Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-02-18 Common Council Meeting AgendaOFFICIAL NOTICE OF MEETING A Regular meeting of the Common Council will be held on Wednesday, May 2, 2018, at 6:00 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Your attendance is requested. AGENDA 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 2. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: 3. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS: 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 6. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 7. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: Superintendent of Public Works Office: 8.1 Simeon’s American Bistro Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution City Administration Committee: 8.2 Ithaca Police Department (IPD) - Amendment to Personnel Roster - Executive Assistant - Resolution 8.3 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Assignment and Reallocation of Positions at the Water Treatment Plant - Resolution 8.4 Youth Bureau - Amendment to Personnel 2018 Roster - Resolution 8.5 Ithaca Fire Department (IFD) – Award of Bid for Gear Washer/Dryer - Resolution 8.6 Ithaca Police Department (IPD) – Request to Amend the 2018 Authorized Budget for Donations - Resolution 9. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 Resolution to Adopt Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Codify Policy Recommendations for Review and Consideration of Adoption 9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” Article II, Section 325-5 entitled “Zoning Map”, Article IV, Section 325-12, entitled “Purpose and Intent”, and Section 325-12.C, entitled “Establishment and Location” in Order to Clarify the Boundaries of the Recently Established Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD) Common Council Meeting Agenda May 2, 2018 Page 2 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 Finance – Request to Give Controller Authority to Approve Expenditures for Veterans Fire Relief Account - Resolution 10.2 Approval of a Local Law Entitled “City of Ithaca Local Law Authorizing Best Value Competitive Bidding and Procurement” 10.3 An Ordinance to Amend the following Chapters and Sections of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Regarding Parking Regulations and Fines – Chapter 250 entitled “Peace and Good Order”, Chapter 260 entitled “Residential Parking Permit System”, and Chapter 346 entitled “Vehicles and Traffic” 10.4 Adoption of Updated Schedule of Parking Fines – Resolution 10.5 City Controller’s Report 11. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES: 12. NEW BUSINESS: 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 13.1 Alderperson McGonigal - Approval of Titus Triangle Park Shared Boat Rack Proposal - Resolution 14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS: 15. REPORTS OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS: 16. REPORT OF CITY CLERK: 17. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: 17.1 Proposed Executive Session to Discuss Collective Negotiations Pursuant to Article Fourteen of the Civil Service Law 18. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: 18.1 Approval of the March 7, 2018 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution 18.2 Approval of the April 4, 2018 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution 19. ADJOURNMENT: Common Council Meeting Agenda May 2, 2018 Page 3 If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 274- 6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. Out of consideration for the health of other individuals, please try to refrain from using perfume/cologne and other scented personal care products at City of Ithaca meetings. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. ______________________________ Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC City Clerk Date: April 26, 2018 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: Superintendent of Public Works Office: 8.1 Simeon’s American Bistro Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution WHEREAS, since 1987 the City of Ithaca has issued a license to Simeon's American Bistro Restaurant allowing that restaurant to utilize certain areas along North Aurora Street and on the Ithaca Commons for outdoor dining; and WHEREAS, this use of public property has generally been deemed proper and successful; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Ithaca Commons, including outdoor dining; and WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow the serving and consumption of alcohol on the Ithaca Commons; and WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for outdoor dining at Simeon's American Bistro Restaurant, including the responsible sale and consumption of alcohol, is desirable; and WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a minimum of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, For the year 2018, Common Council hereby approves a revocable Alcoholic Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for Simeon's American Restaurant that includes the sale of alcohol in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit. 8. CONSENT ITEMS CONTINUED: City Administration Committee: 8.2 Ithaca Police Department (IPD) - Amendment to Personnel Roster - Executive Assistant - Resolution WHEREAS, the Ithaca Police Department anticipates a retirement in the position of Executive Assistant on July 27, 2018; and WHEREAS, the Executive Assistant is a critical position responsible for the smooth operation of the Chief’s Office; and WHEREAS, it would be beneficial for the current incumbent of the position to provide training and orientation to the next incumbent; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to create an overlapping position to allow for this training and orientation to occur; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Ithaca Police Department be amended as follows: Add: One (1) Executive Assistant (40 hours) ; and, be it further RESOLVED, That upon the retirement of the current Executive Assistant, the position vacated through retirement shall be abolished effective on the employee's retirement date; and, be it further RESOLVED, That funding for this overlapping position shall be derived from within the existing 2018 Ithaca Police Department budget. 8.3 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Assignment and Reallocation of Positions at the Water Treatment Plant - Resolution WHEREAS, the position of Assistant Chief Water Treatment Plant Operator was created in the 2018 City budget; and WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works is moving forward with filling this position; and WHEREAS, the implementation of the Assistant Chief Water Treatment Plant Operator position will reduce the level of responsibility of the Senior Water Treatment Plant Operator position; and WHEREAS, the Human Resources Department has conducted point factor evaluations of the Assistant Chief Water Treatment Plant Operator position and the restructured Senior Water Treatment Plant Operator position and has made salary grade recommendations for both positions; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the position of Assistant Chief Water Treatment Plant Operator shall be assigned to the CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan at salary grade 15; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the position of Senior Water Treatment Plant Operator shall be reallocated from Grade 15 to Grade 13 of the CSEA Administrative Unit Compensation Plan; and, be it further RESOLVED, That for the sole purpose of determining days worked reportable to the New York State and Local Employees’ Retirement System, the standard workday for the Assistant Chief Water Treatment Plant Operator position shall be established at eight (8) hours per day (forty (40) hours per week). 8.4 Youth Bureau - Amendment to Personnel 2018 Roster - Resolution WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau has examined the best ways to provide academic support and mentoring given the recent retirement of the long-time Program Coordinator for The Paul Schreurs Memorial Program; and WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau has made the decision to merge the Paul Schreurs Memorial Program with the College Discovery Program under the leadership of the current College Discovery Program Coordinator; and WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau requests amendments to the 2018 Roster in order to best meet its needs and support the vision, mission and goals of the academic support and mentoring programs; and WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau has been advised by and worked closely with the HR department throughout the planning process; and WHEREAS, the funding of two Youth Program Leader positions (35 hours) will allow the program to continue services to youth in our community; and WHEREAS, the Youth Bureau would like to defund the current Youth Program Coordinator position, as well as the Youth Program Leader position (22 hours) and transfer that employee to one of the funded Youth Program Leader positions (35 hour); and WHEREAS, this restructuring will not require additional funds from the City and will allow the Youth Bureau to optimize resources and personnel to continue to provide quality services to residents; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Youth Bureau shall be amended as follows: Fund: Two (2) Youth Program Leader (35 hours) Defund: One (1) Youth Program Coordinator (35 hours) One (1) Youth Program Leader (22 hours) Ithaca Youth Bureau 1 James L. Gibbs Drive Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone: (607) 273-8364 Fax: (607) 273-2817 “Building a foundation for a lifetime.” To: City Administration Committee From: Liz Klohmann, Director Re: 2018 Roster Amendment Date: 4/10/2018 At the beginning of March our long time coordinator of the Paul Schreurs Memorial Program, Eloise Barrett, retired due to health issues. Since that time the staff of the Paul Schreurs Memorial Program and the College Discovery Program have collaborated to ensure that programming and activities continued. This opening has given us the opportunity to look at the best ways to offer academic mentoring and support to our students in both programs. We have decided to not fill the vacant Program Coordinator position and merge the two programs under the leadership and supervision of our College Discovery Program Coordinator, Linda Cimakasky- Barr. In order to best meet the Youth Bureau needs and support our vision, mission and goals we are requesting amendments to the 2018 Roster. We have been advised by and worked closely with the HR department throughout the planning process. We are requesting permission to defund the Program Coordinator position previously held by Eloise Barrett. We would like to fund two Youth Program Leader positions (35 hours) on the roster that are currently unfunded. We also have one 22-hour Youth Program Leader position that we would like to defund. The person in this position will move to one of the newly funded 35 hour a week positions and we will hire for the second newly funded position. These changes are made within our approved 2018 budget. To summarize: Defund Youth Program Coordinator (35 hours) Defund Youth Program Leader (22 hours) Fund Youth Program Leader (35 hours) Fund Youth Program Leader (35 hours) This restructure does not require additional funds from the City and will allow us to optimize our resources and personnel to provide quality services to residents, both now and in the future. 8.5 Ithaca Fire Department (IFD) – Award of Bid for Gear Washer/Dryer - Resolution WHEREAS, on March 2, 2018, the City of Ithaca posted a Notice to Bidders with specifications for Gear Washer/Extractor; and WHEREAS, on March 27, 2018, the City of Ithaca Controller’s Office received sealed bids from three bidders; and WHEREAS, staff have reviewed the bids, specifications, options, and proposals made by each bidder; and WHEREAS, after review, Fire Chief Parsons recommends the award of the bid be made to Dry Gear Solutions, Inc., 6382 Route 191, Cresco, PA 18326; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves the award of a bid and contract between the City of Ithaca and Dry Gear Solutions, Inc. in accordance to the pricing and bid specifications for Gear Washer/Extractor received on March 27, 2018. 8.6 Ithaca Police Department (IPD) – Request to Amend the 2018 Authorized Budget for Donations - Resolution WHEREAS, the Ithaca Police Department received a $10,000 grant from Triad Foundation to provide support for the hiring of a consultant who specializes in law enforcement policy; and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Police Department is in need of updating the Department policies and procedures; and WHEREAS, the most cost effective solution to updating the Department’s policies and procedures is by hiring a consultant to assist with such an undertaking at an estimated cost of $25,000; and WHEREAS, The $10,000 grant will help support the $25,000 cost for said service with the other $15,000 derived from existing 2018 Police Department funds; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby accepts the $10,000 grant from the Triad Foundation to provide support for the hiring of a consultant to update the Department’s policies and procedures and amends the 2018 Authorized Police Department budget as follows: Increase Appropration Account: A3120-5435-5000 Contracts $10,000 Increase Revenue Accounts: A3120-2705 Donations $10,000 9. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 Resolution to Adopt Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Codify Policy Recommendations for Review and Consideration of Adoption WHEREAS the City has adopted a goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2050, and nearly three quarters of the Ithaca community GHG emissions come from residential and commercial buildings; and WHEREAS the City of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan suggests “Enact more stringent local energy codes based on standards for new and existing buildings and voluntary certification programs” and The City’s Energy Action Plan recommends “Encourage sustainable and energy efficient development (and re- development) through green building policies and implementation of advanced energy codes” and “Consider regulatory tools to encourage/require higher energy efficiency standards for rental housing;” and WHEREAS with the aid of a consultant team, as part of the Green Building Policy project, the City has conducted a comprehensive examination of our existing and future building stock, as well as green building standards for new construction and potential economic, social and environmental impacts of policies which incentivize or mandate those standards; and WHEREAS the Green Building Policy report provides policy recommendations for energy efficiency requirements and related incentives to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings, while emphasizing and supporting affordability; and WHEREAS additional work, such as research (possibly in conjunction with a technical consultant) and stakeholder outreach, is needed to provide a level of detail sufficient to develop code language for a green building policy; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca adopts the Green Building Policy report, dated April 25, 2018; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca directs staff to perform additional research and stakeholder outreach and codify the policy recommendations contained in the Green Building Policy report for review a nd consideration of adoption. Page 1 of 1 To: Common Council From: Nick Goldsmith, Sustainability Coordinator Date: April 25, 2018 RE: Green Building Policy Final Report The purpose of this memo is to provide background information for the upcoming Green Building Policy discussion at the May 2, 2018 Common Council meeting. Please see the attached memo to Planning and Economic Development Committee (PEDC) dated April 6, 2018, for additional details. The final Green Building Policy report, dated April 25, 2018, is attached. The report incorporates changes and clarifications prompted by the public comments received on the second draft GBP report; all changes are tracked in the document. The comments, along with project team responses, were shared in the agenda materials for the April 11, 2018 PEDC meeting. You can download both the final Green Building Policy report with changes tracked and a clean version of the final Green Building Policy report here: http://www.ithacagreenbuilding.com/documents. The attached resolution is to adopt the Green Building Policy final report and to direct staff to begin developing code language for a green building policy. We recognize that additional work, such as research and stakeholder outreach, is needed to provide a level of detail sufficient to develop code language for a green building policy that can be considered for adoption by Common Council (and the Ithaca Town Board). However, as documented in the public comments, it is important to stress that the need for careful vetting of any proposed legislation must be balanced with the need to act quickly to address climate change amidst a local building boom. A thorough but swift codification and adoption process will give the City (and the Town) of Ithaca the best chance of meeting their ambitious climate goals and securing Ithaca’s reputation as a leader in environmental action. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at ngoldsmith@cityofithaca.org or on my cell at 917- 270-1683. Attached: 1. Final Green Building Policy report, dated April 25, 2018, with changes tracked 2. Resolution to Adopt Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Codify Policy Recommendations for Review and Consideration of Adoption 3. Memo to PEDC for April 11 meeting (dated April 6, 2018) CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 JoAnn Cornish, Director DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org To: Planning and To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Nick Goldsmith, Sustainability Coordinator Date: April 6, 2018 RE: Green Building Policy Report Final Draft The purpose of this memo is to provide background information for the upcoming Green Building Policy discussion at the April 11, 2018 Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. In 2016, the City of Ithaca was awarded a $100,000+ grant to study green building policies. In 2017 the City began working on the Green Building Policy project with a consultant team led by Stream Collaborative and sub consultants Taitem Engineering and Randall + West Planners. The main deliverable of this project is the Green Building Policy Report, which provides policy recommendations for energy efficiency requirements and related incentives to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings, while emphasizing and supporting affordability. A steering committee made up of City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca elected officials and senior staff members has guided the project since the grant was awarded. An advisory committee made up of 13 community stakeholders met five times to provide feedback. In addition, extensive outreach has been done to reach various stakeholder groups and municipal boards. Feedback received after the completion of the first draft Green Building Policy report informed the second draft report. The second draft was circulated for comments and the project team held a public outreach meeting in late March, as well as dedicated outreach sessions with Cornell and Ithaca College. Through this review process we received over 200 comments from several local organizations and community members. Many comments expressed general support, others stated that the policy recommendations are not strong enough to meet the city’s climate goals. Comments from large institutions expressed concern with elements of the proposed policy and their ability to comply with the requirements. All comments, along with responses from the project team, are attached for your review. We propose several changes to be incorporated into the final report. We hope to have a resolution considered at the May 02, 2018 Common Council meeting for adopting the final report and directing staff to begin developing code language for a green building policy. We recognize that there is much more work to be done before the City can earnestly consider actual code changes. We anticipate that the next phase of this project would use the GBP report as a starting point, and through additional research (possibly in conjunction with a CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 JoAnn Cornish, Director DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org technical consultant) and stakeholder outreach, provide a level of detail sufficient to develop code language. We have already started thinking about external funding resources for this work. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at ngoldsmith@cityofithaca.org or on my cell at 917-270-1683. Attached: 1. Comments on Second Draft Green Building Policy Report (dated 03/09/18) and responses from the project team 2. Resolution to Adopt Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Codify Policy Recommendations for Review and Consideration of Adoption Ithaca Green Building Policy  FinalDRAFT Project Report 43/259/18                Written by:                  With support from:        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 2      Table of Contents      1 Executive Summary 3  2 Green Building Policy Study and Social Impacts Study 10  3 Education and Outreach 549  4 Building Stock Survey and Development Forecasts 583  5 Glossary 80               Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 3  1 Executive Summary  Climate change is a real and significant threat to our community, as it is to the nation and world.      Local goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050 are roughly consistent with state,  federal, and international goals, even if federal activity is currently weaker.  The building sector,  responsible for more than half of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions locally, is a critical sector to address.  The most affordable and cost‐effective time to reduce GHG emissions isare when a building is built,  rather than at a time of later retrofit.     Thus, the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca – with assistance from consultants STREAM  Collaborative, Taitem Engineering, and Randall + West Planners – have conducted a comprehensive  examination of our existing and future building stock, as well as green building standards for new  construction and potential economic, social and environmental impacts of policies which incentivize or  mandate those standards. have studied the potential of various green building policy approaches. This  report provides background and results of the studies and makes recommendations for a green building  policy to be implemented as soon as possible.    1.1 Green Building Policy and Social Impacts Study  The project team reviewed current approaches and best practices for green building policies. On the  basis of this review, we propose a green building policy that emphasizes affordability, measurably  reduces carbon emissions, lends itself readily for compliance review, and provides flexibility and choice  to developers.  The policy focuses on an approach that would be incorporated into site plan review and  the building code, requiring either a certain number of points to be achieved, or whole‐building  compliance with energy requirements of a third‐party certification system such as LEED. The proposed  policy comprises a set of mandated and incentivized new construction standards, to be required in  addition to compliance to the New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code (also Energy Code  or Energy Conservation Code).. The policy was developed through a series of open meetings of an  advisory panel, and a subsequent set of outreach meetings, followed by a public comment period..    1.2 Education and Outreach  An important part of implementing any new policy is to perform outreach to educate and gather input  from key stakeholders. The project team has met with a project steering committee and advisory  committee throughout the duration of the project to help guide and inform the process. The team also  participated in several presentations with energy and sustainability minded groups as well as town and  city committees and boards to present the overall project goals, preliminary findings and  recommendations for the implementation of the Green Building Policy. A public information session was  held in is being planned for late March 2018 to reach out to members of the general public with special  invitations to key stakeholder groups such as developers, landlords, realtors, and architects. Additional    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 4  personal communications between the project team members and interested individuals has been  ongoing and suggested feedback has been incorporated into the recommendations.    The consultant team established a project website www.ithacagreenbuilding.com to store the core  information generated by the project including draft reports, meeting agendas, minutes, presentations,  reference materials and case studies. The website is a key tool for sharing information with the news  media and any interested member of the City and Town of Ithaca.    One goal of the project was to increase the diversity of active participants in Ithaca sustainability efforts.   Through the steering and advisory committees, through many outreach sessions, and through individual  conversations with stakeholders, new voices were incorporated into the local sustainability  conversation. We recommend ongoing efforts in this area.   1.3 Building Stock Survey and Development Forecasts  To help the community and our team understand the implications and potential levers for change that  can help the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca to achieve energy and water savings goals, Randall +  West developed a Survey of Existing Buildings and a Development Forecast. This analysis helps us to  understand the context for a Green Building Policy in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca.    Our building stock survey detailed the type, location, size, and age of every building in the Town of  Ithaca and City of Ithaca. We gathered available local and regional information on building energy and  water use, and analyzed the permitting databases used by the City and Town. The trend in permitting  and building area show that a Green Building Policy for new construction will be one important  component in reducing community level greenhouse gas emissions, and that additional incentives  and/or mandates will need to address existing buildings, renewable energy development, and  transportation energy use in order to meet the City and Town goals for greenhouse gas emissions.    Based on data made available from local, state, and national sources, our projections suggest significant  growth and development continuing into the foreseeable future. This projection is based on population  and employment growth projections by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., a well regarded economic  projection firm, through the year 2050 based on market demand, the competitive position of Ithaca for  certain types of development, as well as the City’s and Town’s respective Comprehensive Plan Future  Land Use Maps (see 4.7 Projections in the Context of Local Plans). Our projections suggest modest but  substantial growth and supports the findings of the building stock survey: new buildings are a small but  important component of the City and Town wide future building stock.    1.4  Recommendations    The project team recommends a combination of energy efficiency requirements, and related incentives,  to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings while emphasizing and supporting  affordability.  The proposed requirements are in addition to compliance with the New York State Energy  Conservation Code. The project team also recommends further study and policy work in the area of  existing buildings.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 5    The proposed requirements allow developers to either comply with a simple point‐based scoring  system, or with a whole‐building certification.  There are underlying mandatory requirements for water  conservation.  The requirements apply to all new buildings, as well as majorgut renovations, and large  new additions.  Small building additions and limited renovations are proposed to comply with a more  modest energy‐efficiency standard. Historic buildings are exempt from the requirement. A summary of  the proposed requirements is included in the abbreviated table on the next page.      Energy efficiency requirements are proposed to go into effect as soon as possible, and to become more  stringent in 2025, and finally to transition to a requirement for net‐zero energy buildings in 2030.      In order to further reduce carbon emissions and to promote the early adoption of best practices, a  variety of incentives are proposed for those buildings that significantly exceed the initial requirements.    These incentives will sunset in 2030.    Other major recommendations deriving from the study include:  1. 9.Consider conducting a similar study and policy for existing buildings.  2. Consider adopting a benchmarking policy to require the tracking of energy usage for existing  buildings.  3. Consider evaluating an institutional compliance path, to address such issues as institution‐wide  renewable energy capacity and district heating systems.  Develop requirements for buildings with large internal loads (such as labs), which might not be  able to comply with the proposed whole‐building requirements.  2. Assess other strategies to reduce or offset carbon emissions, such as reforestation.. in  cooperation with large local institutions, as part of the next phase of this project.  2.4.     A summary of the proposed requirements is included in the abbreviated table below.  Detailed  recommendations can be found starting in Section 2.2014 of the report.         1.4 Ithaca Green Building Policy ‐ Summary Table  To comply with the Ithaca Green Building Policy, all new buildings must meet the requirements of the  Easy Path OR the Whole Building Path, AND meet the water efficiency requirement,  in addition to still  meeting requirements of the New York State Energy Conservation Code. See Chapter 2 for general  background.  See section 2.14 for detailed requirements;, this table is a limited summary..    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 6   EASY PATH ‐ Buildings must achieve six points Category Improvement Points Details   EFFICIENT ELECTRIFICATION  EE1  Heat pumps or biomass  for space heating  2 ‐4 2 points (Commercial) or 3 points (Residential) for air source heat pumps.  3 points (Commercial) or 4 points (Residential) for ground source heat  pumps or biomass.  EE2  Heat pumps or biomass  for domestic hot water  1 1 point for water heating systems that use heat pumps or biomass  (Residential).  EE3  Electric stove and ventless  heat pump clothes dryer  1 1 point total for electric stoves AND ventless heat pump clothes dryers  (Residential).   Requires EE1 as prerequisite, and no fossil fuels in the building.   AFFORDABILITY IMPROVEMENTS  AI1  Smaller building/room size  (residential/hotel)  1 ‐2 1 point for building/room size 15% smaller than reference size.  2 points for building/room size 30% smaller than reference size.   AI2  Heating systems in heated  space  1 1 point for placing heating/cooling systems and distribution inside  actively heated and finished spaces.  AI3  EfficientSimple building  shape  1 1 point if exterior surface area divided by gross floor area is less than  maximum value provided in table.  AI4  Right‐lighting 1 1 point for reducing overlighting and other lighting improvements  (Commercial).  AI5  Modest windows with  views and natural light  1 1 point for overall window‐to‐wall ratio less than 20% (individual spaces  may exceed 20%).   RENEWABLE ENERGY  RE1  Renewable energy (non‐ biomass) electric or  thermal systems  (on‐site or remote).      1 ‐3       (3 points  max.)  Electric Systems (on‐site or remote): 1 point per 1.2 kwh/sf/year  renewable energy capacity (Residential) or per 2.4kwh/sf/year  (Commercial).  Thermal Systems: 1 point per 4.0 kBtu/sf/yr renewable energy capacity  (Residential) or per 8.0 kBtu/sf/year (Commercial).  RE2  Renewable energy  biomass  3 ‐4 3 points (Commercial) or 4 points (Residential) for approved biomass  space heating systems.   OTHER POINTS  OP1  Development density 1 1 point for density of more than 7 dwelling units per acre. OP2  Walkability 1 1 point if the property is on the walkability map.  OP3  Adaptive reuse 1 1 point for substantial re‐purpose of existing building. OP4  Meet NY Stretch Code 1 1 point for complying with 2015 NY Stretch Energy Code OP5  Custom eEnergy  improvement of choice (2  points max.)  1 ‐2    1 point for each 1.2 kwh/sf/year (Residential) or 2.4 kwh/sf/year  (Commercial) reduction in energy use. Prerequisite: no fossil fuels. 2  points maximum.    WHOLE BUILDING PATH  WB1 Comply with recognized  high performance building  standard  N/A Commercial:  Passive House OR min. 17 energy points per LEED V4.   Residential:  Passive House OR RESNET HERS/ERI max. 40 points OR  National Green Building Standard min. 80 energy efficiency points       WATER EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS  WE1  Use EPA Water Sense /  other efficient fixtures  N/A All buildings must meet this requirement, regardless of which  compliance path is used.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 7  Table 1. Easy Path Summary Table  1.5 Projected Impacts  The projected energy impacts of the green building policy are shown in the following graphs. The three  lines shown represent business as usual (blue), the impact of the green building policy in new buildings  (red), and the impact of both the green building policy in new buildings and energy efficiency in existing  buildings (green). The impact of both the green building policy in new buildings and energy efficiency in  existing buildings (green)  assumessuming 25% reduction in energy use by 2030 and 50% reduction by  2050.  “Business as usual” assumes energy use intensity for new buildings reflects the current energy  code. The impact of the green building policy assumes 40% savings for buildings through 2025, 80%  savings for buildings built in the period 2025‐2030, and zero energy buildings after 2030. The impact of  both the green building policy in new buildings and energy efficiency in existing buildings (green)   assumessuming 25% reduction in energy use by 2030 and 50% reduction by 2050.          Figure 1. Project impacts of green building policy in City of Ithaca    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 8    Figure 2. Project impacts of green building policy in Town of Ithaca    Possible interpretations of these projections include:    1. The green building policy is required to slow the growth of energy use.  2. A separate policy will be required to deliver energy efficiency in existing buildings.   