIXJSVTEVOMRKTVMGIHEXMXWGSWXXSXLIHIZIPSTIV EGEVJSVKVSGIVMIWERHSXLIVWLSTTMRK  SJVIWMHIRXW[MXLGEVW [IVI[MPPMRKXS +VIMKWXYH]MRXLEXHIZIPSTQIRXMRGPYHMRKGSQQIVGMEPWTEGIzIWTIGMEPP]WTEGI OIITMRKEGEVMR'SPPIKIXS[R TEGIzIWTEGIz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vWXVERWTSVXEXMSRIRZMVSRQIRXEPMQTEGXWXEXIQIRXERH8VERWTSVXEXMSR -QTEGX1EREKIQIRX7]WXIQ1SWXSJYRHIVKVEHYEXIWXYHIRXW[EPO  SVXEOI XLIFYW  KVEHYEXIWXYHIRXWXEOIXLIFYW  SV[EPO  QSWXJEGYPX]ERH VSYXIW[IVIQSVIGSRZIRMIRX 9RJSVXYREXIP]RSXEPPSJXLIWIQIEWYVIWEVIFIMRKJYPP]MQTPIQIRXIH 1IXIVIHTEVOMRKWTEGIWEVIYRHIVIRJSVGIH +VIMK ERHTVMGMRKMWRSXHIQERH WIRWMXMZI4E]MRKJSVTEVOMRKIZIREXXLIPS[TVMGIMWELEWWPIHYIXSSPHGSMRFEWIH XIGLRSPSK]GSPPIGXMRKXLIWIGSMRWMQTSWIWEREHHMXMSREPI\TIRWISRXLIGMX]9THEXMRK XLIRIMKLFSVLSSHvWQIXIVMRKW]WXIQYWMRKWQEVXQIXIVWXLEXEGGITXGVIHMXGEVHWGER [SYPHFIEQENSVWXITQEOMRKMXIEWMIVXSTE]JSVTEVOMRKIEWMIVXSIRJSVGITEVOMRK ERHIEWMIVXSMQTPIQIRXEHIQERHFEWIHTVMGMRKWXVYGXYVI)RJSVGIQIRXSJTEVOMRK VIKYPEXMSRWWLSYPHFIEXSTTVMSVMX]MRER]TEVOMRKTSPMG]ERHLEWXLITSXIRXMEPXS 6IQSXITEVOMRKEPXLSYKLEZEMPEFPIMWRSX[IPPORS[RF]VIWMHIRXW +VIMK  EZEMPEFPI 6IWMHIRXMEPTEVOMRKTIVQMXW]WXIQW 6447 LEZITVSZIRI\XVIQIP]WYGGIWWJYPEX GSQFEXMRKWTMPPSZIVTEVOMRKTVSFPIQWz[LIVIVIWMHIRXWSVGSQQYXIVWMREVIEW[LIVI TEVOMRKMWTVMGIHSVHIQERHMWLMKLTEVOSRRIMKLFSVLSSHWXVIIXW[LIVIXLIVIMWPIWW KIQKIQ E]YKE+VIIREE]YKE EZEVMIX]SJWLSTTMRKERHEZEVMIX]SJWLSTT SJXLIEVIESJXLI IRXEPMQTEGXWXEXIQIRXERH8QTEGXWXEXI YRHIVKVEHYEXIWXYHIRXW[EPO YRHIVKVEHYEXIWXYH OIXLIFYW  SV[EPO  XLIFYW  SV[EPO SJXLIWIQIEWYVIWEVIFIMRKJSJXLIWIQIEWYVIWEVIF KWTEGIWEVIYRHIVIRJSVGIH TEGIWEVIYRHIVIRJSVGIH RKJSVTEVOMRKIZIREXXLIPS[JSVTEVOMRKIZIREXXLIPS[ GSPPIGXMRKXLIWIGSMRWMQTSWIGSPPIGXMRKXLIWIGSMR LFSVLSSHvWQIXIVMRKW]WXIQYLFSVLSSHvWQIXIVMRKW]WXIQ EQENSVWXITQEOMRKMXEQENSVWXITQEOMR SMQTPIQIRXEHISMQTPIQIRXEH YPHFIEXSYPHFIEXS  [LIRXLIGMX]KVERXWEZMVXYEPP]JVIIERHI\GPYWMZIVMKLXXSTEVOSRGMX]TVSTIVX]XS VIWMHIRXWSJPS[HIRWMX]WXVIIXW[MXLELMKLTIVGIRXEKISJLSQIS[RIVW[LMPIGLEVKMRK VIRXIVW%WEXSSPJSVTVIZIRXMRKWTMPPSZIVLS[IZIV6447LEWEREWXSRMWLMRKXVEGO MR-XLEGELEZISTXIHXSMQTPIQIRXXLIW]WXIQ WII%TTIRHM\ -JXLIVIEVIJYVXLIV WLSYPHFIJYPPMQTPIQIRXEXMSRSJXLIW]WXIQXLEXMWEPVIEH]MRTPEGI TEVOMRKMRXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHvWQSWXHIRWIEVIEWQEOMRKWXVIIXWXLEXWLSYPHFIXLI QSWX[EPOEFPIPIWWEXXVEGXMZI4EVOMRKPSXIRXVMIWSR(V]HIR6SEHERH'SPPIKI%ZIRYI ERHXLIEGGSQTER]MRKPMKLXMRKH[EVJWTIHIWXVMERWERHGVIEXIWKMERXLSPIWMRXLIWXVIIXv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v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w[SVWXGEWIWGIREVMSx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vWEZIVEKIHI GIPSGEXIH [MXLMREUYEVXIVQMPIVIHYGIWXLIHIQERHERSXLIV SVWTEGIWJSVIZIV] GEVWLEVIWTEGISRWMXI,MKL[EPOEFMPMX]zGEPGYPEXIHXLVSYKLETIHIWXVMERPIZIPSJ WIVZMGIIZEPYEXMSRQIXVMGWYGLEWE;EPO7GSVIz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vWTVSTSWIHEQIRMXMIWFYXKMZIRXLIVIWYPXW[MXLXLIQMRMQYQ MRGPYHIXLIMRGVIEWIMRRIMKLFSVLSSH[EPOEFMPMX]ERHEQIRMXMIWXLEXXLITVSNIGXQE] FVMRK W TSTYPEXMSR!?GIRWYWF]FPSGOA          VSNIGXWMXI[IGVSNIGX [R'VSWWMRK6IUYM[R'VSWWMR VXIVQMPISJJVIUYIRXFYWWVXIVQMPISJJVIUY VVIWMHIRXTIVEGVIVIWYPXMRKMRVVIWMHIRXTIVEGVIVIWYP HIRWMX]HIRWMX 'EVWLEVMRKWIVZMGIPEVWLEVMRKWIVZMGI SXLIV SVWTEGIWJSSXLIV SV GEPGYPEXIHXLVSYKLETIHIWXVMEXIHXLVSYK O7GSVIz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w'EVWLEVMRKMRE7QEPP'MX]-XLEGE'EVWLEVIvW*MVWX8[S =IEVWx LXXTW[[[HSXR]KSZHMZMWMSRWIRKMRIIVMRKXIGLRMGEPWIVZMGIWXVERWVERHH VITSWMXSV ]' -XLEGE 'EVWLEVI *MREP 6ITSVX 2=7)6(%  %KVIIQIRX THJ 4VITEVIHJSVXLI2I[=SVO7XEXI)RIVK]6IWIEVGLERH(IZIPSTQIRX%YXLSVMX] 2=7)6(% ERHXLI2I[=SVO7XEXI(ITEVXQIRXSJ8VERWTSVXEXMSR 2=7(38  'MX]SJ-XLEGEw'MX]SJ-XLEGE4LSRI7YVZI]6IWYPXWx LXXT[[[IKSZPMROGSQTYFPMGCHSGYQIRXWMXLEGETYFPMWLIHCHSGYQIRXW 1MRYXIWCSJC1IIXMRKW+SZIVRQIRXC4IVJSVQERGICERHC%GGSYRXEFMPMX]C'SQQMXXII :MWMSR7XEXIQIRXx )'()&( (YTPSEHW &&%**%)*&''* ( 4(* 'SVRIPP9RMZIVWMX]w*-2%0XVERWTSVXEXMSRJSGYWIH+IRIVMG)RZMVSRQIRXEP -QTEGX7XEXIQIRX X+)-7 x LXXT[[[XKIMWTVSNIGXSVK8+)-7C(SGYQIRXWX*+)-7C*-2%0  %'')48)(TH 6ITSVX x (EZMW(YX^MOERH&E\ERHEPPw8VERWTSVXEXMSRERHXLI2I[+IRIVEXMSR;L] =SYRK4ISTPI%VI(VMZMRK0IWWERH;LEX-X1IERWJSV8VERWTSVXEXMSR4SPMG]x*VSRXMIV +VSYTERH974-6+)HYGEXMSR*YRH LXXT[[[JVSRXMIVKVSYTSVKVITSVXWJKXVERWTSVXEXMSRERHRI[KIRIVEXMSR (YRGER(YWXMR8%PHWXEHX.EVIH;LEPIR.SLR1IPP]7XIZIR.+SVXQEOIV 7XIZIR0w:EPMHEXMSRSJ;EPO7GSVI’JSV)WXMQEXMRK2IMKLFSVLSSH;EPOEFMPMX] %R%REP]WMWSJ*SYV971IXVSTSPMXER%VIEWx-RX.)RZMVSR6IW4YFPMG,IEPXLRS  HSMMNIVTL [EPOEFMPMX]MRHI\%TTPMGEXMSRXSXLIRIMKLFSVLSSHUYEPMX]SJPMJIWXYH]x&VMXMWL.SYVREP SJ7TSVXW1IHMGMRI   YFPMWLIHCHSGYYFPMWL %GGSYRXEFMPMX]C'SQ%GGSYRXEFMPM &%**%)&%** -2%0XVERWTSVXEXMSRJSGYWIHRWTSVXEXMSRJSGYWIH  GXSVK8+)-7C(SGYQIRXWX*GXSVK8+)-7C(SGYQI THJTHJ (YX^MOERH&E\ERHEPP(YX^MOERH&E\ERH PI%VI(VMZMRK0IPI%VI(VMZMRK0 4-6+)HY4-6+)HY RXMIVKRXMIVK  +VIMK.IWWMGEw'SPPIKIXS[R4EVOMRK7XYH]x4VITEVIHJSVXLI'SPPIKIXS[R 1SVEXSVMYQ7YFGSQQMXXIIXSXLI4PERRMRKERH)GSRSQMG(IZIPSTQIRX'SQQMXXII LXXT[[[WGVMFHGSQHSG :MGXSVME8VERWTSVX4SPMG]-RWXMXYXI LXXTZXTMSVKRQXXHQTHJ 0MXQER8SHH4EVOMRKQEREKIQIRXFIWXTVEGXMGIW'LMGEKSPPP%QIVMGER4PERRMRK %WWSGMEXMSR %YXLSVvWFSSOWYQQEV]EXLXXT[[[ZXTMSVKTEVOCQERTHJ 1EPI](SREPHERH6EGLIP;IMRFIVKIVw*SSH7LSTTMRKMRXLI9VFER)RZMVSRQIRX 4EVOMRK7YTTP](IWXMREXMSR'LSMGIERH1SHI'LSMGIx4VIWIRXIHEXXLI8VERWTSVXEXMSR 6IWIEVGL&SEVHXL%RRYEP1IIXMRK;EWLMRKXSR('. LXXT[[[MXHTSVKHSGYQIRXW-8(4C97C4EVOMRKC 1ERZMPPI1MGLEIPERH7LSYT(SREPH'w4EVOMRKVIUYMVIQIRXWEWEFEVVMIVXS LSYWMRKHIZIPSTQIRXVIKYPEXMSRERHVIJSVQMR0SW%RKIPIWxI7GLSPEVWLMT9RMZIVWMX]SJ 'EPMJSVRME LXXT[[[IWGLSPEVWLMTSVKYGMXIQ 1ERZMPPI1ERH(7LSYTw4EVOMRK4ISTPIERH'MXMIWx.SYVREP3J9VFER 4PERRMRK%RH(IZIPSTQIRX  LXXTWLSYTFSPYGPEIHY4ISTPI4EVOMRK'MXMIW.94(THJ 2SZEO'SRWYPXMRK+VSYTw'MX]SJ-XLEGE4IVJSVQERGI1IEWYVIW*VEQI[SVOERH 3VKERM^EXMSREP%R LXXT[[[IKSZPMROGSQTYFPMGCHSGYQIRXWMXLEGETYFPMWLIHCHS GYQIRXW'PIVOWC 6ITSVXSRGMX]KSZIVRERGIGSQQMWWMSRIHF]XLI'MX]SJ-XLEGE 8VEZIVW%WWSGMEXIW'SRWYPXERXWw'SVRIPP-XLEGE4EVOMRK7XYH])\MWXMRK4EVOMRK (IQERH>SRMRK3VHMRERGI4EVOMRK6IUYMVIQIRXWx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w4EVOMRKVIUYMVIQIRXWEWEVOMRKVIUY QMR0SW%RKIPIWxI7GLSPEVWLQMR0SW%RKIPIWx QUVV w4EVOMRK4ISTPIERH'w4EVOMRK4ISTP      HY4ISTPI4EVOMRK'MXMIW.94(HY4ISTPI4EVOMRK'MXMIW.9 RK+VSYTw'MX]SJ-XLEGE+VSYTw'MX]SJ-XLEGE %REP]WMW6ITSVXx%REP]WMW6ITSVXx [IKSZPMROGSQTYFPMGCHSGYQ[IKSZPMROGSQTYFPMGCHSGY MX]KSZIVRERGIGSQQMWWMX]KSZIVRERGIGSQQ IW'SRWYPXEIW'SRWYPXE MRERGMRERG  :MGXSVME8VERWTSVX4SPMG]-RWXMXYXIVIZMWMSRw?97A8VERWTSVXEXMSR'SWXERH LXXT[[[ZXTMSVKXGEXGETHJ ;E PO7GSVI1IXLSHSPSK] LXXT[[[[EPOWGSVIGSQTHJ;EPO7GSVI1IXLSHSPSK]THJ ;IMRFIV KIV6EGLIP.SLR/EILR]ERH1EXXLI[6YJSw974EVOMR K4SPMGMIW %R3ZIVZMI[SJ1EREKIQIRX7XVEXIKMIW2I[=SVO2=-RWXMXYXIJSV8VERWTSVXEXMSR ERH(IZIPSTQIRX4SPMG]x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z JSVXLIWIFYMPHMRKW+MZIRERw2xSJ[IRIIHIHWYVZI]VIWTSRWIW%WYVZI] VIWTSRWIUYSXE[EWEPPSGEXIHJSVIEGLFYMPHMRKFEWIHSRXLIFYMPHMRKv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v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z'E]YKE7XVIIX(V]HIR6SEH7IRIGE7XVIIXERH+VIIR7XVIIXz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z'E]YKE7XVIIX(V]HKEVEKIWz'E]YKE7XVIIX(V QXMQIWHYVMRKX]TMGEP MIMRQXMQIWHYVMRKX]TMGEP MIMR %TTIRHM\796:)=%2(6)79087 'SPPIKIXS[R'VSWWMRK§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¬XLEZIXSXEOIEFYWSVTPERIXSKIXFEGOLSQIXSJEQMP] -LEZIERSJJGEQTYWNSFERHYWIQ]GEVXSKIXXLIVI 8SKIXXSKIXXSKVSGIV]WXSVIWSYXWMHISJ'SPPIKIXS[R 8SHSSXLIVWLSTTMRKSYXWMHISJ'SPPIKIXS[R 1]JEQMP]PMZIWGPSWIXS-XLEGEERH-KSLSQIJVIUYIRXP] *SVVIGVIEXMSREPTYVTSWIW KSMRKLMOMRKXSTEVOWRMKLXGPYFWIXG  8SKIXFEGOERHJSVXLXS'EQTYW 3XLIV TPIEWIWTIGMJ] CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ;LIVIHS]SYTEVO]SYVGEV# -RETEVOMRKWTEGITVSZMHIHEXQ]FYMPHMRK -RETVMZEXITEVOMRKPSXSVKEVEKIE[E]JVSQQ]FYMPHMRK TPIEWIWTIGMJ]PSGEXMSR CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 3R'EQTYW -RXLI(V]HIR6SEHTEVOMRKKEVEKI -RE(S[RXS[RTEVOMRKKEVEKI 3RXLIWXVIIX )7)7 XSXS EVOMRKRK CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ERETEVXQIRXERETEVXQIRX XLEXTVSZMHIHJXLEXTVSZMHIHJ EVOMRK#EVOMRK# EFSZITPIEWIGSRXMRYIEFSZITPIEWI ]] LEZIZILMGPIMR-XLEGE#LEZIZILMGPIMR-XLEG 4PI4PI SR¬XLEZIXSXEOIEFYWSSR¬XLEZIXSXEOIEF RSJJRSJJGEQTYWNSFERGEQTYWNSFE IXXSKVSGIV]WIXXSKVSGIV]W LSTTMRKSLSTTMRKS PSWIPSWI ,S[QYGLHS]SYGYVVIRXP]TE]JSVTEVOMRK# FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL SZIVQSRXL ;LEXMWXLIQE\MQYQTVMGI]SY[SYPHTE]JSVTEVOMRK# FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL SZIVQSRXL ;SYPH]SYGIEWIOIITMRKEGEVMR-XLEGEMJ 4PIEWIGLIGOEPPXLEXETTP] =SY[IVISJJIVIHJVIIYRPMQMXIHFYWVMHIWHYVMRK%008'%8WIVZMGILSYVWSREPPVSYXIW# =SY[IVISJJIVIHMR'EVWLEVIGVIHMXWJSVXVMTW]SYQE]RIIHXSXEOIEJXIV8'%8WIVZMGI LSYVW# =SYLEHJVIIWIGYVIFMOITEVOMRKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRK 3XLIV TPIEWIWTIGMJ] CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC -J]SYGSYPHRSXEJJSVHTEVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[RFYX[IVIKMZIREJVII8'%8FYWTEWW[SYPH]SYTEVOEX EGLIETIVPSGEXMSRWYGLEW(S[RXS[RSVSRGEQTYW# =IW 2S -GYVVIRXP]TEVOSYXWMHI'SPPIKIXS[RFYXTE]JSVQ]S[RFYWTEWW SVJEVI  -J]SYGSYPHRSXEJJSVHTEVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[RSVEXWSQIPIWWI\TIRWMZIPSGEXMSR[LEX[SYPH]SYHS# 4PIEWIVEROMRSVHIVSJTVIJIVIRGI[MXLFIMRK]SYVXSTGLSMGI CCCCCC0IEZIQ]GEVEXLSQI-[SYPHMRWXIEHFMOI[EPOVMHI[MXLEJVMIRHYWIFYWXVERWMXSV YWIGEVWLEVMRKWIVZMGI[LMPIMR-XLEGE CCCCCC8V]XSJMRHJVIISZIVRMKLXTEVOMRKSRXLIWXVIIXWRIEVF]IZIRMJ-LEZIXSHVMZIEVSYRHJSVE [LMPI CCCCCC3XLIV TPIEWIWTIGMJ] CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 8LERO]SYJSVTEVXMGMTEXMRKMRSYVWYVZI]-J]SY[SYPHPMOIXSTVSZMHI]SYVREQIERHGSRXEGXMRJSVQEXMSR FIPS[[I[MPPIRXIV]SYMREHVE[MRKJSVMRGEWL (VE[MRKXSFILIPHHYVMRKJMREPW[IIO'SRXEGX MRJSVQEXMSR[MPPFIOITXWXVMGXP]GSRJMHIRXMEP  2EQICCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 0SGEP%HHVIWWCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 4LSRICCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC)QEMPCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 4PIEWIGLIGOEPPXLE 4PIEWIGLIGOEPPX XETTP] YWVMHIWHYVMRK%008'%8WIWVMHIWHYVMRK%008'% EVIGVIHMXWJSVXVMTW]SYQE]GVIHMXWJSVXVMTW]SYQE] TEVOMRKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRKTEVOMRKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRK CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC VOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[RFYX[IVVOMRKMR'SPPIKIXS[RFYX[I GLEW(S[RXS[RSVSRGEQTYW(S[RXS[RSVSRGEQTY XP]TEVOSYXWMHI'XP]TEVOSYXWMHI'SPPIKIXS[RPPIKIXS RSXEJJSVHTEVOMRKMR'SPPIRSXEJJSVHTEVOMRKMR' SVHIVSJTVIJIVIRGISVHIVSJTVIJIVIRG Q]GEVEXLQ]GEVEXL MGIMGI VIWTSRWIW 7YQQEV] 5YIWXMSR =IW  2S  5YIWXMSR =IW  2S  5YIWXMSR -HSRSXS[REGEV  -HSRSXRIIHEGEV  ,MKLTVMGISJTEVOMRK  (M RHMRKJVIISVMRI\TIRWMZITEVOMRK  ERHLEWWPISJHVMZMRK  +SSHFYWWIVZMGI  %ZEMPEFMPMX]SJ'EVWLIV  3XLIV  4ISTPIQE]WIPIGXQSVIXLERSRIGLIGOFS\WSTIVGIRXEKIWQE]EHHYTXSQSVI XLER  5YIWXMSR =IW  2S   [RE -HS RSXRIIH L TV 5YIWXMSR 7S-HSR XLEZIXSXEOIEFYWSVTPERIXSKIXFEGOLSQIXSJEQMP] -LEZIER TYWNSFERHYWIQ]GEVXSKIXXLIVI 8SKIXXSKVSGIV]WXSVIWSYXWMHISJ'SPPIKIXS[R 8SHSSXLIVWLSTTMRKSYXWMHISJ'SPPIKIXS[R 1]JEQMP]PMZIWGPSWIXS-XLEGEERH-KSLSQIJVIUYIRXP] *SVVIGVIEXMSREPTYVTSWIW KSMRKLMOMRKXSTEVOWRMKLXGPYFWIXG  8SKIXFEGOERHJSVXLXS'EQTYW 3XLIV  4ISTPIQE]WIPIGXQSVIXLERSRIGLIGOFS\WSTIVGIRXEKIWQE]EH HYTXSQSVI XLER  5YIWXMSR -RETEVOMRKWTEGITVSZMHIHEXQ]FYMPHMRK  -RETVMZEXITEVOMRKPSXSVKEVEKIE[E]JVSQQ]FYMPHMRK TPIEWIPMWXPSGEXMSRMR3XLIV  3R'EQTYW  -RXLI(V]HIR6SEHTEVOMRKKEVEKI  -RE(S[RXS[RTEVOMRKKEVEKI  3RXLIWXVIIX 3XLIV  5YIWXMSR FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL  FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL  FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL  FIX[IIRERHTIVQSRXL  FIX[IIRERH FIX[IIRERH FIX[IIRERH FIX[IIRERH SZIVQSRXL  XQ]MP KEVEKI E  TP IEWI EH TEVOM TEVOMRK 5YIWXMSR =SY[IVIS IVIHJVIIYRPMQMXIHFYWVMHIWHYVMRK%008'%8WIVZMGILSYVWSR EPPVSYXIW# =SY[IVIS IVIHMR'EVWLEVIGVIHMXWJSVXVMTW]SYQE]RIIHXSXEOIE IV8'%8WIVZMGILSYVW# =SYLEHJVIIWIGYVIFMOITEVOMRKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRK 3XLIV  5YIWXMSR =IW  2S  -GYVVIRXP]TEVOSYXWMHI'SPPIKIXS[RFYXTE]JSVQ]S[RFYWTE WW SVJEVI  5YIWXMSR    5YIWXMSR    0IEZIQ]GEVEXLSQI MHIWHYVMRK%008'%8WMHIWHYVMR IGVIHMXWJSVXVMTW]SYQE]RIIHIGVIHMXWJSVXVMTW] RKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRKKMRWMHI]SYVFYMPHMRK =IW=IW 2S2 -GYVVIR 5YIWXMSR3XLIV    &YMPHMRK 0MRHIR  'SPPIKI   'EWGEHMPPE,EPP 'SPPIKI%ZI 'SPPIKI%ZI%TEVXQIRXW 'SPPIKI%ZI 7LIPHSR'SYVX )HH]KEXI4EVO%TEVXQIRXW 'SPPIKIXS[R4PE^E 'SPPIKIXS[R'IRXIV 'SPPIKIXS[R'SYVX 0MRHIR%ZI ,MKL'LETEVEPP 'SPPIKI XW 'SPPIKI%Z 7LIPH X HH]KE VO%TE RXW PPIKIXS[R4P KIXS[ IXS[R 0MRHI ,MKL'LETEVE %TTIRHM\1%47   NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 Dat Map Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-20 Data Source: City of Ithaca Department of Public Works, 20 Map Prepared by: GIS Program, City of Ithaca, NY, July, 20 100100 100 100 100 100 100 200 300 300 400 500 400 400 100 200 100 200 100 100 300 100E CLINTON ST WORTH ST MITCHELL ST RPCC LOADING DOCK E JAY ST E SENECA ST E EWIS ST GRANDVIEW PL KLINE RD SENECA WAY EDGECLIFF PL ELMWOOD AVE E MARSHALL ST COTTAGE PL HIGHLAND AVE KELVIN PL GLEN PL RESERVOIR AVE ONEIDA PL ORCHARD PL EDGEWOOD PL MAPLE GROVE PL CITY OF ITHACA CEMETARY E STATE ST / M.L.K. JR ST WEST AVE CAMPUS HILL APARTMENTS DRIVEWAY WILLARD LOOP RESERVOIR AVE N AURORA ST BOOL ST N QUARRY ST WILLETS PL EASTWOOD TER WOODCREST TER TREVA AVE HOLLISTER DR SOUTH HILL TER FAIRVIEW SQ GRANDVIEW CT HAWTHORNE PL PLEASANT ST CASCADILLA PARK RD ROBERT PURCELL COMMUNITY CENTER DRIVEWAY CITY OF ITHACA CEMETARY WEST CAMPUS DRIVEWAY ALPHA DELTA PHI DRIVEWAY TRIPHAMMER RD WATER TREATMENT PLANT DRIVEWAY Residential Parking Permit Zone 02,000Feet Legend RPPS Streets RPPS Boundary ZONE R-1a; R-1b R-2a; R-2b; R-2c Roads Parcels For More Information Visit: http://www.cityofithaca.org/departments/clerk/resparking.cfm ESENECAESENECAAAE SENECCACNESEE SESENECAESENECA STSTTSTTSTST RVOIRRVOIRVOIRVOIROI AVEVE UAN QQUQNQNQNUUUA STSTSSTTTTS ER %TTIRHM\463.)'82%66%8-:) Executive Summary Campus Advantage 1 Proprietary & Confidential The Subject Development is located at 301 East State Street in Ithaca, NY, approximately 0.6 miles to Cornell University and 0.9 miles to Ithaca College. It sits at the gateway of the new downtown pedestrian corridor, known as Ithaca Commons. This area is a four-block pedestrian area populated with retail, restaurants and nightlife that is frequented by Ithaca residents, as well as Cornell and IC students. The 0.76 acre site is proposed to be a 11-story building with the first floor containing retail, as well as the leasing office and common area amenities. Possible amenities include a 24-hour fitness center, a flex fitness space, media/game lounge, study rooms and an internet café. The city of Ithaca is in central New York and is the county seat of Tompkins County, as well as the largest community in the Ithaca-Tompkins County metropolitan area. This contains the municipalities of the Town of Ithaca, the village of Cayuga Heights, and other towns and villages in Tompkins County). The city of Ithaca is located on the southern shore of Cayuga Lake, in Central New York. Ithaca is home to three institutions of higher learning - Cornell University, Ithaca College and Tompkins Cortland Community College (TC3). In 2013, the city's estimated population was 30,515, and the metropolitan area had a population of 103,617.1 Of the three institutions of higher learning, two are Tier 1 investable markets and given their proximity to the Subject Site, it can be assumed that this development will attract students from both. The site is within one mile of both campuses and can be accessed via TCAT shuttle routes. Routes 10 & 11 provide express access to both Cornell and Ithaca College, respectively, every 10 minutes from 7am to 7pm, seven days a week. Additionally, late night routes also provide coverage from 8:00 to 2:30 am from downtown Ithaca to Cornell Monday through Saturday. Additionally, the site’s adjacency to downtown Ithaca provides residents with superb access to the entirety of Ithaca and Tompkins county given downtown Ithaca is the hub in the TCAT’s Hub and Spoke accessibility model. Cornell students are able to accesses TCAT via purchasing an OmniRide pass for $200 per year. Ithaca College students are also offered discounted passes for $265 for the year. In fall 2014, Cornell saw its highest enrollment yet, reaching 21,850 which is a 4.4% growth over the past five years, an increase of 911 students. Undergraduates at Cornell account for 66% of the total population, approximately 14,453 students, and graduates number 7,397. All students are attending this institution on a full-time basis. Out-of-state students make up 73% of the total population. Cornell currently houses approximately 7,463 students, which accounts for approximately 51.6% of the undergraduate students and 34.2% of the total population. There is no on-campus housing requirement. Ithaca College enrolls 6,587 students, of which 6,124 are undergraduates. 