HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURA-2018-09-27Approved: 10/25/18
108 E. Green St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
(607) 274-6565
MINUTES
ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY
Common Council Chambers, City Hall
8:30 A.M., Thursday, September 27, 2018
Members: Svante Myrick, Chair; Karl Graham; Eric Rosario; Tracy Farrell, Vice‐Chair; Laura Lewis
(Common Council Liaison)
Excused: Chris Proulx
Staff: Nels Bohn; Anisa Mendizabal; Charles Pyott
Guests: Lynn Truame, Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS)
I. Call to Order
Chair Myrick called the meeting to order at 8:32 A.M.
II. Agenda Additions/Deletions
No changes were made to the agenda.
III. Public Comment (3‐min. maximum per person)
ADIL GRIGUIHI, owner of Casablanca Pizzeria and the Commons Kitchen, expressed general concern
with the lack of affordable housing downtown, and wondered how genuinely affordable the
housing for the chosen Green Street Garage redevelopment project will turn out to be. He is not
sure how much sense it makes to have two separate entrances for the affordable housing and
market‐rate housing components. He also urged the IURA to ensure the project retains enough
parking spaces. He would like to see a comprehensive survey identifying downtown parking
demand. He also noted the number of concurrent downtown construction projects has created
many difficulties (e.g., traffic/congestion, obstructions, noise, air pollution) for residents,
businesses, and visitors alike. Construction companies seem to have been unduly intrusive,
leading to chaotic conditions in the area
IV. Review of Meeting Minutes: September 7, 2018
Rosario moved, seconded by Graham, to approve the September 7, 2018 minutes, with one minor
modification.
Carried Unanimously 4‐0
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 2 of 14
V. Economic Development Committee (EDC)
A. Green Street Garage Site Redevelopment Urban Renewal Project
1. Receipt of Committee Ranking of Proposals
Bohn explained this agenda item is simply to clearly certify that the IURA Board has received the
Economic Development Committee (EDC) recommendation (listed below).
Harold’s Holdings, LLC (“Little Commons”) click to view proposal
Vecino Group New York, LLC (“Asteri Ithaca”) click to view proposal
Ithaca‐Peak Development, LLC click to view proposal
Newman Development Group, LLC & Visum Development Group, LLC click to view proposal
2. PUBLIC HEARING ― Comments on Proposals Received to Redevelop Green Street Garage Site (3‐
minute maximum per person)
Farrell moved, seconded by Rosario, to open the Public Hearing.
Carried Unanimously 4‐0
VICKI BROUS, Brous Consulting, LLC [Harold’s Square consultant], expressed concern with the project
approval process and timeline, noting that feasibility studies really need to be completed before
making a final decision. She would like to see a detailed data‐driven parking demand study, examining
both short‐ and long‐term needs for downtown parking, as well as a more detailed investigation of the
costs for repairing/refurbishing the garage. Although she would like to see a conference center in
Ithaca (although the local conference and meeting industry has been declining in recent years), there
are other sites in Ithaca that could be equally well‐suited. More research needs to be conducted to
ensure the conference center is sited in the right place. She recommended the IURA organize a design
charrette for the project that includes both community members and developers.
All project applications and other information about the process can be found at: www.IthacaURA.org, including
supplemental information not included in the 9/27/18 IURA Agenda Meeting Packet (questions and responses from applicants
and public comments/letters), at the following link:
http://www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/View/9230/92718‐IURA‐Agenda‐Meeting‐Packet‐Supplemental‐Information
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 3 of 14
PETER WISSOKER noted the Newman/Visum ‘workforce housing’ concept seems misguided, since it is
oriented to renters at 100% of Area Median Income (AMI), equivalent to approximately $62,000 in
annual income. It would make far more sense to identify 100% of Area Median Income (AMI)
specifically for renters, and not homeowners. Local median rent is $1,000/month, which is only ⅔ of
the project’s proposed 100% of AMI benchmark. He also believes the proposal to make the City
responsible for any shortfall in bond funds is too much of a risk. Finally, the Newman/Visum project
shows a 1.376 debt‐service coverage ratio (DSCR) in 10 years, which demonstrates it would be making
enough money by that time and would not in fact need a 30‐year tax abatement. Wissoker likes the
Harold’s Holdings project, even if it does not provide many housing units. It does provide a reasonable
number of affordable housing units. He suggested Harold’s Holdings negotiate with the adjacent
Harold’s Square project to bolster the total number of affordable housing units. The Vecino Group
project provides many affordable housing units, but should make more of them affordable for families;
it currently provides smaller units not suited for families.