1.6 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)  Q. Is the Ithaca Green Building Policy different from the NYS Energy Conservation Code?  A. Yes. The proposed Ithaca Green Building Policy would be a supplement to the NYS code that  requires a property owner to take steps to lower the overall greenhouse gas emissions of new  or renovated buildings in order to help meet the energy goals of the City and Town  Comprehensive Plans. The NYS code is a minimum standard and it does not effectively achieve  the goals.    Q.  How do I comply with the policy?  A. New construction and substantially renovated existing buildings will need to choose either an  “”Easy Path” based on an estimated yet carefully calibrated point system OR the Whole Building  Path with third‐party verification such as LEED, Passive House or other energy modeling to  demonstrate compliance above and beyond NYS Energy Code.    Q. How do I get points if I want to use traditional efficiency approaches, such as more insulation?  A. Points for more insulation and other traditional efficiency approaches are possible through the  NY Stretch Code which is part of the Easy Path.  Or the “Custom Energy Improvement” of   Choice” points may be pursued. Or the Whole Building Path can be used.           Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 9  Q. Will the green building policy make buildings more expensive?    A. If the Easy Path is chosen, points can be achieved using improvements that reduce energy use  AND reduce construction cost. So it is possible for a building to meet the requirements and cost  the same or less than a conventional building.  If the Whole Building path is chosen, for wider  flexibility in design and construction, we anticipate the added cost might be 5‐8% more than a  conventional building.  We also anticipate that such added costs will continue to come down, as  we have seen significant cost reductions in areas such as LED lights, solar energy systems, and  other energy‐efficient technologies.    Q.  Do I need a special energy consultant?  A. Not if the Easy Path is chosen.  If the Whole Building path is chosen, an energy consultant is  required. Costs of energy consultants can sometimes be covered through state (NYSERDA) or  utility or other energy programs.    Q. Can I use fossil fuels in my new building?  A. Fossil fuels are discouraged in several ways. But fossil fuels are not prohibited.     Q. Are green building approaches such as deconstruction and reused materials, light pollution, indoor  environmental quality, gray‐water reuse, rainwater harvesting, electric vehicle chargers, solar‐ready  roofs, and others a part of the green building policy?   A. The initial focus of the green building policy is energy and water, as both of these impact carbon  emissions and relate to recommendations in the City and Town Comprehensive Plans. We  recognize the importance of other green building characteristics and will recommend that these  be examined in the future. The initial focus of the policy is limited to energy (and, specifically,  carbon emissions) and water.        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 10  2 Green Building Policy Study and  Social Impacts Study  2.1 Goals  Goals for energy efficiency, renewables, and reductions in carbon emissions are emerging at the  national, state, and local levels.    Global sustainability efforts are aimed at meeting or exceeding the ambitions of the Paris Climate  Agreement signed by all countries except the United States, which will require a reduction of  greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 80% or more by 2050. The U.S. is a signatory to the Paris agreement,  but may be withdrawing; however, New York State is one of 14 states that intends to comply with the  agreement.    Nationally, the voluntary Architecture 2030 Challenge advocates for all new construction and major  renovation buildings to be “carbon‐neutral” buildings in 2030. Carbon neutral buildings are defined to  be buildings that use no fossil fuel, greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting energy to operate. The schedule of  targets for Architecture 2030 is:     ● 70% GHG‐emitting, energy consumption reduction below the regional (or country)  average/median for that building type.  ● 80% in 2020  ● 90% in 2025  ● Carbon‐neutral in 2030 (using no fossil fuel GHG emitting energy to operate)    New York State has also adopted the goal of decreasing GHG emissions 80% by 2050, as well as the mid‐ term goal of reducing emissions 40% by 2030. In 2015, New York adopted its important and current “50  by 30” renewable energy goal, which targets 50% of the State’s electricity to come from renewable  sources like solar and wind power by the year 2030. Other state goals include a 23% decrease in energy  consumption in existing buildings from 2012 levels, also by 2030.  (https://energyplan.ny.gov/)    The state of California’s revised Title 24 energy code includes ambitious energy‐related performance  requirements and goals for residential and commercial buildings. It states that all residential buildings  must be zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020 and all commercial buildings must achieve ZNE by 2030. The  code applies to retrofit projects that pass certain thresholds. The California Energy Commission and the  California Public Utilities Commission jointly released a New Residential Zero Net Energy Action Plan  2015‐2020. This plan outlines the path for reaching the residential ZNE goals and key strategies to get    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 11  there, including building awareness of value and benefits of ZNE, and aligning regulations, policies,  incentives, etc.    At the local level, the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca and Tompkins County all have goal of 80%  reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. The Tompkins County Energy Roadmap was created to evaluate  the local energy resources in the area and develop scenarios to meet the county’s greenhouse gas  emission reduction goal and projected energy needs through 2050. The report recommends  constructing new buildings that are extremely energy efficient, aiming for a 70% reduction in energy use  compared to the national median for comparable buildings, and increasing to net zero carbon emissions  between 2030 and 2050, which is in line with the nationwide goals of Architecture 2030 and the Ithaca  2030 District . Another recommendation is a 35% reduction in energy use in existing buildings through  retrofits and upgrades by 2050.   2.2 Criteria of a Successful Green Building Policy   In short, a successful green building policy should be FAIR:    ● Flexible: Allow flexibility and creativity for developers, building design professionals, and  builders.  ● Affordable: Maximize positive social impacts and minimize negative social impacts.  Most  importantly, but not exclusively, should allow for affordable buildings, to allow home‐ownership  and affordable rents.  ● Impactful: Result in buildings that measurably use less energy and reduce carbon emissions.  ● Reachable: Not add unreasonably to  work for City and Town building departments, developers,  design professionals, and builders.    A successful green building policy should also:  ● Be adaptable, to change in coming years, as carbon emission goals become more ambitious.   ● Complement the existing New York State energy code.  ● Deal with new buildings as well as renovations.  ● Harmonize with other energy programs, such as NYSERDA, PACE financing, Federal tax credits,  etc.  ● Promote best practices in energy‐efficient design and construction, to show the path forward as  the energy code itself becomes more challenging, and to serve as a model for other  municipalities.  2.3 Social Impacts  As we consider options for a green building policy, it is important to keep in mind possible social  impacts.  Some of these include:      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 12  ● Human Health: Reduced air pollution is good for human health and the health of the planet, in  the broadest sense, with benefits ranging from reduced lung disease to reduced impacts of  climate change.  ● Lower energy costs:  Lower energy costs are a major benefit of a green building policy. And  energy costs are not only those of building owners, but also of tenants in rented spaces.  Energy  costs are also often borne by building owners who did not develop a building, and so who were  not responsible for its first cost.   ● Construction and Living Costs: Construction costs have generally been viewed as being higher  for green buildings, resulting in higher costs of buildings, housing, mortgages, and/or rent for  tenants. Interestingly, and importantly, there are a number of energy improvements that also  reduce the construction cost of buildings. These are addressed in a separate discussion in this  report and are a major component of the proposed policy.   ● Maintenance costs:  Some green building improvements reduce maintenance costs.  For  example, more efficient lighting can mean fewer light fixtures, and so fewer lamps to replace.   Also, LED lamps last longer than other types of lighting, and so replacement labor is reduced.   Other improvements, such as solar photovoltaic systems, increase maintenance costs.   ● Transportation Equity: Locating buildings in urban areas and close to public transportation  reduces both the carbon emissions from, and the costs of transportation.  ● Resilience: In general, green buildings are generally more resilient, in other words they will  stand up better to storms, power outages, and other unusual scenarios. Most importantly,  energy‐efficient buildings will stay warmer for much longer (for example, for days instead of  hours) during winter power outages, and will stay cooler for longer during summer power  outages.    ● Security:  There are not many links between green building policy and security, but there are a  few. For example, motion sensors for outdoor lighting save energy and are viewed as being  good to ward away intruders.   ● Safety:  Insofar as green buildings use less fossil fuels, the risk for poisoning from carbon  monoxide or explosion from natural gas or other fossil fuels is reduced. Several hundred people  die in the U.S. each year from either carbon monoxide poisoning or gas explosions. Green  buildings can reduce the risk of flame spread as they are tighter (less infiltration), and can  reduce mold and moisture, which is better for human health and also preserves building  components.  ● Jobs: Green building creates new jobs in the design and construction industry.       Throughout the study, Ithaca‐specific needs were at the forefront of considerations, including needs of a  college town, climate‐specific needs (cold climate), geographic constraints of Ithaca (bounded by the  lake and three hills), and well‐recognized needs for affordable housing and transportation.   Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 13  2.3.1 Do green buildings cost more?   High‐performance buildings are estimated to cost between 0 and 15% more than minimally code‐ compliant buildings. Generally, the higher the energy efficiency (in other words, the lower the energy  use), the higher the cost. Examples, drawn from local projects, are shown in Figure 14.           Figure 314. Relationship between energy use and incremental construction cost.    Buildings meeting high‐efficiency passive house standards (approximately 24 EUI) are estimated to cost  2‐6% more than conventional buildings.    Buildings that are zero‐energy (0 EUI) are estimated to cost 10‐15% more than conventional buildings.  As a reality check, if a conventional building were supplied with 100% of its energy from commercially  available solar energy, without any other building improvements the added cost would be 14%, using  prices for currently‐available solar photovoltaic systems.     Added costs for energy‐efficient construction continue to drop, for two reasons:  a. The above estimates do not account for energy improvements that not only reduce energy use  but also reduce construction cost.  See the separate discussion of affordable energy  improvements. If affordable energy improvements are chosen, their savings in construction cost  can be applied to the added cost of improvements that do add cost to a building, but the overall  added cost will be less than 10‐15% for a zero‐energy building.  The potential for affordable  high‐performance design and construction are shown with two points on the above graph.     Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 14  Ecovillage TREE’s 4‐story apartment building, with 15 apartments, delivered extremely low‐ energy performance (EUI = 9, viewed as close to zero‐energy) at a construction cost 5% LESS  than a typical equivalent building. And a single‐family home on Perry City road is operating at  zero‐energy performance despite costing only 10% more to build than a comparable home.  b. The costs of individual components of high‐performance buildings are dropping as demand  increases.  Examples of these are shown in Figure 15.  Solar photovoltaic system costs have  dropped by over 75% over the past seven years. Air source heat pump costs have dropped by  over 60% over the past seven years, and it is strongly believed that costs will continue to drop as  demand increases. LED lamp costs have dropped by over 60% in the last four years alone.      Figure 415.  The dropping costs of energy technologies. (Footnote: The future impact of recently new  imposed tariffs on imported solar panelsenergy isare as yet unknown.)    With net‐zero buildings being built for less than 15% over the cost of than conventional buildings, and  with the costs of energy‐efficiency and renewable energy still dropping steadily, we predict that net‐zero  buildings will cost less than 5% more than conventional buildings, as the market for net‐zero buildings  grows, and could even be built at no additional cost, if attention is directed to affordability through  improvements that both reduce energy use and reduce construction cost.    Another lens through which costs can be viewed is as life cycle costs, accounting not only for the “first”  cost, or capital cost, but accounting also for operating costs, including energy and maintenance. Viewed  through this lens, the life cycle cost of energy‐efficient buildings is typically shown to be lower than the  life cycle cost of conventional buildings. This lens is convincing to some early adopters, but is typically    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 15  not convincing to most developers. Since the operating costs of buildings typically do not fall on  developers, but rather on tenants and on future building owners (either directly or indirectly), the lower  life cycle cost of energy‐efficient buildings can be viewed as a consumer protection issue, in addition to  being an environmental issue.  (https://www.wbdg.org/resources/life‐cycle‐cost‐analysis‐lcca)    2.4 Certifications  The built environment has extensive direct and indirect impacts on our environment. Whether during  demolition, construction or operation, either in the residential and commercial sector, all building types  use significant natural resources, require embodied energy (energy used in making construction  materials), create waste, and, most significantly, use energy during their lifetime. However, one way to  urge movement toward a more sustainable building design practice is through green building  certifications. These certifications are a set of independent third‐party guidelines and criteria against  which the design, construction, and/or performance of a building are evaluated.      Green building certifications offer several benefits:   1. The criteria and threshold requirements end up guiding local energy codes in the long run or  even being integrated (e.g. HERS into the NYS IECC for homes).   2. They serve as high‐performance building best practice guidelines.   3. They allow people the opportunity to do better‐than‐code design and construction, and so  obtain a certificate to be proud of, be seen as a model and be used as inspiration.   4. Certifications can be used as mandatory requirements, and have been by such entities as  universities or municipalities. For example, the City of Evanston, Illinois, requires that city‐ owned/city‐financed commercial or residential buildings over a certain square footage be LEED‐ Silver certified.   Certifications can be used as a quality control check and so help that project goals are delivered.  It is possible for a high‐performance building project to get off track and not meet goals, and so  certifications provides checkpoints, with third party verification.    5. Certifications can be used as a quality control check and so help ensure that project goals are  delivered. It is possible for a high‐performance building that is not a certified project to get off  track and not meet goals, and so certifications provides checkpoints, with third party  verification.  6. Environmental stewardship through reduced carbon emissions, and reduced impacts on the  environment through the extraction, development, and transportation of fossil  fuels.Environmental stewardship.   7. For positive community relations, to show that a developer is a good neighbor and cares about  their building.  8. It is common that most of the standards are created through a consensus process and evolve  through a three‐year development cycle, so they are well‐vetted, and periodically update.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 16  While there are plenty of advantages, there are several concerns about green building certifications.  Chiefly, the two common criticisms not to pursue a certification (such as LEED) are the perception of  increased construction cost and the documentation path is long and arduous. It has also been reported  that some owners and developers argue that certifications do not deliver on the results due to the lack  of post‐occupancy reporting and bridging the gap between design and performance.  In some cases, it  has even been suggested that plaques should not be issued until a building can prove actual energy  usage. The Living Building Challenge certification has taken this step and grants certification after one  full year of data has been submitted. There also seems to be a trend of clients wanting “certifiable”  projects but not actually wanting to commit to a certification. A lot of the same reasons mentioned  above apply in the motivation for not pursuing a certification and cost is always a huge contributing  factor. It seems the perception of cost could be misplaced, however. For instance, much of the  incremental cost is doing the documentation, energy modeling, etc. which would be necessary to verify  performance goals are met regardless of pursuing a certification or not. Meeting and project  coordination are also time and money spent, but a necessary requirement for any high‐performance  building. A certification can keep the project team accountable and on track to help achieve their  ultimate performance goals. It could also be the natural tendency of a team to jump into a program  checklist with a narrow “checklist mentality” ,and so providing a shortsighted interpretation of  requirements and goals. Instead, success can be more deeply achieved if a project team approaches  certification from a holistic standpoint, keeping broader goals in mind, and even by defining who they  are as an organization and what they want to stand for in their project.       Over the past 20 years, there has been a significant number of building certifications and programs that  have been rolled out. Some have gained traction and others came and fizzled out.  Several certification  programs have been more successful, and in fact transformative in the built environment. We have  examined many of these certification programs, both for residential and commercial buildings, including  LEED, EPA Energy Star, DOE Zero Energy Ready Home, HERS, Passive House, and others.     In considering certifications, we also recognize the energy code as a type of certification. Developed by  the International Codes Council, the International Energy Conservation Code is the basis for energy code  requirements in New York State. The state typically adopts the IECC with minor state‐specific  modifications. The latest version was adopted in October 2016, and is based on the 2015 version of the  IECC. The next IECC version is already due in 2018, and might well be adopted by New York State.  In parallel, NYSERDA recently developed a “stretch” energy code (2015), based on the IECC, but even  more energy‐efficient.  Developed in code‐ready language, the stretch code is intended to be ready for  use by municipalities in New York State to take energy efficiency performance beyond the current code  to further reduce the impact of buildings on the environment. The main objective is to produce a model  code that is adoptable with minimal changes by local governments and that is one cycle ahead of the  current New York State energy code. The final language was originally set to be issued in 2017, but has  been delayed. We believe that the stretch energy code will be roughly 10% more energy‐efficient than  the current energy code. Work has already begun on the next stretch energy code, informally referred  to as the 2018 Stretch Energy Code, targeting 20% lower energy use than the energy code. to be ready  to roll out in conjunction with the 2018 IECC, .   The stretch energy code has a set of mandatory    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 17  requirements, separate core requirements, and a set of additional energy efficiency options from which  one must be chosen.  The core requirements are met through either “prescriptive” compliance (for  example, additional insulation) or “performance” compliance (meeting specific performance goals on a  whole‐building basis).     In choosing possible certifications, a variety of criteria should be considered:  ● Ease of compliance  ● Ease of reviewing/approving compliance  ● Cost  ● Use of independent third party verifiers  ● Impact on design and construction schedule  ● Energy and water use reductions    The project team reviewed a wide number of certifications, compared them to the criteria listed, and  chose certifications that best met the policy’s goals.  2.5 Overall Approach  There are many options for green building policies. The diagram below somewhat arbitrarily arranges  these on a continuum from “carrot” (positive incentives) to “stick” (code requirements, mandates, etc.).   “Penetration” indicates the market penetration of various approaches, in other words, the success or  adoption rate of the approaches:    Figure 5. Diagram of policy approaches      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 18  Experience with other government and utility energy programs has generally found that a single  approach to reducing energy use or carbon emissions is not as effective as a balanced and  comprehensive multifaceted approach.  For example, code requirements can be ineffective unless  combined with training for design professionals, contractors, and code officials. Otherwise, new code  requirements are not complied with, even if they are law.    Market penetration is important to evaluate and predict for any policies under consideration. It is  important to recognize that experience with high‐performance buildings, so far, has primarily been on a  demonstration basis, targeting “early adopters”. We see that LEED, widely regarded to have been a huge  success, has nonetheless only seen market penetration in the 2‐3% range, for new buildings. By using  incentives such as rebates, states have achieved almost 12% average market penetration with the  Energy Star program for new homes. Penetration for the Energy Star program for new homes has been  higher in a small number of states, as high as 42% in Maryland and 60% in Arizona, but the highest in our  northeast climate has only been 12%, in Pennsylvania.    The urgency to respond to the effects of climate change is calling for us to move from demonstrations  and early adoption to widespread implementation. The only approach that can guarantee broad market  penetration is through code requirements.  Incentives can be used to supplement mandated code  requirements, to accelerate the process and to ease the cost burden.    We propose a policy that combines many of the  approaches listed above including a strong mandate.    2.6 Timing of Interventions / Processes  Another aspect of policy interventions and processes is their timing. For new buildings, options may be  visualized as follows. The interventions shown are for example only, and do not represent final  recommendations for policies. What is important is that early interventions have the greatest chance of  impacting projects.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 19  Figure 6. Timing of Interventions  2.7 Fossil Fuels   Should fossil fuels be discouraged as heating fuels as part of a city/town policy?     A natural question in considering policies to reduce and eventually eliminate carbon emissions in the  City and Town is whether to discourage the use of fossil fuels as heating fuels for space and water  heating. Fossil fuels used for space and water heating make up a large fraction of the city and town’s  carbon emissions.  Fossil fuels are also higher in carbon emissions than other forms of space and water  heating, such as heat pumps, and this difference will only increase as the electric grid is increasingly  composed of more renewably‐generated electricity.    We examine the pros and cons of discouraging fossil fuels for space and water heating:    2.7.1 Pros of Discouraging Fossil Fuels  ● Reduce carbon emissions  ● Reduce risk of stranded assets:  New fossil fuel infrastructure may well only end up lasting a few  decades as a transition to electricity is strongly anticipated.  ● Consumer protection:  As the cost of heat pumps has come down and is now roughly at parity  with fossil fuel systems, there is no longer an installed‐cost (construction cost) benefit to fossil  fuel heating systems.  For some fossil fuels, such as fuel oil and propane, consumers suffer  significantly increased energy costs, at no benefit in lower construction cost.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 20  ● Safety ‐ reduced risk of carbon monoxide poisoning and explosions from gas leaks  ● Support NYSEG’s new pilot project, which has the goal of providing adequate natural gas service  to the region without building a new gas pipeline. A big part of this effort is to reduce gas use in  current and future buildings. NYSEG and the New York State Department of Public Service have  cautioned that if too much gas is drawn from the system to feed downtown Ithaca, then the  non‐pipe alternative approach to meeting Lansing’s gas needs could fail, and a new pipeline will  be needed.  We are all connected and what the City and Town do has impacts elsewhere.     2.7.2 Cons of Discouraging Fossil Fuels  ● If natural gas prices drop or if electricity prices rise, we might risk preventing the lowest‐cost  heating fuel.    2.7.3 Basis for Discouraging Fossil Fuels  Historically, consumer protection has been a widely justified basis for banning or limiting certain heating  systems.  The energy code, for example, significantly limits the use of electric resistance heat, primarily  because it is so expensive for consumers.    There is a strong emerging consensus among energy policy‐makers at the national, state, and city (such  as New York City), and local levels that to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals, we will need to  transition to high‐efficiency electric space and water heating systems (as opposed to natural gas or  other fossil fuels).There is an emerging consensus that we will need to electrify our buildings.   As a  result, New York State has new incentives for both ground source heat pumps and air source heat  pumps.  This essentially discourages the use of fossil fuels for space heating.    Architecture 2030 has set as a goal the elimination of fossil fuels in new buildings by 2030.       2.7.4 Options for Discouraging Fossil Fuels    Options for discouraging fossil fuels include:    ● Providing incentives for non‐fossil options, such as heat pumps.  ● Using a rating system that accounts for carbon emissions, that gives points for non‐fossil  alternatives such as heat pumps. Therefore, if gas is chosen to be used, a building would need to  be measurably more energy‐efficient in other ways.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 21  Recommendation:  We are discouraging fossil fuels through a point system, for which additional points  are obtained if fossil fuels are not used.   2.8 Benchmarking  Should a benchmarking ordinance be a part of a green building policy?     As the old adage goes, “if you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it.” Benchmarking is the collecting,  reporting, and sharing of measured energy usage in buildings. This data is typically reported annually  through the free online tool EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager, and allows you to compare energy  usage against other buildings. The purpose of benchmarking and other transparency policies is to bring  awareness of building energy consumption and performance and identify opportunities to help inform  building owners/operators and tenants how to make their buildings more efficient.     New York City adopted Local Law 84 (NYC Benchmarking Law) in 2010, the first energy benchmarking  requirement of its kind. Many other States and municipalities have since adopted a benchmarking and  transparency policies as a way to quantify and evaluate building energy usage their building stock.    The advantages of a benchmarking ordinance is that it is good for seeing where buildings are, for  establishing best practices and “benchmarks”, and for encouraging (some would say “shaming”) building  owners to design and operate more efficient buildings.  Another advantage is to provide better data to  enable better policy around reducing building energy use.    Disadvantages of considering benchmarking as a green building policy include that it is really more of an  “existing building” policy, rather than a policy for new buildings, which is the focus of this study.  In  other words, benchmarking is not something that is captured on design drawings and submitted to the  building department for review, in order to get a building permit.  Also, a benchmarking program is fairly  time‐consuming to define and implement.  As implemented in other cities, such as New York,  benchmarking is only applied to larger commercial buildings. So benchmarking might not be able to be  cost‐effectively implemented for all buildings.     Recommendation:  We are not recommending a benchmarking requirement in the green building policy,  because it applies to existing buildings more than to new buildings. We strongly recommend that a  benchmarking policy be examined separately.   2.9 Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS) ‐ New Buildings:   Local examples of what is possible and is already being done.  Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS) maintains a unique database of energy performance for  their portfolio of buildings. Because INHS builds locally, is committed to high‐performance buildings, and    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 22  is committed to affordability and other positive social impacts, this dataset can be a helpful reference  for the green building policy effort.     INHS is a not‐for‐profit, specializing in affordable housing . INHS recently expanded its service area from  the City of Ithaca to all of Tompkins County. Their buildings include a variety of low‐rise wood‐frame  multi‐family buildings, as well as medium‐rise masonry buildings such as Breckenridge Place.    A sample of new buildings from the last 10 years found an average Energy Use Index (EUI) of 44. This is  highly energy‐efficient, approximately equal to the current energy code, even though the buildings were  all designed and built before the new code. EUI’s range from 33 to 65.  All of the buildings in the sample  were designed and built to high‐performance standards such as Energy Star or LEED, except one.  Interestingly, the one building that was not designed and built to a high‐performance standard is the  one that has the highest EUI (65), and the EUI for which is measurably higher than all the others: The  second‐highest EUI is 49.      For reference, the current average local multifamily building stock has an EUI of 78, and the average  new multifamily building likely, designed to the fairly efficient energy code of 2016, has an EUI of  approximately 44.  The Passive House standard is approximately 23, and the current Architecture 2030  target (through 2020) is approximately 24.     INHS reports that their strategies for green building design and construction include:  Air sealing, added  insulation, high efficiency heating (better than code), high efficiency appliances (ENERGY STAR), and  high efficiency lighting (LED, etc.).   Takeaways from this analysis include:    1. High‐performance design and construction is feasible locally, and indeed is already being done. 2. INHS’s data set confirms that high‐performance certifications such as Energy Star and LEED  appear to work.  And a building by the same reputable developer that was not certified did not  deliver the same level of energy efficiency. The best practices and quality control that  accompany certifications do appear to deliver energy efficiency.      2.10 Affordability‐Driven Energy Efficiency Approach  There is an important but perhaps not widely‐recognized group of energy improvements to buildings  that interestingly (and perhaps counter‐intuitively) both reduces construction cost, and reduces energy  use.  There is another group of improvements that is generally cost‐neutral, while, again, reducing  energy use.  Examples of cost‐reducing and cost‐neutral improvements include:    ● Building orientation (optimize for solar gain)    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 23  ● Reducing floor area  ● Reducing surface area (simple shape)  ● Using ductless air source heat pumps, which appear to be close to parity for construction cost  with conventional systems for many types of buildings, and for which prices continue to drop  ● Using fewer light fixtures due to reduced lighting loads, resulting from optimized design  ● Combining multiple uses or tenants in one building rather than in several smaller buildings  ● Reducing window size and quantity (reduce “window‐to‐wall” ratio).  This does not mean  eliminating windows, but rather avoiding over‐glazing, while maintaining views and daylighting.  See discussion below.    These affordable energy improvements may not be widely recognized because they are not incentivized  by government and utility energy programs, and so are not widely promoted. In fact, it is not possible to  incentivize them.  How can one provide a tax credit or rebate for something that costs less to install?     A small number of these affordable energy improvements have started to find their way into codes and  standards. For example, the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code, which serves as the basis for  NY State’s 2016 energy code, limits the window‐to‐wall ratio of commercial buildings to 30% (with some  exceptions allowed).  