97% of students are attending IC full-time and 56% come from out of state. IC requires housing through junior year and houses approximately 4,395 students in 27 traditional residence halls and two apartment complexes. This accounts for 71.8% of the undergraduate population and 66.7% of the total enrollment.. The Mayor of Ithaca, Svante Myrick, and Tompkins Legislator, Martha Robertson, recently submitted an article to The Ithaca Voice stating Ithaca’s housing crisis2. They state the shortage of rental and for-sale housing is getting worse every year. The lack of housing causes people to live further out in the suburbs, causing traffic congestion, damage to the infrastructure, environmental issues, as well as putting a strain on public transit. The county’s 2006 assessment reported that Ithaca would need at least 2,127 new rental units by 2014 to meet the demand. During the 2006-2014 timeframe, only 657 new units have been completed in the city of Ithaca. During that time, Cornell added 2,400 new undergraduate and graduate 1 ProximityOne – Ithaca, NY – Demographic Economic Characteristics. http://proximityone.com/acp/36/3638077.htm 2 Ithaca Voice ‘Ithaca’s housing crisis, economic justice and the path forward’, July 1, 2015 Executive Summary Campus Advantage 2 Proprietary & Confidential students. What was not accounted for in the 2006 Demand Study, was the 2,400 new undergraduate and graduate students added at Cornell with zero (0) new beds added on-campus. Further compounding the on-going housing shortage will be the estimated 1,300 students projected at Cornell over the next 5 years along with the closing of Maplewood Apartments in the summer of 2016, leaving 480 graduate students without housing.3 This is a net increase of unmet demand of 1,780 students. The off-campus market can be mostly characterized by a collection of smaller apartment communities that offer very few amenities, are not professionally managed and do not resemble traditional purpose- built student product. The overall occupancy for the Ithaca market is strong at 99%, with many of the properties beginning lease up for the following year in early fall due to strong housing demand. The Subject Development will bring a professional management team and residence life program unlike what is currently present in Ithaca. Additionally, it will offer residents a variety of amenities and apartment finishes that will be superior to the rest of the market. According to Nels Bohn, of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, Ithaca’s vacancy rate in 2014 was 1% with rental rates increase of 13% from 2013 to 2014.4 In April 2014, the New York Times named Ithaca America’s 11th least affordable housing market with residents spending on average 38.6% of their income on housing. This means Ithaca is more expensive than Napa, CA, Honolulu, Hi and Boulder, CO.5 General macroeconomics theory will illustrate that a market whose supply and demand is so stretched, that new supply is needed in order to provide slack in the economy. The off-campus market can be mostly characterized by a collection of smaller apartment communities that offer very few amenities, are not professionally managed and do not resemble traditional purpose- built student product. The overall occupancy for the Ithaca market is strong at 99%, with many of the properties beginning lease up for the following year on October 1st due to strong housing demand.6 The Subject Development will bring a professional management team and residence life program unlike what is currently present in Ithaca. Additionally, it will offer residents a variety of amenities and apartment finishes that will be superior to the rest of the market. The proposed project presents the Ithaca with the ability to close the 1,470 unit rental housing unit shortage by 232 units, nearly an entire third of the units the market was able to provide over an eight year period. This 15.7% reduction in the shortfall should provide added relief to a severely strained rental housing market. In order to create a diverse living environment and reduce required capture ratios from a student specific property, a varied unit mix is suggested. {Remainder of Page Intentionally Blank} 3 Ithaca Journal – “Cornell Plans closure of Maplewood Park Apartments”, May 2015 4 Ithaca Times – “Why is Ithaca one of the least Affordable US Cities”, April 2014 5 New York Times – “In Many Cities, Rent Is Rising Out of Reach of Middle Class.” April 2014. 6 Cornell Sun – “In Housing Rush, Cornellians Weather Collegetown Line for Hours.” Executive Summary Campus Advantage 3 Proprietary & Confidential Below is the proposed unit mix: Unit Types# of Units # of Beds per  Unit # of BedsOcc  PercTenants% Students# Students %  Professional s #  Professional s Efficiency50150 95%48 25%1275%36 1 Bed/ 1 Bath3013095%29 25%775%22 2 Bed/ 1 Bath4028095%76 50%3850%38 2 Bed/ 2 Bath 2024095%38 50%1950%19 3 Bed/ 2 Bath 6 3 1895%17 50%950%8 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Odds29411695%110 100%1100%0 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Even37414895%141 100%1410%0 5 Bed/ 4 Bath 20 510095%95 100%950%0 Total 2322.5158295%55477.8%43122.2%123 In addition to the mix between students and nonstudents estimated above, it is also contemplated that the project will draw both graduates and undergraduate students as illustrated below. Estimated Classification Make ‐Up  of  Student Residents Unit Types# Students% UG# UG% Grad# Grad Efficiency 12 5.0%195.0%11 1  Bed/ 1  Bath 7 10.0%190.0%6 2  Bed/ 1 Bath 38 25.0%1075.0%28 2 Bed/ 2 Bath 19 25.0%575.0%14 3 Bed/ 2 Bath 9 50.0%550.0%4 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Odds110 90.0%9910.0%11 4 Bed/ 4 Bath ‐ Even141 90.0%12710.0%14 5 Bed/ 4 Bath 95 95.0%905.0%5 Total 43178.4%33821.6%93 The diverse population of undergrads, graduate students and non-students, mitigates capture risk associated with a single demand driver. Given the above residential mix, the capture rates of each target group are as follows:  338 Undergraduate students represent 3.3% of the off-campus undergraduate student demand (Ithaca College and Cornell only)  93 Graduate students represent 1.4% of the off-campus graduate student demand (Ithaca College and Cornell only)  123 Conventional renters (93 units) represent a mere 0.4% of the Ithaca population and marginally more than the 82 housing units delivered on average from 2006-2014. In summary, the combination of the tight housing market, a lack of quality purpose-built housing and the diverse unit mix creating a diverse demand target, creates a high likelihood of success for the proposed development. http://nyti.ms/1JVbA3c REAL ESTATE The Millennial Commune By  RONDA  KAYSEN JULY 31, 2015 Applying to live in a Pure House apartment is a little like signing up for an online dating service. Prospective residents answer probing questions like “What are your passions?” and “Tell us your story (Excite us!).” If accepted, tenants live in what the company’s promotional materials describe as a “highly curated community of like-minded individuals.” In other words, they rent a room in an apartment in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, but with opportunities for social and spiritual growth, like dinner parties and meditation sessions. Pure House is among a handful of businesses that are renting rooms at a premium in exchange for access to amenities, a dormlike atmosphere and an instant community. For a certain set of New Yorkers, often new arrivals to the city with an income but no rental history, Pure House offers something of a reprieve. No credit check. No draconian rules about earning 40 times the monthly rent. No 12-month lease. Instead, they sign a 30-day membership agreement, paying from $1,600 to $4,000 a month for a room in an apartment to be shared with others who, theoretically, have a similar worldview. The arrangement is a commercial outgrowth of co-living, taking life with roommates to a different level. “We live in a super-disconnected city that has tons and tons of people, but it can feel really lonely here,” said Harrison Iuliano, who until last week worked as the programming director of Pure House, which rents out rooms to about 40 people in nine apartments in various buildings around Williamsburg. “Our goal is to make that a nonissue.” Russell Jackson relinquished a studio six months ago to live in a six- bedroom Pure House apartment with a rotating cast (he presently has three flat mates). “I’m getting exposure to stuff and things that I would not have had sequestered on the Upper West Side,” said Mr. Jackson, a 52-year-old chef. “Laundry services and cleaners and masseuses — all of that is icing,” he said. The real perks are the people he has met along the way. “How cool is it that I walk in the door and they ask me, ‘How’s your day?’ And I am genuinely interested in hearing from them,” said Mr. Jackson, who considers himself the Den Dad to the other tenants, who generally are two or three decades his junior and stay a month or two at a time. Mr. Jackson, who has appeared on “Iron Chef America,” also orchestrates Pure House’s food events, including its pop-up dinner parties. At one such party, none of the 30 guests knew one another, but most embraced when the night was over, Mr. Jackson recalled. Co-living has gained traction on the West Coast, particularly among the tech crowd in places like Seattle and the Bay Area. Rambling Victorians have been turned into “hacker houses” peopled with young tech entrepreneurs plugged into their laptops like a scene plucked from “The Social Network,” the 2010 film about Mark Zuckerberg, a Facebook founder. But in New York, where apartments are generally small and do not immediately lend themselves to communal living, the concept has been slow to catch on. But now, a few companies are assembling bundles of apartments in New York with plans to fill them with cherry-picked inhabitants. Promising “a modern, urban lifestyle that values openness, collaboration and relationship building,” Common has entered into agreements with developers to renovate properties in Crown Heights and Bedford-Stuyvesant. This fall, it will begin renting 19 rooms at a Crown Heights property. Another company, Stage 3 Properties, is constructing a new co-living building with 180 units to house 400 people, to be completed around 2017. Stage 3 describes its mission as “passionately disrupting the housing industry by reimagining its process, product and price points and curating an all- inclusive cosmopolitan living experience designed for today’s creative class.” However, its leases will be conventional, 12 months long. But most co-living companies in New York do not own the buildings in which these experiences take place. They play the role of property manager, vetting tenants and collecting security deposits. “We found a group of property owners and investors who are interested in owning real estate but don’t want to deal with the management and think that this model of co-living is in huge demand,” said Brad Hargreaves, 29, the founder of Common. Of course, like-minded pals have been pooling resources and talents to create ad hoc communities for generations, and that’s not even taking into account boardinghouses and residential hotels. But with the advent of the sharing economy, which has brought about a proliferation of companies that make it easy for people to do everything from rent a cubicle in a common work space to share a taxi with strangers, some entrepreneurs are betting co-living has the potential to go mainstream. And as renters warm to the idea of micro-units, co-living might not be much of a stretch, either. Both housing models are structured around shared common areas and amenities. And sometimes the lines are blurred: Bedrooms in Stage 3’s apartments are to start at 80 square feet, and come outfitted with space-saving furniture. “There is a very real shift occurring, and I think it has to do with different expectations for privacy and for sharing,” said Andrew Till, a vice president of Simon Baron Development, which is partnering with Stage 3 Properties. Many New Yorkers need more flexible housing arrangements, particularly those who come to the city for a brief stint, or do not have the credit history or income requirements needed to qualify for a yearlong lease. “In cities, especially in New York, there has been — and still is — a huge need for exactly this,” said Kathy Braddock, a managing director of the New York City office of William Raveis. Critics, however, say the co-living business model could ultimately drive up housing costs, since many of the companies sublease units and charge a premium on the rent. And in some cases, the arrangements could violate city and state housing laws. For example, it is potentially illegal for a tenant of an apartment or a house to have more than two roommates who are not family members. And to limit single-room occupancy hotels, city law prohibits landlords from renting out individual rooms in apartments. “I think it’s only a matter of time before the courts recognize them as effectively landlords who are running S.R.O.’s,” said David E. Frazer, a Manhattan lawyer who represents tenants. It remains to be seen how successful these companies will ultimately be. Campus, which has co-living spaces in the Bay Area of California and in New York City, announced in June that it is shutting down operations on Aug. 31. Campus is now trying to find housing for residents living in its various properties. Ultimately, the company was “unable to find a way to make Campus into an economically viable business,” Tom Currier, 24, a founder, wrote in an email. But for Justin Gerstley, renting out rooms in a six-bedroom, three-bath loft in the financial district has proved lucrative and sustainable. In 2008, he came across a raw 5,000-square-foot space near the South Street Seaport. He signed a five-year lease with the landlord, borrowed $60,000 from his father and renovated it, christening it the Loft. Mr. Gerstley, 30, a May graduate of New York University’s Stern School of Business, has been renting out the rooms for seven years, charging up to $2,500 a month for a spacious bedroom with several windows. He declined to say how much he pays for the entire lease, although it is up for renewal in 2016 and the rent could rise. Mr. Gerstley, who lived in the apartment until October, married in February and now lives on the Upper West Side with his wife, Ashley Feinstein Gerstley, 29, a financial adviser. “My wife thinks this is all I should do,” said Mr. Gerstley, who is searching for a job. He has considered repeating the co- living model with other properties, but has yet to find another one as well suited to that use as the Loft. The apartment has a large, open living room with a 20-foot projection screen, three sofas, a large dining table and a Ping-Pong table. There is also a small gym space and a tiny windowless guest room that residents can reserve for overnight visitors. The Loft is currently home to six single people in their 20s, although one is moving out in September. Getting accepted into the Loft is an informal but challenging process. Prospective tenants are subjected to several lengthy interviews with Mr. Gerstley and the residents, who collectively agree on their next housemate. Usually, the process involves a fair amount of alcohol and a visit to a favored Loft haunt, Fresh Salt, a Beekman Street bar. “We look for friendly people who aren’t super weird,” said Akshay Nagula, 24, a software engineer who moved into the Loft last October. Mr. Nagula had considered living in a hacker house when he was in the Bay Area, but found it off-putting, describing the household as “eight super- nerdy awkward dudes living together.” The Loft is different, he said, with a collegial atmosphere. Residents frequently share meals and even go on group outings, like a geo-tracking expedition that soon devolved into a bar crawl. For Mr. Gerstley, playing the role of landlord comes with its responsibilities. Even though he no longer lives in the apartment, none of the tenants communicate with the real landlord. So when a leak from an upstairs unit damaged Mr. Nagula’s computer monitor, Mr. Gerstley had to resolve the problem from Italy, where he was on his honeymoon. “My biggest job is making sure everybody stays happy, because you can get a bedroom in New York for less than $2,500,” he said. In order to charge residents top dollar for living with others, bells and whistles are in order. Pure House, for example, offers a premium $4,000-a- month package that includes massage, yoga, fresh fruits and vegetables, personal coaching and wellness counseling. The company’s founder, Ryan Fix, 40, sees Pure House as a departure from the standard rental model that binds tenants to a long-term lease with a landlord who does not view the tenant as a consumer who deserves to be wooed. The Pure House website includes images of people gazing at breathtaking vistas with inspirational taglines like “We design experiences that empower our members to thrive.” “The traditional landlord-renter model is broken,” said Mr. Fix, who launched the company in January. Instead, the company strives to “provide an amazing experience and leave with a hug.” The arrangement is not for everyone. “I think it’s just better to have a lease and know your roommates,” said Anthony F. Dzaba, 34, who has lived in two different Pure House apartments in the past three months and rarely sees his fellow inhabitants. Pure House might strive for a collegial vibe with its residents, avoiding words like “tenant” and “landlord,” but ultimately, he said, the relationship is still a traditional one. “After all, you’re paying them and when something breaks they come and fix it,” said Mr. Dzaba, who plans to look for an apartment with a traditional lease this fall. But perhaps the biggest drawback is the 30-day lease that many co-living advocates rally behind. It provides residents with virtually no housing security at all. Their rent could rise or they could be displaced with as little as a month’s notice. “We are hopeful that many of our members will be able to stay in their homes after the company winds down,” Mr. Currier of the disbanding Campus wrote in an email. And as for the traditional tenant who happens to share a building with a co-living apartment, the advent of short-term rentals means living next door to neighbors who stay for a few months, if that long. Some critics argue that month-to-month rental agreements do not amount to a housing collective, even if residents attend social events. “To me, it seems like a bastardization of the idea,” said Oriana Leckert, the author of “Brooklyn Spaces: 50 Hubs of Culture and Creativity” (Monacelli Press, 2015). “It’s not the real world. The real world isn’t where you crash somewhere for 30 days and you get to immerse yourself in a neighborhood and then you leave,” said Linda B. Rosenthal, a member of the New York State Assembly who has been critical of short-term rentals. “It’s about a few people making a lot of money masquerading as a shared economy.” While collective housing has historically often been a way to live more economically, for some of the new adherents your home is not only where you lay your head, but also where you forge business relationships and advance your career 24/7. On a sweltering July evening, about two dozen people gathered around an oversize dining table at Gramercy House, an elegant shared townhouse on East 18th Street. Guests mingled at a potluck dinner that included, among other things, Spam sushi. (“I wouldn’t try it,” joked one.) The purpose of the night: networking. “I wanted to live in a place where I could invite people over and we could build something that is bigger than the sum of its parts,” said Gillian Morris, a founder of Gramercy House and the travel app Hitlist, as she prepared her signature drink for the party, a mix of rosemary, grapefruit juice, soda and gin. Ms. Morris, 29, a Harvard graduate, rented the apartment in January with two other entrepreneurs to create a household that could double as a place to build a brand. The apartment, two floors connected by a staircase with a handsome curving banister, was listed for $12,500 a month when the three rented it. The residents (who now number four) host brunches, dinners and a meditation class, all with the intent of enlarging their social sphere. “We’re willing to give up living alone for a few years because we define privacy differently,” said Melissa Kwan, 32, a founder of the real estate app Spacio and of Gramercy House, who hopes that the connections she makes there will help her find investors in her fledgling company. “I think as an entrepreneur, it’s not only motivating, but necessary for you to constantly surround yourself with these kinds of people.” For weekly email updates on residential real estate news, sign up here. Follow us on Twitter: @nytrealestate. A  version  of  this  article  appears  in  print  on  August  2,  2015,  on  page  RE1  of  the  New  York  edition with  the  headline:  Rooms  With  a  Viewpoint. ©  2015  The  New  York  Times  Company http://onforb.es/1s82NHu LIFESTYLE 10/07/2014 @ 9:30AM 12,373 views Why Millennials Love Renting With Millennials facing an unemployment rate of more than 8% and $1 trillion in student loan debt, they’re increasingly renting instead of buying homes. In fact, the true homeownership rate for 18-34 year olds has fallen to a new low: 13.2%. But finances aren’t the only reason for the dip in homeownership. Millennials are recognizing the many benefits of renting — including reasons that have nothing to do with money. 