FRED SCHOEPS remarked that the downtown Rev: Ithaca Startup Works incubates a variety of start‐up
businesses with numerous young people needing housing. The city does not need more market‐rate or
luxury‐oriented housing projects. He supports the Vecino Group project, because of its affordable
housing component. The city has a vibrant hospitality industry in the downtown area, so the
conference center is crucial, especially for downtown businesses. Schoeps noted he is the chair of the
Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA) Board of Directors’ Transportation Demand Management Committee
that has been doing some Transportation Demand Management (TDM) modeling, which will also be an
important part of the process. Any future anticipated decreases in parking demand will not take place
overnight, so the city will continue to need sufficient parking in the near‐term.
ROGER FREEMAN indicated he attended the “Ithaca Conference Center Market and Feasibility Study”
(Hunden Strategic Partners) meeting, which was very professionally conducted. The study concluded
Ithaca could definitely support a conference center, which will be critical for increasing local economic
diversity and resilience, especially during the workweek. He very much supports Harold’s Holdings’
“Little Commons” project, which seems the most suitable and compatible with the spirit of the
community, even though it lacks a full‐size conference center. He suggested the IURA re‐open the
process and ask Harold’s Holdings to include City Hall in its design, moving it to the William Henry
Miller building and perhaps 2‐3 floors of the new project.
SUSAN HOLLAND, Executive Director, Historic Ithaca, remarked that all the proposals should be evaluated
within the context of the City’s Downtown Design Guidelines. The Harold’s Holdings proposal fulfills
the highest percentage of elements in those guidelines (e.g., street‐level interest at a human scale,
features welcoming to the public, open‐air/common spaces), including opportunities for engaging the
public interest and compatibility with local historic architecture.
NATASHA BRATKOVSKI, Brous Consulting, LLC [Harold’s Square consultant], noted the Harold’s Holdings
project creates sufficient parking, as well as connectivity with surrounding projects, businesses, and
services. It is the only project that maintains long‐term of control of the parking by the City, ensuring it
remains a public good. The City would only be responsible for modest out‐of‐pocket expenses and the
project would take the least time to construct, while providing the most local labor.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 4 of 14
THERESA ALT expressed concern with affordable housing in Ithaca, which is why she was most attracted
to the Vecino Group project (with the Harold’s Holdings project a close second), since it offers the most
affordable units, although there were some concerns in the community about the building’s design and
the Vecino Group’s performance as a landlord. She was relieved to discover that Andrea Ogunwumi,
Chief Executive Officer of the Economic Opportunity Program of Chemung and Schuyler Counties, who
has worked extensively with the Vecino Group, had nothing but praise for the company. She does not
believe the project has enough 2‐ or 3‐bedroom apartments for families. Her basic concern about the
Vecino Group project is that it is too large. She would prefer eliminating the conference center
altogether and just provide stores and amenities at ground level. She would also prefer to see most of
the parking eliminated. Alt urged the IURA to ensure the chosen project complies with the City’s Green
Building Policy.
ANDRE GARDINER expressed strong support for the Ithaca‐Peak Development proposal. The City of Ithaca
has high property tax rates, since so much of it is tax‐exempt due to the amount of land Cornell
University owns. The Ithaca‐Peak Development proposal is the only one that would broaden the tax
base. He stressed that the City’s goal should be to maximize the total amount of housing in Ithaca, and
not focus exclusively on affordable housing. The recent growth in housing construction has already
begun to lower rents.