LEED version 4 provides extra credits for homes that are smaller than a reference  (typical) size, which varies by the number of bedrooms, and conversely penalizes homes that are bigger.  This requirement also appears in other residential high‐performance standards (Energy Star, DOE Zero‐ Ready Homes, etc.).    We increasingly see examples of these affordable improvements in high‐performance buildings. For  example, the Ecovillage Tree common building, a 20,000 SF four‐story with 15 apartments and common  areas (common area kitchen, laundry, community area, etc.) was built for a remarkably affordable  $124/SF (including foundation, structural, interior finishes, siding, mechanical, electrical including the  service/distribution/lighting, plumbing, stairs, elevator, insulation and soundproofing, the common  kitchen, doors and windows, sprinkler system, and permits).  (See References:  Green Energy Incentives,  p. 18.) The building adopted a number of these cost‐reducing improvements, such as:    ● Reduced surface area (simple shape)  ● Smaller apartment size.  Studio apartments in TREE are 450 SF, compared to the national  average new studio size of 512 SF in 2015; one‐bedroom apartments in TREE are 690 SF,  compared to the national average new one‐bedroom apartment size of 751 SF.    ● Low window‐to‐wall ratio    (https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental‐market/us‐average‐apartment‐size‐trends‐downward/)    Benefits of affordability‐driven energy improvements include:  ● Lower energy use  ● Lower construction cost    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 24  ● Complements the energy code and high‐performance standards, such as LEED. For example, as  the energy code becomes more stringent over time, the affordability‐driven improvements  deliver additional energy savings.  ● Promotes best practices  ● Savings persist well over time  ● Adapt to energy code changes well over time  ● Prevent pushback from those who are concerned that reducing energy use drives building costs  up.  ● Innovative – we are not aware of any jurisdiction (federal, state, local) that has tried anything in  this area, other than the two examples mentioned earlier (commercial energy code limit of  window‐to‐wall ratio, and LEED’s credits for avoiding large homes).      A description of improvements that deliver more significant energy savings follows.  2.10.1 Reduce building size  A smaller building uses both less energy and costs less.  The impact of smaller buildings on energy use is  almost linear, due to energy uses that scale with size: heating, cooling, lighting, etc.:  A 10% smaller  building is expected to use slightly less than 10% less energy, as some energy uses remain constant  regardless of building size.    Are smaller buildings acceptable?  This is obviously an owner‐specific question.  For example, the size of  the average new American home ballooned from 1,660 SF in 1973 to over 2,600 SF in 2016, before  reportedly beginning to become smaller again.  Homes overseas are significantly smaller:  1,200 SF in  the Netherlands, 1,000 SF in Japan, and 800 SF in the U.K.  LEED and other high‐performance residential  building standards recognize the importance of building size, and provides credits for smaller homes.     Promoting smaller buildings is only possible for those building types that have a metric for size:  number  of bedrooms for homes and apartments, hotel room size, etc.  The reference (typical) building size for  residential buildings is shown in Appendix B. The reference hotel room size is 330 square feet  (https://www.orourkehospitality.com/average‐hotel‐room‐size‐is‐shrinking/).     2.10.2 Placing heating/cooling systems within the heated space  Many heating/cooling systems are placed outside the heated space (on roofs, in attics, in unheated  basements, in crawl spaces, etc.), and as a result lose significant energy.   Even when an unheated  basement is located inside the thermal envelope, losses of 10% or more are typical.          Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 25  2.10.3 Reducing hot water energy use  High‐efficiency water fixtures typically do not cost more than regular‐efficiency fixtures. EPA’s Water  Sense program requires water flow rates that are 20% less than required by code for shower heads, and  30% less than required by code for bathroom faucets.    Hot water energy savings could be further delivered through requirements for Energy Star ratings for  major water‐using appliances, such as dishwashers and clothes washers, at modest cost increase.    In a simplified analysis of a 2000 square foot house, reducing hot water energy use by 20% reduces the  overall building energy use by 8%.  This would be more applicable for buildings with significant shower  and faucet hot water use (homes, apartments, hotels), and less applicable for buildings with low hot  water use such as offices, and so would likely only be offered as an option to applicable buildings  (residential and hotels).     2.10.4 Efficient Reduce surface area (building shape)  Buildings with high exterior surface area require more energy to heat and cool, because they have more  exterior surface area through which heat is transferred.  Such buildings also cost more to build.  Reducing a building’s ratio of surface area to floor area by 20% is estimated to reduce overall building  energy use by 10%. This can be done by avoiding complex shapes, avoiding overly‐tall ceilings, and other  approaches.     2.10.5 Avoiding overlighting  Most commercial buildings are overlit, far exceeding recommendations of the Illuminating Engineering  Society of North America (IESNA).  By sizing lighting correctly, on a space‐by‐space basis, buildings can  be right‐lit instead of overlit. Right‐lighting reduces construction cost by avoiding the installation of  more light fixtures than necessary.  Right‐lighting also reduces maintenance costs over time.  Right‐ lighting also reduces energy costs for air conditioning, and can reduce the construction cost for air  conditioning systems as well, by allowing smaller systems.    Reducing overlighting by 25% is projected to reduce overall energy use in commercial buildings by 8%.   Savings in residential buildings are less because lighting use in homes is far less than in commercial  buildings.     To be clear, this does not mean reducing lighting below levels recommended nationally by the  Illuminating Engineering Society (IES).  Rather, it means avoiding overlighting, in full compliance with  IES‐recommended lighting levels.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 26  2.10.6 Modest Low window‐to‐wall ratio while retaining views and natural light  Windows cost more per unit area than the wall they displace, due to a combination of the window and  the framing required around the window. Windows also cause high energy losses due to heat transfer,  despite these losses being very modestly offset by gains from daylighting, gains which are themselves  being lost due to the development of energy efficient lighting such as LED as well as efficient lighting  controls. There are also modest solar gains from south‐facing windows, if not shaded, but these accrue  only if the south‐facing windows are optimally sized.    In a small sample survey of new commercial buildings in Tompkins County, high‐performance buildings  (TREE common house, HOLT Architects new office) were all found to have a window‐to‐wall ratio less  than 20%, and standard code‐compliant buildings (a hotel, an apartment building, and an office building)  were all found to have a window‐to‐wall ratio over 30%. In a small sample of residential buildings,  findings were the same.    To show the power of the window‐to‐wall ratio, in a simplified analysis of a 2000 square foot house,  reducing the window‐to‐wall ratio from 30% to 20% reduces the overall building energy use by a  significant 8%.    As mentioned, the new energy code limits commercial buildings to 30% window to wall ratio, with  exceptions that allow it to go up to 40%.    A frequent concern voiced about lowering window‐to‐wall ratio is “Will the building be dark?  Will it lack  in views or daylighting?  Will it be unattractive?”     Green building standards are clear that, for views, we do not need a window‐to‐wall ratio of 30% or  more, that 20% is sufficient, and that we only need views in regularly occupied spaces.  The green  building standard BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method)  defines views as being able to see the sky from desk height, and further defines a “view out” as being a  minimum window‐to‐wall ratio of 20%.  And a case can also be made that views do not need to be  provided for all types of spaces.  Views might be considered optional for spaces such as mechanical  rooms, laundry rooms, other utility‐type spaces, corridors, stairwells, bathrooms, and more.  Similarly,  the green building wellness certification system WELL (International Well Building Institute) only  requires a minimum 20% window‐to‐wall ratio, and only in regularly occupied spaces (which would  mean an overall minimum window‐to‐wall ratio less than 20%), in addition to proximity of workstations  to windows.    Large windows are also not needed for daylighting. Gains from daylighting are offset by window thermal  losses, and there is an optimum window size and shape for maximum energy efficiency. With the  introduction of extremely high‐efficiency lighting such as LED, and artificial lighting increasingly  controlled (dimmed or turned off), the optimum window‐to‐wall ratio for energy efficiency has  plummeted, and is likely far below 20% for most spaces.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 27    Buildings with modest window‐to‐wall ratios can still have attractive facades.  Despite the TREE common  house having a modest window‐to‐wall ratio (approximately 16%), the building has a dramatic and  attractive south‐facing façade with significant windows:      Figure 7. The Sustainable Living Center at EcoVillage South wall    The building achieved a low window‐to‐wall ratio by locating fewer windows in rooms that do not need  windows, and limiting glazing on the north side, east, and west side of the building. Here is a photo of  the building’s west elevation:    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 28    Figure 8. The Sustainable Living Center at EcoVillage West wall    Many attractive buildings have window‐to‐wall ratios even lower than 15%. This is common in buildings  such as the beautiful brownstones in the cities of the Northeast.  Covering our buildings with glazing is  relatively recent phenomenon.  Consider a brownstone in Brooklyn:       Figure 9. Brooklyn brownstone      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 29  Its front facade window‐to‐wall ratio is 29% (shown above), its two sides have no windows (due to  common walls), its rear facade has a window‐to‐wall ratio of 22%, and its overall window‐to‐wall ratio is  14%.     2.11 Renewables  Renewable energy installed on or near buildings is referred to as on‐site or site‐located (as distinct from  remote‐located) and includes, most commonly, solar photovoltaic electricity.  Less common is solar  thermal energy (mostly solar hot water, but can also include solar‐heated hot air). Another option is  wind‐generated electricity.    Renewable energy has been growing rapidly, and is expected to continue to grow.    Why not simply allow or require renewable energy to provide all the energy needed by a building,  without requiring the building to be energy‐efficient, in other words not requiring good insulation,  windows, heating, etc.?   There are several reasons to not just allow renewable energy to meet all a  building’s energy needs, without better buildings:    ● Renewable energy systems can fail, making a building revert to relying on non‐renewable  backup energy.  ● Renewable energy systems take energy, themselves, to be fabricated.  This is referred to as  embodied energy, and offsets some of the savings of the renewable energy system.  ● Renewable energy systems cost money to maintain, and this cost offsets some of the energy  cost savings.    In order to address these limitations of renewable energy systems, it is not unusual to encourage a  balance of efficient building design and renewable energy. The voluntary Architecture 2030 system, for  example, limits renewable energy to 20% of its goal to eliminate fossil fuel use by 2030.  The 20% is  relative to a baseline of energy use in the early 2000's, for each of a variety of building types, and for  different geographic locations.    Requiring the use of on‐site renewable energy is problematic because not all buildings are suited to on‐ site renewable energy. Many buildings are shaded by adjacent buildings or other things.     As a result, we recommend:    1. Encourage renewable energy systems, but limit the credit given for them, to prevent a building  from over‐relying on renewable energy. This approach is consistent with most widely‐accepted  green building certification schemes, such as Architecture 2030 and LEED.  2. Allow either on‐site renewable energy or remote renewable energy.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 30  Biomass  Biomass used for space heating (direct thermal energy) is considered to be renewable.  For space  heating, the most common forms of biomass are cord wood, pellets, and chips, all of which rely on  waste wood from other logging operations. Having a market for the low‐grade timber prevents high‐ grade logging (taking only the very best trees and leaving the rest, which makes for very unhealthy  forests). Our forests in NYS are growing at a rate of more than 2.5 times the rate of harvest. Also, in the  case of pellets, they are made up of roughly 85% waste wood from other lumber operations (sawdust  and offcuts), which are waste from an existing industry (and pose a fire hazard if left on‐site). As  referenced in the Tompkins County Energy Road Map, our forests throughout the Northeast and New  York State are also, for the most part, fully mature, which means that they are not growing much, and  therefore not sequestering nearly as much carbon as managed forests could, with a mix of older and  younger forest stands. Woody biomass contributes to improved forest health, carbon sequestration  rates, and forest biodiversity; generally keeps energy dollars local; creates a market for low‐quality  trees; and if offsetting fossil fuels, clearly reduces carbon emissions. One area of legitimate concern is air  quality. Older and not‐well‐operated wood stoves and outdoor wood boilers can produce  pollution.   Therefore, requirements for biomass systems should include provisions for air quality. Biomass does  require energy for harvesting and transportation, but this is a small fraction of its useful energy, even for  wood pellets. NYSERDA considers biomass for heating applications to be carbon neutral.  2.12 Incentives  Financial incentives are a common way to promote energy efficiency. For example, the federal  government gives a 30% investment tax credit for solar energy, and furthermore allows accelerated  depreciation for commercial capital investments in solar energy systems. NYSERDA gives rebates for  solar energy systems.  New York State furthermore gives its own 25% state tax credit for residential solar  energy systems, with a cap of $5,000.    When considering financial incentives, it is important to target the incentive in such a way as to  motivate people to invest in energy savings (incentives need to be sufficient to change behavior) but not  so high as to waste taxpayer money. We have seen government and utility programs in which energy  efficiency is given away, and yet some people still do not participate.  We have also seen programs in  which incentives were so small that participation went to zero.     The following conceptual graph illustrates these issues.        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 31    Figure 10. The Effect of Financial Incentives on Participation in Energy Programs    As mentioned earlier, even successful incentive programs typically do not achieve deep market  penetration rates.  For example, the combined incentives for solar photovoltaic systems have exceeded  50% of the installation cost, for over 10 years, and these have been sufficiently attractive to launch the  industry in a substantial way (almost 80,000 completed projects in New York State by 2017), but  cumulative market penetration is still less than 5% (https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐ Programs/Programs/NY‐Sun/Data‐and‐Trendshttps://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/NY‐ Sun/Solar‐Data/Solar‐Data‐Summary‐and‐Trends).      A specific technology can be supported, such as high efficiency lighting, high efficiency heating, or  renewable energy systems. Or incentives can be on a whole‐building basis, for example if a building  achieves a certain LEED score or HERS score. Finally, incentives could be awarded if buildings achieve a  specific number of points under a custom scoring system.    It is also important to consider other incentive programs, where possible, such as those offered by  NYSERDA, New York State government (other than NYSERDA), the federal government, local utilities  such as NYSEG, and others.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 32  2.12.1 Reduction or fee waiver of Building Permit and/or Site Plan Review fees  Like many municipalities in New York State, both the City and Town of Ithaca, respectively, charge fees  for building permits and Site Plan Review (for projects subject to Site Plan Review). These fees are  typically established by resolution of the City’s Common Council or the Town’s Board. The City of Ithaca  currently charges $1.50 per $1,000 of construction cost for Site Plan Review as well as $7.00 per $1,000  of construction cost for a building permit. For example, a new seven‐story, $11.5M commercial project  (approximately 75,000 square feet) adjacent to the Commons paid approximately $80,500 in Building  Permit fees as well as another $12,250 in Site Plan Review fees in 2014.  2.12.2 Amend City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and Town Environmental  Quality Review (TEQR) Thresholds  The Department of Environmental Conservation, charged with overseeing the State’s Environmental  Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is currently conducting a review of those regulations. Proposed in the new  draft regulations (proposed 6 NYCRR §§ 617.5(c)(19)‐(22)) is the reclassification of Infill Development  (occurring on previously disturbed sites) as a Type II Action. The rationale is that development on sites  that have been previously disturbed and that have existing infrastructure would categorically result in  significantly less environmental impact than developing undisturbed sites.     One action the City and Town could take independently – but complementary to the proposed SEQRA  amendments – would be to amend their respective local SEQRA thresholds – the City Environmental  Quality Review (CEQR) and Town Environmental Quality Review (TEQR) – to classify smaller projects  demonstrating energy and location efficiency as Type II Actions. For example, the City of Ithaca could  amend Chapter 176: Environmental Quality Review (§ 176‐4 (k) to reclassify ‘Construction of 15 or more  residential units’ from a Type I Action to a Type II Action for projects that meet the following criteria: be  located within the ‘Walkable Neighborhoods – Green Building Policy Map’; commit to energy  benchmarking; and earn at least a minimum number points on the checklist. Of course, if the project  met other listed Type I Action thresholds, such as proximity to a Critical Environmental Area, the action  would still be Type I.       2.13 Net‐Zero Energy Buildings   Net‐zero energy buildings use renewable energy to generate as much (or more) energy as they  consume, on an annual‐average basis.     There are already multiple net‐zero energy buildings in and near Tompkins County. Several homes in the  Ecovillage TREE neighborhood are net‐zero. HOLT Architects new office was designed to net‐zero, and in  practice is reportedly operating close to net‐zero. A new home on Perry City Road was designed to net‐   Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 33  zero and appears to be operating at net‐zero. Nearby, Lime Hollow has a new education center that was  designed to net‐zero and is operating at net‐zero.     Net‐zero buildings using on‐site renewable energy depend on the ability to site the renewable energy  system. This is not always possible. In most cases, the on‐site renewable energy is solar energy, and  many buildings do not have either unshaded roof area or unshaded site area for adequate solar energy.  In these cases, off‐site solar energy is now possible, through community solar or remote net‐metering,  although these programs and offerings are new relatively new.     It might be noted that adequately sized and sited renewable energy systems also do not guarantee net‐ zero operation. For example, if a renewable energy system fails, then a building might revert to buying  energy, and so no longer makes as much energy than it uses.  For this reason, efficient buildings are  important. Architecture 2030, for example, limits the amount of renewable energy that can be used, on  its path to carbon‐neutral buildings.    Our main questions relating to net‐zero were:    1. Should we have a goal for net‐zero being required for buildings?  2. If so, by when?  3. And, if so, what types of renewable energy will be required/allowed?    A possible guide to answer these questions is the Architecture 2030 program, which targets the year  2030 for carbon‐neutral buildings, by incrementally increasing energy efficiency and renewables every  five years between the present and 2030.  As the number of buildings that are already net‐zero  increases steadily, and as we see that this is no longer an unreasonable or unaffordable goal, 2030 is  clearly realistic as a goal for net‐zero.      Any net‐zero goal must allow remote renewable energy, because not all buildings have access to  renewable resources such as on‐site solar or wind power.     It is inevitable that we will need to end up requiring net‐zero energy buildings.  As populations grow and  communities develop, the only way to control carbon emissions in the long term is with net zero  buildings.  We take our lead from Architecture 2030, which has set a goal of net zero by 2030, and from  the State of California, which is targeting 2020 for net‐zero homes and 2030 for net‐zero commercial  buildings. The Tompkins County Energy Roadmap also strongly affirmed the need for net‐zero energy  new buildings.         What types of renewable energy should be required/allowed? The most common form of renewable  energy is solar energy, either photovoltaic or solar thermal. Solar thermal must be located onsite (either  roof‐mounted or ground‐mounted), but photovoltaic systems can be located either onsite or remotely,  under provisions of New York State regulations covering remote photovoltaic systems. Wind (electric)  systems are another type of renewable energy system, that can be either onsite or remote. Biomass for    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 34  space heating is also viewed as being renewable and close to carbon‐neutral, even accounting for the  energy required to harvest and transport biomass feedstock.    2.14 Pulling it All Together: Recommendations    We recommend that a local ordinance be passed requiring that all new buildings, including majorgut  renovations and new additions, comply with the green building policy. Two compliance paths are  provided:    1. The Easy Path emphasizes energy improvements that also reduce construction cost, such as  smaller building size.  This is a point system.  A building must meet 6 points.  2. The Whole‐Building Path allows more flexibility in building design.  Commercial buildings must  obtain a minimum of 17 LEED Energy points, residential buildings must achieve a HERS score of  40 or less, or a minimum score of 80 Energy Efficient points using the National Green Building  Standard.  Alternatively, all buildings may comply by designing and constructing to the Passive  House standard.         Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 35  All new buildings shall use efficient water fixtures:    Fixture Requirement Source  Toilet (including tank or flush  valve)  1.325 gpf TABLE P2903.2 , 2017  UNIFORM CODE SUPPLEMENT  (New York State)EPA Water  Sense  Urinal 0.5 gpf EPA Water Sense  Shower 2.0 gpm EPA Water Sense  Kitchen Faucet 1.8 gpm California Requirements  Bathroom Faucet 1.5 gpm EPA Water Sense  Pre‐Rinse Spray Valve 1.28 gpm EPA Water Sense  Notes:  1. gpm: gallons per minute  gpf:  gallons per flush  2. Exception:  Unless code requirements are more stringent, such as 0.5 GPM for faucets in public  bathrooms.  Table 2. Water fixture requirements    (It should be noted that allsome of the above requirements were recently adopted in the 2017 code  supplement. We have decided to keep the requirements, even though some are already mandatory,  because awareness of the new code requirements appears to be very low.)    In addition to the requirements of this policy, all new buildings shall still comply with the New York State  Energy Conservation Construction Code.     Where possible, roofs should be designed to be “solar‐ready”: A. Maximize area available for solar  collection systems. For pitched roofs, place roof‐mounted components or structures (plumbing vents,  exhaust fans, access hatches, etc.) on north‐facing roof surfaces, to keep south‐facing surfaces available  for solar collection systems. Where this is not possible, or on flat roofs, cluster roof‐mounted  components and structures such as to allow the maximum possible contiguous area for solar collector  systems. B. Design roof structures to support future solar collector systems. C. Orient one roof surface  to the south, plus/minus 30 degrees, to maximize potential for solar energy.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 36  2.14.1 Easy Path  A building must achieve a minimum of 6 points, from among the following.  Each point represents a  reduction of 6‐10% in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, very roughly, when compared to NYS Energy  Code and documented local building practices.  The points were developed based on simplified energy  models, assuming average building characteristics as the “baseline” against which savings are measured.  EPA factors are used for calculating greenhouse gas emissions based on energy usage.  Six points is  estimated to deliver 40‐50% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.     Points in the Easy Path that are labelled “Residential” apply to all buildings covered by the New York  Residential Energy Code, AND ALSO residential buildings that are four stories and higher that are  covered by the New York Commercial Energy Code.  Points that are labelled “Commercial” apply to all  buildings covered by the New York Commercial Energy Code EXCEPT residential buildings that are four  stories and higher. Mixed‐use buildings, where a portion of the building is residential and a portion of  the building is commercial, should be evaluated based on the criteria for the use that covers a majority  of the building’s floor area. If more than 50% of the floor area is residential then the buildings should be  scored using residential criteria, if more than 50% of the floor area is comercial then the building should  be scored using comercial criteria.   Points in the Easy Path that are labelled “Residential” apply to all  buildings covered by the New York Residential Energy Code, AND ALSO residential buildings that are four  stories and higher that are covered by the New York Commercial Energy Code.  Points that are labelled  “Commercial” apply to all buildings covered by the New York CommercialResidential Energy Code  EXCEPT residential buildings that are four stories and higher.       2.14.1.1 Points for Efficient Electrification:    These points are intended to reward reductions in carbon emissions with the use of efficient electric  technologies, which is expected to become increasingly lower in carbon emissions over time as the  electric grid becomes more renewable. The cost of these technologies are rapidly dropping, and in many  cases are already lower than fossil fuel technologies, or are expected to drop below the cost of fossil  fuel technologies. In many cases, higher product costs are offset by lower installation costs (no gas pipe  required, no venting required).    3 points (residential), or 2 points (commercial buildings) ‐ use air source heat pumps for space heating. 4  points (residential) and 3 points (commercial) for ground source heat pumps or biomass heating  systems. (Water loop boiler/tower heat pumps do not comply, as these heat pumps rely on fossil fuels.   Also, packaged terminal heat pumps do not comply, because of their low energy efficiency.) Ventilation  must also not be fossil‐fuel heated. To allow flexibility for small rooms, electric resistance heat is  allowed for up to 10% of the building’s projected annual space heating load. Air source heat pumps shall  comply with the NEEP Cold Climate requirements.    For more information on heat pumps and biomass, see the Reference section, at the end of this report.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 37      For more information on heat pumps and biomass, see the Reference section, at the end of this report.      1 point (residential) ‐ heat pump or biomass water heaters.  The heat pump water heaters shall initially  be set on heat pump‐only mode.    1 point (residential) ‐ use both electric stoves and ventless heat pump clothes dryers (see Glossary).    This point requires the use of heat pumps or biomass for space heating, and additionally requires no  fossil fuels in the building.        2.14.1.2 Points for Affordability Improvements:    1 point ‐ Building size more than 15% smaller than the reference size. See the table below for residential  buildings. The reference size is 330 SF for hotel rooms.  Or: 2 points ‐ Building size more than 30%  smaller than the reference size – see the table below for residential buildings, or more than 30% smaller  than 330 SF for hotel rooms.  (Building size points are not available for buildings other than residential  or hotels.)  For the purpose of this point, multifamily buildings are defined as buildings with two or more  units in a single building.  For hotels or multifamily buildings, the size is the average of all units or rooms;  individual units or rooms may exceed the requirement.    Conditioned (heated) floor area of reference home, by number of bedrooms, in square feet.      Table 3. Residential reference sizes.    1 point ‐ Heating systems in the heated space. Place heating/cooling systems inside actively heated and  finished spaces.  No heating systems, ductwork, or water piping shall be located in unheated or  unfinished basements, in unheated attics, in crawl spaces, outdoors, on roofs, in exterior wall cavities,    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 38  above the ceiling of the top floor of a building, or through‐wall such as packaged terminal equipment or  window‐mounted systems.  Outdoor units of split system heat pumps may be located outdoors and  there are no limitations on the location of refrigerant piping.  Examples of where equipment, ductwork,  and water piping can be located:  In heated spaces, in interior wall cavities, in mechanical rooms that are  not in unheated/unfinished basements/attics/outdoors, in closets in finished spaces, above ceilings that  are not on the top floor of buildings.   1 point ‐ EfficientSimplify building shape.   Exterior surface area divided by gross floor area is less than  the maximum value provided in the table below.  For the exterior surface area, include the above‐grade  exposed insulated surface, typically including above‐grade walls, floor of vented attics (or roofline if  insulated at the roof), floors above vented crawl spaces. Include windows and doors as part of walls,  include skylights as part of roofs.  Include exposed floors, such as below a cantilever. Include walls  between heated spaces and unheated spaces, such as between a house and an attached garage. The  table was developed for a simple rectangular building shape for different ranges of building size (floor  area), for an optimum number of stories, assuming a 9 foot floor‐to‐floor height, with an allowance to  give flexibility for slightly more complex shapes or taller ceilings.         Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 39  Table 4. Maximum wall plus roof to floor area ratio     1 point ‐ Right‐lighting. Commercial buildings only. Reduce overlighting (25% lower lighting power  density than the energy code).   Perform photometric lighting design on a space‐by‐space basis, using  the space‐by‐space lighting power density method (not the whole‐building method), designing to the  mid‐range of IESNA foot‐candle targets, unless the building is for primary use by the elderly.  Construction documents shall include a table of space‐by‐space lighting power density. Use LED lighting  where possible. Use reflective surfaces where possible, with a preferred target reflectance of 90% for  ceilings, 70% for walls, and 50% for floors. Require motion sensors for all exterior lighting, combined  with photocells to ensure that lighting stays off during the day.  Require motion sensors for interior  lighting in the following spaces:  offices, conference rooms, kitchenettes, corridors, stairwells,  bathrooms, lobbies. Require short off‐delay for occupancy sensors (1 minute or less), and  commissioning of lighting controls. Provide for manual control to allow lights to be kept off. Both  requirements of this section must be met (e.g. reduced overlighting AND lighting controls) in order to  obtain the point.    1 point ‐ Modest windows with views and natural light. Overall window‐to‐wall ratio less than 20%.   Windows in individual regularly‐occupied spaces are allowed to be more than 20%. For calculations,  include glazed portions of doors in the window area, but not opaque portions of doors. Include glazed  portions of curtain walls, but not spandrel/opaque areas.          Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 40  2.14.1.3 Renewable Energy:    3 points ‐ non‐biomass renewable energy capacity (4 points starting in 2025):  Residential buildings   a. 1 point for each 1.2 kwh/sf/year (electric systems, e.g. solar photovoltaic)   b. 1 point for each 4.0 kBtu/sf/year (thermal systems, e.g. solar domestic hot  water)   Commercial buildings   a. 1 point for each 2.4 kwh/sf/year (electric systems, e.g. solar photovoltaic)   b. 1 point for each 8.0  kBtu/sf/year (thermal systems, e.g. solar domestic hot  water)   Non‐biomass Rrenewable energy points are capped at 3 points maximum (4 points starting in  2025).     Off‐site (remote) renewable energy generationsolar is allowed. Documentation must be  provided for contractual commitment to either ownership or long‐term (20 years minimum)  commitment.      3 points (Commercial) or 4 points (Residential) ‐ biomass space heating systems.  