1. Love of Amenities Many apartment buildings feature free amenities that would come at a significant cost for homeowners. These range from obviously visible perks like electric car charging ports, gyms, and movie screening rooms, to the subtle, such as concierge service and cell phone reception in all areas of the building, including the underground garage — a boon to Millennials, many of whom don’t have landlines. 2. Love of Community Millennials are drawn to the community and shared spaces in apartment buildings. With limited budgets in urban locales, including places where studio apartments can be smaller than 400 square feet, younger renters are enjoying common kitchens or coffee bars, libraries, and rec rooms. Plus, there’s the love of community outside of the building itself. Renting a downtown apartment allows for close proximity to enjoy culture and nightlife without having to move to the suburbs— even if they could afford a house in a more Trulia Contributor Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own. residential neighborhood. But if Millennials DO want to try living in a suburban neighborhood to get to know that community before making a commitment to buy, renting is always an option (see the next reason…). 3. Love of Flexibility Many see buying a single-family home as the path to forever escaping noisy neighbors on the other side of a wall or ceiling, but in truth, renting provides much more flexibility to leave behind troublesome places. A nuisance who moves in halfway into a year-long lease becomes a memory in months; one who moves next door halfway into a 15-year mortgage can feel like a problem for life. Home,  Sweet  Rental:  An  eBook  From Forbes Homeownership isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Learn how to find the perfect rental and negotiate a lease that meets your needs. The ultimate benefit of renting may arise from the flexibility of leaving for any reason, especially career reasons. Millennials tend to change jobs three times more often than their older counterparts and stay with the same employer for just three years on average, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Renting instead of buying makes transferring to a new or better job much simpler. Some leases may even include a termination clause that specifies acceptable reasons for early termination, such as a job transfer that is more than 50 miles away. In some cases, the tenant may not be liable for any payment if the unit is re-rented within a particular time period. 4. Love of Convenience This article is available online at: http://onforb.es/1s82NHu 2015 Forbes.com LLC™   All Rights Reserved There’s a lot of work that goes into maintaining your own home—yard work, standard maintenance and repairs, and important upgrades. Plus, if something major like a furnace breaks, it’s on you. Renters are able to keep home maintenance out of their budgets, and out of their weekend to-do lists. For Millennials with active lifestyles, having fewer things to do around the house can have a huge upside. Millennials—what  are  other  reasons  you love  renting?  Tell  us! RECOMMENDED BY FORBES NFL Team Values 2015 6 Ways To Win At Office Politics September 16, 2015 RE: State Street Triangle, Aurora Street and MLK Jr. Street, City of Ithaca, NY Transportation Demand Management Plan Below are the supporting narratives for the Impacts on Transportation in support of the FEAF: Transportation Impact Study Revised trip generation estimates were used for the Traffic Impact Study submitted in August 2015 . These are a revision from the Traffic Assessment prepared in June 2015. The revised estimates refer to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) data for the residential and commercial land uses . These estimates also take into account the revised trip generation reduction credits (e.g., transit, pedestrian, bicycle) used for the initial Traffic Assessment submitted in June 2015. Based on the Traffic Impact Study for the Proposed Project, the existing transportation system can accommodate the added vehicle trips without significant adverse impacts to the study area intersections. As well, measurements of the existing sidewalk widths in areas with more than likely moderate to high levels of pedestrian activity throughout the Ithaca CBD reveal that five feet is standard, with minimum widths of six feet along Green Street nearby City Hall and along Seneca Street. The Commons has clear pedestrian zone widths of ten to twelve feet. Existing data and analysis should be presented from the concerned parties that allege the existing transportation facilities, including the pedestrian and bicycle facilities, are operating at capacity and will therefore be adversely impacted as a result of the Proposed Project. The existing 3 City owned and operated parking garages are each no greater than 0.25 mile, which on average takes 6 minutes to walk, are currently not operating at capacity. The expected increase in residents in the Project with vehicles would be able to be accommodated in these garages. Frank Nagy has verbally confirmed this as of September 8, 2015. The Proposed Project is providing 27 bicycle parking spaces. The elevators should be large enough to fit a standard sized bicycle and accompanying person. Parking Demand The users of the building would have varying parking needs that range from short-term to long-term and storage. It is estimated approximately 20 percent of the proposed residential component will require long-term parking with the remaining designated for short-term parking and guests. It is anticipated that retail customers who arrive by personal vehicle will predominately require short- term parking (less than 2 hours), while retail employees and building staff who arrive by personal vehicle will require long-term parking. Residents who have a vehicle that they do not need to access regularly will have the option of parking in an off-site storage lot. 3495 Winton Place Building E, Suite 110 Rochester, NY 14623 phone 585.272.4660 fax 585.272.4662 Re: State Street Triangle, City of Ithaca, NY September 16, 2015 Transportation Demand Management Plan Page 2 of 5 SRF Associates completed a Traffic Impact Study on August 14, 2015 for the State Street Triangle project. Using the Shared Parking Model, a total of 283 parking spaces are needed. A total of 57 parking spaces are required for customers, seven parking spaces for employees (commercial), and 219 parking spaces are reserved for residents. A car ownership studied prepared in 2012 by the Upstate Research Group indicates that based on the residential component alone, approximately 191 parking spaces are required. It can be estimated that a range of 191 to 219 parking spaces are required by residents, The 219 parking spaces use a national standard (Urban Land Institute and ITE), and can therefore be seen as more conservative estimation. The parking capacity for the proposed project will be provided primarily in the Cayuga Street Parking Garage via 250 reserved parking spaces. The 27 bicycle parking spaces provided on-site may reduce the need for vehicle parking spaces. Additionally, there were will be two to three carshare parking spaces which can equate to a reduction of approximately 15 personal automobiles per carshare vehicle. Factors such as carsharing, demographics, nearby land use mix, employment density, transit accessibility, et al have the ability to affect parking demand and optimal parking supply. Truck deliveries are planned on-site during off-peak hours. The availability of parking is discussed in the following section. Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) This section expands on the Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) strategies described in the August 2015 TIS in an effort to highlight the importance of developing a TDMP to decrease the dependence on personal automobile ownership and usage, and to create a more walkable, bikeable, transit-oriented development within the heart of downtown Ithaca. A TDMP is the application of strategies and policies to reduce Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) travel demand, or to redistribute this demand in space or in time. By definition, TDMP includes various strategies that produce a more efficient use of transportation resources and increase the efficiency of a transportation system. TDMP programs have many potential benefits. They can reduce the total number of vehicle miles traveled by promoting alternatives to driving alone. Fewer vehicle miles traveled results in less ozone pollution. Employers can use TDMP programs to reduce overhead costs, enhance productivity and reduce employee turnover. TDMP programs can also improve the use of public transit services, bikeways, sidewalks and carpool lanes by educating users about their travel options and coordinating trips between users with similar trip patterns. Implementing an effective TDMP program may reduce the required number of parking spaces for a project and/or eliminate the need to consider building costly multi-story parking structures. Table I summarizes some of the benefits that can be realized from an effective TDMP program. TABLE I: BENEFITS OF TDMP PROGRAMS BENEFIT DESCRIPTION Congestion Reduction Reduces traffic congestion delays and associated costs. Road & Parking Savings Reduces road and parking facility costs. Consumer Savings Helps consumers save money by reducing their need to own and operate motor vehicles. Transport Choice Improved travel options, particularly for non-drivers. Road Safety Reduced crash risk Re: State Street Triangle, City of Ithaca, NY September 16, 2015 Transportation Demand Management Plan Page 3 of 5 The following TDMP strategies are recommended for consideration and implementation in connection with the proposed State Street Triangle: Transit Coordination – Continued coordination with TCAT on transit ridership and marketing the nearby routes will boost ridership through increased awareness coupled with improved service. Carpooling – Carpooling will be encouraged by providing incentives and other services such as ride- matching using local services like vRide (www.vride.com via http://www.tompkinscountyny.gov/itctc). Transportation Alternatives Information – Bus schedules, walking and bicycling maps, neighborhood and on-site wayfinding will be made readily available. Location and Quantity of Bicycle Parking Spaces – The proposed project will include convenient bicycle parking locations in clear sight of access points into the building, safe and secure longer-term storage within parking areas, and sufficient number of bicycle parking spaces that encourage a greater number and demographic of residents, employees, and visitors to utilize bicycling as a means of transportation. Parking for 27 bicycles will be provided. Carshare – The project site will have two to three carshare parking spaces to encourage lower rates of personal automobile ownership and reduce parking demand. This will be coordinated locally through Ithaca Carshare. Although carshare is not typically used for commuting purposes, carshare can help reduce the dependency on vehicle ownership (one carsharing vehicle replaces approximately 15.3 privately owned vehicles, based on data provided by Ithaca Carshare) and, thus, reduces the need for on-site parking. Carshare can be viewed as an amenity and incentive to live and work in the Proposed Project. This supports the County’s Comprehensive Plan and goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and decrease dependency on cars. Coordination with the nearby Colleges/Universities – A successful relationship between the proposed project and the nearby education institutions of Ithaca College and Cornell University can affect the trip generation rates and parking demand for the proposed project. Transportation services like a dedicated shuttle may encourage lower rates of SOV usage. The Price of Parking – Parking spaces that are typically included in building and rental costs will be reviewed, and “unbundled” parking, paid as a separate item will be considered. Environmental Protection Reduced air, noise and water pollution, wildlife crashes and other types of environmental damages. Efficient Land Use Supports strategic land use planning objectives, such as reduced sprawl, urban redevelopment and reduced habitat fragmentation. Community Livability Improved local environmental quality and community cohesion. Economic development Supports a community’s economic objectives, such as increased productivity, employment, wealth, property values and tax revenues. Physical Fitness and Health Improved public fitness and health due to more physical activity, usually through increased daily walking and cycling. Re: State Street Triangle, City of Ithaca, NY September 16, 2015 Transportation Demand Management Plan Page 4 of 5 Other strategies include reducing the availability of on-site parking and encouraging shared parking (the shared parking concept builds upon the assumption that land uses in a mixed use development often do not share the same peak demand period, so spaces can be shared between the different land uses during different peak periods) can begin to change commuter patterns and mode choice. Seattle, Washington recently has been presented with a proposal to city council to offer tenants of new developments alternative transportation options, such as transit passes and car share memberships, in place of providing parking spots (http://www.seattle.gov/dpd/cityplanning/2015parkingreport.pdf). A Four-Point Parking Program is being created for residents with private vehicles. The plan is being created in conjunction with the City of Ithaca’s parking facilities and will utilize vacant parking spaces in existing City garages and surface lots. It is conservatively anticipated that up to 40% of the residents may have personal vehicles.  Cayuga Garage - Campus Advantage is in the process of seeking a parking agreement with the non-profit ownership entity for Cayuga Garage to utilize vacant spaces in the upper levels of the garage. There are over 300 vacant parking spaces in the garage and parking revenues from residents of the project will help reduce the $960,000 in annual public subsidies currently needed to fund the garage debt.  Seneca Garage – Approximately 100 vacant spaces have been identified by City parking officials that could be reserved by residents of the State Street Triangle Project.  Green Street Garage – There are approximately 75 underutilized spaces in the Green Street Garage which is within a 2-3 minute walk from the site.  