MONA SULZMAN noted she has been a renter in Ithaca almost 30 years. She is grateful the RFP process
was extended and further opened to public comment. Ithaca has both an affordable housing crisis and
a public space crisis. She urged the IURA to scrutinize what each proposal actually provides in terms of
genuinely public spaces. The Vecino Group project is very appealing, since it provides genuinely
affordable housing, but it does not provide enough public space. She strongly supports Harold’s
Holdings’ proposal, which treats its public space more authentically than the other projects. The IURA
should also closely consider the degree of green/sustainable development for each of the projects.
The selected project should comply with the City’s new Green Building Policy.
RUTH YARROW remarked she is primarily speaking for the numerous people not present today. She
drives for OAR (Opportunities, Alternatives & Resources) and has seen first‐hand the impact of the
affordable housing crisis on disadvantaged populations. There is far less affordable housing today,
compared to 20 years ago. She is skeptical of the need for a conference center.
TERI TARSHUS, General Manager, Hilton Garden Inn, expressed strong support for a downtown
conference center. With the city’s current/future hotel capacity, a conference center would be a highly
effective way of strengthening and diversifying the local economy. All existing meeting spaces in local
hotels are essentially full. Ithaca is an attractive destination for potential meeting/conference
attendees, as the Hunden study confirmed, but there are not enough available hotel meeting spaces to
meet that demand. She noted the hospitality and tourism industry is the fifth largest employer in
Tompkins County, enjoying 8% growth in 2017. A conference center would create a ripple effect that
would provide substantial economic impact.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 5 of 14
GARY FERGUSON, Executive Director, Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA), noted although many projects have
recently been completed, none would have more impact than this project. The Green Street Garage is
the primary parking facility for downtown retail establishments and businesses, as well as 8 major
downtown buildings (including 60 businesses, 400 housing units, 500 employees, ¾ million square
feet). The DIA Board of Directors passed a resolution and issued statements outlining its priorities and
concerns. The Green Street Garage will soon reach capacity, so any project needs to provide more
than the existing number of spaces. The site was rezoned to allow a height of 140 feet for a reason, so
any proposed project should be permitted to maximize the use of the site. Ferguson stressed the
importance of the conference center. Visitors and tourists are crucial to supporting downtown retail
businesses and services.
BRETT BOSSARD, Executive Director, Cinemapolis, indicated that the theatre’s being able to stay open
during construction is very important. He appreciates that the theatre’s interests were included in the
RFP process. Cinemapolis is a vital part of the downtown core and he would like to ensure the chosen
project has a positive impact on it. The project is a great opportunity to increase quantity of parking
for downtown businesses and new residents. Improving the corridor from The Commons to Green
Street is also very important, which some projects have done more effectively than others. Since any
Payment‐in‐Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement with the selected developer could have an impact on the
theatre, it would like to be included in those conversations.
JOHN SCHROEDER remarked only the Harold’s Holdings proposal creates a dialogue between Ithaca’s
architectural past and future. It expresses some of the best forms of past urbanism, in terms of color
and form, evoking the 19th century style of buildings on The Commons. It also transitions effectively
from The Commons architecture to the more modern Green Street architecture. The arches mimic the
constant motion of the Green Street corridor, while the bay windows are suggestive of Simeon’s on
The Commons. The project focuses on downtown’s most pressing needs: affordable housing and
access to a grocery store like GreenStar. In comparison, the other three proposals are unremarkable,
non‐contextual, uninspired, and seem to overwhelm the City Hall building.