All eligible biomass  equipment must comply with NYSERDA’s Renewable Heat NY guidelines. To be eligible, a pellet stove  must produce less than 2.0g/h particulate emissions and be on the EPA’s list,  available at  https://www.epa.gov/compliance/list‐epa‐certified‐wood‐stoves. A list of eligible residential and small  commercial pellet boilers (less than 300,000 Btu/h) is available through the link at  https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/Renewable‐Heat‐NY/Small‐Pellet‐Boiler. They  must have a thermal efficiency of at least 85%, particulate emissions of less than 0.080 lb/mmBtu, and  carbon monoxide (CO) emissions less than 270 ppm at 7% O2. Requirements for larger pellet boilers can  be found at https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/Renewable‐Heat‐NY/Large‐Commercial‐Pellet‐ Boiler. Requirements for residential and commercial cord wood boilers can be found at  https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/Renewable‐Heat‐NY/Advanced‐Cordwood‐Boiler.    For more information on biomass, see the Reference section, at the end of this report.  2.14.1.4 Other Points:    1 point for lots developed at more than 7 dwelling units per acre density (the threshold to support  frequent transit service). Projects should be built at this density or greater to contribute to the existing  or future transit accessibility and walkability. Non‐residential development can be converted to units by  dividing the area of conditioned space, in square feet, by 1000.    1 point for being within 1/4 mile (walking distance) to at least 5 of the following destinations:  schools, stores, cafes/restaurants/pubs, dentist/doctor's offices, libraries/community services, or within    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 41  the development priority areas mapped in the walkable neighborhoods map. We recommend that the  City and Town update the map on an annual basis. The draft map, included below, was developed based  on a ¼ mile buffer from existing service hubs where a resident could accomplish multiple errands on  foot, or where the Town of Ithaca has planned future mixed use neighborhoods. Adoption of the final  map for implementation of this policy will require more complex review of locations including university  campuses where different walkability metrics may apply.    Figure 11. Walkability map    1 point ‐ adaptive reuse.  When a building is kept and re‐purposed for a different use (for example,  when an old school is adapted for use as apartments). A majorgut renovation of a building and re‐use  for the same purpose (e.g. old apartments are renovated) is not eligible for this point. Maintain at least  50% (based on surface area) of the existing building structure and envelope.     1 point ‐ comply with the 2015 New York State Stretch energy code.  (This will be increased to 2 points  if/when the next version of the energy code is released, anticipated to be in 2019, when the stretch  code targets 20over 15% energy reduction.)    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 42    2 points ‐ Custom Energy Improvement. Can only be applied to buildings that do not use fossil fuels.  Reduce energy use by 1.2 kwh/SF/year per point (residential buildings) or 2.4 kwh/SF/year per point  (commercial buildings).  Cannot be provided by renewable energy savings.  Savings must be shown  through energy analysis performed by an experienced energy professional.  For a baseline, use the NYS  Energy Code, latest edition.  If the baseline condition is not addressed by the NYS Energy Code, use  baseline conditions as defined in ASHRAE Standard 90 Appendix G, or RESNET HERS.   Savings must be  calculated after applying all other proposed energy improvements to the proposed design.  Simplified  calculations (e.g. spreadsheet) are acceptable. Multiple improvements may be combined to achieve  each point under this improvement. The proposed energy improvement shall be submitted in writing to  and approved by the AHJ before proceeding with design.    2.14.2 Whole Building Path    In lieu of accruing points, the developer can choose to comply with a recognized whole‐building high‐ performance certification, such as:    1. For commercial buildings, 17 energy points (Optimize Energy Performance) based on LEED  Version 4, to be demonstrated either with LEED review/certification or by other third party  certification of the energy model, such as NYSERDA.  The energy model (printed complete input  and output reports) shall be submitted with the design documents with the application for a  building permit, with a statement by the energy modeler that the energy model meets the  requirements for 17 energy points based on LEED Version 4.  2. For low‐rise residential buildings, RESNET HERS/ERI (with a maximum score of 40). Compliance  shall follow procedures defined for the ERI compliance path in the New York State Energy  Conservation Code.   3. For residential buildings (single‐family, multifamily low‐rise or high‐rise):  National Green  Building Standard (“NGBS”, also known as ICC/ASHRAE 700‐2015) with a minimum of 80 NGBS  Energy Efficiency points.  The professional documenting compliance will provide a statement  that the design meets the intent of a minimum 80 Energy Efficiency points per ICC/ASHRAE 700‐ 2015, and documentation supporting these points.  4. For commercial or residential buildings, Passive House.  Submit approved pre‐certification from  either PHIUS or Passive House International, according to current‐version standards of either  organizationthe PHIUS+ 2015 Passive Building Standard: North America, when submitting  construction documents in application for a building permit.    This whole building compliance path allows more flexibility, but typically requires more insulation,  higher‐efficiency heating and cooling, and extensive other energy improvements.  Note that for the  whole building path, definitions of residential and commercial buildings adhere to definitions in the  energy code, unlike the Easy Path in which residential buildings include buildings 4 stories and higher.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 43  2.14.3 Renovations and Additions  RGut renovations that consist of the removal of interior or exterior finishes for more than 50% of an  existing building and additions over 500 square feet shall comply with the requirements for new  buildings (Easy Path or Whole Building Path).       Additions over 500 square feet shall comply with the requirements for new buildings (Easy Path or  Whole Building Path). Additions shall be treated on their own, and not as part of a larger building.   For  the window area point, treat the shared new common wall area (where the addition meets the existing  building) as part of the new addition’s exterior wall. For the building shape point, the area of the shared  wall (or floor of the addition, if above the existing building) is not counted as part of the exposed above‐ ground wall/roof area.    New additions less than 500 square feet shall comply with the 20156 New York State Stretch Energy  Code, in addition to the above requirements for water conservation.    All otherLimited renovations that trigger the energy code, such as heating system replacement, lighting  replacement, bathroom renovations, kitchen renovations, etc. shall comply with the 20156 New York  State Stretch Code, in addition to the above requirements for water conservation.     Building owners are encouraged to replace fossil fuel space and water heating systems with heat pump  systems.      2.14.4 Exemptions    Consistent with the New York State energy code, historic buildings are exempt from the green building  policy. In renovation of a historic building, steps to reduce carbon emissions are encouraged that  preserve the historic fabric of the building, such as rehabilitation of windows, installation of heat pumps  for space and water heating, insulation and air sealing, and high‐efficiency lighting where lighting needs  to be replaced.    2.14.4 Future   On January 1, 2025, the requirements are proposed to change to:    1. Easy path:  12 points  2. Whole building path:    a. LEED:  17 energy points (LEED version 4) AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding the  Stretch Energy Code and lighting point)    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 44  b. HERS Score Maximum 40, AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy  Code and lighting point), OR a HERS Score Maximum 20  c. National Green Building Standard (“NGBS”, also known as ICC/ASHRAE 700‐2015) with a  minimum of 80 NGBS Energy Efficiency points, AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding  the Stretch Energy Code and lighting point)  d. Passive House, AND 3 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy Code and  lighting point)    On January 1, 2030, the requirements are proposed to further change to net‐zero building designs that  are free of fossil fuels.  The fossil‐fuel‐free requirement will allow exceptions for commercial cooking  and industrial applications for which no electric options are available, such as emergency generators.   The standard by which net‐zero is defined will be established before January 1, 2024.      2.15 Compliance  A successful green building policy is one that does not place a significant burden on those who will  review and approve building planning, design, and construction.  We propose the following compliance  documentation:    1. For the proposed point system, a checklist that shows which points are sought, and support for  each point. For example, if a developer is seeking the size credit for a house design, the checklist  would show the house area (square feet), number of bedrooms, required house size, and  proposed house size, to show that the house meets the size requirement.  2. For the proposed whole‐building compliance, a report by an accredited third‐party energy  consultant, at the time of planning review and again when applying for a building permit.     We propose that at the planning review phase, a preliminary green building checklist be submitted,  indicating which green compliance items are proposed/planned. This will serve to show the planning  department how compliance is planned, but will also serve to bring the green building requirements to  the attention of the developer and their design professionals. A final checklist will be required to be  submitted with the construction documents, prior to the building department issuing the building  permit.    2.15.1 Incentive Package Recommendations  In order to receive incentives a new building should meet a significantly higher bar to lead the building  community toward the long term goal of net zero energy. The proposed mandatory standards ratchet  up in 2025 and 2030. We propose that buildings seeking incentives be required to meet the proposed  2025 minimum level of points or whole building certification levels in the years before 2025, and starting    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 45  in 2025 buildings would need to meet the 2030 performance level to receive the incentive package.  After 2030 incentives for green building would phase out because all buildings would be required to be  net zero. In order to receive the incentive package building owners would also commit to sharing energy  use data by granting the city or town permission to access energy consumption data through NYSEG that  could be tracked in a future benchmarking program or evaluation study. Buildings would also be  required to be located within the priority area (see walkability map) and be 100% fossil fuel free.    The high bar for incentives and the strong municipal priority for meeting energy goals should result in a  broad and attractive package of incentives. Projects meeting these ambitious goals are providing a  significant community benefit and deserve recognition and municipal support. Incentives that could be  considered in a package include: the NYS Green Building Tax Exemption (more details on this are below),  priority application processing, designation as a Type 2 action in CEQRA and TEQRA, permit fee  reduction, height bonus, minimum parking reduction, and area requirements reduction (lot size,  setbacks, coverage).  Another possible incentive is a recognition system, such as an award and associated certificate, perhaps  given in conjunction with an existing program, such as the Pride of Ownership award. An administrative  fee could be charged for this recognition, in order to cover the costs of administering the awards.    2.16 Harmony With Other Requirements, Incentives, and Programs  The proposed green building policy harmonizes with other program requirements as follows:    1. PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) financing.  PACE financing supports renewable energy  and energy efficiency improvements with financing that flows through property taxes. The  proposed policy would work fine with PACE financing. Affordability‐related energy  improvements obviously do not require financing, because they lower construction costs  instead of adding to them.  2. NYSERDA.  NYSERDA provides financial and other support for high‐performance design and  construction. Homes and other low‐rise residential construction meeting NYSERDA’s Tier III  program would meet the requirements for the whole‐building compliance path, and so be  eligible for financial incentives. Buildings following the affordable‐related energy improvements  would not be eligible for NYSERDA assistance but, again, do not need assistance because they  reduce construction cost.   3. TCIDA Energy Tax Abatement.  The Tompkins County IDA has been offering an energy tax  abatement incentive for buildings that qualify for IDA tax abatements for economic  development, since 2016. The whole‐building requirements  for commercial buildings in this  proposed Green Building Policy are similarto the IDA requirements. The question arises, “If the  green building policy is roughly equal to the TCIDA requirements, why incentivize TCIDA  buildings?”  Therefore, if this green building policy proceeds as proposed, TCIDA may want to    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 46  consider raising the bar for its incentives.  For example, in the period until 2025, TCIDA may wish  to offer its energy tax incentives for projects that achieve the 2025 targets.  Similarly, in 2025,  TCIDA may wish to again raise the bar to the 2030 targets.  And in 2030, TCIDA could consider  eliminating the incentive.  4. Solar incentives (Federal Investment Tax Credit, state residential tax credit, NYSERDA  incentives).  All these programs would assist in paying for renewable energy, if renewable  energy is used under the point system.  5. The Energy Code.  The Energy Code is a requirement for all new buildings and renovations. The  proposed green policy harmonizes well with the Energy Code. Buildings meeting the whole‐ building requirements would typically automatically comply with the code, and so not need to  submit separate compliance documentation.  Buildings following the point system would still  need to comply with the energy code, but there are no conflicts, and the point system only  helps to comply with the energy code in several areas (window‐to‐wall ratio, water use, etc.).  6. Tompkins County Green Energy Property Tax Exemption.  In 2012, the county passed a county  property tax exemption for buildings that reach the LEED Silver, Gold, or Platinum certification  levels, in alignment with a state law that enables this exemption. Only two buildings have  reportedly obtained these exemptions. The proposed green building policy could potentially be  aligned with this existing property tax exemption as follows:  a. The city and town (and even the school district) could consider adopting the exemption.  2.17 Risks and Obstacles  As best practices become common practices, it is possible that developers could choose among  improvements they were planning to do anyway. These are considered to be “free riders.”  However,  free ridership also happens with other approaches to energy efficiency, such as mandated requirements  (energy code) and incentivized requirements (tax credits, rebates, etc.).     Checking for compliance, in addition to the requirements of the energy code, could place an additional  burden on code officials, although Town and City code officials have indicated the burden would not be  significant. It might be possible for compliance to be self‐certified by design professionals, using a  checklist, and then the code official only needs to double check compliance.      “Gaming” is another risk, in which developers or builders seek to circumvent requirements of the  proposed green building policy. For example, low‐flow water faucets and shower heads could be  replaced with higher flow devices, after a building is built. Some points in the proposed point system can  be more easily gamed (for example, water flow), some points can be gamed but at some difficulty and  cost (for example, window size), and finally other points cannot be gamed (density/transportation,  building shape, building size).  Some gaming should be anticipated, and so 100% compliance should not  be expected.  Gaming is also possible with the regular energy code. The U.S. Department of Energy has  observed 80‐90% compliance with the energy code.      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 47  2.18 Indoor Comfort and Health  Indoor comfort and health are cornerstones of green buildings.  If the whole building compliance path is  chosen (LEED, Passive House, HERS), provisions are made within those certification systems to ensure  indoor environmental quality, even while energy use is reduced.  If the point system is used as the  compliance path, none of the proposed points put indoor comfort or health at risk, and some points  improve comfort and health.  For example, heat pumps eliminate risks of poisoning from carbon  monoxide, risks of explosion from leaking gas, and environmental hazards from leaking fuel oil or  propane.    2.19 Items Not Included in the Green Building Policy  The green building field is vast, and areas of green buildings are almost endless. We made a difficult  decision to not include many aspects of green buildings in the policy at this time.  Priority was given to  building improvements that reduce carbon emissions, in support of local, state, and national goals to  reduce carbon emissions.     For example, some green building certification systems give credit for electric‐vehicle chargers and/or  for “solar‐ready” buildings, buildings which have been designed and built to readily accommodate solar  systems in the future.  These two items were discussed.  While both have merits, it was decided to not  recommend either of them at this time, because neither guarantees substantial and actual reductions in  carbon emissions, and both add cost to building construction.    A wide variety of other possible green building features were discussed, such as wastewater re‐use,  rainwater harvesting, indoor environmental quality, light pollution, building deconstruction, certified  wood, beauty, and many more. Again, for a first green building policy, it was decided to focus on  substantial reductions in carbon emissions, while strongly prioritizing building affordability. Other green  building features are important and have merit, and could be considered in the future.    2.20 Other Recommendations  Other recommendations coming out of this study include:    1. Examine a benchmarking and disclosure policy for the City and Town of Ithaca, specifically with  regard to benefits and costs.    a. Review experience with benchmarking in other cities:  Compliance, costs to administer,  benefits, shortfalls.  Has benchmarking led to measurable decreases in carbon  emissions?  Has benchmarking yielded data that facilitated policy or program changes?   Examples of a benchmarking policy might include a requirement that buildings be  evaluated for their energy use, either at the time of sale, or on a periodic basis. This can    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 48  either be applied for all buildings, or for types of buildings or for buildings of a minimum  size. The energy use can be represented either with a full report of energy use, or as  some form of simplified score.  b. Develop requirements/recommendations.    2. Undertake a similar study for existing buildings and develop an associated policy for reducing  carbon emissions in existing buildings.  A possible focus could be on encouraging replacement of  heating systems as they reach the end of their useful life, insulating roofs and siding when they  reach the end of their useful life, replacing appliances with Energy Star appliances when they  reach the end of their useful life, etc.    3. Consider evaluating an institutional compliance path, to address such issues as institution‐wide  renewable energy capacity (and allocating such capacity to specific new buildings) and district  heating systems.      4. Develop requirements for buildings with large internal loads (such as labs), which might not be  able to comply with the proposed whole‐building requirements.. in cooperation with large local  institutions, as part of the next phase of this project.  5. Examine possible approaches to behavior, such as education, advocacy, and maintenance of  energy systems in buildings, to supplement the building design and construction requirements  of the Green Building Policy, in order to maximize energy savings and promote persistence of  savings over time.    6. Examine ways in which to encourage use of recycled, local, renewable, and reusable materials.    7. Examine changing site plan review process to incorporate design guidelines as partner  documents. Consider adding in elements such a requirement that developers provide  documentation of energy use study and consideration of heat pump options.     8. Consider Aadding a reference to the DEC's “Guide for Assessing Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in an Environmental Impact Statement, 2009.” in the City and Town’s CEQR and TEQR requirements. This type of review is already allowed under existing rules, but specifically referencing this guide would help to make GHG impacts a more common review criteria.   2.   2.9. Assess other strategies to reduce or offset carbon emissions, such as reforestation.           Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 49  2.21 Green Building Policy Point System:  Stress Test  As we consider a point‐scoring system for a Green Building policy, how would recently‐designed  buildings score on the system?  Would the proposed point system work for known high‐performance  buildings, in other words, would they have passed?  Would the point system work for known ¬non‐high‐ performance buildings, in other words, would they have failed?  Would such a point system have  impacted designs?  Do “better” buildings score higher?  Would the point system be unusually  cumbersome and costly?  We consider some examples.       In this discussion, we use the following nomenclature:    Net‐zero buildings:  Buildings that generate as much energy with renewable sources, such as solar  power, as is used, over a whole‐year measurement period.    Near‐net‐zero buildings:  Buildings that use less than 10 kBtu/SF/year.    Somewhat high performance buildings:  For example buildings that are LEED certified or Energy Star  certified, but are neither net‐zero or near‐net‐zero.    Not high performance buildings:  Buildings that are designed andin built to be minimally compliant with  the energy code.   2.21.1 Low‐Rise Residential Buildings  Hemsin House.  Completed in January 2016, the Hemsin house is a single‐family residence on Perry City  Road. It was designed to be net‐zero, and so far its performance is reportedly delivering on the net‐zero  design goal. The house was also reportedly highly affordable.  Despite the net‐zero design and solar  photovoltaic system, the added green features reportedly only cost about 10% more than a code‐ compliant house.  The building scores 3 points for heat pumps (although some electric resistance heat  might disqualify these points), 1 point for a heat pump water heater, 1 point for an electric stove and  heat pump clothes dryer (with no fossil fuels to the building), 1 point for a modest window‐to‐wall ratio,  1 point for modest floor area (2240 SF for a four‐bedroom house), 1 point for including all heating  equipment and distribution within the heated space, 1 point for modest surface area, and 3 points for  on‐site renewables (6.9 kw), for a total of 12 points (9 points if the heat pumps are disqualified due to  the electric resistance heat).  It easily passes the threshold of six points, as we would hope it would, and  in fact scores very high in points, as we would also hope it does, as a net‐zero building.    Overlook Apartments. Overlook Apartments (across from the hospital) were built in approximately 2007,  as a high‐performance project in NYSERDA’s Energy Star program. But despite its high‐performance  design, it likely would not meet the proposed better‐than‐code whole‐building requirement.  It might  only achieve 1 density/transportation points (if that).  Heated with boilers, it would not get the heat  pump points. It also would likely not get any of the affordability points (window size, floor area, building    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 50  shape, etc.).  We presume it would end up with perhaps 1 point, and so not come close to meeting the  proposed requirements.    Demarest Spec House, Spencer Street.  Downtown location, 1152 square feet for a 2‐bedroom single  family house, heat pumps, small window‐to‐wall ratio, and heating within the heated space all combine  to deliver 9 points.   It passes easily, and is anticipated to be a highly‐efficient house.     Ecovillage TREE – Three single‐family homes that have proven net‐zero performance, and others  designed to Passive House standards.  Even though they might only get 1 point for  density/transportation (if that), they would get one point for windows, likely two points for size, one  point for shape, one point for heating in the heated space, and one point for solar energy, for a total of  6‐7 points.  Heating is electric resistance, so does not qualify for the heat pump points. In short, the  buildings pass, as we expect they might, although do not get as many points as we might expect. Several  of these buildings would also pass, separately, due to their whole‐building Passive House certification,  which some of them achieved.    Belle Sherman Cottages.  Designed to Energy Star at the time, they are reportedly not much better than  the current energy code.  They use gas furnaces. Their location will likely earn them two  density/transportation points, but they would not qualify for any other points, and so would fail.   However, with such as heat pumps or a combination of other affordable improvements, they could pass.    Double Wide.  A typical 55x25 double wide manufactured home , with 3 bedrooms, would get one point  for modest windows and two points for modest size.  The typical exposed floor (over the crawlspace)  prevents such a home from getting the shape point.  If it does not get the density points, it would fail,  but heat pumps would allow it to pass.    2.21.2 Commercial and Large Multifamily Buildings   Ecovillage Tree Common House.  This is a 15‐apartment, 4‐story, 20000 SF building, which has a proven  performance of 9 site EUI (extremely low energy). It has 50 kw of solar PV. It would achieve maybe 1  point for density/transportation, 1 point for windows, 1 point for size (possibly two), 1 point for shape,  and 2 points for renewables (just short of 3 points), for a total of approximately 6 points, and so would  pass the point system.  If the building had heat pumps, it would have achieved 9 points.      Marriott Hotel.  The new Marriott would likely achieve 2 points for density/transportation. But it would  likely not get any other points, and so would not pass without design modifications.    Carey Building.  The Carey Building (multi‐story residential above the old Meyers shop) would get 2  points for density/transportation, 3 points for heat pumps, and 1 point for heating within the heated  space, so would pass, even though it would likely not get any other points.  Its score (6) is not as high as  a super‐high‐performing buildings, and we would also not expect its performance to be as good as these    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 51  buildings.  But its downtown location and heat pumps likely will deliver low‐carbon operation.  This  building would not have required any modifications to pass the proposed rating system, from how it was  designed/built.    Typical Building at Cornell Technology Park.  The typical building at the Cornell Technology Park is of  interest because it might be typical of commercial buildings in the Town of Ithaca:  Single‐story, ribbon  windows, efficient combustion system or boiler/tower water loop heat pump.  Such a building might  only qualify for 1 point (building shape), and perhaps 1 density/transportation points, and so would fail  unless the design were modified.   Possible design modifications would include slightly lower window to  wall ratio (1 point), use of heat pumps (2 points for a commercial building), heating within the heated  space (1 point), and high‐efficiency lighting (1 point).     Big Box Retail.  As an example, Bed Bath and Beyond.  It would get 1 point for window to wall ratio.  Almost all big box stores would get this point, automatically. Its current shape does not qualify due to its  tall ceilings. It might get 1 point for right‐lighting, although there may be corporate standards that would  prevent this.  The rooftop HVAC could go with heat pumps for 2 points, although would not be eligible  for the 1 point within the heated space.  Density might get it the points it needs to pass.  So the primary  design change would be the heat pumps and these would deliver strong reduction in carbon emissions.   If it used split heat pumps, it could get the heating‐inside‐envelope point, although this would need  separate rooftop ventilation.  This approach could be used for big box stores that do not meet the  density requirement.     107 South Albany Street.  Under construction.  14 apartments with heat pumps.  Same situation as Carey  Building – same points, same outcome, and no change to the actual design/construction would be  required. It would pass as is.    Gateway Commons.  Built in about 2006, Gateway Commons was one of the first LEED buildings in the  City, achieving a LEED Silver rating, and so is an interesting test case:  A high‐performance building, but  not very high‐performance.  This building would get 2 points for density/transportation, but likely would  not get any other points – the windows are too large, floor area is too large, the heat pumps rely on a  boiler so would not qualify, it does not have heat pump water heating, etc. It might get one point for  building shape.  So, the building would only get 2‐3 points, and would not pass.  Interestingly, the  building was benchmarked in 2012 with an energy use index (EUI) of 47.  This confirms that the building  is high performing, but not very high‐performing.     Breckenridge Apartments.  50 apartments in downtown Ithaca. Would get 2 points for  density/transportation, and possibly 1 point for floor area.  It does use heat pumps, except for  ventilation which is gas‐fired.  The gas‐fired ventilation disqualifies the heat pump points, so the building  fails, with only 3 points, even though it is LEED Platinum.   It would not be difficult to have modified the  design to get the building to pass with 3 more points, for example with more modest windows or slightly  smaller apartment sizes and/or a heat pump for the ventilation. Breckenridge’s actual energy use index    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 52  (EUI) is 45, similar to Gateway Commons.  Gateway Commons and Breckenridge confirm that high‐ performing buildings that are not very‐high‐performing do not pass the point system.  2.21.3 MajorGut Renovations  HOLT Architects . HOLT Architects’ majorgut rehab of a building in the City’s west end was designed as a  net‐zero building, with significant roof‐mounted solar energy and other green features. Its performance  has not reached net‐zero, but has still reportedly been highly‐efficient, and we would expect it to pass  the rating system.  This building would likely get 2 points for density/transportation, 3 points for  renewables, 1 point for modest window‐to‐wall ratio, 2 points for heat pumps, and 1 point for heating  within the heated space, for a total of 9 points.  It scores well, and this is good because it is a proven  high‐performance building.    109 S. Albany.  109 S. Albany is a small 1625 SF commercial professional office building.  Although not  “gut‐rehabbed” at one single point in time, extensive energy renovations over 15 years have been the  equivalent of a majorgut rehab, and the building uses 80% less energy than it did when last bought in  2002, with a site EUI of less than 25.  It would receive 2 points for density/transportation, 2 points for  solar (slightly shy of 3 points), and 1 point for low‐energy lighting, and so would just fail pass the scoring  system, although barely, with 5 points.  This is another example of a high‐performing building that fails  because it is not very high‐performing, and still relies on natural gas.  It would pass with additional solar  energy, or with heat pumps.    110 S. Albany.  Renovated in 2009, it was also converted at that time from an apartment building to an  office.  It has received LEED Platinum certification. It would receive one fewer solar points than 109 S.  Albany, and so would fail with 4 points. It is another example of a LEED Platinum building that does not  pass the point system, largely because of its natural gas use, and its energy use index (EUI) of just over  60, which is good but still not very‐high‐performance.  Required changes would include heat pumps, or  more solar, in order to reach six points.    2.22 Conclusions/Takeaways  The point system as currently proposed appears to pass known high‐performance buildings (Hemsin  House, Ecovillage TREE homes and common house, HOLT Architects, Demarest house on Spencer  Street).    The point system fails known non‐high‐performance buildings (Marriott, typical building at Cornell  Technology Park), even if they have modest high‐performance features like high‐efficiency boilers.    The point system fails moderately high‐performance buildings if they are not very high‐performance  (Gateway Commons, Overlook Apartments, Breckenridge, 109 and 110 S. Albany), although the building  designs would pass with minor modifications.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 53    The point system’s most distinctive features are the density/transportation points and points for heat  pumps. A residential or multifamily building can pass by primarily just meeting these two requirements  (e.g. Carey Building, 107 South Albany Street), and using heat pumps that are located within the heated  space.    In answer to our initial questions:    1. Would the proposed point system work for known high‐performance buildings, in other  words, would they have passed?   Yes.  2. Would the point system work for known non‐high‐performance buildings, in other  words, would they have failed?  Yes.  3. Would such a point system have impacted designs?  