Satellite Parking Lots – Surface parking lots near the Cornell campus and others that are in the planning stage elsewhere throughout the City will be available for those residents that primarily use their vehicles on weekends and holidays. The lots can be easily accessed via public transit. Bike Share – A micro bike share system that is developed for the proposed State Street Triangle Project provides additional public transportation options and can encourage more transit ridership. A bike share system can offer mobility, economic, health, safety, and quality of life benefits. The system is extremely useful for short, spontaneous or planned trips of 30 minutes or less. Most bike share systems offer free rides for the first 30-60 minutes of the ride (a per day/month/year fee is attached to the program). Bike share systems come in the form of smart docks or smart bikes. Additionally, exploration of electric assisted bicycles can promote increased bicycle usage to help deal with the challenging topography that is well known around the City and Town of Ithaca. However, at the time of writing, electric assisted bicycles are not legal in New York State. The Project Team has initiated discussions with a national bike share provider to provide service upon completion of the Proposed Project. The proposed State Street Triangle development will take advantage of the City’s existing multi-modal transportation system, as well as augment it through an improved interface with the public realm. Developing a mixed-use project of this nature will help meet the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, enhance the pedestrian and bicycle experience, and further activate an historic part of downtown Ithaca. Re: State Street Triangle, City of Ithaca, NY September 16, 2015 Transportation Demand Management Plan Page 5 of 5 The existing transportation system has been inventoried and documented, as well as the analysis of future transportation impacts, in the August 2015 TIS. The anticipated needs of automobile users will be accommodated via the existing roadway network and specified off-site parking areas. Pedestrians will be accommodated via the existing sidewalk network found throughout downtown Ithaca and the linkages to further reaching destinations, such as Cornell University. Additionally, the expanded sidewalk along the Proposed Project’s frontage will offer better pedestrian circulation in and around the site. On-site bicycle parking will offer residents and visitors an alternative mode of transportation travelling to the site. Move-in/-out coordination should be organized utilizing the proposed on-site loading area. The on- street parking spaces located nearby the Project Site may also be utilized when residents are moving in/out in coordination with City. A Street Occupancy Permit – like those utilized in Boston, for example (http://www.cityofboston.gov/streetoccupancy/) – can be obtained for those needing to utilize the public way as means to move-in/-out of their residences. If you have any comments or questions concerning these materials, or require any additional information, please contact our office. Very truly yours, SRF & Associates Stephen R. Ferranti, P.E., PTOE Principal SRF/dlk S:\Projects\2015\35027 Cornell Residental Mixed Use State St\Report\State Street Triangle Part 3 FEAF Letter 09.16.15.docx PLANNING BOARD- UPDATED SITE PLAN SUBMISSION: SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 STATE STREET TRIANGLE NEW RESIDENCES IN DOWNTOWN, ITHACA LIST OF DRAWINGS P2-4 Proposed Site Plans P5-16 Proposed Building: Perspectives + Precedent Images P17-20 Proposed Building: Elevations P21 Proposed Building: Section + Solar Diagram September 17, 2015 Page 2 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED SITE PLAN - EXISTING SIDEWALKS 1”=40’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 3 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED SITE PLAN WITH EXISTING CONDITION + DIMENSIONS 1”=40’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 4 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED SITE PLAN - EXTENDED SIDEWALKS 1”=40’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 5 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING STATE - AURORA PERSPECTIVE Changes to Building and Tabulations Corner Section- 11 stories to 10 stories State Street Section- 11 stories to 8 stories; 11 stories to 9 stories From 288,845 GSF to +/- 216,434 GSF From 240 units to 232 units From 620 bedrooms to 582 bedrooms September 17, 2015 Page 6 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING WEST PERSPECTIVE September 17, 2015 Page 7 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING NORTH PERSPECTIVE September 17, 2015 Page 8 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING EAST PERSPECTIVE STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 ‘BUILDING 1 & 6’ https://theatrehistoricalsociety.files.wordpress.com/2010/11/chicago-stock-exchange.jpg https://www.flickr.com/photos/peterjsieger/7653647518 EAST PERSPECTIVE 1 2 3 47 September 17, 2015 Page 9 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDINGS 1 + 6 ‘BUILDING 2’ STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 NORTH PERSPECTIVE 1 2 3 4 7 September 17, 2015 Page 10 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDING 2 ‘BUILDING 3’ STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 NORTH PERSPECTIVE 1 2 3 4 7 September 17, 2015 Page 11 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDING 3 ‘BUILDING 4’ STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 https://www.flickr.com/photos/icfusemag NORTH PERSPECTIVE 1 2 3 4 7 September 17, 2015 Page 12 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDING 4 ‘BUILDING 5’ STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 http://ithacabuilds.com/category/current-projects/hotel-ithaca-marriot/ WEST PERSPECTIVE 541 3 September 17, 2015 Page 13 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDING 5 STATE STREET TRIANGLE 9/10/2015 ‘BUILDING 7’ http://ithacabuilds.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Harolds_Square_Perspective.jpg http://ithacabuilds.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Marriott-Ithaca-7.jpg NORTH PERSPECTIVE 1 2 3 4 7 September 17, 2015 Page 14 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - PRECEDENTS BUILDING 7 September 17, 2015 Page 15 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING SOUTH PERSPECTIVE September 17, 2015 Page 16 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING AURORA STREET PERSPECTIVE September 17, 2015 Page 17 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - WEST ELEVATION 1”=20’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 18 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - SOUTH ELEVATION 1”=20’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 19 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - EAST ELEVATION 1”=20’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 20 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - NORTH ELEVATION 1”=20’-0” September 17, 2015 Page 21 STATE STREET TRIANGLE Ithaca, NY PROPOSED BUILDING - NORTH-SOUTH CROSS SECTION 1”=40’-0” Downtown Parking Future Capacity Analysis 9/15/2015 Seneca Garage Spaces Occupied   Spaces Available Number %Number % Total Number of Spaces in Garage 451 Daytime 325 72%126 28% Evening 167 37%284          63% Projected Seneca Future Users Canopy Hotel 123 12 Daytime 337 75%114 25% 123 Evening 290 64%161 36% Tompkins Trust‐Essential Seneca  Permits   (Currently 45, 15 additional  planned‐60 total)15 15 Daytime 352 78%99 22% 0 Evening 290 161 *Includes 100 spaces under contract to the Hilton Garden Inn **Assumes 100% hotel occupancy with one car/room State Street Triangle Project 50 50 Daytime 402 89%49 11% 50 Evening 340 75%111 25% Seneca Garage Total Projected Occupancy Daytime Spaces Occupied 402 Daytime Spaces Available 49           Evening Spaces Occupied 340 Evening Spaces Available 111      Green Garage Spaces Occupied Spaces Available Number %Number % Total Number of Spaces in Garage 385 Daytime 236 61%149 39% Evening 173 45%212          55% Projected Future Users Marriott Hotel*144 14 Daytime 250 65%135 35% 144 Evening 317 82%68            18% Fingerlakes School of Massage 45 45 Daytime 295 77%90 23% 0 Evening 250 65%134.6 35% *Assumes 100% Occupancy 1car/room) State Street Triangle Project 50 50 Daytime 345 90%40 10% 50 Evening 345 90%39.6 10% Tompkins Trust‐Essential Seneca  Permits   (Currently 45, 16 additional  planned‐61 total)16 16 Daytime 361 80%24 6% 0 Evening 345 39.6 10% Green Garage Total Projected Occupancy Daytime Spaces Occupied 361 Daytime Spaces Available 24         Evening Spaces Occupied 345 Evening Spaces Available 40           Cayuga Garage Spaces Occupied Spaces Available Number %Number % Total Number of Spaces in Garage 684 Daytime 342 50%342 50% Evening 287 42%397          58% Projected Future Users Cayuga Place II 52.65 30 Daytime 372 54%312 46% 52.65 Evening 340 50%344          50% Tompkins Trust (requesting 171 new  permits‐65 in Seneca)129 129 Daytime 501 73%183 27% Evening 340 50%344.35 50% Harold Square***101 88 Daytime 589 86%95 14% 101 Evening 440 64%243.73 36% State Street Triangle Project 148 148 Daytime 737 108%‐53 ‐8% 148 Evening 588 86%95.73 14% Cayuga Garage Total Projected Occupancy Daytime Spaces Occupied 737 Daytime Spaces Available (53)       Evening Spaces Occupied 588 Evening Spaces Available 96           ***Parking Demand units Parking Demand Rate Harold Square residential (ITE Urban  mid rise apartment 1.17)\ 86 1.17 101 evening 20 daytime office (SF)14,460 4.00 57.84 daytime 0 evening retail (SF)11,410 0.89 10.15 daytime Parking Summary Supply Occupied Spaces at Full Available Spaces daytime evening daytime evening Seneca Garage 451 352 290 99 161 Green Garage 385 295 250.4 90 134.6 Cayuga Garage 684 737 588.27 ‐53 95.73 Total Downtown Garage Parking Total Supply Total Projected Occupied Spaces Total Available spaces 1520 Daytime 1501 Daytime 19         Evening 1274 Evening 246       Source: Frank Nagy, City Director of Parking 1 September 16, 2015 To: City of Ithaca Planning Board and Staff Dear Senior Planner Lisa Nicholas and members of the Planning Board We are writing to follow up on our initial letter to you dated July 27, 2015, regarding the proposed bar-restaurant proposed for 416-418 E. State Street. As co-owners of 420 E. State Street, we remain strongly opposed to the proposal due to the potential for significant negative environmental impacts on the abutting and nearby residents in the East Hill Historic District. Chief among the concerns are noise pollution as well as the potential danger to patrons due to the off-site parking arrangement which requires crossing a state route that has a history of traffic accidents and fatalities. At the July 28, 2015 Planning Board discussion of this proposal it became clear that the objections to the proposed off-site parking arrangement, and the potential increase in noise pollution due to the symbiotic arrangement between the Bar Argos and the proposed bar-restaurant, are legitimate and serious concerns shared by several stakeholders. Subsequent to this initial meeting, the developers’ team held a meeting for the neighbors with the aim of learning about their concerns and clarifying aspect of the proposal. Though we were unable to attend the meeting, we read the minutes of the meeting circulated by Scott Whitham’s office as well as those circulated by a neighbor who attended the meeting. Based on these minutes and the description of the agenda item for the Planning Board’s September 22, 2015 meeting, it seems as if the appellants have not made any changes to the proposed project except for requesting a curb cut. In other words, it appears that even at this early and incipient stage of the business, stakeholder concerns have not been taken seriously. During the meeting, Avi Smith, a party to the project, also made clear that the new bar- restaurant will operate as a ‘steam valve’ for the Bar Argos thus shifting the noise and parking issues from his Argos Inn guests to the greater neighborhood. Even with only the Bar Argos in place, the environmental impacts are significant: you can find comments on the Yelp social media site from patrons about finding additional parking on adjacent residential streets (e.g. see Yelp comment dated October 21, 2014: “Parking is limited, especially during special events. We had to find side street parking in one of the residential suites[sic]”). Such pressures on the neighborhood will significantly increase if the proposed bar-restaurant is allowed to go through. 2 Furthermore, Avi could not guarantee that the business would not evolve into one with a roof- top entertainment area. Such statements add to the uncertainty regarding future expansion and changes to the current proposal. Likewise, he could not guarantee that he would remain a co-owner of the business even five years from now. This is understandable but underscores that promises of responsible management made today may not be kept by another owner. If this dangerous parking arrangement is approved and the significant area variance granted, which would then permit the bar- restaurant use, this use would remain with the property in perpetuity regardless of ownership. For these reasons, we remain opposed to the proposed parking arrangement and the granting of the area variance being requested. Since the project remains essentially unaltered, we attach here a copy of our original letter and the photos showing the proximity of 416-418 E. State Street and 420 E. State Street as well as the deficiencies in the proposed pedestrian route for the parking arrangement plan (a plan that the County also disapproved of). Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our concerns as you conduct the environmental review for this proposal. Sincerely, Neha Khanna and Eric Rosario Attachments: 1. July 27, 2015 Khanna Rosario Statement to Planning Board Re 416-418 E. State St. 2. Photo of south facing private driveway and lack of south facing pedestrian curb cut on E. State St. 3. Photo of lack of north facing curb cut on south side of E. State St. 4. Photo of low wall and sheer drop on south side of E. State St. 5. Zoning Appeal 2991 - 416-418 E. State St. (Rosenblum) - County GML Response - 07-17-15 6. Argos_Yelp_Reviews_2014-2015 From:   Matthew Clark   Sent:   Wednesday, September 16, 2015 11:09 PM   To:   Lisa Nicholas   Subject:  416‐418 E. State Steet Public Comment    To the members of the Ithaca Planning Board,    We understand that there is another public hearing regarding the excessive zoning  variances requested by the owners of 416‐418 E. State Street. Attached is the message  sent for a prior meeting stating my family’s history concerning the introduction of the  Argos Inn as a nuisance to our neighborhood and our dismay that a nightclub is  requesting variances so they can further intrude on our family living space.    Here it is at 10:45pm on Wednesday, September 16, and conversations from the Argos  amphitheater can be heard clearly since it is another warm September evening. These  loud conversations were never an issue prior to the Argos, and now having even more  bar noises extended for three hours further into the evening is absolutely unacceptable.    The owners of 416‐418 have no legal standing to say a bar is “as right” under the B‐4  zoning ordinance since they have insufficient parking. By zoning rules, the three current  parking spaces offered by the 416‐418 owners gives them the right to a bar or  restaurant of 150 square feet  (http://www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/View/1435); their proposed bar is much,  much bigger. Having an arrangement for shared parking at the Gateway Center is  laughable and frankly dangerous for any patrons. The planning board could be liable for  any accident that could occur from a granted parking variance that requires patrons  crossing a state highway.    As long‐term residential owners in the East Hill Historic District, we ask that these  variances be denied. The building at 416‐418 E. State Street is not under any hardship  and not only is there no public good in granting these variances, but there will be  further detriment to us residential neighbors and (because of parking safety) our  community in general.    Again I am extending an offer to planning board members to visit our backyard any  warm evening to hear the existing nuisance of incessant bar conversations on warm  evenings, and then imagine this nuisance being extended until after 1am. Please support  our Ithaca community and deny the variances requested by the 416‐418 owners.    Sincerely,    Matthew Clark  Virginia Augusta  419 E. Seneca St., Ithaca, New York  14850  Page 1 of 11 City of Ithaca  FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF) ― Part III    Project Name: 301 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. ―‐State Street Triangle Project  Date Created: 7/14/15 | Revised: 7/30/14 | Updated 9/17/15    Yellow highlighted text has been added since the previous draft.  Information received in the  mailing for the 9‐22 PB meeting has not been incorporated    PROJECT DESCRIPTION    The applicant proposes to redevelop the 0.759‐acre site with an 11‐story, 116’ tall, 288,845 GSF  mixed‐use building.  The building will have approximately 12,341 SF of new retail space on the  ground floor, 2,029 of which is anticipated to be a restaurant.  Upper floors will have a mix of unit  types (from 1‐bedroom/1‐bath to 5‐bedroom/4‐bath) for a total of 240 units with approximately  620 bedrooms.  The targeted market is primarily college students.  The ground level of the  building includes a loading/delivery/trash area with vehicular access provided from N. Aurora  Street.  35 parking spaces will be eliminated ― limited site parking (4‐5 spaces to accommodate  deliveries and loading) is proposed.  The project is in the CDB‐120 Zoning District and requires  Design Review.     This is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance  (“CEQRO”), §176‐4 B. (1) (h)[4], (k) and (n), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act  (“SEQRA”), §617.4 (6.)(iv), and (11), and requires environmental review.     IMPACT ON LAND    The project site is located in the downtown core, in a densely developed mixed‐use environment.   Construction is expected to last for approximately 20 months.      The applicant has submitted a Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated June 2015, and prepared  by Empire Geo Services, Inc.  The report makes the following 5 recommendations pertaining to  foundation work:    1) Considering the extensive depth and variability of the existing fill, and the substantial  loads associated with the proposed structure, Empire recommends the building be  supported on a deep foundation system consisting of either driven steel piles or drilled  shafts seated on or within the shale bedrock at depth. As noted previously, we understand  that drilled shafts (DEFINE) have been identified as the preferred foundation option.    2) Assuming that fill materials throughout the site are similar to that found in the test  borings, consideration may be given to leaving the fill in place beneath new building floor  slabs. However, the owner must accept some risk of floor slab settlement under this  scenario. As a minimum, the subgrades should be proof‐rolled(DEFINE) to identify any  localized soft areas which should be investigated and stabilized as necessary, and at least  24 inches of structural fill should be provided beneath the slab (we expect that this would     for the most part be accomplished through excavation backfill of pile caps, grade beams  and deeper foundation elements).  Page 2 of 11   3) It is anticipated that soils which are excavated for foundation construction will consist  largely of existing fill soils. As the existing fill is variable in composition and to some  extent comprised of unsuitable materials, we recommend that the fill be wasted and that  an imported granular fill be used for all fill and backfill work around new building  foundations.  