DAN HOFFMAN remarked he would rank Harold’s Holdings’ project first, since it respects the existing
historic scale and context of the area, includes significant affordable housing, does not dwarf or clash
with neighboring structures, and is consistent with the City’s Downtown Design Guidelines. It also
expands the spirit of The Commons more than any of the other projects, bringing the most liveliness to
the street level, with more welcoming public spaces. Given how busy the site already is, the Harold’s
Holdings project is more appropriate sized. Hoffman added there are other better sites downtown for
a conference center.
PEGGY COLEMAN, Vice President of Tourism and Community Relations, Ithaca/Tompkins County
Convention and Visitors Bureau (Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce), remarked that visitors
spent more than $2.7M in Tompkins County in 2017. Since conferences and large meetings tend to
take place Sundays through Thursdays, a conference center would meet demand precisely when the
city community most needs the business, which would support retailers, restaurants, and even create
ancillary businesses (e.g., linen services). Conferences and conventions produce $5.2B in business
annually, with $1.2B of that in New York State. A conference center would provide the city with 60‐100
full‐time equivalent (FTE) jobs.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 6 of 14
LAURA WINTER FALK, Experience The Finger Lakes, LLC, noted the Finger Lakes region has recently
experienced an explosion of interest, especially its wine region, which is now at the top of the list of
domestic wine regions, and is also being increasingly recognized internationally. The most popular
gateways to the region include Ithaca, Geneva, Rochester, and Corning. A conference center would be
a vital means of taking advantage of the region’s growing wine reputation. She knows of several
instances when Ithaca was not chosen as a conference site, because of its lack of meeting capacity.
FRANK STENTO, Apprentice Coordinator, International Union of Painters, expressed strong support for the
Vecino Group project, since it has partnered with a local contractor and architect who are both friendly
to local labor. The project would provide a valuable opportunity for local laborers to earn fair wages.
DAVID MARSH, New York State Laborers' Union Local 785, noted the New York State Laborers' Union
represents thousands of people employed in the construction industry, including retirees. The impact
of investment in local labor extends far beyond any given project. He expressed strong support for the
Vecino Group project, which has already started negotiations with Welliver, a large local labor
company.
KELLI CARTMILL, Chair, Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Planning Board, urged the IURA to select a
project that includes a conference center. The tourism/hospitality industry has become increasingly
important to Ithaca’s economy. The “Ithaca Conference Center Market and Feasibility Study”
concluded that the economic impact of a conference center would lead to $3.8M in additional
spending after the first year, 60 jobs, and local sales tax revenue over $260,000. The County definitely
needs additional meeting space. In the first half of 2018, the County was estimated to have lost $1M in
conference/meeting business due to the lack of capacity.
JONATHAN JEDD, owner of Home Dairy Building, essential consideration for the project should be the feel
of the project to match The Commons, which is the heart of the city. The project should definitely
increase connectivity and the welcoming nature between Commons and Green Street. Both the
Harold’s Holdings and Newman/Visum projects have done a good job in terms of public spaces and
connectivity, as well as delivery/loading spaces for local businesses.
TODD FOX, Visum Development Group, remarked his development team did not think its project was
being compared ‘apples‐to‐apples’ with the other projects. For example, the Vecino Group project is
asking for $10M in subsidies and tax credits; if the Visum/Newman project were asking for that much
funding, it could provide significantly more affordable housing. Also, Visum/Newman actually
investigated the option of building housing above the parking component of the project and
determined that would not be financially feasible. He added that the Visum/Newman projects is also
designed to be 63 feet from the Harold’s Square project, unlike some of the other projects which would
be a lot closer, and would therefore likely not be approved by the Planning and Development Board for
that reason.
Graham moved, seconded by Rosario, to adjourn the Public Hearing.
Carried Unanimously 4‐0
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 7 of 14
Bohn added the IURA also received written comments from Historic Ithaca, Ken Jupiter (Tompkins
County Strategic Tourism Planning Board), and Heather McDaniel (Tompkins County Area
Development).