Yes.  We see multiple examples  where somewhat high‐performance buildings would fail, but by pursuing extra points,  could be brought to pass.  4. Do “better” buildings score higher?  Yes.  5. Would the point system be unusually cumbersome and costly?  No.      2.23 References  Green Energy Incentives, Final Report, Tompkins County Planning Department / Tompkins County  Industrial Development Agency (TCIDA) / Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD).  August 2016.    Biomass:  https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/Renewable‐Heat‐NY     Heat pump references:    https://energy.gov/energysaver/heat‐pump‐systems/air‐source‐heat‐pumps    https://energy.gov/energysaver/geothermal‐heat‐pumps    Biomass references:    https://www.epa.gov/rhc/biomass‐heating‐and‐cooling‐technologies  https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/All‐Programs/Programs/Renewable‐Heat‐NY        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 54    3 Education and Outreach  3.1 Goals  The primary goal of the education and outreach campaign is to explain the process and methodology  used to develop recommendations for the proposed green building policy regarding energy and water  conservation.     Another goal of the campaign is to solicit input and feedback on the draft deliverables and  recommendations.   3.2 Target Groups  The target groups include the following:  1. Homeowners  2. Landlords  3. Developers  4. Design professionals  5. Builders  6. Community leaders  7. Municipal staff   8. Elected officials  3.3 Strategy  The City and Town of Ithaca are in a unique position with a strong vocal community engaged in both  green energy and social equity issues. Ithaca has the opportunity to be at the forefront of energy and  water conservation policies that exceed the code minimums and push our communities toward a net‐ zero energy future. Implementing an effective policy will demonstrate leadership and set a positive  example for other municipalities.       The process of developing the recommendations for a new policy includes regular meetings of the  project team with meeting agendas and minutes which will be made available to the target groups.     A mailing list of the target groups and any interested parties will allow for regular communications to  announce special presentations or events as well as notify people of new content on the website. The  mailing list will be a primary method to solicit feedback on draft reports as well as preliminary and final  recommendations.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 55  3.3.1 Branding  The branding of a campaign can be an important part of effectively communicating the message to the  target groups and ultimately achieving the project goals. A campaign need not be flashy or overly  complex but it does require consistency. All communications should include a simple masthead with the  name of the project and a tagline. A consistent use of font styles and colors will help build confidence  and reinforce the underlying message.    For this campaign the project team has agreed on the name:    Ithaca Green Building Policy: Energy + Water    The font used is Calibri with the main name in bold and the Energy and Water regular.    The brand joins both the city and town together by just referring to “Ithaca” and the term/color “Green”  has historically been used to represent sustainability. In spite of being somewhat overused and perhaps  cliche, the term “Green” is simple and commonly understood. The terms “Energy” and “Water” provide  focus and avoid any confusion about the policy possibly applying to other common green building  practices such as sustainable sites, building materials or indoor air quality.    All communications will reference the Ithaca Green Building Policy name with the Energy + Water terms  included on more formal documents.    3.3.2 Distribution  Information will be distributed primarily by way of presentations to various stakeholder groups and  email announcements.  3.3.2.1 Website  A project website draft was ready for team and committee review on 9/22/17 and full launch in  November 2017.     The website will be the main focus of the marketing strategy with all communications directing people  there to review reports, agendas, minutes, resources and to make comments and ask questions through  a contact form.  3.3.2.2 Presentations  Some of the public presentations given through the course of this project include the following. A  complete list of events including agendas, attendees, and meeting minutes can be found on the project  website at www.ithacagreenbuilding.com.       Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 56    City Planning and Economic Development Committee ‐ January 10  City Planning and Development Board ‐ January 23  Town Planning Committee ‐ December 21  Town Planning Board ‐ January 16  TCCPI ‐ January 26  Public Information Session ‐ March 28    The outreach generated well over 200 comments on the draft report. Revisions to the report have been  made to reflect the consultant’s responses to these comments. The complete list of comments is  included as an appendix to this report as well as on the project website.  3.4 Advisory Committee  3.4.1 Summary of Selection Criteria and Process  A preliminary list of possible committee members was generated through a brainstorming activity by  the consultant with input from the client at a regular project meeting. The list included known  individuals in the community who are active with design, construction, real estate, energy, planning, and  social equity issues. Efforts were made to make the list as diverse as possible in terms of gender and  race and to include people who are both familiar with green building practices and also those who are  not. The list was then sorted into three groups of people who could best represent the three categories  of economic development, ecology or social equity.     The entire client team and consultants were presented with an anonymous online survey where they  were asked to select three possible committee members for each category to ensure a healthy and  diverse mix of people. The results of the survey were then discussed by the project team with the nine  people receiving the most votes added to the list of finalists. The project team then discussed some of  the names who received fewer votes but may have been overlooked as good candidates. Four additional  names were added through this discussion.     Once the final list of thirteen candidates was established the consultant reached out to each person to  ask them if they would be interested in joining the committee. All of the candidates responded favorably  with only one candidate suggesting an alternative person due to other commitments (the representative  from Cornell University).    The following is the list of 13 Advisory Committee Members and the organizations they represent:            Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 57  Peter  Bardaglio Ithaca 2030 District; Tompkins County Climate Protection  Initiative  Katie  Borgella Tompkins County Department of Planning & Sustainability  Kirby  Edmonds Building Bridges, The Dorothy Cotton Institute   Erik P.  Eshelman Cornell University  Steve  Hugo HOLT Architects  Jon  Jensen Park Foundation  McKenzie  Jones City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board  Brent  Katzmann Warren Real Estate  Leslyn  McBean‐Clairborne Tompkins County Legislature; Greater Ithaca Activities  Center  Heather  McDaniel Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD)  Guillermo  Metz Cornell Cooperative Extension  Scott  Reynolds Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services  Frost  Travis Travis Hyde Properties      3.4.2 Agendas, Presentations, Minutes  Agendas, presentations, minutes, and other materials from each Committee meeting can be found in  the appendix and on the project website www.ithacagreenbuilding.com.       Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 58  4 Building Stock Survey and  Development Forecasts  4.1 Introduction  In order to evaluate policy options and understand the possible outcome from different policies, it is  necessary to first understand the built environment that exists in Ithaca, as well as the associated energy  and water use relative to our policy goals. In addition, it is important to have a baseline of expectation  for how development will proceed in the future and how the future City and Town building stock could  be influenced by policy changes.   4.2 General Approach  To help the community understand the implications and potential levers for change that can help the  Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca to achieve energy and water savings goals, Randall + West has  developed the following Survey of Existing Buildings and a Development Forecast to project the future  built environment.     Identifying the data available locally, reviewing its accuracy and completeness, and performing some  basic analysis was the first step for this project. Using data made available by the Tompkins County  Department of Assessment, the City of Ithaca Zoning Division, the City of Ithaca GIS Program,the Town  of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department, and the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water  Commission, we have processed and analyzed parcel land use data, local water consumption, and  building permits. We have also estimated expected future energy use using data from from the New  York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG) 2010‐2016 Ithaca Community Energy Report, the U.S. Energy  Information Administration Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and Commercial Building  Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS), and the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority  (NYSERDA) New York State Residential Statewide Baseline Study (RSBS).     After reviewing all available local datasets, local plans, and other projections created for local studies  and projects our team decided to base our future assumptions largely on economic and population  projections from Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. This firm is well regarded in the field of economic and  population projections and has been used locally in reports by TCAD and Tompkins County Planning.  Woods & Poole’s methodology differs from other projections by modeling the entire national economy  as well as individual counties and statistical areas to better understand the interplay between economic  conditions and “natural” changes related to birth, death, and aging. The projections include an expected  breakdown of the future population based on a number of factors including economic sector, age, and  gender. We believe that Woods & Poole’s focus on trends within economic markets as predictors of    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 59  population change is the best available method for creating a baseline of expectations for future  building stock in a world where workers, and population in general, is increasingly mobile.     The outcome of any long‐term prediction, particularly when working with imperfect data, is not an exact  science. The development forecasts, and the land use demands they imply, are subject to variation due  to the many factors driving future demand. That said, these projections provide a sense of the  magnitude and proportion of change that can be expected in the long‐term based on the best available  information.   4.3 Building Stock Survey  In order to better understand the current stock of buildings, including the mix of uses, ages, sizes, and  distribution, Randall+West started with a review and analysis of all pertinent data that the City of Ithaca  and the Town of Ithaca were able to provide as well as available datasets from Tompkins County  Department of Assessment, New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG), and the aforementioned regional  Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and regional Commercial Building Energy Consumption  Survey (CBECS).     The evaluation of available data provides key insights into the built fabric of our community, the existing  building stock, and trends of change over time. These data sources provide a background for  understanding Ithaca’s buildings; however, the development forecasts, and the land use demands they  imply are subject to variation due to the many factors driving demand in the future. These projections  are intended to provide a good idea of the magnitude and proportion of change that can be expected  over time based on the best available information.  4.3.1 Land Use Area  Urban land use greatly impacts the energy and water consumption of cities and towns. Data made  available by the County Department of Assessment helps illustrate the amount of land dedicated to  each of the land use types in the City and Town.        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 60         Figure 12 ‐ City of Ithaca: Parcel Area Distribution of Land Uses  At 28% of the City’s total parcel area, residential uses consume more land than any other use in the City  of Ithaca, followed by commercial land use, and community services. In 2008, U.S. residential and  commercial buildings used 73.2% of all electricity produced in the United States1. Thus the future energy  and water demand in the City of Ithaca would be driven largely by energy and water needs of the  residential and commercial land uses.          Figure 132 ‐ Town of Ithaca: Parcel Area Distribution of Land Uses    In the Town of Ithaca, residential land use also occupies the largest parcel area. The energy demand for  agricultural and community service land uses remains relatively stable over the years. Therefore the  energy and water demand in the Town of Ithaca would be driven largely by its residential land use.    Water and energy demand depends not only on the land use, but also the size of parcels and the mix of  uses, ages, sizes, and distribution of buildings within each land use. In order to predict the energy and                                                               1 http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1791&context=lawfaculty    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 61  water requirements of the City and Town of Ithaca, a built area inventory was created to estimate the  future development and usage of built space in the City and Town.   4.3.2 Building Area Inventory ‐ Building Use Types  While land use area is useful for understanding how the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca have allocated  their limited amount of land, to understand the impact of building policies we must understand the  buildings that we have now and those we expect to be built in the future. Using County Department of  Assessment data we have evaluated the amount of building area in the City of Ithaca and Town of  Ithaca, respectively, based on the variety of use categories available. The inventory of building area was  derived by processing data from the Tompkins County Department of Assessment 2017 tax year parcel  data in ESRI ArcGIS 10.3. The Assessment Department data follows New York State Office of Real  Property Services’ Property Type Classification Codes, a uniform system used in assessment  administration in New York State which includes the following numeric codes in nine categories:    ● 100 ‐ Agricultural ‐ Property used for the production of crops or livestock.  ● 200 ‐ Residential ‐ Property used for human habitation. Living accommodations such as hotels,  motels, and apartments are in the Commercial category (400).  ● 300 ‐ Vacant Land ‐ Property that is not in use, is in temporary use, or lacks permanent  improvement.  ● 400 ‐ Commercial ‐ Property used for the sale of goods and/or services.  ● 500 ‐ Recreation & Entertainment ‐ Property used by groups for recreation, amusement, or  entertainment.  ● 600 ‐ Community Services ‐ Property used for the well being of the community.  ● 700 ‐ Industrial ‐ Property used for the production and fabrication of durable and nondurable  man‐made goods. Parcels used for research aimed primarily at improving products are coded as  Industrial, while parcels used for marketing research are coded as Commercial.  ● 800 ‐ Public Services ‐ Property used to provide services to the general public.  ● 900 ‐ Wild, Forested, Conservation Lands & Public Parks ‐ Reforested lands, preserves, and  private hunting and fishing clubs    Within each of these nine categories are a number of specific uses. For example, within the 200 ‐  Residential use category some of the specific use codes include: 210 ‐ One Family Year‐Round  Residence; 215 ‐ One Family Year‐Round Residence with Accessory Apartment; and 220 ‐ Two Family  Year‐Round Residence, among others. The Department of Assessment Property Class codes and  associated improvement descriptions were used to assign parcels into the aforementioned land use  categories used for this study.     Once the parcels in the City and Town were identified, we tallied square footage, building area for each  type of development directly from the provided parcel data. Three property types make up the vast  majority of built area in both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca; these types are Residential,  Commercial, and Community Services. At this level of analysis, it is important to understand that some    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 62  uses that most would consider residential are split between the ‘Residential’ and ‘Commercial’ land use  codes. The 200s Residential use numbers includes one‐, two‐, and three‐family homes, single mobile  homes on a lot, and multiple mobile homes on a lot when the lot is not a commercial enterprise. The  400s Commercial land use codes include several housing types including apartments, mobile home parks  where the land is leased or rented to mobile home owners as a business, rooming and boarding houses,  and fraternity and sorority houses. In addition, it is worth pointing out that Community Services includes  three of Ithaca’s largest employment sectors ‐ Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (including  university owned dorms, but not including fraternity/sorority houses).        Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 63        Figure 14. 3. City of Ithaca: Building Area by use‐type      Figure 15g. 4. Town of Ithaca: Building Area by use type    Residential, commercial, and community services land uses make up the vast majority of building area in  both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca. Residential land use makes up one of the largest  components of building area in the Town and City of Ithaca. The residential use building area is expected  to increase with demand in the coming years. In the next section, we analyze the different kinds of  residential uses as each type has a different water and energy requirement.   4.3.3 Residential Building Use Types  To better understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most people consider to be  residential, we have created a sub‐analysis of all residential uses including residential uses considered to  be “Commercial” under New York State land use classifications. This data does not include dorms on    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 64  university campuses which do not have a different property class to distinguish them from other campus  buildings (considered  Community Services) and are frequently not on their own parcels.       Figure 16. 5. City of Ithaca: Residential Building Area ‐ 2017      Figure 176. Town of Ithaca: Residential Building Area ‐ 2017      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 65  Single‐family residential buildings account for more building area than any other residential building  type in both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca, followed by two family residential, and  apartments. In the City of Ithaca, while single‐family housing comprises more building area than other  residential types, at 38% of the total residential building area it is less building area than the sum of the  non‐single‐family residential building area. According to the 2015 Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan  Housing section, “Within the City of Ithaca, 73 percent of households are renters, and countywide 44  percent of households rent their homes.” In the Town of Ithaca, single‐family building area accounts for  72% of all residential building area.   4.3.4 Building permits and demolitions  Along with the building area of different property use types, the future energy and water demand also  depends on the growth rate of the city or the town. In order to be able to make an informed estimate  for a city’s growth rate, understanding the rate of new construction and demolitions are imperative. In  this section, we take an overview of new constructions and demolitions in the City of Ithaca and Town of  Ithaca. Both the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca recently changed building permit database  systems and are working to improve data entry and data gathering practices. The best analysis for this  section would be to compare the building areas for new construction with any demolished building area  to understand the net increase each year. Unfortunately, while data on number of demolished buildings  is available, data on demolished building area is not and the vast majority of demolished buildings  appear to be sheds, garages, and carriage houses. The building area affected by any given permit is also  not currently tracked, although there is the potential in each new building permit database system to do  so. Given the limited data available, we are able to draw some basic conclusions by tracking simple  numbers of permits.              Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 66            Figure 18. City of Ithaca Building Permit Data 2014, 2015, 2016      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 67    Figure 19. Town of Ithaca Building Permit Data 2016 and 2017 (through Jjuly 2017 when data was  collected)    We find that new construction and demolitions are a small proportion of the total building permits  issued over last three years as compared to other types such as additions, alterations, repairs,  renovations, etc. While this project specifically focuses on a policy related directly to new construction,  future work looking at standards for existing buildings and smaller renovations including roof  replacements, and heating/utility upgrades could have a significant impact on overall energy use.   4.4 Building Area Forecast  In this section, we estimate the expected building area for residential, commercial, community service,  and industrial land use for the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. Building area by  land use could be used to determine the energy and water needs of each land use in the City and Town.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 68  To estimate the long‐term expected changes for the community, we relied on the 2015 American  Community Survey (ACS) for employment and demographic estimates, and Woods & Poole Economics,  Inc. employment projections for Tompkins County. Readers should note that there are many  unforeseeable events such as natural disasters (drought, earthquake, floods etc.), in‐migration, or other  significant economic, social, or political changes that could occur in the future. Changes due to these  events are difficult to quantify in the present and have not been accounted for in this study.   4.4.1 Residential Development and Market Analysis  This section of the report presents the analysis of housing and population growth for 2030 and 2050  based. We first look at the population growth estimates for Tompkins County by Woods & Poole. Using  the projected population, total residential building area is calculated for 2030 and 2050 for the City and  Town of Ithaca assuming that future residents will use a similar amount of space per person that current  residents use. As with any projection methodology we cannot be sure the assumptions will hold far into  the future. One influencing factor is the increase of one‐ and two‐person households; despite using  smaller units, these tend to have more square feet per person as even the smallest apartment can’t  shrink certain critical features like the size of bathrooms that have to be ADA accessible.  4.4.2 Population growth  We used Woods & Poole2 population projections for 2030 and 2050 for Tompkins County. Woods &  Poole follow a standard economic approach for their regional demographic and economic projections  called the ‘export‐base’ approach. Given the availability of regional data, ‘export‐based’ approach  remains one of the most reliable projection approaches.     Figure 20. Total Population, Tompkins County, 1975‐2050                                                                 2 Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. is a small, independent corporation that specializes in long‐term county  economic and demographic projections. Source:  https://data.sagepub.com/sagestats/html/public/WP%20Methodology%202016.pdf .    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 69    Figure 218. Population Distribution by age, Tompkins County, 2017    Figure 229. Population Distribution by age, Tompkins County, 2030          Figure 2310. Population Distribution by age, Tompkins County, 2050      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 70      Figure 24g. 11. Household number and size change, 1969 to 2050. Source: Woods & Poole Economics,  Inc.    We find that the overall population is expected to increase by approximately 10% between 2017 and  2050, resulting in an increased demand for housing, commercial services, water, and energy. The  highest proportion of population falls between the age group of 15 to 24 years. The population in this  age group is expected to increase by approximately 20% between 2017 and 2050. The 15‐24 age group  may be a major driver for the residential housing market throughout the region. An increase in the  number of households with a decreasing household size indicates an increase in one and two person  households. With many individuals in the 15 to 24 years age group as well as seniors living as one and  two person households, the expected residential demand for smaller dwelling unit types including  studios and apartments is expected to increase relative to large single‐family homes.   4.4.2.1 Residential building area  We first calculated the population growth rate between 2015 to 2030, and 2015 to 2050, respectively,  for Tompkins County using Woods & Poole time series data. The population growth rates for 2030 and  2050 were then multiplied with the 2015 population of the City and the Town to estimate the  population for 2030 and 2050. Residential building area per capita was calculated for 2015. Residential  building area per capita was then multiplied by the population estimates for 2030 and 2050 to project  the total residential building area for both the City and the Town for 2030 and 2050, respectively.    For the residential building area estimates, we assume that the population growth rate in the City and  the Town of Ithaca would remain the same as that of Tompkins County. In recent decades, the  population growth in the City of Ithaca has been low despite growth in Tompkins County. In a 2015  interview with Brian Crandall of the Ithaca Voice, Megan Wilson, Senior Planner with the City of Ithaca  stated, "In 1950, approximately 50% of Tompkins County residents lived within the city; today (2015),    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 71  that number has fallen to 30%. At the same time, the city remains an employment center, and more  than 13,000 people commute into the community every day.“ We want to encourage more people to  live within the city, closer to jobs and services. Population growth rate similar to Tompkins County  serves as a goal to maintain a higher population growth rate in the City of Ithaca. In addition, to better  understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most people consider to be residential,  we have included residential uses considered to be “Commercial” under New York State land use  classifications under the residential building area in our analysis.3 To avoid duplication, the area of such  property types have been eliminated from the commercial building area analysis.     We also assume that the residential area per person would remain the same in the future as it is now. In  reality, the building area per person may increase or decrease in the future. For example, as the number  of households in the future increases with a decreasing household size, demand for studio and one  bedroom apartments is expected to rise, and the demand for large single‐family homes is expected to  fall. It may appear that this would decrease the residential building area per person. However, new  suburban single‐family homes tend to be significantly larger than historic homes in urban  neighborhoods, and even apartments are trending toward having an increased number of bathrooms  relative to the number of bedrooms (this trend exists in student focused apartments as well as luxury  apartment markets). The various Housing Needs Assessments performed by the Danter Company for the  Downtown Ithaca Alliance, the City of Ithaca, and Tompkins County identifies additional closet space and  additional bathrooms as amenities in high demand. Such trends may outweigh any decrease in average  unit size. However, these changes in demand and user behavior are unforeseeable, and have not been  accounted for in this study.                                                                   3 Apartments (commercial property use type 411 as per the NYS property use codes) have been included in the  residential building area. Sixty percent (60%) of building area of detached row type and attached row type  (commercial property use types 481 and 482, respectively) has been included in the residential building area, and  the remaining 40% in the commercial building area based on a survey of such property types in the City of Ithaca.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 72  Figure 25 12. Projected Residential Building Area (in sq. ft)    The residential building area in the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca  is expected to increase by 13%  between 2015 and 2050 owing to an increase in the total population of the city and the Town. The rate  of employment growth will likely continue to outpace the rates of housing and nonresidential  construction.   4.4.3 Non‐Residential Development and Market Analysis  The development forecasts used in this study are based on projections of economic growth from the  New York State Department of Labor Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), the New  York Regional Economic Analysis Project (REAP), and the 2017 Complete Economic and Demographic  Dataset by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., a proprietary database containing more than 900 economic  and demographic variables for every county in the United States for every year from 1970 to 2050. We  first looked at the Woods & Poole employment projections for the different economic sectors in  Tompkins County. We then use this data to estimate the building area for commercial, community‐ service, and industrial land use for 2030 and 2050 in the City and the Town of Ithaca, respectively.     Historically, the data series shows that total employment in the Ithaca Metropolitan statistical area  (MSA)4 took a hit in the 2008‐2009 recession, but bounced back to that level in 2016 and is predicted to  continue to rise at the rate of approximately 600 new jobs annually through 2050 according to Woods &  Poole 2017 projections.  4.4.3.1 Employment growth  We used the Woods & Poole5 employment projections for 2030 and 2050 for Tompkins County. Woods  & Poole follow a standard economic approach for their regional demographic and economic projections  called the ‘export‐base’ approach. Given the availability of regional data, ‘export‐base’ approach  remains one of the most reliable projection approaches.                                                                  4 A Metropolitan statistical area (MSA) is a geographical region with a relatively high population density at its core.  MSAs are defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and used by the U.S. Census Bureau and  other federal government agencies for statistical purposes.  5 Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. specializes in long‐term county economic and demographic projections. Source:  https://data.sagepub.com/sagestats/html/public/WP%20Methodology%202016.pdf .    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 73    Figure 26. 13. Total Projected Employment in Tompkins County. Source: Woods & Poole    The total employment is expected to increase by nearly 27% between 2017 and 2050. The increase in  employment acts is an indicator for an overall increase in population of Tompkins County. The rate of  employment growth will likely continue to outpace the rate of residential construction. Increased  employment means an increased requirement of office, retail, industrial and community service building  area.  4.4.3.2 Non‐residential building‐area growth  This section presents the building area estimates  for commercial, community service and industrial land  use for 2030 and 2050 for the City and the Town of Ithaca. We first calculated the employment growth  between 2015 to 2030 and 2015 to 2050 using the Woods & Poole time series data for Tompkins  County. Employment growth expectations were calculated by combining projections for each Bureau of  Labor Statistics employment sector category to approximate groupings based on the New York State  Land Use Codes that identify the use of every parcel in the County Parcel dataset. We calculated the  total number of employees for each sector within each Land Use classification in 2015 for the City of  Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca, and applied a growth rate in each industry to arrive at an expected  number of employees in 2030 and 2050. The expected number of employees in each Land Use Code was  multiplied the by the average 2015 building area per employee in that Land Use Code to arrive at an  expected building area in 2030 and 2050. For the purposes of these calculations we assumed that each  sector’s employment growth rate in the City and the Town of Ithaca would be the same as that sector’s  growth rate in Tompkins County, this is a necessary assumption as employment projections are only  available at the County level. This assumption has not always held true historically, for much of  Tompkins County’s early history job growth was focused in the Village of Ithaca, and then the City after  it’s incorporation in 1888, and in the mid‐20th century economic development was largely focused  outside of the City of Ithaca, however, it is a stated goal of the City, Town, and County to encourage and  increase economic development in areas with the most existing infrastructure and recent trends have  shown substantial growth within the transit served areas of the City and Town, we expect development  to be spread more evenly across the county in future decades based on the County’s nodal development  scenarios.