4) At the time of investigation, groundwater levels were found below the depths likely to  impact on design and construction of pile caps, grade beams, etc. Should zones of  temporarily trapped or perched water be encountered in shallow excavations, it is  expected that standard sump and pump methods will be adequate for dewatering  purposes. However, it should be understood that groundwater will be an important  consideration in drilled shaft construction, rendering installation procedures more  difficult; appropriate measures will need to be implemented to dewater the excavations  and/or maintain borehole stability.    5)  Lastly, while environmental considerations were outside the scope ofthis investigation,  we point out that possible petroleum odors were noted in the 20‐22 foot depth interval at  boreholes B‐1 and B‐2. These informal observations are referenced on the subsurface  logs; no attempt has been made to quantify the severity or extent of contamination, if  any. Further investigation in this regard may be prudent, to the extent it may impact on  handling and disposal of excavated soils/pumped groundwater during construction.    The report also anticipates the need for temporary excavation bracing to protect contiguous  infrastructure and utilities.        Information needed:  • Confirmation that drilled piles (as opposed to driven piles) will be used  • Details about temporary bracing  • Dewatering techniques for #4 above – if a perched water table is encountered  • Amount of fill to be removed  •       IMPACT ON WATER    The project sponsor anticipates that project will use approximately 25,500 gallons/day.  The Lead  Agency requests confirmation that the utilities are adequate to provide this amount.     No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON DRAINAGE    The project is within 100 feet of Six Mile Creek.  More information is needed to understand  stormwater management to ensure it does not affect the creek.     No impact anticipated.    Page 3 of 11 IMPACT ON AIR    The project site is in the densely developed downtown core.  Construction is projected to last  approximately 20 months and will likely be concurrent with several other construction projects in  the downtown area.     The cumulative impacts of airborne dust could have a negative impact during the construction  period.  The excavation and the preparation of foundations can also create the potential for  increased dust and dirt particles in the air.  The applicant should employ the following applicable  dust‐control measures as appropriate:  • Misting or fog spraying site to minimize dust.  • Maintaining crushed stone tracking pads at all entrances to the construction site.  Re‐seeding  disturbed areas to minimize bare exposed soils.  • Keeping roads clear of dust and debris.  • Requiring trucks to be covered.  • Prohibiting burning of debris on site.  The project includes a 12,341 SF of new retail space ― some of which is anticipated to be  restaurant use.  Both the building and restaurants will require venting.  The Lead Agency is  concerned about potential impacts, particularly to pedestrians, from noise; smell, and air flow  emanating from mechanical vents.  More information is needed about air‐handling equipment  and systems    IMPACT ON PLANTS & ANIMALS  No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES    The project site is extremely prominent ― all four façades of the building will be visible.  In  addition, the building ― as proposed ― will be the tallest and largest in the downtown area.    The Lead Agency has expressed concerns about the size, height, and massing of the building as  follows:  • Concern with the building height, especially as there is  no setback to allow light to reach the  street   • Too massive for the site ― needs to be broken down into smaller pieces.  • Concern that the massing would create a visual canyon‐like effect.  • Need visual renderings from a human perspective, from lower elevations.  • Need better understanding of street‐level experience on Green Street.    Other concerns: obstructed views of vegetated hillside on Six Mile Creek, visibility of mechanical  systems and vents ― need more information    In response to these concerns the applicant has submitted the following:   • A shadow study, dated June 24, 2015, and prepared by Whitham Planning and Design, LLC.  • Revised building elevations and a visualization, dated July 23, 2015 and prepared by STREAM  Collaborative.  Page 4 of 11 • A new site plan, dated July 23, 2015 and prepared by Whitham Planning and Design, LLC,  shows changes to the intersection and curbline on E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. that are  intended to improve traffic flow, facilitate pedestrian circulation between the Commons and  the project site, provide a more generous sidewalk, and accommodate outdoor dining and  congregation.  The site plan also shows a sidewalk along the Green St. side of the building.  (This proposal is more fully described in a memo and accompanying drawings, dated July 20,  2015, from Steve R. Ferranti of SRF Associates to Tim Logue, City Transportation Engineer.)    The revised elevations show breaking‐up the majority of the façades into three horizontal ‘bands’  of varying styles, materials, and fenestration patterns.  The bands consist of three stories with  cornice at the pedestrian level that has limestone storefronts and masonry above, 7 stories  above ― topped by a darker eleventh story having similar materials as the ground floors.  No  reduction in height or volumetric variation is currently proposed.      The shadow study shows existing and proposed conditions, as well as two alternatives: a shift in  building position and a reduction of building height.    Potential Mitigations:    • Implementation of the proposed intersection improvements to increase the public space  in front to the building.    IMPACT ON HISTORIC RESOURCES    The project site is on E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. in the block preceding the eastern end of the  Commons, the City’s retail, tourism, and entertainment center.  The applicant has stated the  desire that this project feel like an extension of the Commons.  The project site is in close  proximity to the Downtown Ithaca National Historic District.  Its boundary comprises the building  on the northeast corner of Aurora Street and E. State Street, directly north of the project site,  and the buildings along the north side of the Commons, northwest of the project site.  The Ithaca  Downtown Historic District includes commercial and mixed‐use buildings, which are  predominantly made of brick.       The proposed building occupies a large prominent parcel and, as proposed, is designed to the  maximum allowed height.  Because of its scale and proximity to the Historic District, its design ―  including massing, height, architectural expression, and building materials ― have the potential  to significantly impact the character, feeling, and experience of the district.       The proposed project has been reviewed by the City Historic Preservation Planner who offered  the following advisory comments in a memo dated 8‐19‐15 to the Planning Board:    Despite the architectural similarities between the proposed building and some within the  historic district, it is my opinion that proposed 11‐story building that encompasses an  entire block is not compatible with the massing, size, scale or proportions of the Ithaca  Downtown Historic District. Buildings within the historic district are typically only 4 or 5  stories, and, at most, 7 bays wide. This contrasts dramatically with the size, scale and  massing of the proposed new building, which dwarfs the historic structures and makes  the building contextually incompatible with surrounding historic environment. The  Page 5 of 11 massing is further emphasized by the building's relatively flat elevations that read as  single volumes. This design feature makes the already large building feel significantly  larger than any other contributing or non‐contributing structure within the historic  district. As a comparison, the primary facades of the two largest contributing buildings  within the district, 114‐118 N. Tioga and 200‐204 E. State Streets, are approximately 1/4  to 1/3 the size of the north elevation of proposed building.    It is my opinion that the incorporation of architectural features that break up the  building's massing and give it the appearance of being several smaller buildings could  make the building more contextually and aesthetically compatible with Ithaca  Downtown Historic District. The introduction of substantial light wells in place of the  vertical bands of windows on all elevations, but particularly the north and west, would  significantly reduce the visual impact of the massing. This design feature would also be  reflective of the late‐19th and early‐20th design scheme the architect seems to be  referencing with the tripartite composition. A reduction in the overall height of the  project or stepping back the upper four stories of the building could also reduce the  visual weight of the building, making it more compatible with its historic surroundings.  Failure to physically or visually reduce the size, scale and massing of proposed building  will result in a significant adverse impact on the integrity of the Ithaca Downtown  Historic District.    The applicant must demonstrate how the project responds sympathetically to the district.    Potential Mitigations:  • Where facing the Historic District, step building down and vary massing to be more  compatible to the height and rhythm of the historic context.     IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AREA    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION    The City Transportation Engineer has reviewed the Transportation Assessment prepared by SRF  and dated June 11, 2015.  He has submitted the following comments:     Existing Conditions: 2nd paragraph: Rt 79 through the downtown (actually from Rt 13 to I‐81)  has been upgraded from an urban minor arterial to a principal arterial.  Proposed Development: Trip Generation: The report basis the residential trip generation on  the Collegetown Terrace Apartment Project. The Collegetown Terrace Apartment Project, as a  condition of site plan approval, provides shuttle service to Cornell University on fairly frequent  headways (I think every half an hour, though I’m not sure). Will the State Street Triangle  project be committing to running shuttle service to campus? Additionally, if a local trip  generation study is going to be used as the basis for this project, the study should be  coordinated with the Engineering Office, and the report should be submitted as part of the  analysis.    Page 6 of 11 Moreover, if a local trip generation study is going to be used from an existing development,  and if the study is actually only measuring vehicular trips, then it does not make sense to  further discount the trip generation with transit, ped/bike, or carpool credits. These  reductions would already be accounted for in the study itself. Also, for a transit reduction, it  doesn’t make sense to me to use a 50% reduction, if within the City approximately 10% of  people use transit for commuting purposes. While it may be true that 71% of TCAT fares are  Cornell related, there is also a greater density of ridership on campus than across the City. It  might be more appropriate to look at what percentage of boardings at the Green, Seneca and  Aurora (temporarily relocated to East State/MLK) bus stops are related to Cornell University  or Ithaca College. The non‐residential components of the project have not been accounted for  in the trip generation analysis.     I’m having a hard time believing that 230 apartments (600 bedrooms), a restaurant, and over  10,000 sf of retail space will only generate 11 entering trips in the PM peak hour, or any of the  other proposed traffic volumes. Once we have agreement on the trip generation for this  project, we can move on to the other steps in a transportation impact study, but it doesn’t  make sense to move on to other topics until we have better agreement on this one.    The applicant has submitted an updated Traffic Impact Study dated August 2015 and prepared by  SRF Associates, which is under review by the City transportation Engineer.     The project is in close proximity to public transportation and is walkable from many points within  the city.  However, due to the significant increase in residential as well as the additional  commercial retail traffic, the existing transportation facilities, including pedestrian facilities,  public parking, bike facilities, and public transportation, likely lack sufficient capacity.      More information is needed as outlined in Impacts to Neighborhood and Community Character to  determine potentially significant impacts.      The applicant has proposed that the streetscape in surrounding the building be designed to feel  like an extension of the Ithaca Commons.  To that end, the applicant is proposing changes to the  intersection and curbline on E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. that are intended to improve traffic flow,  facilitate pedestrian circulation between the Commons and the project site, provide a more  generous sidewalk, and accommodate outdoor dining and congregation.  This proposal is more  fully described in a memo (and accompanying drawings), dated July 20, 2015, from Steve R.  Ferranti of SRF Associates to Tim Logue, City Transportation Engineer.  The proposal is currently  under review and will be presented to the Board of Public Works in September 2015.   More  analysis may needed to determine how the proposal addresses potential impacts of to  transportation.      The Lead Agency has required, and the applicant has agreed, to develop and implement a  Transportation Demand Management Plan.  At a minimum, the plan should provide an inventory  of existing of projected transportation patterns and modes, anticipated needs, and how they will  be accommodated ― including move‐in/‐out coordination.     Also see Impacts to Community Character for information needed.    Potential transportation mitigations:  Page 7 of 11 • Shuttle Service  • Incorporating parking into the project  • Green Street public sidewalk ― rebuild and add 5’ treelawn and street trees  • Design and installation of intersection improvements    Transportation Construction Impacts:    The following information is needed to evaluate potential construction impacts of the project:   • Construction staging and deliveries   • Potential Road and sidewalk closures  • Construction routing   • Contractor parking     IMPACT ON ENERGY    The applicant intends to exceed NYS Building Code standards for energy use.  LEED Certification is  anticipated.    Medium pressure gas line needed‐ Utility Plan should be submitted showing how the connection  will be made     No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON NOISE AND ODORS    The project site is in the downtown core.  Construction is expected to last approximately 20  months.  Adjacent residents and businesses will be affected by the cumulative impacts of  numerous simultaneous construction projects.       Construction impacts:  More information is needed about foundation construction ― duration  and type.     The Lead Agency will limit noise‐producing construction activities.      IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH    The applicant has submitted a Geotechnical Engineering Report, dated June 2015, and prepared  by Empire Geo Services, Inc.   The report noted the following:     Lastly, while environmental considerations were outside the scope of this  investigation, we point out that possible petroleum odors were noted in the 20‐22  foot depth interval at boreholes B‐1 and B‐2. These informal observations are  referenced on the subsurface logs; no attempt has been made to quantify the severity  or extent of contamination, if any. Further investigation in this regard may be  prudent, to the extent it may impact on handling and disposal of excavated  soils/pumped groundwater during construction.    Page 8 of 11 The applicant submitted a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), dated May  2015, and a cover letter, dated May 7, 2015, both prepared by Barton & Loguidice, D.P.C.  (B&L).  The report identified an historic filling station with associated underground  storage tanks, as well as the known petroleum contamination in the subsurface soil  (approximately 18‐19 feet below grade), as Recognized Environmental Concerns (RECs).     The cover letter explains the following:     B&L reported the contamination to the NYSDEC (Spill No. 1202183), and the spill was  closed following review of the laboratory results, as there were no direct pathways  for exposure to the contamination at the time. NYSDEC noted that future site  development may require the handling and disposal of impacted soils, as well as  removal and disposal of any remaining UST components.    B&L spoke with Mr. Kevin Kemp, NYSDEC Region 7 Spill Engineer, during preparation  of the Phase I ESA. Mr. Kemp confirmed that NYSDEC has only limited concern  regarding the contamination on the target property parcel because of the depth of  contamination, as well as because the spill file has already been closed. Mr. Kemp  stated that NYSDEC would require proper handling and disposal of any contaminated  soils that are encountered or excavated as part of the proposed construction work;  however, NYSDEC would not require the owner to excavate all contaminated soils on  the property, but rather only the contaminated soil that must be excavated during the  course of normal construction. This process would require engineering oversight  during excavation of soils below 15 feet, as the soils would need to be screened for  contamination. Soils identified as contaminated would need to be staged on  polyethylene sheeting, sampled, and disposed of at a landfill. All soils identified as  clean could be reused as fill onsite or hauled off‐site.    NYSDEC would expect that engineering controls be used during construction of the  proposed building to limit the potential for soil vapor intrusion into occupied spaces if  petroleum contaminated soils remain in place below the building footprint. Examples  of engineering controls available for a relatively low cost include ventilation, use of  vapor barrier, or a sub‐slab depressurization system, depending on the design of the  building and parking garage.    