3. Next Steps ― Discussion (possible ExecuƟve Session to discuss proposed sale of real property
when publicity would substantially affect value thereof)
Myrick asked Bohn to provide guidance about the best process for moving forward. Bohn replied the
IURA Board should meet with Common Council to ensure there is an exchange of ideas about the
proposed projects, which vary considerably. The IURA Board could meet with Common Council at the
end of one its October 2018 budget meetings. One way or the other, Bohn stressed that the IURA
Board should feel comfortable with any decision it is prepared to make and not feel compelled to
choose a preferred developer by any given deadline. Each project has its own set of potential
feasibility issues. Bohn recommended evaluating the projects and selecting the top two preferred
projects for further consideration. The IURA Board should certainly have the opportunity to discuss the
projects further, before meeting with Common Council.
Graham asked Bohn to review the anticipated timeline. Bohn replied the earliest the IURA Board could
make a formal decision on the preferred project would be at its regular October 25th, 2018 meeting.
Assuming a decision is made then, the 90‐day Exclusive Negotiation Agreement (ENA) period would
begin (11/1/18‐2/1/19). The Economic Development Committee (EDC) will review the resulting draft
Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) at its February 12th, 2019 meeting, with the IURA Board
scheduled to approve the DDA at its February 28th, 2019 meeting. Finally, Common Council’s Planning
and Economic Development Committee could hold a Public Hearing on March 3rd, 2019 and vote to
recommend approval of the DDA to Common Council, which would make the final decision on April 3rd,
2019. Bohn stressed there is no absolute urgency requiring the IURA to make a decision on 10/25/18.
Rosario noted numerous questions emerged from the public comments, including the actual feasibility
of constructing housing over the parking component. Bohn replied he did ask the Vecino Group about
that particular issue in the “IURA Request for Information/Clarifications,” and they provided a
response, but more research will be required.
(Rosario departed at 9:45 a.m.)
Lewis indicated she very much appreciated all the public comments, some of which were very
thoughtful and also raised additional questions/concerns. She also appreciates the work done by the
Economic Development Committee in reviewing and ranking the projects. Re‐opening the RFP process
was highly beneficial, enabling the process to be as thorough, open, fair, and public as possible. She
agreed 10/25/18 does not necessarily need to be the deadline for making a decision.
Myrick remarked the City should focus on identifying the greatest needs and what the private sector is
not capable of doing, in terms of the most important project components (e.g., local labor, conference
center, affordable housing, tax revenue, parking). The private sector will not build parking on its own,
since it is a money‐loser. The City loses approximately $1M on parking annually. The affordable
housing component is crucial, since it represents both the greatest need and it is not something the
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 8 of 14
private sector would implement on its own. Myrick noted there is in fact still sufficient parking
downtown, with hundreds of available parking spaces.
Myrick indicated the single most important decision‐making factor for him is which project can deliver
the greatest number of affordable housing units. His second greatest priority would be the parking
component; and the third would be the conference center. The Economic Development Committee
rankings generally seem reliable. At this point, the Vecino Group project is his preferred choice. The
Visum/Newman project also has considerable merit, since it includes considerable parking, is led by an
extensive and experienced development team, and seems highly feasible. Bohn’s proposal to select
two projects for recommendation to Common Council seems well‐suited for identifying the most
desirable and feasible project; and it would also insert a competitive element into the process and
likely improve the outcome for the City.
Farrell noted that, in examining the affordable housing issue, she considers the City’s high property
taxes and the large tax‐exempt portion of the city as part of a wider housing affordability problem; so
she would prefer a project that provides as much tax revenue as possible. In terms of design, the
Harold’s Holdings project is the most attractive by far, although she has concerns with its proposed
light/ventilation wells. She would like to see a wide mixture of affordable housing units designed for
various income levels. She is concerned with the parking component and its cost to the City. She
would like a better understanding of the comparative costs to the City associated with each proposal.