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 74    For the commercial, community service and industrial land use, projected employment numbers for  each economic sector were classified into the most suitable land use category using the NY state land  use codes. For each land use, we calculated the building area per capita for 2015. The building area per  capita was then multiplied with the employment estimates of 2030 and 2050 to project the total  building area of commercial, community service and industrial land use for the City and the Town of  Ithaca.     The Commercial property use was subdivided into office and retail property use as the two types have  significantly different energy and water requirements. We eliminated storage space, parking garage, and  parking lots from the commercial building area as these property types do not have significant energy  (for example heating, electricity etc.), and water requirements compared to other buildings. As  previously mentioned, to better understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most  people consider to be residential, we have removed residential uses considered to be “Commercial”  under New York State land use classifications (apartments) and have incorporated those buildings in the  residential building area analysis6.       Figure 27 14. Projected commercial building area (in sq. ft)      Table 5. Growth rate of commercial building area                                                                 6 Apartments (commercial property use type 411 as per the NYS property use codes) have been included in the  residential building area. 60% of building area of detached row type and attached row type (commercial property  use type 481 and 482 respectively) has been included in the residential building area, and the remaining 40% in the  commercial building area based on the author’s experience and survey of such property types in the City of Ithaca.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 75  The commercial building area in the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca is expected to increase by 11%  by 2030 and 25% by 2050 owing to an increase in employment and demand for office, services, and  retail.       Figure 28 15. Projected community‐service building area (in sq. ft)            Table 6. Growth rate of community‐service building area        Figure 29 16. Projected Industrial Building area (in sq. ft)      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 76    Table 7. Growth rate of Industrial building area    The industrial building area is the only sector where we project a reduction in building area.  We project  a building area decline in the City of Ithaca of 11% from 2015 to 2050, and a decline of 12% for the Town  of Ithaca. This projection is consistent with trends of Ithaca’s industrial space being converted to other  uses including commercial and residential space.   4.5 Energy and Water Usage  4.5.1 Energy  This section of the report presents the analysis of energy demand for 2030 and 2050 for the residential  and non‐residential uses in the City and Town of Ithaca. To estimate the long‐term expected energy  requirements of the community, we used the 2015 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and  Commercial and Business Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) administered by U.S. Energy Information  Administration (EIA) for per foot energy demands of residential, commercial, and community services  property types. RECS and CBECS are a nationally representative sample of housing units. For the 2015  survey cycle, EIA used web and mail forms – in addition to in‐person interviews – to collect detailed  information on household energy characteristics, including the housing unit, usage patterns, and  household demographics. This information is combined with data from energy suppliers to estimate  energy costs and usage for heating, cooling, appliances, and other end uses for these housing units. We  multiplied the building area estimates (from the building area forecast) with the EIA per square foot  energy requirement to estimate the total energy requirement for residential, commercial, and  community service property use types.     Apart from building area, energy demand also depends on user behavior. There are a range of factors  that could impact user behavior: stringent energy codes; changing technology; changing energy costs;  increased affordability of renewable energy such as solar panels; personal motivation etc. User behavior  is extremely difficult to quantify and is not accounted for in this study. In order to compare apples to  apples for our baseline future energy use forecast for a business as usual scenario we assume future  energy use per square foot to stay the same. In other words, unknowable factors such as change in  energy codes, technology, etc. are not factored into this analysis as an expected baseline. The impact of  these factors is difficult to account for, especially at the household or independent business level. In  addition, changes in energy use due to unforeseeable future events such as natural disasters, in‐ migration, etc. have not been considered. Overall, the energy demand forecast calculations are based on  the assumption that the energy requirement per square foot in the future remains constant. In future    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 77  sections of the report possible changes to energy density due to some expected trends will be more fully  explored.  4.5.1.1 Residential Energy Demand  This section presents the total energy demand by the residential property type in the City and the Town  of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. We used the residential building area projections for 2015, 2030, and 2050,  and multiplied expected building area by the per foot energy usage for residential property type as per  RECS.       4.1.5.1.2 Figure 30 17. Residential Energy Demand (in million BTUs)    We find that the estimated residential energy demand for the City and the Town of Ithaca in 2015 was  approximately 579,000 million BTUs and 456,000 million BTUs respectively. This estimate lines up  reasonably with NYSEG’s energy consumption data7 for the City and Town of Ithaca, i.e. approximately  700,000 million BTUs and 430,000 million BTUs respectively. The Cleaner Greener Southern Tier  Regional Sustainability Plan report states that residential property use type makes up for 28% of the  total energy end use. As per our estimates, residential energy demand makes up approximately 34% of  the total residential, commercial and community service energy demand combined together for both  the Town and the City. This means that residential demand would make up close to 30% of the total  energy demand of the City and the Town (with energy demand of other sectors such as industrial, public  services etc. combined). The residential energy demand is expected to increase linearly between 2015  and 2050 for both the City and the Town.       4.5.1.2 Non‐ Residential Energy Demand  This section presents the total energy demand by the non‐residential property types (commercial and  community services) in the City and the Town of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. We used the non‐residential  building area projections for 2015, 2030, and 2050, and multiplied it with the per foot energy usage for  non‐residential property types  as per CBECS.                                                                  7 Community‐wide Utility Energy Consumption Report 2010‐2015.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 78  As per CBECS, the retail and office commercial spaces have different energy requirements. Thus, we  divided the commercial property types into retail and office space depending on the spatial use of the  activity. As mentioned earlier, we then multiplied the building area projections with the per foot energy  usage for office and retail space as per CBECS.      Figure 31 18. Commercial Energy Demand (in million BTUs)      Table 8. Commercial Energy Demand by Office and Retail use    We find that the estimated commercial energy demand for the City and the Town of Ithaca in 2015 was  approximately 330,000 million BTUs and 42,000 million BTUs respectively. The Cleaner Greener  Southern Tier Regional Sustainability Plan report states that commercial property use type makes up for  17% of the total energy end use. As per our estimates, commercial energy demand makes up  approximately 20% of the total residential, commercial and community service energy demand  combined together. This means that the commercial demand would make up close to 17% of the total  energy demand of the City and the Town (with energy demand from other sectors such as industrial,  public services etc. combined). In the City, retail energy demand is a substantially larger component of  total commercial energy consumption, while in the Town retail uses only slightly more energy than  office space, this difference is directly related to the fact that a significantly higher percentage of  commercial building area in the city is retail space.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 79    Community services use the third largest building area in the City, and second highest in the Town. As  mentioned earlier, we multiplied the building area projections for community services with the per foot  energy usage as per CBECS.      Figure 32 19. Community Services Energy Demand (in million BTUs)    Projections of energy use if the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca adopt the proposed green building  policy are provided in Section 1.5.  4.5.2 Water  This section of the report presents the analysis of water demand for 2030 and 2050 for the residential  and non‐residential uses in the City and Town of Ithaca. To estimate the long‐term expected water  requirements of the community, we used the 2015 parcel‐wise quarterly water consumption data  provided by the City of Ithaca. A major limitation faced with estimating the water demand were  incomplete datasets. Water consumption data for many parcels  was missing in the quarterly datasets.  Keeping this limitation in mind, we were able to estimate the water demand by using annual average  water‐use per‐foot for each property use type. To do this, we considered those parcels that have a built  area, and whose water consumption data was complete within a quarterly dataset. We eliminated  parcels with ‐0‐ building area, negative or ‐0‐ water consumption,8 as well as outliers where there was a  huge variance from the building type’s average use (such outliers are likely the result in changes in  meter technology or other errors). We calculated the total water usage for residential, commercial and                                                               8 A building cannot have negative water use over a quarter. A ‐0‐ or negative water reading may imply an empty  building or parcel, or an issue with the water meter.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 80  community services in each quarter. We then divided the water use for each use type by their building  area (given in the dataset) to get the average quarterly water‐use per‐square‐foot for a each property  type. Because of issues in the dataset and the way water use data is collected there was not consistent  data for every building for every quarter so calculating average use per square foot separately for each  quarter was the most accurate method. The average water‐use from the four quarters was combined to  deduce the annual average water‐use per‐foot for each building type.   A similar process was applied to water consumption data provided by the Town of Ithaca with  consumption for 2017, however the town water data was extremely inconsistent with other tested data.  For the residential parcels that water consumption data was available for, the average per square foot  consumption was about 26 gallons/sqft, while the City of Ithaca’s average was just over 50 and national  averages are in the upper 50 gallons/sqft. This may be the case for a number of reasons, the average  home size per person in the Town is significantly higher than the average home size per person in the  city, however none of the tested reasons fully account for the discrepancy. We expect that the majority  of future development in the Town, based on the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, will be more similar to  development in the City than it is to existing development in the Town so we have decided to apply City  water consumption rates (that are more in line with regional and national datasets) to the expected  future development in the Town.     Figure 33 20. Quarterly water‐use per‐foot in the City of Ithaca, 2015    The water demand projections assume that the rate of use relative to building area will be constant, in  reality, water usage demand is based more on per capita (per person) consumption than per foot usage.  Water demand per foot may change in a number of scenarios; for example, we project that the number  of households in the City and the Town are likely to increase with a decreasing household size leading to  a higher demand for apartments instead of single‐family homes. In such a scenario, if the water use per  person remains the same, the water usage per foot would increase if the residential area per person  decreased and vice versa.  With that said, consumption per square foot of building at the municipal scale  is not likely to change substantially and for the use as a simple baseline for scenario comparison this  tradeoff is reasonable.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 81  4.5.2.1 Residential Water Demand  This section presents the estimated water demand for residential buildings in the City and the Town of  Ithaca. We multiplied the residential annual water use per foot use with the estimated residential  building area for 2015, 2030, and 2050.      Figure 34 21. Residential water demand (in thousand gallons)    We find that the residential water demand in the City and the Town is expected to increase linearly for  the City and the Town between 2015 and 2050.  4.5.2.2 Non‐ Residential Water Demand    In this section, we present the estimated water demand for commercial buildings in the City and the  Town of Ithaca. The water requirements for retail and office spaces are different. We calculated the  annual water use per foot for retail and office spaces separately for 2015, 2030, and 2050 based on each  uses average water consumption per square foot.          Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 82  Figure 35 22. Commercial water demand (in thousand gallons)      Table 9. Commercial Water Demand by Office and Retail use    We find that the water demand for the City increases at a higher rate than the Town between 2015 and  2050. The water demand in both the City and the Town is driven largely by the increasing retail water  demand.    For the community services water demand projections, we multiplied the annual water use per foot for  community services with its estimated building area for 2015, 2030, and 2050.      Figure 36 23. Community Services water demand (in thousand gallons)    We find that the water demand for community services buildings in the City increases at a higher rate  than that of the Town.  4.6 Benchmarking and Data Limitations  While there is adequate information to move forward with a Green Building Policy in the City of Ithaca  and Town of Ithaca now, to be most efficient such policy will require ongoing monitoring and evaluation    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 83  with more complete data than is currently available. Data collection should be improved in the areas of  building characteristics and individual building energy use benchmarking, particularly the latter, as it is a  foundational element of energy management strategy.Data collection in the specific areas of building  characteristics and individual building energy use benchmarking, particularly the latter, as it is a  foundational element of energy management strategy, should be improved.     The City’s FileMaker Pro building permitting system has capacity for inventorying basic building  characteristic information, including siding materials, foundation, roof, heat type / BTU, water heaters /  BTU, and electrical system but these values were generally missing in the data, indicating an opportunity  area for establishing a protocol for filling in data gaps. The Town of Ithaca uses Municity, an advanced  database for processing building permits that has significant capacity for monitoring the size and  performance of new and existing buildings but that would require better record keeping and data input  for all projects to be as useful as possible for the evaluation of green building related policies.    The distributed nature of buildings in addition to perceived and real permitting costs and time  requirements for developers make it an especially hard sector to regulate. However, robust and  accurate data collection is critical to achieving optimal energy use in the City and Town. Without it, it is  difficult to estimate the impact of a proposed green building policy and to assure that the incentives  offered by the City and Town, respectively, lead to the optimized energy use and public benefits that are  desired.   4.7 Projections in the Context of Local Plans  To understand the range of variation between this report’s projections for growth and other local long  range estimates it is useful to compare the various published expectations. While none of the existing  local plans fully describe buildout scenarios in the way that this report attempts to quantify, the context  is helpful to understand.     The City of Ithaca published Ithaca Planning Influences report9 in 2012 as part of their Comprehensive  Plan process. The Planning Influences report references Cornell’s Program on Applied Demographics  (PAD) projections for Tompkins County. According to this source the population of Tompkins County was  expected to grow very slowly from 2011‐2020 and then to decrease by 0.8% and 2.3% by 2030 and 2050  respectively. The PAD projections predict the total population of Tompkins County to be 100,893 in  2030, and 98,606 in 2050. The Woods & Poole projections used our baseline expectations of buildings in  Ithaca suggest that the population of the County would increase to approximately 112,000 in 2030, and  to 118,000 by 2050. The reason for a difference in the projected population for the County are likely a  difference in methodology, with Tompkins County’s  strong economic performance in recent years and  the expected growth of major employers we believe planning for more development, rather than less, is  the most prudent approach for the Green Building Policy. The Planning Influences Report informed the  Comprehensive Plan, however, the Comprehensive Plan does not include any specific targets for                                                               9 https://www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/170     Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 84  construction, or expected development within any specified timeline. The Planning Influences Report  also includes an analysis of infill building potential based on then existing zoning and an extremely  conservative metric of assuming buildings would only be torn down for redevelopment if the land under  the building was worth more than the improvements, however, with the average building in Ithaca  being worth five or six times more than the land it sits on and the recent history of variances and zoning  changes, in addition to the significant areas of character change called for in the City of Ithaca and Town  of Ithaca comprehensive Plans, we believe that looking at demand for building either housing or space  for expected business growth is a stronger predictor of future building expectations.     Figure 37. City of Ithaca Future Land Use Map      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 85  The Town of Ithaca’s comprehensive plan includes an appendix with some population growth  calculations. The Town projected a 2030 population of 22,605, this reports methodology projectes a  2030 population of 21,697. The Town of Ithaca projected a 24% increase in housing units every 10 years  with an expectation of 1,029 new housing units by 2030. While our projections are slightly smaller than  the Town’s internal projection, within the Town of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan Appendix E Population  and housing projections the analyst demonstrates that applying the methodology that they used for the  2030 projection to 2000 census numbers would result in an expected population of 17,972 in 2010 while  the census actually found a population of 16,201.       Figure 38. Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map    According to the 2017 Tompkins County Housing Strategy, there is currently a desire for an additional 1‐ 200 subsidized senior apartments, 200 new rental units per year through 2025, 300 new single family  homes in the $150k and up price range per year through 2025, 80 new condominiums per year, and an  existing deficit of 1,400‐1,500 purpose built student housing beds, and that does not include the  demand for new luxury units. The Downtown Housing Strategy, prepared for the Downtown Ithaca  Alliance in 2011, projects that over the next 5 years there is overall housing demand for up to 1,350  units in the Downtown area (consisting of up to 350 for‐sale units and up to 1,000 rental units). This  equates to an annual demand of as many as 70 for‐sale units and 200 rental units per year. As per this  report, it is estimated that there will be new 2000 jobs in Tompkins County by 2020, 5000 by 2030, and  10,000 new jobs in the County by 2050, an annual increase of just under 300. The Ithaca Planning  Influences report of 2012,  estimated a more aggressive 558 new jobs per year from 2012‐2022.    Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 86    Discrepancies in the various long range projections available should be expected, there are no crystal  balls and communities and economies are more complex than any mathematical model can hope to  capture. Compared to the various long range plans available for the City, Town, and County, we believe  this report’s projections to be conservative in terms of not significantly over or under estimating the  potential impacts of the proposed Green Building Policy.     5 Conclusion    This report represents the culmination of work performed to date as part of the Ithaca Green Building  Policy project. The final policy recommendations are based on the other elements of this report. The  survey of Ithaca’s existing building stock and the projections of future development provided a “business  as usual” baseline. The study of green building standards provided insight into potential economic, social  and environmental impacts of policies. A robust public outreach process ensured that stakeholder input  was captured and incorporated into the final policy recommendations. The resulting Ithaca Green  Building Policy, which is proposed to go into effect as soon as possible, and to ramp down to net‐zero  buildings by 2030, aims to maintain affordability and flexibility for the developer while dramatically  reducing carbon emissions from new construction.    Additional work, such as research and stakeholder outreach, is needed to provide a level of detail  sufficient to develop code language for a green building policy that can be considered for adoption by  Ithaca’s City Council and Town Board. However, it is important to stress that the need for careful vetting  of any proposed legislation must be balanced with the need to act quickly to address climate change  amidst a local building boom. A thorough but swift codification and adoption process will give the Town  and the City the best chance of meeting their ambitious climate goals and securing Ithaca’s reputation  as a leader in climate action.       Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 87  5 Glossary   Biomass ‐ “different types of organic material that can be processed and burned to produce energy….  Biomass is considered a renewable resource…. Biomass, however, is not necessarily a carbon‐neutral  resource. A determination of carbon neutrality requires an assessment of the particular conditions  under which a type of biomass (e.g., feedstock) is grown and consumed.”  EPA   EnergyStar ‐ an energy efficiency program of the U.S. EPA, including certification for energy products,  like lighting and appliances, as well as whole‐building energy ratings.    EUI ‐ Energy Use Index. A measure of the total energy used by a building in a year, per square foot of  floor area.  All energy uses (including electricity) are converted into units of kBtu/SF/year.    Fossil fuels ‐ Fuels derived from fossilized carbon‐based sources.  For green buildings, these are used  primarily for heating. For buildings, fossil fuels most prominently include fuel oil, natural gas, and  propane.    GBCI ‐ Green Business Certification Inc. is an American organization that provides third‐party  credentialing and verification for several rating systems relating to the built environment, including most  prominently LEED.  Heat pumps ‐ An electrically‐driven heating and cooling system, that most typically extracts heat from  the outdoor air or from the ground in order to heat buildings.  HERS ‐ Home Energy Rating System. A scoring index for residential energy efficiency, developed and  adminstered by RESNET.     IECC ‐ International Energy Conservation Code.    LEED ‐ Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design.  A green building rating/certification system,  developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and administered by Green Business Certification Inc (GBCI). RESNET ‐ Residential Energy Services Network.  Developer and administrator of the HERS index  residential energy rating system.    Renewable energy ‐ Energy that is produced from sources regarded as renewable, including most  prominently solar photovoltaic systems, solar thermal systems (typically hot water), wind‐generated  electricity, and biomass for heating.     Social Impact ‐ "A significant, positive change that addresses a pressing social challenge. Having a social  impact is the result of a deliberate set of activities with a goal around this definition."  University of  Michigan, Center for Social Impact, http://socialimpact.umich.edu/about/what‐is‐social‐impact/      Ithaca Green Building Policy FINALDRAFT Project Report (4/253/9/18) ‐ Pg. 88  Stretch Energy Code ‐ An energy code recently developed by NYSERDA that can be used by local  municipalities to reduce energy use below what is required by the New York State Energy Conservation  Code. The 2015 Stretch Energy Code targets 10% lower energy use.  A 2018 version is in development  that targets 20% lower energy use.  The stretch energy code has a set of mandatory requirements,  separate core requirements, and a set of additional energy efficiency options from which one must be  chosen.  The core requirements are met through either “prescriptive” compliance (for example,  additional insulation) or “performance” compliance (meeting specific performance goals on a whole‐ building basis).     USGBC ‐ U.S. Green Building Council.  Developer of the LEED green building rating system.    Ventless heat pump clothes dryer ‐ A type of electric clothes dryer that efficiently removes heat from  clothes by condensation, and so does not require a vent.     WaterSense ‐ A water conservation program of the U.S. EPA.    WELL  ‐ A green building wellness certification system, developed and administered by the International  Well Building Institute.    9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” Article II, Section 325-5 entitled “Zoning Map”, Article IV, Section 325-12, entitled “Purpose and Intent”, and Section 325- 12.C, entitled “Establishment and Location” in Order to Clarify the Boundaries of the Recently Established Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD) WHEREAS, on April 4, 2018, the Common Council adopted legislation creating a Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD); and WHEREAS, prior to voting on the establishment of the PUDOD, the Common Council amended the ordinance to include the parcels located along Linden Avenue that were zoned CR-4; and WHEREAS, along Linden Avenue there are two sections of properties that are zoned CR-4, however, it was the intent of the Common Council to include the contiguous stretch of CR-4 only properties that includes the following parcels: 64.-9-6, 67.-3-1, 67.-3-31, 67.-3-30, 67.-3-29; now, therefore: ORDINANCE 2018 – BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325, Section 325-5, Zoning Map of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended in order to change the boundaries of the PUDOD, which was previously established by ordinance 2018-02, to include the following tax parcels: 64.-9-6, 67.-3-1, 67.-3-31, 67.-3-30, 67.-3-29, and the full boundaries are as shown on the map entitled “Boundary for the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD)-April 2018”,” a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk’s office. Section 2. Chapter 325, Section 325-12.B, entitled “Purpose and Intent”, is hereby amended in order to change the allowable location for a potential PUD, and should read as follows: §325-12. B. Purpose and intent. (1) This legislation is intended to institute procedures and requirements for the establishment and mapping of PUDs, which may be placed in any location approved by the Common Council, as long as it is located within the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD), the boundaries of which can be seen on the attached map, “Boundary for the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD) –April 2018”. The PUD is a tool intended to encourage mixed-use or unique single use projects that require more creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while ensuring efficient investment in public improvements, environmental sensitivity, and protection of community character. A PUD should be used only when long-term community benefits will be achieved through high quality development, including, but not limited to, reduced traffic demands, greater quality and quantity of public and/or private open space, community recreational amenities, needed housing types and/or mix, innovative designs, and protection and/or preservation of natural resources. (2) Section 325-12 is intended to relate to both residential and nonresidential development, as well as mixed forms of development. There may be uses, now or in the future, which are not expressly permitted by the other terms of this chapter but which uses would not contravene the long-range Comprehensive Plan objectives if they adhere to certain predetermined performance and design conditions. The PUD is intended to be used to enable these developments to occur even though they may not be specifically authorized by the City zoning district regulations. (3) The PUD is intended to be used in any area located within the PUDOD. Should a proposed project offer community-wide benefits, the Common Council may establish a PUD in order to permit uses not explicitly allowed by the underlying zoning. (4) Areas may be zoned as a PUD by the Common Council. The enactment and establishment of such a zone shall be a legislative act. No owner of land or other person having an interest in land shall be entitled as a matter of right to the enactment or establishment of any such zone. Section 3. Chapter 325, Section 325-12.C, entitled “Establishment and Location”, is hereby amended in order to remove the sentence that states that the PUD is intended to be used in industrial zones, and should read as follows: C. Establishment and location. (1) The intent of a PUD is to create self-contained, architecturally consistent, and compatible buildings, many times with diverse but related uses. The creation of a PUD must entail sufficient review to assure the uses within the zone will have negligible or no significant adverse effects upon properties surrounding the zone. In reaching its decision on whether to rezone to a PUD, the Common Council shall consider the general criteria set forth in this chapter, the most current Comprehensive Plan for the City, and this statement of purpose. (2) No PUD shall be established pursuant to Subsection G (13) of this section unless it is located within the boundaries of the PUDOD ), the boundaries of which can be seen on the attached map, “Boundary for the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD) –April 2018”. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. To: Planning Committee From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner Date: April 25, 2018 Re: Planned Unit Development Overlay District Boundary Clarification The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding the enclosed ordinance and is intended to clarify the boundaries of the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD) that was adopted at the April 4, 2018, Common Council meeting. Last month the proposed PUDOD was amended on the floor of the Common Council meeting before it was adopted. The amendments included some additions of CR4 parcels along Linden Avenue. After the meeting it was discovered that since there are two sets of parcels that are zoned CR4 along Linden Avenue there was some confusion about what actually adopted. The enclosed ordinance is only meant to clarify which parcels are located within the boundary of the PUDOD and does not include any additional changes to the district. If you have any concerns or questions regarding this information, feel free to contact me at 274- 6410. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & 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 SUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEI R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACE O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E O X F O R D P L A C E IIIBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEBRYANT AVENUEM I T C H E L L S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E T M I T C H E L L S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TMITCHELL S T R E E TDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREET B RA B RA B RA B RA B RA B RA B RA B RA B RA E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KI N CENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUE COLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUEHIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE OSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C EOSMUN P L A C E LINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUEBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETO R C H A R D P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC EORCHARD P L AC E C OOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETCATHER I N R E STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE TCATHERINRE STREE T SOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUASOUTH QUAFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACENORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEEAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREETSTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUEW I L L I AM S S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E TWILLIAMS S T R E E T DRYDEN ROADDRYDE N ROADDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DDRYDE N ROA DE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TE BUF F A L O S T R E E TSTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUE250 500 feet 0 Collegetown - PUDOD Boundary -April 24, 2018  Buildings NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 Datum Map Source: City of Ithaca Zoning 2017 Ordinance Map Prepared by: GIS Planning, City of Ithaca, NY, 23 April 2018. J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D J E S S U P R O A D CAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROADCAMPUS ROAD HOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADHOY ROADD E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E D E A R B O R N P L A C E TRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADTRI PHAMMER ROADWAIT AVEWAIT A VEWAIT A VEWAIT A VEWAIT A VEWAIT A VEWAIT AVEWAIT AVEWAIT AVE KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N KELVI N PLACEPLACEPLACEPLACEPLACEPLACEPLACEPLACEPLACESUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETSUMMIT STREETELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEELMWOOD AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEEAST AVENUEV A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D V A L L E Y R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D R I D G E D A L E R O A D I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E I R V I N G P L A C E NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366NYS ROUTE 366GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET GILES STREET T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E T R E V A A V E N U E ONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEONEIDA PLACEN Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6NYS R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6NYS R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 N Y S R O U T E 3 6 6 HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACEHARVARD PLACE HARVARD PLACE OX FO RD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C EOXFORD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C EOXFORD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C E OX FO RD P L A C E W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T W A T E R S T R E E T ITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADITHACA ROADB R Y A NT A V E NUE B RY A NT A V E NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEB RY ANT AVE NUEMITCHELL S TRE ET MITCHELL S TRE ET MITCHELL STREETMITCHELL STREET MITCHELL STREETMITCHELL STREET MITCHELL STREET MITCHELL STREETMITCHELL STREET DELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEDELAWARE AVENUEBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREETBOOL STREET B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE B RA N DON P L A CE E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E T E A S T M A R TIN L U T H E R KIN G J R/ S T A T E S T R E E TCENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUEOAK AVENUE COLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUECOLLEGE AVENUEUNIVERSITY AV ENUE UNIV ERSITY AV ENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE THURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVETHURSTON AVE ROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACEROBERTS PLACE HEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTSHEIGHTS COURTCOURTCOURTCOURTCOURTCOURTCOURTCOURTCOURT W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE W YCKOFF AVENUE LODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYLODGE WAYBBBBBBBBBSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTEEEEEEEEEWWWWWWWWWOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUOUC AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD C AM PU S R O AD SAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVESAGE AVEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEHIGHLAND AVENUEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEFALL CREEK DRIVEBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLBARTON PLNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LNNE LN RRR R R RRRR CENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUECENTRAL AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUEWEST AVENUESOUTH AVESOUTH AVESOUTH AVE SOUTH AVESOUTH AVE SOUTH AVESOUTH AVESOUTH AVE SOUTH AVE EDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANEEDGEMOOR LANE WEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEWEST AVEHIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACEHIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE HIGHLAND PLACE THE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLLTHE KNOLL STEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUEWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYWILLARD WAYOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACEOSMUN PLACE E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E E D G E C L IF F P L A C E NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE NEEDHAM PLACE McGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACEMcGRAW PLACECAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD RIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADRIDGEWOOD ROADSTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUELOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPLOOPKLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD KLINE ROAD QUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREETQUEEN STREET KING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREETKING STREET LAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETLAKE SREETEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VEEAST SHORE DRI VENORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETNORTH TIOGA STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREETEAST LEWIS STREET EAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREET EAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREETEAST LINCOLN STREET EAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREET EAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREETEAST FALLS STREET EAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREET EAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREETEAST YORK STREET LINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUEBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETBLAIR STREETVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEVALENTINE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEDUNMORE PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACEORCHARD PLACE COOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETCOOK STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETEDDY STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREETCATHERINRE STREET SOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETSOUTH QUARRY STREETFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACEFERRIS PLACENORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETNORTH QUARRY STREETELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEELSTON PLACEJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETJAMES STREETCOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGECOTTAGEEAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET EAST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET STEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACESCHUYLER PLACEPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETPARKER STREETHUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET HUDSON STREET STREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSTREETSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYSENECA WAYPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREETPLEASANT STREET COLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREETCOLUMBIA STREET EAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREET EAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREETEAST SENECA STREET TURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACETURNER PLACEEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREETEAST CLINTON STREET SPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETP R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T P R O S P E C T EAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREETEAST GREEN STREET GI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETGI LES STREETHAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HAWTHORNE PLACE HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXT HUDSON STREET EXTHUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.HUDSON ST.PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE PEARSALL PLACE S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T S T RE E T CRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACECRESCENT PLACE H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E H A W T H O R N E C I R C L E RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI RENZETTI P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C E P L A C EHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETHUDSON STREETGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURTGRANDVIEW COURT GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE GRANDVIEW AVENUE HUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACEHUDSON PLACESOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETSOUTH AURORA STREETHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACEHILLVIEW PLACE GRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEGRANDVIEW PLACEC O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D C O D D IN G T O N R O A D DANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADDANBY ROADSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRSOUTH HILL TERRWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREETWILLIAMS STREET D RY D E N R OA DD RY DE N R OA DD RY DE N R OA DDRY DE N R OADDRY DE N R OADDRY DE N ROADDRY DE N ROADDRY DE N ROADDRY DE N ROADE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREET E BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREETE BUFFALO STREET UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE W ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYW ILLARD W AYLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTLLENROC COURTSTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUESTEWART AVENUED E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E D E W IT T P L A C E CORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUECORNELL AVENUE DEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACEDEWITT PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACETERRANCE PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEFOUNTAIN PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEWILLETS PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEGLEN PLACEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUEUNIVERSITY AVENUELINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETLINN STREETCA SCAD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD C A SC AD I LL A P AR K R OAD EAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREET EAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREETEAST COURT STREET EAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREET EAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREETEAST BUFFALO STREET FARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREETFARM STREET SEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETSEARS STREETCASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE CASCADILLA AVENUE YATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREETYATES STREET TOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREETTOMPKINS STREET MARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREETMARSHALL STREET NORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETNORTH AURORA STREETN Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13N Y S R te 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13STATE HIGHWAY 34 & 13NORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADPI ER ROADNYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13NYS ROUTE 34 & 13P IER ROADPIER ROADPIER ROADPIER ROAD PIER ROADPIER ROADPIER ROADPIER ROADPIER ROAD SHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETSHORT STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREETJAY STREET UTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETUTICA STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREETWEST FALLS STREET DEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETDEY STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETNORTH CAYUGA STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETAUBURN STREETWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEW E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T W E S T L IN C O L N S T R E E T FI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETFI RST STREETM O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S T M O N R O E S TLAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUELAKE AVENUEESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREETESTY STREET NORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH GENEVA STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETNORTH ALBANY STREETH A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T H A N C O C K S T R E E T SECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETSECOND STREETF R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T F R A N K L IN S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T A D A M S S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T M A D IS O N S T R E E T CASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREET CASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREETCASCADILLA STREET NORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETNORTH PLAIN STREETWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEWI LLOW AVENUEFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETFOURTH STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETTHI RD STREETM O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E M O R R IS A V E N U E WASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETWASHINGTON STREETPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEPARK PLACEWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETWEST COURT STREETFIFTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETFI FTH STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETMEADOW STREETNYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34NYS ROUTE 13 & 34CARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLECARPENTER CIRCLETHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONTHIRD STREET EXTENSIONSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETSPENCER STREETN O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E N O R T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E S O U T H T IT U S A V E N U E SOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH CAYUGA STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH GENEVA STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETSOUTH ALBANY STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREETHYERS STREET PARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREETPARK STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET WEST MARTIN LUTHER KING JR/STATE STREET CENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREETCENTER STREET FAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETFAYETTE STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREET WEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREETWEST BUFFALO STREET WEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREETWEST GREEN STREET WEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREET WEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREETWEST SENECA STREET SOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADSPENCER ROADE L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A D E L M IR A R O A DSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETSOUTH CORN STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREET WEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREETWEST CLINTON STREET SOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETSOUTH PLAIN STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETFAIR STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREETSOUTH STREET N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E N O R T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E S O U T H TIT U S A V E N U E NORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREETNORTH CORN STREET(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)(STATE RTE 34/13)STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13STATE RTE 96/34/13WOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREETWOOD STREET SOUTH MEADOW STREETSTATE RTE 79 (STATE ROUTE 96) CLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUECLEVELAND AVENUE S OUT H F UL T ON ST REE T STONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADSTONE QUARRY ROADCECIL A MALONE DRIVE S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D S P E N C E R R O A D E LM IR A R O ADNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETNORTH FULTON STREETW EST STATE ST R E ETBR INDLEY STREETTABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET TABER STREET CHERRY STREETCOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECOMMERCIAL AVECHERRY STREETNYS ROUTE 13ACHESTNUT STREETS P E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D SP E N C ER R O A D S P E N C E R R O A DELMIRA R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O AD ELM IR A R O ADFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEFLORAL AVENUEHOOK PLACEHOOK PLACEHOOK PLACE HOOK PLACEHOOK PLACE HOOK PLACEHOOK PLACEHOOK PLACE HOOK PLACE E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T E L M S T R E E T N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 N Y S R te 13 CLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLECLIFF PARK CIRCLE W EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EW EST VILLAG E P LA C EFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE MI LE DRIVEFIVE M ILE DRIVEHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDHALLER BOULEVARDELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLEELMCREST CIRCLETAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.TAUGHANNOCK BLVD.PARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADPARK ROADHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETCLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.CLIFF ST.HOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACE HOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACEHOPPER PLACE SUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADNYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96NYS ROUTE 96VINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLVINEGAR HILLNYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89NYS STATE ROUTE 89WESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVEWESTFIELD DRIVECLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETCLI FF STREETWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEWESTMOUNT DRI VEHECTOR ST REETHECTOR ST REETHECTOR ST REETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETHECTOR STREETT A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E T A Y L O R P L A C E TAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACETAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACENORTH TAYLOR PLACE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUE CAMPBELL AVENUENYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89NYS ROUTE 89TRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADTRUMANSBURG ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADWI LLI AMS GLEN ROADHE CT O R S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E THECTOR S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E THECTOR S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E T HE CT O R S T RE E T FALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERFALL VI EW TERCLIFF PARK ROA D CLIFF P ARK ROA D CLIFF PARK ROADCLIFF PARK ROAD CLIFF PARK ROADCLIFF PARK ROAD CLIFF PARK ROAD CLIFF PARK ROADCLIFF PARK ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD BROOKFIELD ROAD WARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANEOAKWOOD LANECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUECAMPBELL AVENUEWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLWESTWOOD KNOLLNYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79NYS ROUTE 79SUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADSUNRISE ROADRICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACERICHARD PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACEWARREN PLACE1,500 3,0000 feet Boundary for the Planned Unit Development Overlay District (PUDOD)-April 2018 Buildings NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 Datum Map Source: City of Ithaca Zoning 2017 Ordinance Map Prepared by: GIS Planning, City of Ithaca, NY, 11 April 2018. 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 Finance – Request to Give Controller Authority to Approve Expenditures for Veterans Fire Relief Account - Resolution WHEREAS, with the City Charter change, C-96(G), effective January 1, 2018, authority was vested to Common Council to approve Veterans Volunteer Fire Relief Account expenditures; and WHEREAS, this authority for Fire Relief Account expenditure approval was previously under the Board of Fire Commissioners; and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Veterans Volunteer Firemen Association have requested that this account be transferred to them for distribution; and WHEREAS, after review of this request, the City Controller is recommending that Common Council delegate its authority to approve expenditures from the Veterans Volunteer Fire Relief Account to the City Controller; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby delegates its authority to approve expenditures from the Veterans Volunteer Fire Relief account to the City Controller; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City Controller shall submit a report to Common Council annually on any revenues and expenses from said account; and, be it further RESOLVED, That individual expenditures approved by the City Controller to the Volunteer Fireman Companies out of the Veterans Volunteer Fire Relief Fund cannot exceed $200,000; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council requests that City staff explore the feasibility of transferring this und to the Ithaca Veterans Volunteer Fireman’s Association for administration by that association and that members of the Ithaca Veterans Volunteer Fireman are included in the process. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 Office of City Controller Telephone: 607 / 274-6576 Fax: 607 / 274-6415 M E M O R A N D U M TO: City Administration Committee FROM: Steven P. Thayer, City Controller RE: Fire Relief Funds DATE: April 11, 2018 I was requested to review financial activity for Fire Relief Fund accounts that were managed by the Board of Fire Commissioners. Now that the board of Fire Commissions is no longer functioning as a Board, these Fire Relief Funds will be under the financial care of the City of Ithaca. The Fire Relief Funds, located in the City’s Trust and Agency fund are as follows: Account Balance Veteran Volunteer Fire Relief $9,869 Fire Relief Fund (2%) $90,000 In my review, of the above accounts for the period 2012-2017, I found that the Veteran Volunteer Relief account had only interest earned during the time frame examined. No expenses were made from this account during this period. In reviewing the activity, in the Fire Relief Fund 2% account, I found revenue related to the 2% New York State Foreign Fire Insurance tax and interest earned. Funds expended from this account related to the distribution of the 2% money to various organizations, including; the Veteran Volunteer Firemen; Ithaca Paid Firefighter Association and Volunteer Company #9. The annual revenue ranged from $65,000 to $104,000. The expenses generally matched the $65,000 to $104,000 revenue amounts annually. As I understand it, the Veteran Volunteer Firemen have requested that the Veteran Volunteer Fire Relief account of $9,869 be turned over to them. Per City Charter, as of January 2018, the authority to administer these funds was vested to Common Council. I would suggest that Common Council delegate disbursement authority for the Fire Relief Fund to the City Controller. That would allow my office to receive disbursement requests and approve expenditures rather than these requests going to Common Council for approval. I can always give Common Council a report of activity, on an annual basis, if they so desire. At this time, there does not appear to be many request for these funds on an annual basis by the Veteran Volunteer Firemen. Please contact me if you have further questions. 10.2 Approval of a Local Law Entitled “City of Ithaca Local Law Authorizing Best Value Competitive Bidding and Procurement” WHEREAS, New York General Municipal Law 103 has been amended to allow cities in New York to award contracts for goods or services subject to competitive bidding on the basis of “best value” in addition to lowest responsible bidder; and WHEREAS, the “best value” standard will allow the City of Ithaca to take into account cost maintenance, durability, quality, product life, and other factors that allow the City of Ithaca to select an offeror whose good or service will be more cost efficient over time; and WHEREAS, municipalities with a population less than one million are required to authorize the use of “best value” for awarding purchase contracts through a local law before utilizing the “best value” standard; and WHEREAS the City has determined that awarding public contracts on the basis of best value is in the best interest of the City as it will enable the City to optimize quality, cost, and efficiency; now, therefore be it LOCAL LAW NO. 2018- BE IT ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Legislative Findings, Intent, and Purpose The intent of this law is to allow the City the option to award certain purchase contracts (including contracts for services) subject to competitive bidding under Section 103 of the General Municipal Law on the basis of a low bid or “best value” as defined in Section 163 of the New York State Finance Law. Section 2. Code Amendments. Article III is hereby added to Chapter 39 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code as follows: § 39-5. Award based on best value. Contracting agencies [as that term is defined in § 39-3] may award purchase contracts, including contracts for services, on the basis of "best value," as that term is defined in New York State Finance Law § 163. All awards based on best value shall require Common Council approval. § 39-6. Applicability. The provisions of this chapter apply to City purchase contracts, including contracts for services, involving an expenditure of more than $20,000, but excluding purchase contracts necessary for the completion of a public works contract pursuant to Article 8 of the New York Labor Law and any other contract that may in the future be excluded under state law from the best value option. If the dollar thresholds of New York General Municipal Law § 103 are increased or decreased in the future by the State Legislature, the dollar thresholds set forth herein shall be deemed simultaneously amended to match the new General Municipal Law thresholds. § 39-7. Standards for best value. Goods and services procured and awarded on the basis of best value are those that the Common Council determines optimize quality, cost and efficiency, among responsive and responsible bidder or offers. Where possible, the determination shall be based on an objective and quantifiable analysis of clearly described and documented criteria as they apply to the rating of bids or offers. The criteria may include, but shall not be limited to, any or all of the following: cost of maintenance; proximity to the end user if distance or response time is a significant term; durability; availability of replacement parts or maintenance contractors; longer product life; product performance criteria; and quality of craftsmanship. § 39-8. Documentation. Whenever any contract is awarded on the basis of best value instead of lowest responsible bidder, the basis for determining best value shall be thoroughly and accurately documented. § 39-9. Procurement policy superseded where inconsistent. Any inconsistent provision of the City's procurement policy, as adopted prior to the effective date of this chapter by resolution of the Common Council, or as amended thereafter, shall be deemed superseded by the provisions of this chapter. Section 3. Severability If any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, or part of this Local Law or the application thereof to any person, firm or corporation, or circumstance, shall be adjusted by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unconstitutional, such order or judgment shall not affect, impair, or invalidate the remainder thereof, but shall be confined in its operation to the clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, or part of this Local Law or in its application to the person, individual, firm or corporation or circumstance, directly involved in the controversy in which such judgment or order shall be rendered. Section 4. Effective and Operative Date This local law shall become operative immediately and shall take effect upon its filing in the office of the New York State Secretary of State. 10.3 An Ordinance to Amend the following Chapters and Sections of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Regarding Parking Regulations and Fines – Chapter 250 entitled “Peace and Good Order”, Chapter 260 entitled “Residential Parking Permit System”, Chapter 346 entitled “Vehicles and Traffic” WHEREAS Chapter 346, and other provisions, of the Ithaca City Code establish traffic and parking regulations enforced in the City of Ithaca; and WHEREAS on December 2, 2009, the Common Council approved fine amounts for violations of such regulations and of the New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law; and WHEREAS the Common Council and City Staff have reviewed such regulations and fines and now wishes to amend and update such regulations and fines with this ordinance and accompanying resolution; and now, therefore ORDINANCE 2018- ___ BE IT ENACTED AND ORDAINED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows: Section 1. Findings of fact. The Common Council makes the following findings of fact: 1. Portions of the City Code do not conform with current City practices and technology regarding parking regulations and fines. 2. The City Code should be updated, as set forth herein, to reflect current City practices and technology regarding parking regulations and fines 3. In addition to updating the City Code, the City should adopt and publish a schedule of parking fines and make such schedule accessible to the public. 4. Therefore, it is desirous for this ordinance and accompanying resolution to enact changes that implement the above-described findings of fact. Section 2. Amendment of City Code. The following sections of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code shall be amended as follows: § 250-6. Parking on private property. No person shall park or permit to be parked any automobile or other vehicle upon private property without the consent of the owner or lessee. Any parcel of land not conspicuously marked "municipal parking" or "public parking" shall be deemed to be private property with regard to this section. Notwithstanding section 10 of this Chapter, any violation of this section shall be punishable by a fine of not less than $30 and not more than $250. § 260-5. Penalties for offenses. A. No person shall park a vehicle nor allow a vehicle to be parked in an area which has been designated a residential parking permit area by the Board of Public Works, and at times when parking is prohibited in such residential parking permit area pursuant to regulations established by the Board of Public Works, unless the vehicle shall have affixed to the bottom rear corner of the passenger window on the driver's side of the vehicle a valid residential parking permit, or unless said vehicle is registered in accordance with § 404-a of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and the vehicle is being used for the transportation of a person with disabilities. A Vviolation of this section shall be punishable by a fine of $15 not more than $100; a second such violation within 18 months thereafter shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $200; a third or subsequent violation within 18 months after the first violation shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $300. B. No resident of a residential parking permit area designated by the Board of Public Works shall permit a nonresident to use a residential parking permit issued to a resident, or aid a nonresident in any way in obtaining a residential parking permit. Violation of the terms of this section shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed $250 and/or suspension of residential parking permit privileges for a period not to exceed 12 months. § 346-1. Definitions. A. The words and phrases used in this chapter shall, for the purposes of this chapter, have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by Article 1 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York. B. The following words and phrases, which are not defined by Article 1 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this section for the purposes of this chapter: BUSINESS DISTRICT The territory contiguous to and including a roadway when within any 600 feet along such roadway there are buildings in use for business or industrial purposes, including but not limited to hotels, banks or office buildings, railroad stations, and public buildings which occupy at least 300 feet of frontage on one side or 300 feet collectively on both sides of the roadway. CAR-SHARE VEHICLE A vehicle used by members of a qualified car-sharing entity, which vehicle has been so identified to the City and which bears an affixed symbol issued by the City, indicating the same. CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT All streets and portions of streets within the area bounded by both sides of the following streets: 1) State Street from Plain Street to a point 600 feet west of Cayuga Street. 2) Seneca Street from Aurora Street to Cayuga Street. 3) Green Street from Tioga Street to a point 200 feet west of Cayuga Street. 4) Aurora Street from Buffalo Street to Six Mile Creek. 5) Tioga Street from Buffalo Street to Six Mile Creek. 6) Cayuga Street from Seneca Street to a point 220 feet south of Clinton Street. COMMERCIAL VEHICLE (Reserved) CURBLINE The prolongation of the lateral line of a curb or, in the absence of a curb, the lateral boundary line of the roadway. GROSS WEIGHT The weight of a vehicle without load plus the weight of any load thereon. HOLIDAYS New Year's Day, Lincoln's Birthday, Washington's Birthday, President’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Indigenous Peoples Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. ITHACA COMMONS Unless otherwise stated, "Ithaca Commons" or "Commons" shall mean both Primary and Secondary Commons as described below: 1) PRIMARY COMMONS All streets and portions of streets within the area described as follows: all that area bounded by the property between the south building lines on the north side and the north building lines on the south side of the former bed and associated sidewalks of East State Street between the east line of Cayuga Street and the west line of Aurora Street and that area of public property between the west building lines on the east side and the east building lines on the west side of the former bed and associated sidewalks of North Tioga Street between the north line of State Street and the south line of Seneca Street. 