The Lead Agency recognizes any specification for soil handling and disposal, as well as anything  else related to the existing contaminated soil, is under the jurisdiction of NYSDEC and possibly  NYS Department of Health.   The applicant is required to work with those agencies to address any  issues ― therefore, the project will not create any adverse impacts to public health related to the  contamination or its remediation.          IMPACT ON GROWTH & CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD    ― insert description of character of downtown Ithaca ―   In a letter dated August 20, 2015 from Ed Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning to  Lisa Nicholas Senior Planner. Marx provides the following preliminary comments for the project:   Page 9 of 11   We have identified aspects that may have countywide impacts and may require further  analysis, particularly potential impacts on parking. Based on the recent parking analysis  conducted for the Hilton Canopy Hotel project, we expect this project along with the  renovated Commons, other projects currently under construction, and proposed and  potential projects downtown to contribute to a more significant increase in parking  demand.    We continue to believe that rather than trying to assess parking capacity on a case by  case basis as new projects are proposed, this analysis should be conducted for build‐out  of downtown in accordance with recent zoning changes that increase the density of  development allowed on several downtown parcels.    This project would also rely heavily on TCAT service to both Cornell and Ithaca College.  An analysis should be conducted to determine the capacity of transit service from  downtown to these destinations. If necessary, the project should provide support to TCAT  to accommodate an increase in that service.      Insert comparison of project size to other downtown projects (Staff task):  • GSF/footprint/# of units/# of bedrooms/how much parking provided     Potential issues:   • Adequacy of pedestrian facilities   • Adequacy of public transportation to accommodate the volume and needs of residents   • Adequacy of proximate services to serve residents   • Adequacy of parking supply to meet demand created See attached Spreadsheet   • Impact of a homogeneous demographic (predominately students)   • Additional policing / fire/ emergency response needed  • Utility capacity analysis   • City cost of improvements to intersection and street for proposed improvements     Information needed:    • Scalable site plans clearly showing sidewalk widths and widths of unobstructed  pedestrian travel paths with and without the proposed changes to the intersection at  State and Aurora Streets.   • Pedestrian Circulation Plan showing existing conditions, peak pedestrian demand,  needed improvements on the project site and to the Commons, Green Street transit  stop, Seneca Street transit stop, and East State Street across the ‘tuning fork’     Potential Mitigations:  o Green Street public sidewalk ― rebuild and add 5’ treelawn and street trees  o Design and installation of intersection improvements    Page 10 of 11 • Expected resident breakdown ― student/non‐student ― and institution attending.    How will the building be leased ― by bedroom of apartments?  The applicant has  provided the following information about resident breakdown:     The mix of unit types has changed in order to address the concerns of the community  that the project is poised to be a “student dorm.”  The proposal initially had 210 units.  The change in units to 240 resulted from converting 104 bedroom units into 40 studio  apartments.  With this adjustment, 140 of the 240, or about 60% of the units, are studio‐,  1‐bedroom, and 2‐bedroom units.  This modified unit mix was made to accommodate a  mix of people, including young professionals looking to live downtown.    • Market analysis performed for project  • TCAT service and capacity at downtown bus stops  • Building program and services provided to residents/students:  the applicant has  provided the following information about building programming:     The project will have on‐site amenities including ground‐floor retail, a fitness center, quiet  rooms, and residents.  There will be 24/7 on‐site management with a fully staffed building,  and programming for residents focused on community involvement, volunteerism, and  professional development.  The management team consists of a General Manager,  Assistant General Manager, Leasing Manager, Resident Director (a live‐in position), 7  Community Assistants, Maintenance Supervisor, Maintenance Technician, Porter, and  Corporate Support, including an assigned Regional Manager and Vice President of  Operations.    Applicant should define positions – e.g. on‐site vs. off site as well as roles and responsibilities   • Inventory of proximate services for residents   • Additional emergency response services needed  • Information on location and size of existing and required utilities and plans for extension  or upgrades if needed  • Clarification regarding cost burden of proposed street improvements  • Possible expansion of TCAT Services?    • Transportation Demand Management Plan:  o Projected parking demand (documented with evidence) for residents and retail  o Types of parking needed (storage, long‐term, short‐term, etc.)   o Parking Supply:  ƒ Downtown Garages (including build‐out of all approved projects) ― See attached  spreadsheet  ƒ Other types of parking that will be provided     Public Comments Received    The Lead Agency has received numerous public comments about this project.  Commenters  have expressed concerns about the following:  • Impacts to Historic District due to size, height and architectural style  • Impact on Downtown Character due to influx of a large number of students   Page 11 of 11 • Impact on Aesthetics  • Solar access on E State and Aurora  • Capacity of City infrastructure and services to support the project  • Lack of affordability     Prepared by:  Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner  STREAM Collaborative architecture + landscape architecture dpc 123 S. Cayuga Street Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 September 17, 2015 Lisa Nicholas, AICP, Senior Planner Planning Division 108 E Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Lisa: This letter transmits to you 11 copies of the revised site demo, layout, grading, and planting plans along with a preliminary utility plan prepared by TG Miller Engineers. We are also including the front end documents for the geotechnical and Phase 1 environmental reports with the full reports expected to be delivered by the 22nd of September. We are not including any revisions to the building plans at this time as no changes have been made since the last planning board meeting. As you know, we are hoping to receive a recommendation from the planning board to the BZA for our hearing in October. We will plan to make any necessary revisions after this month’s planning board meeting in anticipation of site plan approval at the October planning board meeting. Sincerely, Noah Demarest AIA, RA, RLA, LEED AP Principal noah@streamcolab.com 607.216.8802 September 16, 2015 Project No. CE-15-030 STREAM COLLABORATIVE Architecture + Landscape Architecture DPC 123 S. Cayuga Street, Suite 201 Ithaca, NY 14850 Phone: 607-216-8802 Cell: 607-262-0305 Attention: Noah Demarest RA, RLA, LEED AP Re: Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation 215 – 221 West Spencer Road City of Ithaca, New York Dear Mr. Demarest: Empire Geo Services, Inc. (Empire) has prepared this letter report presenting preliminary geotechnical information obtained from a site investigation completed recently at the referenced site. We understand that City of Ithaca is requiring some information in regard to the suitability of site for construction. Project and Site Information We understand the project consists of construction of four new apartment buildings with each building 3 stories high (nominally two above grade floors with walk-out, partially below grade lower level or basement). The site is located at 215-221 West Spencer Street in Ithaca, New York. During our visit, the site could only be accessed from an existing gravel drive and parking area associated with a rental unit off of South Cayuga Street. The site slopes steeply down rapidly from South Cayuga Street toward West Spencer Road. The site is wooded and grass covered. It is understood that the site was formerly occupied with a multi-unit apartment building which was demolished a few years back. Information pertaining to the exact location of the former building, its demolition, and site restoration to current condition is not available at this time. Method of Investigation The subsurface exploration program consisted of excavating six test pits identified as TP-1 thru TP-6 which were completed on August 31st, 2015 at the proposed site. The test locations were selected and marked by Empire within the proposed building area Empire Goe-Services, Inc. Project No.: CE-15-030 213-221 W. Spencer Rd. September 15, 2015 Page 2 2 based on safe access and clearance from larger trees and steeper areas of site. In addition and for similar reasons, small equipment had to be used to excavate the test pits at this time. The test pits were excavated to depths ranging from 2.5 feet to about 7.5 feet below existing ground surface (bgs). Each test pit was observed and documented on site by Empire. The individual test pits logs are attached for your review. In general, soil conditions at the test pit locations typically consisted of a surficial layer of about 1 to 3 inches of grass, roots and topsoil, this underlain by fill materials. The fill consisted of mixtures of shale rock fragments of various size, along with silts, clays, sands, gravels and miscellaneous debris (e.g., concrete, glass, ash, wood, etc.). The fill extended to approximate depths of 4 feet in TP-1, 2.5 to 3 feet in TP-5 and about 5 to 5.5 feet in TP-6. The depth to bottom of fill at TP-2, TP-3 and TP-4 was not reached due limitations of the small size equipment and presence of concrete rubble. Indigenous soils beneath the fill, where encountered, consisted of varying mixtures of silts, sands and gravels. Apparent weathered rock was observed at the bottom of TP-1. Based on the results of the subsurface investigation, the following preliminary geotechnical information and recommendations are provided with regard to the design of the building addition foundations. 1. It appears that spread foundations can be used to support the proposed buildings, provided that existing fill materials, former building remains and any unsuitable native soils, if present, are removed in their entirety from beneath foundation bearing grades. We anticipate that much of the fill will be removed in association with excavation for the lower or basement levels of the buildings. 2. Spread foundations should bear on suitable indigenous soil subgrades, bedrock, or on compacted structural fill which is placed over the indigenous soil subgrades or bedrock following excavation and removal of fill and/or unsuitable soils. 3. Some rock excavation may be necessary in establishing basement and/or foundation grades. 4. In order to provide a full geotechnical evaluation report and to include allowable soil and / or rock bearing capacities, seismic site class, etc., further investigation and study will be necessary by completing a series of test borings at the site. Empire Goe-Services, Inc. Project No.: CE-15-030 213-221 W. Spencer Rd. September 15, 2015 Page 3 3 It should be understood that issues relating to slope stability, if any, are outside the scope of this cursory evaluation and have not been considered herein. Should you have questions concerning this preliminary information or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact us. Respectfully, Empire Geo Services, Inc. Parviz Akbari, EIT John S. Hutchison, P.E. Geotechnical Engineer Geotechnical Engineer and Project Reviewer Attachments: Test Pit logs Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 3 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Gray-brown SHALE fragments, some Cobbles trace roots, trace tile, trace glass (Moist) Fill: Brown-gray ROCKS (Cobbles and Boulders), some sandy Silt (Moist)Difficult to excavate starting at 3 feet to completion. Possible top of weathered ROCK with soil seams. (Moist to Wet)Gray wet clayey seam. Test pit complete at 5 feet, not able to advance No groundwater was further, bucket scraping of rock.observed. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 11:40 End: 12:30 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-1 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 3 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Brown Silty SAND and GRAVEL, some Some difficulty to cobbles, trace glass, trace wood, trace ceramic excavate upper 3 to trace roots, (Moist)4 feet. Fill: Gray/white ASH, trace sand, trace gravel, trace silt, trace glass, trace cobbles (Moist) Grades to "some" flat rocks at bottom 1 foot Test pit complete at 7.2 feet, not able to advance No groundwater was further.observed. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 3:37 End: 4:30 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-2 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 3 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Gray-brown SHALE fragments, piece of pipe, little: "sand, gravel, silt" (Moist) Grades to "some" Rocks (flat shales, cobbles) Test pit complete at 2.5 feet, not able to advance No groundwater was further, encountered "CONCRETE" at bottom, observed. bucket scaraping on concrete, extended test pit longer towars TP-4 to by pass concret, no change. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 1:00 End: 1:30 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-3 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 3 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Gray-brown SHALE fragments (Moist) Fill: Gray SILT and CLAY, some Sand, some Gravel, some Shale (Moist) Fill: CONCRETE rubbles.Large concrete pieces (Moist)was encountered, extending laterally. Test pit complete at 4 feet, not able to advance No groundwater was further, encountered large "CONCRETE" chunks observed. some with reinforcement. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 1:35 End: 2:00 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-4 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 4 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Gray-brown SHALE fragments, some sand, some gravel, some silt, trace: "bricks, cement, tile" (Moist) A dark brown organic layer noted seperating Brown SAND, some Silt, some Gravel, trace fill and native soils, cobble sloping down toward Becomes slightly clayey B-6 (north). (Verty Moist to Wet) Test pit complete at 5 feet. No groundwater was observed. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 2:12 End: 2:40 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-5 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) Project Name:215-221 W. Spencer Empire Project #:CE-15-030 Field Rep.: P. A. Date of Test Pit: August 31, 2015 Weather: Sun & Cloud SOIL DESCRIPTION Approximately 1 to 3 inch grass, roots, topsoil Fill: Brown-gray SHALE fragments, some silty Sand and Gravel, some debris: "wood, bricks, concrete, piece of cast iron pipe (Moist) Possible boulder east side wall. Fill: Gray SILT and CLAY, trace roots, trace debris (Moist) Brown-gray SAND, some Gravel, some Silt, trace Possible native soils shale starting from 5 to 5.5 (Wet)feet, easy to excavate. Test pit complete at 7.5 feet, not able to advance No groundwater was further.observed. Equipment: Boccat Mini-Ecxavator E20 Location of Test Pit:Start 3:37 End: 4:30 Test Pit #: NOTES SA M P L E TEST PIT 5 10 15 TEST PIT LOG (see Site Exploration Plan) TP-6 De p t h ( f e e t b e l o w e x i s t i n g g r o u n d s u r f a c e ) 203 N. Aurora Street | Ithaca, NY 14850 | phone 607‐272‐6477 | fax 607‐273‐6322 | www.tgmillerpc.com David A. Herrick, P.E. Frank L Santelli, P.E. Andrew J. Sciarabba, P.E. Steven R. Rowe, P.E. Dondi M. Harner, P.E. LEED A.P., C.P.E.S.C. Lee Dresser, L.S. Darrin A. Brock, L.S. Edward D. Ripic, Jr., L.S. September 15, 2015      Scott Gibson, PE  Stormwater Management Officer  City of Ithaca  510 First Street  Ithaca NY 14850      Dear Mr. Gibson,    Regarding the need for a Stormwater SPDES permit for the 215‐221 West Spencer Street  project we offer the following narrative:    The project site is 0.47 acres and it is anticipated that most of the site will be disturbed  during construction.  A site disturbance of more than ¼ acre and less than 1 acre, that  creates less than ½ acre of additional impervious area, requires the preparation of a  “Basic” Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for review and approval by the  City of Ithaca Stormwater Management Officer (SMO) prior to the issuance of a Building  Permit. A Basic SWPPP requires controlling erosion and sedimentation during  construction. Permanent stormwater controls to reduce the rate of runoff and provide  water quality treatment are not required.    The existing site cover is predominantly pervious with 85% of the site being vegetation.  Stormwater runoff sheet drains to the northwest, from South Cayuga Street towards  West Spencer Street, entering the City’s stormwater collection system on West Spencer  Street.      The proposed development of the site will maintain these drainage patterns and will  increase impervious cover from 15% to 62%. As summarized in the two attached cover  type illustrations, the footprint of new impervious surfaces will increase by 0.22 acres.  Since the increase of impervious surfaces is under the ½ acre threshold, as described in  City Code Chapter 282,  we understand the project is exempt from installing permanent  stormwater management practices for either quality or quantity control.    The City Code does require that at least two strategies for “Better Site Design” be  incorporated into the proposed plan for any Basic SWPPP project. The preliminary list of  Better Site Design practices that will be considered for this site include Bioretention  Filters and Tree Planting. Proposed bioretention filters will collect runoff from a portion  of the roofs and provide stormwater treatment.  