She agreed the City needs to ensure there is sufficient parking available. She agreed with the
suggestion to select two of the projects for recommendation to Common Council, since it would
provide further opportunity to resolve any remaining questions or concerns.
Graham remarked he has many questions after listening to the public comments. Affordable housing
continues to be his primary concern, so any project with the most affordable housing would likely be
the one he supports, although there are certainly other competing factors involved. He agreed there is
a need for sufficient parking. He was interested to hear the two union representatives express support
for the Vecino Group project, since it was Harold’s Holdings’ contention that its own project would
result in the most local labor. He would like more information about why the unions supported the
Vecino Group project. He agreed a conference center is needed. In terms of scale and design, Harold’s
Holdings’ project seems the most appealing and the best fit for the site.
Farrell indicated she is potentially interested in a conference center and certainly sees some benefits to
it, but she is concerned about who would be responsible for its operating costs. She would prefer the
City avoid being responsible for it. In addition, she would be reluctant to make a decision on the
preferred project without more detailed information from the second phase of the “Ithaca Conference
Center Market and Feasibility Study.”
Myrick indicated he would like to see a flexible conference center space, but if that is not feasible, he
would like to see it become a retail space. The Ithaca‐Peak Development project would deliver most
tax revenue, which he likes.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 9 of 14
Lewis noted affordable housing is her primary concern. She was surprised to hear there are significant
numbers of unused downtown parking spaces, especially having heard repeated calls for more parking
from downtown businesses; so she would like a more definitive understanding of parking demand and
supply. She would also like a better understanding of tax revenues generated by a potential
conference center. Anything the City can do to increase its tax revenues will help all its tax payers. She
is leaning in favor of the Vecino Group proposal, because of its emphasis on affordable housing. Like
Graham, she was surprised by the unions’ support for the Vecino Group project. Lewis agreed
selecting two projects for recommendation to Common Council seems a good approach.
Farrell noted she wishes Proulx were present to discuss his project rankings, since they differed the
most from other Committee members’ rankings.
Myrick asked if the IURA Board should reach a consensus on the preferred project(s), before its
meeting with Common Council. Bohn replied, not necessarily, but the earlier it can reach a more
uniform understanding of the direction it would like to take, the better.
At this juncture, Myrick indicated he would like to formally affirm the Economic Development
Committee’s rankings and recommend them to Common Council. He is comfortable with the rankings
and believes they are a good basis for discussion with Common Council.
Bohn clarified the Committee’s ranking system required rankings of 1, 2, 3, or 4, so each Selection
Criterion resulted in one project at the top and one at the bottom, which probably created a wider
range of rankings.
Graham remarked several questions arose today that probably need to be investigated by staff, which
could inform how the IURA Board would like to proceed.
Myrick agreed. He added it would also probably be best to make a decision with all five Board
members present. He wondered if the IURA Board should implement its own separate ranking system,
or simply employ the Committee’s system, but focus on ranking only the two preferred projects.
Farrell replied ranking the top two desired projects would probably work best. Graham agreed.
Myrick asked Bohn what the fastest timeline would be for making the decision on 10/25/18. Bohn
replied a Special Meeting of the IURA Board would need to be scheduled, in early to mid‐October,
before the joint meeting with Common Council. Alternatively, if that is not possible, the IURA could
decide to use its 10/25/18 meeting for further deliberations and postpone its decision.
Myrick indicated he believes the IURA should at least attempt to make a decision on 10/25/18, if
possible.
Farrell reiterated she would like a better understanding of the relative costs to the City, for each of the
parking proposals. She is not averse to the City’s not owning the parking component, but there should
certainly be sufficient available public parking.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 10 of 14
Lewis indicated she would like more information about the structural feasibility of situating the housing
above the parking, since she has heard conflicting information about that.
Myrick noted any further questions could be e‐mailed to Bohn.
Graham asked if the consensus is that the IURA Board would rank the projects using the same process
employed by the Committee. Farrell replied that seems reasonable. No objections were raised.