2) SECONDARY COMMONS All streets and portions of streets within the area described as follows: all that area bounded by the property between the south building lines on the north and north building lines on the south side of the 100 and 200 blocks of East Green Street, the 300 block of East State Street, the 100 block of West State Street and the 100 block and 200 blocks of North Aurora Street, the 100 block of South Aurora Street, the 200 block of North Tioga Street, the 100 block of South Cayuga Street and the 100 block of North Cayuga Street. LOADING The act of loading or unloading passengers, items, or merchandise into or from a vehicle in a manner such that the operator of the vehicle is in the vicinity of the vehicle and able to immediately move the vehicle upon the direction of a law or code enforcement officer. OFFICIAL TIME STANDARD Whenever certain hours are named herein or on traffic control devices, they shall mean the time standard which is in current use in this state. PARKING METER Any mechanical device or meter not inconsistent with this article placed or erected for the regulation of parking by authority of this article. Each parking meter installed shall indicate by proper legend the legal parking time established and, when operated, shall at all times indicate the balance of legal parking time and, at the expiration of such period, shall indicate illegal or overtime parking. PARKING METER SPACE Any space within a parking meter zone, which is adjacent to a parking meter and which is duly designated for the parking of a single vehicle by lines painted or otherwise durably marked on the curb or on the surface of the street or lot adjacent to or adjoining the parking meters. PARKING METER ZONE A designated on-street parking area or off-street parking lot location within which the parking of vehicles is regulated by parking meters. PARKING PAY STATION A machine that accepts payment and validates pay-parking access tickets without cashier assistance. These machines accept credit cards, bills, or coins. QUALIFIED CAR-SHARING ENTITY A corporation, cooperative or association, open to application (for membership and shared vehicle use) from the general public, and formed and maintained for the purpose of sharing the use of motor vehicles, which has submitted a proper application for qualification to the City TrafficTransportation Engineer (including proof of sufficient insurance coverage specifically for such shared use, with the City named as a co-insured, and an agreement to indemnify and hold the City harmless), and which has been so qualified by the City TrafficTransportation Engineer. SCHOOL Any public, private, or nonprofit educational institution providing preschool, elementary, or secondary educational instruction. For purposes of this chapter, the term "school" includes a facility designed to provide day care, nursery school or preschool in an institutional setting. TRUCK A commercial motor vehicle with a weight in excess of 10,000 pounds, which motor vehicle is designed, used, or maintained primarily for the transportation of property. For purposes of this chapter the applicable weight shall be either the registered weight, the gross weight, or the vehicle specification plate weight, whichever is higher. C. The following words and phrases, notwithstanding definitions contained in Article 1 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York, shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this section for the purposes of this Chapter: TRUCK A commercial motor vehicle with a weight in excess of 10,000 pounds, which motor vehicle is designed, used, or maintained primarily for the transportation of property. For purposes of this chapter the applicable weight shall be either the registered weight, the gross weight, or the vehicle specification plate weight, whichever is higher. § 346-2. Authority to install traffic control devices. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer, in cooperation with the Department of Public Works, shall install and maintain traffic control devices when and as required under the provisions of this chapter, to make effective the provisions of this chapter, and may install and maintain such additional traffic control devices as he/she may deem necessary to regulate, warn or guide traffic under the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York, subject to the provisions of §§ 1682 and 1684 of that law. § 346-3. Delegation of authority to regulate traffic. A. Emergency and experimental regulations. The Chief of Police, by and with the approval of the City TrafficTransportation Engineer, is hereby empowered to make regulations to make effective the provisions of this chapter and to make and enforce temporary or experimental regulations to cover emergency or special conditions. No such temporary or experimental regulations shall remain in effect for more than 90 days without formal enactment by the Common Council. B. Stop and yield signs. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer shall be authorized to determine and designate intersections where a particular hazard exists upon other than through streets, and to determine whether vehicles shall stop or yield at one or more entrances to any such intersection, and shall erect a stop or yield sign at every such place where a stop or yield is respectively required. C. Traffic and turning lanes. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is authorized to place markers, buttons or signs within or approaching intersections indicating the course or lanes to be traveled by vehicles turning at such intersections, and such course or lane to be traveled as so indicated shall conform to this chapter or as the City TrafficTransportation Engineer shall prescribe. D. Restricted turning. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to determine those intersections at which drivers of vehicles shall not make a right, left or U-turn, and shall place proper signs at such intersections. The making of such turns may be prohibited between certain hours of any day and permitted at other hours, in which event the same shall be plainly indicated on the signs or the signs may be removed when such turns are permitted. E. Crosswalks, safety zones and traffic lanes. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized: 1) To designate and maintain, by appropriate devices, marks or lines upon the surface of the roadway, crosswalks at intersections where, in his/her opinion, there is particular danger to pedestrians crossing the roadway and at such other places as he/she may deem necessary. 2) To establish safety zones of such kind and character and at such places as may be deemed necessary for the protection of pedestrians. 3) To mark lanes for traffic on street pavements at such places as may be deemed advisable, consistent with the traffic regulations of the city. F. Play streets. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer shall have authority to declare any street or part thereof a play street and to place appropriate signs or devices in the roadway indicating and helping to protect the same. G. Parking adjacent to schools. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to erect signs indicating no parking upon that side of any street adjacent to any school property when such parking would, in his/her opinion, interfere with traffic or create a hazardous situation. H. Parking on narrow streets. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to erect "No Parking" signs: 1) On both sides of any two-way street where the width of the roadway does not exceed 26 feet. 2) On one side of any two-way street where the width of the roadway does not exceed 32 feet. 3) On both sides of any one-way street where the width of the roadway does not exceed 20 feet. 4) On one side of any one-way street where the width of the roadway does not exceed 26 feet. I. Parking or standing on one-way streets. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is authorized to prohibit parking or standing upon the left-hand side of any one-way street. J. Divided highways. In the event that a highway includes two or more separate roadways and traffic is restricted to one direction upon any such roadway, the City TrafficTransportation Engineer may prohibit parking or standing upon the left-hand side of such one-way roadway. K. Stopping, standing or parking in hazardous places. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to determine and designate places open to vehicular traffic not exceeding 100 feet in length in which the stopping, standing or parking of vehicles would create an especially hazardous condition or would cause unusual delay to traffic. L. Passenger and freight loading zones. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to determine the location of passenger and freight curb loading zones and the hours during which such zone shall be operable. M. Bus stops, taxicab stands and car-sharing locations. N. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to establish bus stops, taxicab stands, parking locations exclusively for use by car-share vehicles, and stands for other passenger common-carrier motor vehicles on such public streets, in such places and in such number as he/she shall determine to be of the greatest benefit and convenience to the public. The Board of Public Works shall be the body for appeals of the City TrafficTransportation Engineer’s decisions regarding such locations or the qualifications of any applicants therefor. O. Before the City TrafficTransportation Engineer may authorize or renew a parking location for use by car-share vehicles, the car-sharing entity that seeks such authorization must submit a proper written request for the same (including proof of insurance coverage for the car-sharing arrangement, naming the City as a co-insured, and indemnification of the City), and must show that the entity qualifies under the definition of a “car-sharing entity” which is contained herein. P. Application of pavement markings. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to apply or cause to be applied pavement markings in accordance with the standards and specifications established by the Department of Transportation on such highways or portions of highway as shall be determined to be necessary or appropriat e. Q. Traffic control signals. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer is hereby authorized to regulate traffic by means of traffic control signals. § 346-6. Speed limits. A. The maximum speed at which vehicles may proceed on or along any streets or highways within the City is hereby established at 30 miles per hour, except that the speed limit for vehicles proceeding on or along those streets or parts of streets described in Schedule II of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works shall be as indicated in said schedule. This provision shall not apply to ambulances, fire vehicles or police vehicles when on emergency trips. B. Fifteen miles per hour is hereby established as the maximum speed at which vehicles may proceed on or along any streets or highways at or within the following parks: 1) Stewart Park. 2) Cass Park (except temporaryRoute 89 - Park Road). 3) Newman Golf Course, including Pier Road from Willow Avenue to its terminus. § 346-9. U-turns. No person shall make a U-turn on any of the streets or parts of streets described in Schedule V of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-10. Prohibited turns at intersections. No person shall make a turn of the kind designated (left, right, all) at any of the locations described in Schedule VI of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-11. Prohibited right turns on red signal. No person shall make a right turn when facing a steady red signal (stop indication) at any of the locations described in Schedule VII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-12. Stop and yield intersections. A. The intersections described in Schedule VIII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer are hereby designated as stop intersections. Stop signs shall be installed as provided therein. B. The intersections described in Schedule IX of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer are hereby designated as yield intersections. Yield signs shall be installed as provided therein. § 346-13. Yield intersectionsDuty to exercise due care. The intersections described in Schedule IX of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works are hereby designated as yield intersections. Yield signs shall be installed as provided therein. A driver shall exercise due care in operating a motor vehicle when driving on public roadways, public parking lots, or private parking lots accessible to the public. Notwithstanding Section 49 of this Chapter, the penalty for violation of this Section is a fine not to exceed $250. § 346-18. Application of article. A. The provisions of this article shall apply except when it is necessary to stop a vehicle to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or official traffic control device. B. No person shall park, stand, or stop a vehicle in any municipal roadway, driveway, parking lot, or parking garage in violation of any posted, or otherwise applicable, prohibition, restriction, or limitation. § 346-19. Parking prohibited at all times. No person shall park a vehicle at any time upon any of the streets or parts thereof described in Schedule XII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-20. No stopping. No person shall stop a vehicle upon any of the streets or parts of streets described in Schedule XIII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-21. No standing. No person shall stand a vehicle upon any of the streets or parts of streets described in Schedule XIV of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-29. Loading zones. The locations described in Schedule XXII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works are hereby designated as loading zones or as designated by the Transportation Engineer. § 346-30. Taxi stands. The locations described in Schedule XXIII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works or as designated by the Transportation Engineer are hereby designated as taxi stands. § 346-32. Handicapped parkingReserved Parking for People with Disabilities. The locations described in Schedule XXV of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works are hereby designated as handicappedreserved parking zonesfor people with disabilities, and no persons shall park therein without appropriatehandicapped parking permits displayed on the vehicle. § 346-34. Private driveways. A. The City shall, for the purpose of improving access to private driveways where such improved access shall be primarily for the benefit of the applicant, furnish, install and maintain for a period of five years at the expense of the applicant a "No Parking" sign or signs in proximity to private driveways that enter upon City streets. B. Any property owner may make application to the City TrafficTransportation Engineer for such a sign to be installed adjacent to his/her driveway. The City TrafficTransportation Engineer shall approve such application if he/she determines that such sign will improve access to the driveway of the applicant and will not be deleterious to the general public. C. Upon such approval, the City TrafficTransportation Engineer shall determine the location and method of placement of such sign. D. A fee of $50 per driveway shall be paid to the City Clerk in order to defray the expense of the initial installation and to provide for maintenance of the sign in proper condition for five years. E. After expiration of five years from the date of the initial installation or the date of renewal the sign may be removed by the City. F. Any adjacent owner desiring the continued service of such sign adjacent to his driveway for an additional five years shall: 1) Apply to the City TrafficTransportation Engineer for approval of the continued service of such sign. 2) Present the application for continued sign service approved by the City TrafficTransportation to the City Clerk together with a fee of $25 per driveway. G. If at any time prior to the expiration of either the initial or renewal five-year period the applicant requests the City to remove such sign, or if the driveway for any reason ceases to function as a driveway, the sign shall be removed by the City and there shall be no rebate or apportionment of the fee. § 346-35. Ithaca Commons loading zones. Use of the loading zones at the entrances to the Commons is strictly reserved for vehicles making deliveries or loading and unloading passengers, and no other use of the loading zones shall be made without the express written permission of the Chief of the Police DepartmentSuperintendent of Public Works or her/his designee. § 346-37. Designation of parking spaces. The Board of Public Works shall be responsible for the installation of parking meters or pay stations in the City and is hereby directed and authorized to provide for the marking offdesignation of individualsuch parking spacespaces in the parking meter zones designated and described in Schedule XXVII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works, said parking spaces to be designated by lines painted or marked on the curbing or surface of the street or lot. At each space so marked off, it shall be unlawful to park any vehicle in such a way that said vehicle shall not be entirely within the limits of the space so designated. § 346-38. Alternate meter parking. Parking is hereby prohibited at each alternate metered parking space from 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. as designated and marked by the City TrafficTransportation Engineer in the parking meter zones designated and described in Schedule XXVIII of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works. § 346-39. Overnight parking in metered zones prohibited. No person shall park a vehicle in any metered zonemeter or pay stationed zone for a period of time longer than 15 minutes between 2:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. except for streets or parts thereof described in Schedule XXIX of the traffic regulations of the Board of Public Works. § 346-40. Installation of parking meters and pay stations. In said parking meter or pay station zones, the Department of Public Works shall cause parking meters or pay stations to be installed upon the curb, sidewalk or area immediately adjacent to the parking spaces provided in this article. No parking meters shall be installed in areas where parking is prohibited. The Ithaca Police Department of Public Works shall be responsible for the regulation, control, operation, maintenance and use of such parking meters . Each device shall be so set as to display a signal showing legal parking upon th e deposit of the appropriate coin, lawful money of the United States of America, for the period of time prescribed in this article. Each device shall be so arranged that upon the expiration of the lawful time limit, it will indicate by a proper, visible signal that the lawful parking period has expired, and in such case the right of such vehicle to occupy such space shall cease, and the operator, owner, possessor or manager thereof shall be subject to the penalties hereinafter provided and pay stations. § 346-41. Operation of parking meters and pay stations. A. Except in a period of emergency determined by an officer of the Fire or Police Department, or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic control sign or signal, when any vehicle shall be parked in any parking space alongside or next to which a parking meter is located, the operator of such vehicle shall, upon entering the said parking meter space, immediately deposit or cause to be deposited in said meter such proper coin of the United States of America as is required for such parking meter and as is designated by proper directions on the meter, and when required by the directions on the meter, the operator of such vehicle, after the deposit of the proper coin, shall also set in operation the timing mechanism on such meter in accordance with directions properly appearing thereon, and failure to deposit such proper coin and to set the timing mechanism in operation when so required shall constitute a violation of this article. Upon the deposit of such coin (and the setting of the timing mechanism in operation when so required), the parking space may be lawfully occupied by such vehicle during the period of time which has been prescribed for the part of the street in which said parking space is located, provided that any person placing a vehicle in a parking meter space adjacent to a meter which indicates that unused time has been left in the meter by the previous occupant of the space shall not be required to deposit a coin so long as his occupancy of said space does not exceed the indicated unused parking time. If said vehicle shall remain parked in any such parking space beyond the parking time limit set for such parking space, and if the meter shall indicate such illegal parking, then and in that event such vehicle shall be considered as parking overtime and beyond the period of legal parking time, and such parking shall be deemed a violation of this article. B. Except in a period of emergency determined by an officer of the Fire or Police Department, or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or traffic control sign or signal, when any vehicle shall be parked in any parking space regulated by a pay station, the operator of such vehicle shall, upon entering the said parking space, immediately deposit or cause to be deposited in a pay station such proper coin or bill of the United States of America or make a credit card payment, with such credit card payment made directly to the parking pay station or by other electronic means, including by smartphone app, designated at or in the vicinity of the pay station, as is required for such parking pay station and as is designated by proper directions on the pay station. Failure to make proper payment in accordance with the instructions on the pay station shall constitute a violation of this article. If said vehicle shall remain parked in any such parking space beyond the parking time limit set for such vehicle parking space, and if the pay station information system shall indicate such illegal parking, such vehicle shall be considered as parking overtime and beyond the period of legal parking time and such parking shall be a violation of this article. § 346-42. Manner of parking. When a parking meter space is parallel with the adjacent curb or sidewalk, no person shall park or permit the parking of any vehicle in such parking space in any other position than with the foremost part of such vehicle nearest to the parking meter; when a parking meter space is diagonal to the curb or sidewalk, no person shall park or permit the parking of any vehicle in such parking space in any other position than with the foremost part of such vehicle nearest to the parking meter; when a parking meter shall have been installed at the head of and immediately adjacent to any parking space on a municipal off-street parking lot, no person shall park or permit the parking of any vehicle in such parking space in any other position than with the foremost part of such vehicle nearest to the parking meter; provided, however, that in municipal off-street parking lots, signs shall be erected indicating that head-on parking only is permitted. In any event, a vehicle shall be parked within the lines marked on the pavement measuring such parking space, when so provided. In pay station zones, no person shall park or permit the parking of any vehicle in such pay station zone beyond the limits of the pay station zone. § 346-43. Parking meter and pay station fees. A fee of $0.25 per half hour, or $0.10 for each twelve-minute period, and $0.05 for six minutes is hereby established for parking in all parking zones except for the following locations which shall be subject to a parking fee of $0.25 per hour: The 200, 300, 400 and 500 blocks of Thurston Avenue; the 100 block of Edgemoor Place; and the 500 and 600 blocks of Stewart Avenue, which locations shall have a nine-hour limit. The 400 block of North Cayuga Street; the 100 block of West Court Street; the 300 block of East Buffalo Street; the 600 block of West State Street; the 300 and 400 blocks of Stewart Avenue; and the 100 block of Osmun Place.On-street parking fees shall be determined annually by the Board of Public Works. Such fees shall be documented on parking meters and pay stations. § 346-44. Violations. It shall be unlawful and a violation of the provisions of this article for any person to: A. Cause, allow, permit or suffer any vehicle registered in the name of or operated by such person to be parked overtime or beyond the period of legal parking time established for any parking meter or pay station zone as herein described, or to deposit in any parking meter any coin for the purpose of parking beyond the maximum legal parking time for the particular parking meter zone. B. Permit any vehicle to remain or be placed in any parking space adjacent to any parking meter while said meter is displaying a signal indicating that the vehicle occupying such parking space has already been parked beyond the period prescribed for such parking space. C. Park any vehicle across any line or marking of a parking meter space or in such position that the vehicle shall not be entirely within the area designated by such lines or markings. D. Deface, injure, tamper with, open or willfully break, destroy or impair the usefulness of any parking meter or pay station installed under the provisions of this article. E. Deposit or cause to be deposited in any parking meter or pay station any slug, device or metal substance or other substitute for lawful coins. F. Park or permit the parking of any vehicle in any parking meter space where the meter does not register lawful parking. § 346-45. Reports of violations; citations. A. It shall be the duty of the police officersactingCommunity Service Officers, Police Officers or others authorized by the Superintendent of Public Works, acting in accordance with instructions issued by the ChiefDirector of PoliceParking, to report: 1) The number of each parking meter or proximate pay station which indicates that the vehicle occupying the parking space adjacent to such parking meter, or within such pay station zone, is or has been parked in violation of any of the provisions of this article. 2) The state license number of such vehicle. 3) That such vehicle is parked in violation of any of the provisions of this article. 4) Any other facts, a knowledge of which is necessary to a thorough understanding of the circumstances attending such violation. B. Each such Community Service Officer, police officer or other person authorized by the Superintendent of Public Works shall also attach to such vehicle a notice to the owner thereof that such vehicle has been parked in violation of a provision of this article, and instructing such owner to report to the court with regard to such violation. § 346-46. Purpose of meter deposits. The coinspayments required to be deposited in parking meters or pay stations as provided herein are hereby levied and assessed as fees to provide for the proper regulation and control of traffic upon the public streets and also the cost of supervising and regulating the parking of vehicles in the parking meter and pay station zones created thereby, and to cover the cost of the purchase, supervision, protection, inspection, installation, operation, maintenance, control and use of the parking meters or pay stations described herein. § 346-47. Collection of coins from meters; disposition thereof. It shall be the duty of the Police Department of Public Works to designate some proper person or persons to make regular collections of the moneys deposited in said meters or pay stations, and it shall be the duty of such person or persons so designated to remove from the parking meters or pay stations the locked containers therein containing the coins, bills, or receipts so deposited in said meters and pay stations and to deliver such locked containers to the City Chamberlain or other destination determined by the City Controller, who shall be responsible for and shall keep a record of the collection of fees from parking meters or pay stations and shall credit such fees to the Parking Meter Fund. § 346-49. Penalties for offenses. Every person convicted of a traffic infraction for a violation of any provision of this chapter which is not a violation of any provision of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York shall, for a first conviction thereof, be punished by a fine of not more than $100 or by imprisonment for not more than 15 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment; for a second such conviction within 18 months thereafter, such person shall be punished by a fine of not more than $200 or by imprisonment for not more than 4515 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment; upon a third or subsequent conviction within 18 months after the first conviction, such person shall be punished by a fine of not more than $300 or by imprisonment for not more than 9015 days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. § 346-50. Civil penalty for parking violations. A. Notwithstanding the provisions of § 346-49 above and in full acquittance of any violation for parking for a longer period of time than is permitted, a civil penalty in the sum of $5not less than $15 and not more than $50 may be paid if such sum is paid within 20 days of such violation. B. Civil penalty for delinquent violations. In addition to the penalties provided in Subsection A above, additional civil penalties shall be payable upon any violation for parking for a longer period of time than is permitted in accordance with the following schedule: 1) Penalty to be added after 20 days: $15not more than $75. 2) Upon submission of uncollectible fines to a collection agency or other entity for enforcement, an amount not to exceed 35% of the total delinquent fine and penalties will be added to cover collection fees. Section 3. Severability clause. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. 10.4 Adoption of Updated Schedule of Parking Fines – Resolution WHEREAS on December 2, 2009, the Common Council approved fine amounts for violations of parking regulations contained in the City Code and in the New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law; and WHEREAS the Common Council and City Staff have reviewed such fines and wish to amend and update them with this resolution and accompanying ordinance; now, therefore be it RESOLVED That the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby adopts the fine amounts set forth in the attached “City of Ithaca, Schedule of Parking Fines” annexed hereto, which are permissible under the applicable provisions of the City Code and New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law; and, be it further RESOLVED That such Schedule of Parking Fines shall be distributed to all necessary City departments for incorporation into City policies, procedures, and documents and shall be made available to the public on the City’s website. “City of Ithaca, Schedule of Parking Fines” appears on following page. CITY OF ITHACA, SCHEDULE OF PARKING FINES ADOPTED MAY 2, 2018 VIOLATION FINE 1. OVERTIME METER………………………….CITY CODE § 346-41 $15.00 2. OVERTIME ZONE…………………….CITY CODE §§ 346-25 – 27 $15.00 3. PARKING RAMP OVERNIGHT W/O PERMIT................................ ......................................................................CITY CODE § 346-39 $25.00 4. CURB (12’’)………………………………………NYS VTL § 1203(a) $25.00 5. SCHOOL ZONE…………………………….CITY CODE § 356-3(E) $30.00 6. PROHIBITED AREA…………......……CITY CODE §§ 346-19 – 29 $30/45/60* 7. BETWEEN CURB AND WALK……………...CITY CODE § 346-28 $25.00 8. BUS STOP/TAXI STAND………………………….NYS VTL § 1200 $30.00 9. FIRE HYD./FIRE ZN……………………………NYS VTL § 1202(b) $50.00 10. CROSSWALK (20’)………………………NYS VTL § 1202(a)(2)(b) $30.00 11. SIDEWALK………………………………..NYS VTL § 1202(a)(1)(b) $25.00 12. OVERTIME NIGHT, ODD/EVEN……………CITY CODE § 346-26 $15/30/45* 13. OTHER......................................................................................N/A $30.00 14. DRIVEWAY………………………………..NYS VTL § 1202(a)(2)(a) $35.00 15. PRIVATE PROPERTY………………………...CITY CODE § 250-6 $30.00 16. WRONG DIRECTION…………………………..NYS VTL § 1203(c) $15.00 17. TRUCK ZONE………………………………CITY CODE § 346-3(L) $30/45/60* 18. DOUBLE PARKING………………………NYS VTL § 1202(a)(1)(a) $30.00 19. UNINSPECTED…………………………………..NYS VTL § 306(b) $25.00 20. ABANDONED………………………………………NYS VTL § 1224 $25.00 21. HANDICAP……………………………………….NYS VTL § 1203-b $100/150/200* 22. YARD PARKING……………………CITY CODE § 325-20(D)(2)(a) $20/30/50* 23. ACCESS……………………………NYS UNIFORM CODE § 503.5 $50.00 24. OBSTRUCTION OF LANE/ALLEY……………..NYS VTL § 202(A) $50.00 25. RESIDENTIAL PERMIT ZONE……………….CITY CODE § 260-5 $15/30/45* * Escalating fine amounts for the first, second, and third violation(s) within an 18-month period. 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 13.1 Alderperson McGonigal - Approval of Titus Triangle Park Shared Boat Rack Proposal - Resolution WHEREAS, the weather is finally getting warmer and the ice is out of the creeks; and WHEREAS, a neighborhood group in the vicinity of Six Mile Creek and Titus Flats has expressed a desire to build a boat rack for canoes and kayaks and place it at the east end of Titus Triangle Park, a City of Ithaca park, in order to establish easy boating access to Six Mile Creek; and WHEREAS, the boat rack would be approximately 12 feet by 8 feet, built with pressure treated wood and modeled after the racks the City has built and placed near the water at Cass and Stewart Parks; and WHEREAS, boat rack space would be managed by the group of neighborhood volunteers, and rack space would be open to all, granted on a first come, first served basis; and WHEREAS, maintenance and repairs would be covered by donations, suggested at $50/year for each space; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca will incur no cost for any of this, including liability, and trimming tall grass around the boat rack; and WHEREAS, if for any reason the City of Ithaca or the "Titus Triangle Neighborhood Boating Group" decide that the boat rack should be removed or dismantled, the cost of doing so will be born entirely by the neighborhood boating group, and this will be conducted in a timely manner as directed by the Superintendent of Public Works; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council of the City of Ithaca grants permission for the Titus Triangle Neighborhood boating group to construct a boat rack for 9 non- motorized boats to be placed on the grass at the east end of Titus Triangle Park, with permission to be applied for and renewed on an annual basis in the Spring.