The landscape plans show several trees  being planted, which will increase nutrient uptake and help to reduce runoff.   Standard storm sewer improvements will consist of catch basins located in the parking  lot and between the buildings as needed to support the site grading. Deep sumps and  hoods will be provided in the storm structures to further improve water quality.  Temporary erosion and sediment control practices to be used during the construction  phase will focus on minimizing tracking soil off‐site, controlling dust and filtering any  foundation dewatering discharges.     A complete Basic SWPPP, prepared in accordance with the City’s regulations, will be  submitted for your review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit.     Please contact me with any questions or comments. Thank you.    Respectfully,     Andrew J. Sciarabba, P.E.   Vice President   S O U T H C A Y U G A S T R E E T WEST SPENCER STREET AREA=0.411 ACRES TAX MAP NO.93-7-5.1 INST. NO.444685-001 CITY OF ITHACA 21.5'± G U A R D R A I L 7.4'± 7.3'± 1.2'± 4.6'± 0.6'± 13.9'± 4' WIDE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS & EGRESS, 458/422 12" MAPLE 10" ASH 14" MAPLE 12" CHERRY 10" MAPLE 12" LOCUST 1 8 " W A L N U T D R IVE GR AVEL RETAINING W ALL CONCRETE 422 41 8 416 420 442 440 438 436 434 432 430 428 426 424 460 4 6 0 4 5 8 456 454 452 448 450 4 4 6 444 462 464 466 468 470 472 474 468 464 4 6 6 4 6 2 CLEANOUT SEWE R RIM=416.5' RIM=415.7' RIM=414.8' CATCH BASIN 10" ASH 10" BASSWOOD 10" ASH 12" TREE 12" ASH -WATER VALVE -TRAFFIC SIGN -GAS VALVE TBM: ARROWHEAD ON FIRE HYDRANT AT INTERSECTION OF WEST SPENCER ST. & SOUTH CAYUGA STREET. ELEV=422.75' OF SOUTH CAYUGA ST. 179'± TO WEST LINE (VACANT LAND) -COMPUTED POINT -IRON STAKE FOUND, LABELED -UTILITY POLE LEGEND M A P R E F E R E N C E N O R T H P E R WELL MONITORING S T O N E S T E P S LOH (R.O.) 457883-001 TAX MAP NO.93-7-7 TAX MAP NO.93-7-6 IACOVELLI (R.O.) 883/270 TAX MAP NO.93-7-4 623/357 AMICI (R.O.) TAX MAP NO.93-7-3 435860-001 CITY OF ITHACA (R.O.) 4) 8-10" SNOW AND ICE ACCUMULATION AT TIME OF SURVEY. FIELD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. 3) ALL UTILITIES SHOWN HEREON ARE APPROXIMATE LOCATION ONLY, VERIFY IN MONUMENTS. 2) HORIZONTAL DATUM IS TRUE NORTH PER GPS OBSERVATIONS AND NYSE&G INTERVAL IS 2 FOOT. INTERSECTION OF ELMIRA ROAD AND SOUTH PLAIN STREET. CONTOUR 1) DATUM OF ELEVATIONS IS NAD 83 PER NYSE&G MONUMENT T1008 AT THE NOTES: F O U N D P I P E P I P E F O U N D PIPE FOUND PIPE FOUND CONCRETE WALK "DRIVEWAY" WOOD DECK ELEVATED F A C E C U R B S E N T C E N T E R L I N E R B C U T 0.3' NO.514 HOUSE NO.504 HOUSE NO.506 HOUSE CURB FACE CURB FACE CONC. WALK CONCRETE WALL C O N C R E T E W A L K C U R B F A C E C U R B C U T F O U N D P I P E P I N F O U N D N 60°02'29'' W 12 4 .4 1 ' N 29° 08 ' 1 6' ' E 126.19' 87.74'N 59°45'06'' W 2 2 . 0 0 ' S 27°1 6 ' 3 2 ' ' W98.30' 1 1 9 . 1 6 ' S 0 0 ° 3 6 ' 5 9 ' ' E S 59°55'06'' E CLEANOUT SEWER RIM=416.5' RIM=415.7' RIM=478.6'RIM=414.8'CATCH BASIN'10" ASH10" BASSWOOD 10" ASH 12" TREE 12" ASH N 60°02'29'' W 87.74'N 59°45'06'' W22.00'S 27°16'32'' W98.30' 1 1 9 . 1 6 ' S 00°36'59'' E S 59°55'06'' E XXXXXX X X X X TR E E S  TO  BE RE M O V E D RE M O V E  CO N C R E T E RE T A I N I N G  WA L L RE M O V E  GR A V E L DR I V E RE M O V E  PR O P E R T Y  LI N E RE M O V E  AL L  BR U S H AN D  SM A L L  TR E E S 7' ‐4" 1' ‐0" 49 ' ‐0"37'‐0"1'‐0"7'‐5" BL D G  C BLDG D BL D G  A BLDG B 5'‐0"58'‐0"12'‐0"10'‐0". 21'‐5" 21'‐5"12'‐0" AS P H A L T  PARKING CONC. WALK CO N C R E T E ST A I R S T E P P E D   I N   4 '  S E C TIONS 2 8 ' ‐ 0 "   F E N C E STEPPED IN 4' SECTIONS56'‐0" FENCE NE W  CO N C R E T E WA L K CONCRETE RETAINING WALL CO N C R E T E  RE T A I N I N G  WALLWOODDECK10'‐10" R 10' - 0" R 2 0 ' - 0 " C A Y U G A   S T R E E T SPENCER STREET11'‐3"26'‐8"7'‐0"4'‐0" (2 )  BI K E  RA C K S ,  TYP 7'‐0" 4' ‐0"  SC R E E N  FE N C E  SET ON  TO P  OF  RE T  WALL4'‐0" SCREEN FENCE SET ON TOP OF RET WALL BIKE RACKPAINT STRIPES FO R M E R  PR O P E R T Y  LI N E RE V I S E D  PR O P  LI N E  PE R 2. 1 5 . 2 0 1 2  SU R V E Y 4'‐0" 19 ' ‐8" Project #DateSTREAM Collaborative architecture + landscape architecture dpc 123 S. Cayuga St Suite 201 Ithaca, New York 14850 ph: 607.216.8802 www.streamcolab.com A 1234 B C D  1" = 20'‐0" 9/17/2015 8:44:14 AMC:\Users\noah\Documents\215‐221 W Spencer St ‐ SITE_noah@streamcolab.com.rvt L101SITE DEMO AND LAYOUT PLANS2015001215‐221 SPENCER STREET 9/17/2015CITY OF ITHACA, NY PPM HOMES SITE PLAN REVIEW  1"  = 20 ' ‐0" D3 SI T E  DE M O  PL A N  1"  = 20 ' ‐0" D1 LA Y O U T  PL A N REVISIONS ΔDESCRIPTIONDATE 41 8 416 442 438 436 434 432 430 460 4 6 0 4 5 8 456 454 452 462 464 466 468 470 472 474 468 464 4 6 6 462 CLEANOUT SEWE R RIM=416.5' RIM=415.7' RIM=414.8' CATCH BASIN 10" ASH 10" BASSWOOD 10" ASH 12" TREE 12" N 60°02'29'' W 87.74'N 59°45'06'' W 2 2 . 00 ' S 27 ° 1 6 '3 2 ' ' W98.30' 1 1 9 . 1 6 ' S 0 0 ° 3 6 ' 5 9 ' ' E S 59°55'06'' E X X X X X X X X X X CLEANOUT SEWE R RIM=416.5' RIM=415.7' RIM=414.8' CATCH BASIN 10" ASH 10" BASSWOOD 10" ASH 12" TREE 12" AS N 60°02'29'' W 87.74'N 59°45'06'' W 2 2 . 00 ' S 27 ° 1 6 '3 2 ' ' W98.30' 1 1 9 . 1 6 ' S 0 0 ° 3 6 ' 5 9 ' ' E S 59°55'06'' E AGA PCE AG A CVI CVI CVI AGA AGA CVI CVI CVI PCE PCE PCE PCE PCE PCE PCEPCE PCE PCE PCE P A C X X X X X X X X X X TW 4 5 8 . 0 0 45 8 . 0 0 45 8 . 7 5 BS 4 5 8 . 0 0 BW 4 5 8 . 0 0 TW 4 6 3 . 0 0 45 7 . 0 0 45 7 . 0 0 RI M 4 5 6 . 5 0 BW 4 4 8 . 0 0 44 0 . 5 0 44 1 . 0 0 TW 4 3 7 . 0 0 TW 4 3 7 . 0 0 BW 4 3 3 . 5 0 TW 4 3 7 . 0 0 44 0 . 5 0 43 2 . 0 0 42 1 . 5 0 41 6 . 0 0 + / ‐ BS 4 1 6 . 0 0 + / ‐ 42 0 . 0 0 42 3 . 0 0 42 4 . 0 0 TS 4 3 3 . 5 0 TS 4 4 0 . 5 0 TS 4 5 1 . 0 0 TS 4 5 7 . 0 0 44 1 . 0 0 TS 4 6 5 . 0 0 BS 4 2 4 . 0 0 3R D  FF E = 4 6 0 . 5 0 2N D  FF E = 4 5 1 . 5 0 1S T  FF E = 4 4 1 . 5 0 3R D  FF E = 4 6 0 . 5 0 2N D  FF E = 4 5 1 . 5 0 1S T  FF E = 4 4 1 . 5 0 3R D  FF E = 4 4 3 . 0 0 2N D  FF E = 4 3 4 . 0 0 1S T  FF E = 4 2 4 . 0 0 3R D  FF E = 4 4 3 . 0 0 2N D  FF E = 4 3 4 . 0 0 1S T  FF E = 4 2 4 . 0 0 44 4 . 0 0 + / ‐ 44 4 . 0 0 + / ‐ TS 4 2 3 . 7 5 TW 4 2 8 . 0 0 TW 4 5 8 . 0 0 TW  45 8 . 0 0 TW  45 8 . 0 0 RI M  45 0 . 9 1 RI M  44 0 . 4 1 RI M  43 3 . 4 1 RI M  42 3 . 8 3 RI M  43 7 . 0 0 MH BL D G  C BL D G  D BL D G  A BL D G  B 18 0 0 S F  ME A D O W SE E D  MI X ME A D O W  MI X 19 0 0 S F  ME A D O W  SE E D  MI X GR A V E L  MU L C H GR A V E L  MU L C H BL D G  C BL D G  D BL D G  A BL D G  B 16 0 S F  SE D U M GR O U N D  CO V E R (2 )  VI R G I N I A  CR E E P E R  TO GR O W  UP  WA L L  & FE N C E PA V 8 PA V 8 MD E 9 HP L 5 HP L 5 JH B 14 MD E 9 HP L 5 HP L 5 JH B 41 MD E 19 PA V 12 PA V 12 MD E 19 MD E 4 MD E 4 RA G 6 HP L 3 16 0 S F  SE D U M GR O U N D  CO V E R (2 )  VI R G I N I A  CR E E P E R  TO GR O W  UP  WA L L  & FE N C E 2"‐3" SINGLE GROUND HARDWOOD BARK MULCH PLANTING MIX ‐ TOPSOIL (1 PART),COMPOST (1 PART), SAND (1 PART)4" TOPSOIL FOR LAWNSSPADED EDGE ‐ TYPICAL 2'‐0" MIN COMPACTED PLANTING MIX BENEATH ROOT BALL TO PREVENT SETTLING 2" SINGLE GROUND HARDWOOD BARK MULCH PLANTING MIX ‐ TOPSOIL (1 PART),COMPOST (1 PART), SAND (1 PART)5'‐0"SPADED EDGE ‐ TYPICAL COMPACTED PLANTING MIX BENEATH ROOT BALL TO PREVENT SETTLING 3X ROOT BALLROOT BALL + 6"1.CONSULT LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ON SHAPE OF BED EDGE & PLACEMENT OF ALL PLANTS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.2.ONLY NURSERY‐GROWN PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE. ALL TREES, SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS OF ANSI Z60.1, AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK.3.ALL PLANTING BEDS TO BE EXCAVATED TO A MINIMUM DEPTH OF TWO FEET AND REPLACED WITH AMENDED TOPSOIL CONSISTING OF 1 PART SCREENED TOPSOIL, 1 PART COMPOST AND 1 PART SAND.4.TREE PITS IN LAWN TO BE EXCAVATED TO DEPTH OF ROOT BALL PLUS SIX INCHES AND SHALL BE THREE TIMES THE WIDTH OF THE ROOT BALL.5.DECIDUOUS TREES SHALL HAVE A CALIPER OF AT LEAST 2 1/2 INCHES AT BREAST HEIGHT (DBH) AT THE TIME OF PLANTING.6.ALL TREES IN LAWN AREAS TO RECEIVE FIVE‐FOOT DIAMETER MULCH RINGS.7.INSTALL 3 INCHES OF NATURAL SHREDDED BARK MULCH IN ALL PLANTING BEDS.8.NO PLANTS OR TREES SHALL BE LOCATED BENEATH BUILDING OVERHANGS.9.SUN/SHADE LAWN MIX ‐ DEEP TILL ANY COMPACTION DUE TO CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALL 4" OF AMENDED TOPSOIL.10.WARRANTY ALL PLANT MATERIALS FOR A PERIOD OF 1‐YEAR BEYOND THE DATE OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION.GENERAL SHEET NOTES ‐ PLANTING Project #DateSTREAM Collaborative architecture + landscape architecture dpc 123 S. Cayuga St Suite 201 Ithaca, New York 14850 ph: 607.216.8802 www.streamcolab.com A 1234 B C D As indicated 9/17/2015 8:44:16 AMC:\Users\noah\Documents\215‐221 W Spencer St ‐ SITE_noah@streamcolab.com.rvt L102GRADING AND PLANTING PLANS2015001215‐221 SPENCER STREET 9/17/2015CITY OF ITHACA, NY PPM HOMES SITE PLAN REVIEW  1"  = 20 ' ‐0" D3 GR A D I N G  PL A N  1"  = 20 ' ‐0" D1 PL A N T I N G  PL A N  1/2" = 1'‐0"1TYPICAL PERENNIAL PLANTING  1/2" = 1'‐0"2TYPICAL TREE PLANTING PLANTING SCHEDULE KEYQTY.BOTANICAL NAMECOMMON NAMEINSTALLED SIZEMATURE SIZECOMMENTS ORNAMENTAL GRASS PAV40Panicum Virgatum 'Shenandoah'Shenandoah Switchgrass#3 CONTAINER4' tall, 2' wide SHRUB ‐ DECIDUOUS HPL23Hydrangea paniculata 'Limelight'LIMELIGHT HARDY HYDRANGEA#5 CONTAINER6' WIDE, 8' TALLSALT TOLERANT RAG6Rhus aromatic ‘Gro‐Low’FRAGRANT SUMAC#3 CONTAINER1.5' TALL & 6' WIDEDEER RESISTANT SHRUB ‐ EVERGREEN JHB55Juniperus horizontalis 'Bar Harbor'BAR HARBOR CREEPING JUNIPER#3 CONTAINER4' WideSALT TOLERANT MDE66Microbiota decussataRUSSIAN ARBORVITAE#3 CONTAINER5' WIDESHRUBBY GROUNDCOVER,SEMI‐ DEER RESISTANT TREE ‐ DECIDUOUS PAC1Platanus × acerifoliaLONDON PLANE TREE2‐1/2" CALIPER70' TALL TREE ‐ EVERGREEN PCE12Pinus cembraSWISS STONE PINE6' TALL15' TALL TREE ‐ ORNAMENTAL AGA4Amelanchier × grandiflora 'Autumn Brilliance'APPLE SERVICEBERRY2‐1/2" CALIPER20' TALL CVI6Chionanthus VirginicusFRINGE TREE2‐1/2" CALIPER14' TALL VINE ‐ DECIDUOUS PQV4Parthenocissus quinquefoliaVIRGINIA CREEPER#2 CONTAINERN/ASTAKE TO ENCOURAGE VERTICAL GROWTH ALONG WALL REVISIONS ΔDESCRIPTIONDATENOTE: ADD'L GROUND COVERS, PERENNIALS AND ANNUALS BY OWNER PR O J E C T  LI M I T WEST SPENCER STREET+/‐ 50'‐0" ROW EL .  46 8 . 0 0 EL. 415.50 S CA Y U G A  ST R E E T +/ ‐  50 ' ‐0"  RO W 52 1  S CA Y U G A  ST R E E T 216 W SPENCER STREET Project #DateSTREAM Collaborative architecture + landscape architecture dpc 123 S. Cayuga St Suite 201 Ithaca, New York 14850 ph: 607.216.8802 www.streamcolab.com A 1234 B C D  1/16" = 1'‐0" 9/17/2015 8:44:17 AMC:\Users\noah\Documents\215‐221 W Spencer St ‐ SITE_noah@streamcolab.com.rvt L501SITE SECTION2015001215‐221 SPENCER STREET 9/17/2015CITY OF ITHACA, NY PPM HOMES SITE PLAN REVIEWREVISIONSΔDESCRIPTIONDATE PA R K I N G BU I L D I N G  C & D BU I L D I N G  A & B Pr o j e c t # Da t e ST R E A M C o l l a b o r a t i v e ar c h i t e c t u r e + l a n d s c a p e ar c h i t e c t u r e d p c 12 3 S . C a y u g a S t S u i t e 2 0 1 It h a c a , N e w Y o r k 1 4 8 5 0 ph : 6 0 7 . 2 1 6 . 8 8 0 2 ww w . s t r e a m c o l a b . c o m A 1 2 3 4 B C D 20 1 5 0 0 1 215-221 SPENCER STREET 9/ 1 7 / 2 0 1 5 CITY OF ITHACA, NY PPM HOMES SI T E P L A N R E V I E W RE V I S I O N S ¨ DE S C R I P T I O N DA T E 1 " = 1 0 ' - 0 " C1 0 2 SI T E U T I L I T Y PL A N PROPOSED RESOLUTION City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board Declaration of Lead Agency Site Improvements Site Plan Review 416 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. September 22, 2015 WHEREAS: 6 NYCRR, Part 617, of the State Environmental Quality Review Law and Chapter 176.6 of the City Code, Environmental Quality Review require that a Lead Agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law, and WHEREAS: State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the Lead Agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Approval for site improvements, including a 3-car parking lot, to be located at 416 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd., and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to convert the rear portion of the existing commercial space into a bar, expand and renovate the existing office space, create one apartment, and provide storage. Exterior renovations include construction of a rear deck and stairs, connecting the back entrance to the adjacent parking area, the addition of a curb-cut on State St. and a circular drive, the addition of a 3-car parking area, walkways, landscaping, lighting, and signage. The new bar, office spaces, and apartment require 40 off-street parking spaces. The applicant states a Memorandum of Agreement is being signed with Gateway Plaza, located directly south of 416- 418 East State Street, so that 37 parking spaces would be allocated to the applicant under a shared parking agreement. The project is in the B-4 Zoning District and the East Hill Historic District. The project requires variances for existing area deficiencies and a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC), and   WHEREAS: this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), §176-4 (h) [4] and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), §617.4 (11), and is subject to environmental review, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the proposed project, to be located at 416 E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd. in the City of Ithaca. Moved by: Seconded by: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0 Page 1 of 3 City of Ithaca  FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ― Part III  Project Name: Site Improvements ― 416 E. State St./M.L.K, Jr. Blvd.  Date Created: 9/2/15      PROJECT DESCRIPTION    The applicant proposes to convert the rear portion of the existing commercial space into a bar,  expand and renovate the existing office space, create one apartment and provide storage.   Exterior  renovations include construction of a rear deck and stairs connecting the back entrance to the  adjacent parking area, addition of a curb‐cut on State St. and a circular drive, addition of a 3‐car  parking area, walkways, landscaping, lighting, and signage.  The new bar, office spaces, and  apartment require 40 off‐street parking spaces.  The applicant states a Memorandum of Agreement  is being signed with Gateway Plaza, located directly south of 416‐418 E. State Street, so that 37  parking spaces are allocated to the applicant under a shared parking agreement.  The project is in  the B‐4 Zoning District and the East Hill Historic District.  The project requires variances for existing  area deficiencies and a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation  Commission (ILPC) or staff‐level approval from the City Historic Preservation Officer.  This is an  Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) and the  State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), and is subject to environmental review.      IMPACT ON LAND    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON WATER    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON DRAINAGE    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON AIR    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON PLANTS & ANIMALS  No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES    No impact anticipated.  Page 2 of 3 IMPACT ON HISTORIC RESOURCES    The proposed project is in the East Hill Historic District and will require a Certificate of  Appropriateness from the ILPC or staff‐level approval from the City Historic Preservation Officer.    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AREA    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION    The proposed circular drives will require one additional curb‐cut on E. State St./M.L.K., Jr. Blvd.    The new bar, office spaces, and apartment require 40 off‐street parking spaces.  There are three  parking spaces on site in the front yard of 416‐418 E. State Street.  The applicant states a  Memorandum of Agreement is being signed with Gateway Plaza, located directly south of 416‐418  E. State Street, so that 37 parking spaces are allocated to the applicant under a shared parking  agreement.      Zoning requires that off‐site parking be provided at a maximum distance of 500 feet from the  property.  Although the proposed location conforms to this requirement, concerns have been  expressed about the safety of this location.      In a memorandum, dated July 17, 2015, from Ed Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning  to Charles Pyott, City of Ithaca Office Assistant, the County made the following recommendation:    We recommend disapproval of the variance because the proposed project would  encourage pedestrian crossing of State Street in an area that presents a significant  potential pedestrian risk. We also note that the proposed on‐site parking could encourage,  if not require, backing onto State Street in an area with very heavy traffic. This should be  avoided. Together, these two factors would pose a safety concern on this busy State  highway route.    The project is under review by the City Transportation Engineer.      IMPACT ON ENERGY    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON NOISE & ODORS    The Lead Agency has concerns about potential impacts on the surrounding residential neighbors  resulting in the conversion of the ground‐floor space into a bar and music venue.  The Lead Agency  is concerned about noise, smoke, and odors from the designated outdoor gathering and smoking  area, as well as the proposed deck that, due to its location immediately outside the bar entrance,  will likely be used by patrons for that same purpose.    Page 3 of 3   Potential mitigations could include the following:  • Relocating outdoor smoking/gathering area as far away from the residential neighbors as  possible ― e.g., in the front parking area, near (or replacing) the northernmost parking space  • Removal of the deck at the rear entrance in order to discourage gathering in that location  • Signage clarifying non‐smoking areas     The Lead Agency is also concerned about noise from the bar having negative impact on neighbors.    The applicant must submit documentation from a licensed sound professional demonstrating the  anticipated noise levels outside the building will conform to the City’s Noise Ordinance.      IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH    No impact anticipated.    IMPACT ON GROWTH & CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD    The project requires Area Variances for existing deficiencies.  In order to convert the unoccupied  space on the first floor to the new permitted uses, the applicant must obtain variances for existing  deficiencies.  The property at 416‐418 East State Street has existing deficiencies pertaining to lot  coverage, side yard, and other side yard setbacks.  Percentage of lot coverage is 60%; allowed is  50%.  The building also is deficient in side yard and other side yard setbacks.  The side yard to the  west of the building is 0.02 feet; required is 10 feet.  The other side yard to the east of the building is  0.1 feet; required is 5 feet.       The Lead Agency has concerns about potential impacts on the surrounding residential neighbors  resulting in the conversion of the ground‐floor space into a bar and music venue.  See Impacts from  Noise and Odors.     No impact anticipated.    Prepared by: Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner   PROPOSED RESOLUTION Site Plan Review CEQR Resolution ― AMENDED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Hotel Ithaca Modernization 222 S. Cayuga St. City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board September 22, 2015 WHEREAS: on March 27, 2012, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determined that a proposed project involving an expansion and Area Variance of the former Holiday Inn, located at 222 S. Cayuga St., would 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, and WHEREAS: the above-referenced proposed project included the demolition of the existing north, south, and west guestroom wings (110 rooms) and construction of two new additions: a one-story 13,845-SF banquet and meeting facility on the north side of the main building; and a 100’-tall 10-story (including rooftop complex) tower with a 9,190-SF footprint, featuring 115 new guestrooms, a rooftop entertainment complex, and the relocation of the existing hotel restaurant to the ground floor, fronting Cayuga Street, and six 2-bedroom units of employee housing. Site development included: two new curbcuts to make a conference center drop-off; reconfiguration of the parking areas, resulting in a decrease of 21 parking spaces; removal of 9 mature trees and much of the existing landscaping along Cayuga Street; new landscaping and sidewalks; lighting; and signage, and WHEREAS: the applicant has since redesigned the project and now seeks Site Plan Approval for a new proposal, and WHEREAS: the new proposal (now named Hotel Ithaca) is for construction of a five-story wing with first- and second-floor connections to the existing building. These connections will create a new pre-function area on the north side of the existing ballroom, new break-out rooms, and a new fitness center. Site improvements will include new landscaping, walkways, and site furnishings. Vehicular circulation will remain the same, but parking throughout the site will be reorganized, resulting in a reduction from 106 to 97 spaces. Site demolition will include removal of the north and west multi-story wings, as well as paving and some landscaping. The project is in the CDB-100 Zoning District and requires Design Review. This project requires a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). This project does not require an Area Variance, and WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), §176-4 B.(1) (h.)(4) and (l), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), §617.4 (11), and WHEREAS: in accordance with §176-7 E. of CEQR and §617.7(e) of SEQRA, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board acting as Lead Agency has determined that changes are proposed for the project and determined that no significant adverse impacts will occur, and WHEREAS: the Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has on September 22, 2015 reviewed and accepted as adequate: a revised Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 3, prepared by Planning staff; drawings titled “Existing Site Plan (C-1),” “Proposed Site Plan (C-3),” “Proposed First Floor Plan (A-1),” “Proposed Second Floor Plan (A- 2),” “Proposed 3rd-5th Floor Plan (A-3),” “Proposed Elevations (A-4, A-5, A-6, & A-7);” and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the Board acting as lead Agency has determined the proposed changes result in a project significantly smaller in scale, which will therefore have no new impacts not previously considered, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby determine the proposed Hotel Ithaca Modernization Project 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. Moved: Second: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0   CITY OF ITHACA  108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor   Ithaca, NY   14850‐5690  DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT  JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT  PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT  Telephone:  Planning & Development – 607‐274‐6550 Community Development/IURA – 607‐274‐6559  Email:  dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email:  iura@cityofithaca.org  Fax:  607‐274‐6558 Fax:  607‐274‐6558    TO: Board of Zoning Appeals  FROM: Planning & Development Board  DATE: September 23, 2015  SUBJECT: Comments for Zoning Appeals 2994, 2999, 3003, 3004, & 3005    On September 22, 2015, members of the Planning and Development Board discussed the above‐listed Zoning  Appeals and agreed to forward the following recommendations:    APPEAL #2994                                                                                                                        215‐221 W. SPENCER STREET  Area Variances    Appeal of Noah Demarest, for PPM Homes, owner of 215‐221 W. Spencer Street, for an Area Variance from  Section 325‐20 F. (a) [1], Rear Yard Parking Setbacks, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.    The owner proposes to construct four 3‐story residential buildings containing three units each on a steeply  sloped site between West Spencer and West Cayuga Streets.  Because of the site’s topography, the applicant  proposes to locate the 12 required off‐street parking spaces for this project in the property’s rear yard, where  there is access to Cayuga Street.  However, Section 325‐20 F. (a) [1] does not allow parking in a property’s  required rear yard setback.  The rear yard setback requirement is 31 feet and the applicant’s design requires  parking in 77% of the required rear yard.      The property at 215‐221 W. Spencer Street is located in an R‐3b zone where the proposed residential use is  permitted.  However, Section 325‐38 requires that a variance be granted before a Building Permit can be issued.    The Board feels that the unique attributes of the site (steeply sloped with street frontage at both the front and  back of the site) present a large barrier to locating the parking such that it will not require a variance.  The Board  has worked with the applicant to mitigate concerns about visual/aesthetic impact of the proposed parking  location.  The applicant has agreed to install fencing (see Perspectives L001, dated 8/6/15) and landscaping to  block view of parking lot from Cayuga Street adjacent property owners.     The Board recommends granting this appeal.     APPEAL #2999                                                                                                                  1106 N. CAYUGA STREET  Area Variances     Appeal Noah Demarest, STREAM Collaborative, for Sarah and Craig Cummins, owners of 1106 North Cayuga  Street for variances from Section 325‐8, Columns 7, 10, 11, and 12, Lot Width, Percentage of Lot Coverage, Front  Yard, and Side Yard, respectively, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.  “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 1 of 4  “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 2 of 4    The applicant proposes to add a 505‐SF addition to the existing single‐family home at 1101 North Cayuga.  This  one‐story addition will be located in the property’s rear yard.  However, before the addition can be constructed,  the applicant must remove an existing 355 SF deck.  Though the addition will meet zoning setback requirements,  it will increase the existing lot coverage deficiency from 36.2% to 40.76%.  The allowed lot coverage is 35%.   Furthermore, the existing building does not meet several district regulation requirements.  The lot width is 32.9  feet; required is 35 feet.  The front yard is 3 feet; required is 10 feet.  The side yard is 2.2 feet; required is 10  feet.    The property at 1106 N. Cayuga Street is in an R‐2b Use District, where the single‐family home is permitted;  however, Section 325‐38 requires that variances be granted before a Building Permit can be issued.      The Board did not identify any long‐term planning issues and recommends granting this appeal.     APPEAL #3003                                                                                                                                 209‐215 DRYDEN ROAD  Design Variances     Appeal of John Novarr for 209‐215 Dryden Road Associates for variances from Section 325‐45.2 G. (2.) (12) and  325‐45.2 G. (3.) (b), distance between entries and chamfered corner, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.    The applicant proposes to develop a new six‐story building at the corner of Dryden Road and Linden Avenue,  located in the MU‐2 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) Zoning District.  This building will be the home for  Cornell University’s Johnson School of Management Executive Education program.  The proposed building design  incorporates classrooms, offices, and meeting spaces on all six stories of the building and includes an open  three‐story atrium with a stairway visible to pedestrian traffic along Dryden Road.  However, to meet the  school’s programmatic needs, the applicant is requesting two variances from the MU‐2 Zoning District’s design  requirements.     The applicant requests a variance from Section 325‐45.2 G. (2.) (12), the requirements that the distance between  functioning street‐facing entries be limited to a maximum of 60 feet apart, and that those commercial entries be  functional and useable during business hours.  The proposed building has two street‐facing façades, one on  Dryden Road, and one on Linden Avenue.  The façade on Dryden Road is 122’ 8” long and has one‐ two‐door  entry located between 8 and 14 feet from the façade’s northwest corner; required are two doors along this face  of the building.  On Linden Avenue, one door is located approximately 16.5 feet to 20 feet south of the northeast  corner of the building and 64’ from the building’s southeast east corner; required are two doors on this face of  the building.  While the entry door on Dryden Road meets the requirement that entries must be functioning and  useable during business hours, the door on Linden Avenue serves a stair exit and is not intended for ingress  access.     The applicant also requests a variance from Section 325‐45.2 G.(3) (b), requiring a building on a corner lot in the  MU‐2 Zoning District have a chamfered corner or be setback a minimum of 5 feet from both street frontages.   The proposed building is set back 7 feet from Dryden Road, but the Linden Avenue setback varies from 2 to 0  feet.  The applicant claims the slight gain in visibility or pedestrian access at the corner would cause a significant  loss of useable interior space and a greater construction cost due to increased structural complexity.    The proposed building at 209‐215 Dryden Road is in the MU‐2 Zoning District where the proposed use is  permitted; however, Section 325‐38 requires that Area Variances be granted before a Building Permit is issued.    “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 3 of 4  The Board supports granting this appeal for two reasons: (1) regarding the doors, the Board feels that the design  of the building meets the intent of the Collegetown Area Form Districts zoning.  The extensive glazing on its  bottom floors provides an animated street experience, as views are into well‐lighted gathering and event areas;  and (2) regarding the required chamfered corner on Dryden and Linden, the Board feels the building meets the  intent of the ordinance on this corner.  This corner transitions from a high‐density mixed‐use district to a lower‐ density residential district.  There is far less vehicular, pedestrian, and bike traffic at this corner than at the corner  of Dryden and College Ave., where a chamfer is also required.  The bottom floors of the building are pushed back  from the property line an additional 2 feet in excess of the required setback ― which achieves sufficient visibility  and openness (as intended by the ordinance) in this location.     APPEAL #3004                                                                                                                                  705 N. AURORA STREET  Area Variance     Appeal of Joseph Steuer, owner of 701 N. Aurora Street, for variances from Section 325‐8, Columns 4 and 14/15,  Parking, and Rear Yard, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.    The applicant has requested a Lot Line Adjustment from the Director of Zoning Administration for two of his  contiguous properties located at 701 and 705 N. Aurora Street.  The existing property at 705 N. Aurora Street is a  two‐family dwelling with a non‐conforming accessory structure, which is located 2.9 feet from the rear yard  property line.  This accessory structure was granted a variance on March 10, 1986 (Appeal #1678) to the former  property owner for an accessory use as a home office.  As the new owner of 705 N. Aurora Street, the applicant  wants to convert this structure into a studio apartment making it a second primary use on the lot.  However, the  lot at 705 N. Aurora Street does not have sufficient lot area for two primary uses.  To resolve the lot size issue,  the applicant proposes to consolidate a portion of the lot at 705 N. Aurora Street and its accessory use with the  adjacent property at 701 N. Aurora Street.  This will create an “L”‐shaped parcel at 701 N. Aurora Street with  sufficient lot area for two primary uses.     The Director of Zoning Administration cannot adjust the lot lines of two contiguous lots, if it will create a new  buildable lot or create a zoning deficiency in either lot.  Both properties in their current configurations have a  number of existing area deficiencies, but these deficiencies are not relevant to issuing a Lot Line Adjustment.   While the proposed Lot Line Adjustment would cause the lot size at 705 N. Aurora Street to be reduced from  4,080 SF to 3,010 SF, the lot area requirement for the two‐family dwelling is only 3,000 SF.  Furthermore, the  proposed Lot Line Adjustment would create two deficiencies at 705 N. Aurora Street, lot coverage and depth of  rear yard, compliant with respect to zoning regulations.     Nevertheless, the proposed Lot Line Adjustment will create new deficiencies for the property at 701 N. Aurora  Street.  The 4‐bedroom single‐family home at 701 N. Aurora Street requires two parking spaces.  The studio  apartment will increase the parking requirement to three off‐street spaces.  The property at 701 N. Aurora  Street has no off‐street parking.  Furthermore, the Lot Line Adjustment will cause the property to have a  deficient rear yard.  In its current configuration, 701 N. Aurora Street has a compliant rear yard with a lot depth  of 29’6”.  Consolidating the rear portion of the lot at 705 N. Aurora Street with the parcel at 701 N. Aurora Street  would reduce the rear yard to 2.9 feet.  701 N. Aurora Street is required to provide a rear yard that has a depth  of 26 feet.  “An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.” 4 of 4    The properties at 701 and 705 N. Aurora Street are in the R‐2b Use District where converting the former  accessory structure to a one‐unit dwelling is permitted.  However, Section 290‐1, “Lot Line Adjustment,” requires  that variances be granted before the Zoning Director issues a Lot Line Adjustment.    The Board did not identify any long‐term planning issues and recommends granting this appeal.  The Board  recognizes the need for new housing and supports the conversion of an existing structure into housing.     APPEAL #3005                                                              123‐127, 133, 135‐139 E. STATE STREET (HAROLD’S SQUARE)  Area Variances     Appeal of Scott Whitham for the owner, L Enterprises, LLC, for an Area Variance from Section 325‐8, Column 10,  Percentage of Lot Coverage, and Column 14/15, Rear Yard Depth, requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.  The  applicant proposes to develop a 140‐foot tall, 11‐story, mixed‐use building of approximately 162,750 GSF,  known as “Harold’s Square.”  The building is designed to have commercial business on the ground floor, three  stories of upper‐story office space, 6 stories devoted to residential use, and an 11th‐story penthouse with multi‐ purpose amenities.  The residential portion of the building is in a tower that will be set back 62'8" setback or  more from the building’s four‐story façade facing the Commons.  This tower will reach a height of no more than  140 feet.  The building will have two main entrances, one on the Commons and the other facing the Green Street  Alley between the Commons and the Green Street garage.     The applicant claims the size of the project necessitates using 100% of the lot for the building. However, District  Regulations state that 100% lot coverage is allowed only when the required 10‐foot rear yard is provided.  As  proposed, the project has no rear yard.  The proposed project is located in the CBD‐60/CBD‐140 Use Districts  where the uses of the proposed building are permitted.  However, Sections 325‐38 and 325‐39 require Area  Variances be granted before a Building Permit or a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued.     The Board granted Site Plan Approval for this project in August 2013 and granted a two‐year extension to the  approval in August 2015.  The Board supports the project and recommends granting this appeal.