C. Committee Chairperson Report
None.
VI. Neighborhood Investment Committee (NIC)
A. HUD EnƟtlement Grant ― 2018 AcƟon Plan: Program Amendment #2, INHS Scattered Site Project #7
Graham explained the proposed amendment to the 2018 Action Plan is necessary, since the original
project scope changed, due to internal delays at the Salvation Army. As a result, Ithaca Neighborhood
Housing Services (INHS) was unable to move the original project forward in time for implementation,
so it has formally asked the IURA to reallocate the funds for several other affordable housing units. The
Committee reviewed the proposal, discussed it with INHS, and agreed on the proposed resolution.
Truame added the original Salvation Army project would still be pursued, but not until next year.
Bohn noted the resolution will need Common Council approval.
Moved by Graham, seconded by Farrell:
HUD Entitlement Program: 2018 AcƟon Plan ― Program Amendment #2,
INHS Scattered Site 2 (Project #7)
WHEREAS, the City adopted 2018 Action Plan allocated $100,000 in HOME funds to assist the
Scattered Site Phase 2: New Construction project (Project) sponsored by Ithaca Neighborhood
Housing Services, Inc. (INHS), and
WHEREAS, the Project included redevelopment of the site located at 150 N. Albany Street, owned
by the Salvation Army, for new construction of an approximately 42‐unit affordable housing
project, and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2018, the IURA received notice from INHS that the 150 N. Albany Street
project will not be ready for submission for the annual NYS Unified Funding in December 2018, and
requested re‐allocation of the HOME funds to a substitute affordable housing project including
reconstruction and rehabilitation of 29 rental housing units at the following locations:
203‐209 Elm Street
111 W. Clinton Street
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 11 of 14
406 S. Plain Street
227 S. Geneva Street
502 W. Green Street, and
WHEREAS, development of the 150 N. Albany Street project is now projected to be submitted for
State funding in December 2019, and
WHEREAS, the HUD Citizen Participation Plan requires a public hearing and Common Council
approval for substantial amendments to the Action Plan, and
WHEREAS, a change in the location of the original Project and a change in the use of funds from
new rental housing construction to reconstruction and rehabilitation of existing rental units
qualifies the requested action as a substantial program amendment, and
WHEREAS, at their September 27, 2018 meeting, the IURA recommended approval of reallocation
of HUD funds for the proposed substitute INHS affordable housing project; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby approves program amendment
#2 to the 2018 HUD Action Plan, as follows:
REVISED PROJECT – Program Amendment #2, 2018 Action Plan
Sponsor: Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc.
Project Name: Scattered Site 2
Funding Amount: $100,000
Funding Source: HOME
Project Locations: 203‐209 Elm St. (demolition and reconstruction)
111 W. Clinton St. (rehabilitation)
406 S. Plain St. (rehabilitation)
227 S. Geneva St. (rehabilitation)
502 W. Green St. (rehabilitation)
Project Type: Reconstruction and Rehabilitation of Rental Housing
Number of Housing Units: 29
ORIGINAL PROJECT – To Be Defunded in 2018 Action Plan
Sponsor: Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc.
Project Name: Scattered Site Phase 2: New Construction
Funding Amount: $100,000
Funding Source: HOME
Project Location: 150 N. Albany St.
Project Type: New Construction of Rental Housing
Number of Housing Units: 42
Carried Unanimously 3‐0
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 12 of 14
B. NYS Small CiƟes CDBG Program Income Policy Change ― Discussion
Graham explained that the IURA participated in the Small Cities CDBG program in 2000, 2001, and
2003. It funded numerous programs over that Ɵme, only one of which produced Program Income ― a
$665,000 loan to the Hilton Garden Hotel, which has been steadily repaid and has accumulated
$538,035 in unused funds for the IURA. The IURA will either need to spend that money by the March
31, 2019 deadline, or return it to the State. Funds would not have to be spent by March 31, 2019, but
they would need to be formally committed under contract.
Bohn indicated the IURA should determine how it would prefer to invest the unused funds before the
deadline. He created the following “NYS‐Administered CDBG Program Income Allocation Plan”
worksheet to facilitate discussion.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 13 of 14
Bohn noted potential projects that could be funded include the 2015 Spencer Road Sidewalks and 2016
Wading Pool Renovations projects. The IURA could also choose to fund the Aurora Street Sidewalk
Extension Project, which was not funded by the IURA. The City plans to construct 1,500 linear feet of
sidewalk in order to connect with the Town of Ithaca’s sidewalks (all the way up to Ithaca College).
Since it is scalable, the IURA can determine how much funding to provide. Another project the IURA
might consider funding is the new inter‐city bus infrastructure on Green Street (e.g., curb work, shelter,
signage, lighting); however, it is not yet clear how that project will unfold. The City’s Engineering
Division did not think it would be ready to be contracted out by 3/31/19. The Aurora Street Sidewalk
Extension Project, on the other hand, has already been designed and could be put out for bid in
January 2018, ready to be funded by 3/31/19.
Farrell indicated she would support funding the Aurora Street Sidewalk Project.
Graham observed there would be a cost savings associated with completing all the work at the same
time. Bohn replied that is correct, although the Town of Ithaca’s portion of the project would be an
entirely separate contract. Also, at this point, the IURA only has an estimate of the total project cost,
which may change. Once the IURA formally recommends funding of the project to Common Council,
Sidewalk Program Manager John Licitra could then continue moving the project forward and establish
a detailed timeline.
Moved by Farrell, seconded by Myrick, to fund the City of Ithaca’s Aurora Street Sidewalk Extension
Project with the IURA’s NYS Small Cities CDBG Program Income.
Carried Unanimously 3‐0
Myrick also indicated he would follow up with Paula Younger, Ithaca College’s Executive Director for
Government and Community Relations, about the college possibly funding a portion of the project.
C. Committee Chairperson Report
Graham reported the Committee heard the Housing for School Success Program started the school year
with four homeless families, so Beverly J. Martin Elementary School remains the school with the most
families at risk of lack of housing.
VII. Other New/Old Business
A. Review of IURA Financials: August 2018
Bohn reported most grant activities are progressing on schedule, except the Spencer Road Sidewalks
and GIAC Wading Pool projects (although the latter just submitted its final remaining funding request).
The Spencer Road Sidewalks project is underway and should be completed by the end of this year’s
construction season. All loan repayments are current, except the Finger Lakes School of Massage. All
lease payments are current. The IURA just received its 2018 HUD grant award agreements, so 2018
projects should be listed in future reports.
IURA Minutes
September 27, 2018
Page 14 of 14
B. IURA Chairperson Report
None.
C. Common Council Liaison Report
None.
D. Staff Report
Mendizabal reported that Cornell Cooperative Extension of Tompkins County just withdrew its funding
request for the 2018 Food Entrepreneurship Program (CDBG), since it is pursuing internal leadership
changes and exploring developing a larger entrepreneurship and workforce development project in
partnership with a large local anchor institution, which it would roll the Food Entrepreneurship
Program into. As a result, $25,000 in CDBG funding is now unallocated. Combined with the $26,052 in
the Economic Development Loan Fund, that leaves $51,052 available in unallocated CDBG funding.
Bohn reported that City just instituted a task force to address homeless encampment issues in the
Jungle, as a result of a recent fire there and the difficulties the Fire Department encountered accessing
the site. 50‐70 people are estimated to be living in the Jungle. The task force will examine both short‐
term and long‐term solutions to the problem, focusing first on resolving immediate health and safety
issues.
VIII. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 11:04 A.M.
— END —
Minutes prepared by C. Pyott, edited by N. Bohn.
j:\planning\community development\admin files\minutes\iura\2018\09‐27‐18 iura minutes ‐ draft nb.doc