Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2020-01-28 Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 1 Planning and Development Board Minutes January 28, 2020 Board Members Attending: Robert Aaron Lewis, Chair; McKenzie Lauren Jones, Vice Chair; Garrick Blalock, BPW Liaison; Jack Elliott; Mitch Glass; Matthew Johnston; Emily Petrina Board Members Absent: None Board Vacancies: None Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning, Division of Planning and Economic Development Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning, Division of Planning and Economic Development Applicants Attending: Student Apartments – 238 Dryden Road Brandon Ebel, Stream Collaborative Carpenter Circle Yamila Fournier, Whitham Planning & Design Catherine Blakemore, HOLT Architects Marty Hiller, Project Growing Hope City Harbor – 101 Pier Road David Herrick, T.G. Miller Kate Chesebrough, Whitham Planning & Design Mixed Use Student Apartments – 411-415 College Ave Kate Chesebrough, Whitham Planning & Design Steve Hugo, HOLT Architects Frank Santelli,TG Miller Sara Hayes, owner’s representative Student Apartments – 126 College Avenue Craig Modisher, Stream Collaborative Marissa Reilly, Visum Development Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 2 Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 1. Agenda Review There were no changes to the agenda. 2. Privilege of the Floor Chair Lewis opened Privilege of the Floor. C.K. Cheung, owner of 109 Summit Avenue, spoke in opposition to the 238 Dryden Road project. He said that the developers had no permission to use their property for construction purposes, and that they have lost parking spaces as a result of the project. There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed Privilege of the Floor. 3. Site Plan Review A. Student Apartments, 238 Dryden Road by Todd Fox for Visum Development. Public Hearing, Amendment to Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance, & Recommendation to the BZA. The applicant is proposing to construct a four-story building with eight apartments and associated site improvements. The project site is in the CR-4 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and had previous received Design Review. This has been determined to be an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) for which the Lead Agency made a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance on September 24, 2019. The applicant has revised the project and will be seeking design review, an amended negative declaration and site plan approval the revised layout in January 2020. Brandon Ebel of Stream Collaborative appeared in front of the Board to present project changes. He said that due to a Fire Department request for additional fire access, they have determined that it will be necessary to extend Summit Avenue Slightly in order to create a fire lane. He said that the owners of 109 Summit Avenue will not be affected in the event the IFD needs to access the site. He said the interior layout of the building changed slightly, as they moved a bedroom to the other side of the building to accommodate the change. Other changes include moving a balcony and modifying the planting plan by removing one tree and adding two serviceberry bushes. Jones asked if they needed a rear yard variance previously. Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 3 Ebel said yes, and they were granted it. He said they are also looking for another recommendation from the Board for when they return to the BZA with the modified proposal. He said their lot coverage has increased a fractional amount due to the extension of Summit Avenue as well. Public Hearing On a motion by Jones, seconded by Elliott, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing. Ray Schlather of 201 Sunrise Road, a lawyer representing ENP Associates, which owns 320 Dryden Road, shared his clients’ opposition to the proposed project. He submitted a letter dated January 28, 2020, which is included as an addendum to these minutes. His clients claim the applicants do not have site control, and he said the matter is currently being litigated. He also said that the previous BZA decision included in it a request to the Planning Board that their approvals include a condition that the long-standing historic pedestrian ROW connecting Summit Avenue to Dryden Road be maintained. He asked that the Board make that an express condition of any site plan approval. There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed the Public Hearing on a motion by Johnston, seconded by Blalock. Jones asked if the Board had seen that recommendation previously. Deputy Director Nicholas said no, they did not see it because the project didn’t come back in front of them after the last BZA hearing. She said the Board could still require such a condition if they want. Ebel said Visum has zero interest in restricting public access. He said they have already replaced a dilapidated stairway connecting Summit and Dryden Road in a previous phase of work done on the site. Deputy Director Nicholas asked if there’s an easement. Ebel said he doesn’t know. Elliott said the stairway doesn’t read as public. Ebel said they could add signage as a means to inform people. Jones said she’s a little unclear on how they move forward, with Summit Avenue either being a firelane or a collectively owned private street. Chair Lewis said that it’s his understanding that the Board can move ahead with considering the site plan as proposed and leave the determination of the other issues up to the court. He asked staff for clarification. Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 4 Deputy Director Nicholas said that the City attorneys have not advised her that the Board should stop its reviews of the site plan application. Ebel said that the parking spaces that will be eliminated to create the firelane belong to Visum, and they have no problem with them going away. Chair Lewis said that it looks like the actions in front of them are to review the amended FEAF Part 3 and vote on the amended neg dec. He asked if they wanted to add language regarding signage for the stairs. Director Cornish said it would be a good idea to include that language. Chair Lewis asked where they would put it. Staff said under the “Transportation” section. The Board next reviewed Part 3. Ebel next asked for clarification on the site wall along Dryden Road. Transportation Engineer Eric Hathaway in a comment asked for the opening to be widened, but the opening had been narrowed previously in response to a request from the Board. Ebel asked what they would prefer. Johnston asked about maintenance of the walks and stairs in winter. Ebel said he wasn’t sure whose responsibility it is, but it’s always been cleared when he was up there in the winter. Director Cornish said that it is the property owners’ responsibility to clear the walks. The Board next reviewed the amended Part 3. After some discussion about the size of the address numbers on the building, Petrina said she would like to see a mockup. Ebel agreed to bring one to the next meeting. Adopted Amendment to the Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Elliott: WHEREAS: on September 24, 2019, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determined that the proposed apartment building project “238 Dryden Road” ― consisting of the site plan and variance ― at 232-236 Dryden Road would result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 5 WHEREAS: the project consists of the construction a four-story building with eight apartments and associated site improvements. The .777-acre project site contains two recently-completed apartment buildings. Site development requires the removal of existing landscaped areas and the removal, relocation, or upgrading of water and sewer lines within Summit Avenue. Site improvements will include retaining walls, landscaping, walkways, and exterior bike racks. Parking for bikes will be provided inside the buildings. The project site is in the CR-4 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and requires Design Review. As no parking is proposed for the project, the applicant will submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) for approval by the Planning Board in accordance with district regulations. The project requires area variances, and WHEREAS: this has been determined to be an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review, and was treated as a Type I Action for the purposes of environmental review, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on July 24 2019, declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project, and WHEREAS: After filing of the Negative Declaration, the applicant was required to alter the design to address fire access. Changes include extending the paving at the southern end of Summit Avenue, altering the building footprint and exterior arrangement of building features, and making additional minor site adjustments to accommodate the new spatial arrangement. The new arrangement triggered a revised appeal for area variances and, as stated above, will require a routine variance from the Regional NYS Board of Code Review for fire access, and WHEREAS: in accordance with §176-7 E. of CEQR and §617.7(e) of SEQRA, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board acting as Lead Agency has determined that (1) new information has been discovered and (2) a change in circumstances related to the project has arisen that was not previously considered, and the Lead Agency has determined that no significant adverse impact will occur, and WHEREAS: the Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has on January 28, 2020 reviewed and accepted as adequate the new information consisting of: a revised Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part1, submitted by the applicant and Parts 2 and 3, prepared by Planning staff; the following revised drawings: “Site Layout Plan (L101)” and “Planting Plan (L104)” dated 12-3-19, “Demo Plan (D100)” dated 12-18-19, “Site Perspective 1 (A1)” and “Site Perspective 2 (A2)”, “Elevation South (A201)”, elevation North (A202)”, “Elevation East (A203)” and “Elevation West (A204)” dated 12-4-19, and “Floor Plan (A101)” dated 12-20-19 and a;; prepared by Stream Collaborative, and other supporting materials, now therefore be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby amend the Negative Declaration issued on September 24, 2019 to include the above-mentioned information in the environmental record, and be it further RESOLVED: that based on all supporting documentation, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby determine that the proposed apartments (238 Dryden Road) located at 232-236 Dryden Road will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Moved by: Petrina Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 6 Seconded by: Elliott In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina Against: None Abstain: None Absent: None Vacancies: None B. Carpenter Circle Project, Carpenter Park Road by Andrew Bodewes for Park Grove Realty LLC. Architecture (Medical Building) & Community Gardens. The project seeks to develop the existing 10.8-acre parcel located adjacent to Route 13 and off of Third Street. The parcel currently contains 2.1 acres of community gardens, an access road (Carpenter Circle Road), and one storage building to be removed. The proposal includes Building A, a 64,000 SF medical office building; Buildings B & C, two mixed-use buildings which will include ground-level retail/restaurant/commercial uses of 23,810 SF, interior parking, 166 market-rate apartment units, and 4,652 SF of amenity space; and Building D, a residential building offering +/-42 residential units for residents earning 50-60% AMI. Site amenities will include public spaces for residents and visitors, bike parking, transit access for TCAT, open green space, a playground, and access to the Ithaca Community Gardens. The project includes 187 internal parking spaces within Buildings B and C, 349 surface parking spaces, and an internal road network with sidewalks and street trees. The Project Sponsor is seeking a Break in Access from NYS DOT to install an access road off of Route 13. The property is located in the Market District; however, the applicant has applied to Common Council for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The project will require subdivision into four lots to separate each program element, resulting in Lot 1 measuring 2.086 acres and containing Building A, Lot 2 measuring 5.758 acres and containing Buildings B & C, Lot 3 measuring 2.12 acres and containing the community gardens, and Lot 4 measuring .833 acres and containing Building D. This has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(d), (i), (k), and (B)(6) and (8)(a) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11). Applicant Yamila Fournier of Whitham Planning & Design and Catherine Blakemore of HOLT Architects appeared in front of the Board to provide updates on the proposed project, with a focus on the medical office building architecture and the design of the Community Gardens. Blakemore discussed changes to the parking configuration, and tentative materials selections and rooftop mechanicals screening for the medical office building. Jones asked where the applicants are in terms of getting the DOT approvals for the Fifth Street intersection. Deputy Director Nicholas said that it’s in progress, and they should know better within a few weeks. Johnston expressed some concern about the illuminated signage on the top of the building facing a residential neighborhood. He said they had denied similar signage recently proposed by Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 7 Tompkins Financial. He asked if it would be possible to light just the lower signage over the entryway at night instead of the upper signage. He asked what the other Board members thought. Petrina asked when the urgent care would be open. Applicants said it would be open fairly early in the morning and stay open into the evening. Petrina said this seems a little different from the Tompkins Financial proposal because the hours of operation mean that some wayfinding has to happen. Chair Lewis said that Tompkins Financial is also in the downtown core, and this is not. It’s on a highway. Jones said it is near the waterfront though, and the Board wants to avoid light pollution around that natural resource as much as possible. Director Cornish asked if the applicant would be returning to the Board with a complete signage package. Blakemore said yes they would. The drawings being presented are just to give the Board a general sense of placement just for concept right now. She said they still have to look at all the zoning requirements and size of everything. Fournier said they want to return with all the signage for Carpenter Park as a complete package, and that will be easier when they have secured tenants for the ground floor retail spaces, and she said that the portions of the building facing the waterfront would not have any signage. Elliott said that especially given the project’s proximity to the waterfront, they should look into bird safe glass. Blakemore said they were already doing so. She said that because they are breaking up the glazing with opaque spandrels, it won’t have the same reflectivity that typically causes problems for birds. She said it’s more of a problem where you have a monolithic surface of clear glass. She said they will continue to look into it. Glass asked if they had considered a green roof on the two-story base. Blakemore said they looked into it, but they decided against it based on energy performance and structural concerns. She said they are looking at light stone to keep the heat gain low. There being no additional questions or comments on the medical office building, the applicants next discussed the Community Gardens portion of the project, and they were joined by Marty Hiller, president of Project Growing Hope. Hiller said the Community Gardens are located under the NYSEG lines and re split into two sections separated by Carpenter Park Road. She said the new configuration would be pretty close Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 8 to the size they are now, and they would be located between the affordable housing building to the north and the mixed-use buildings to the south. She said the side of the gardens nearer to the railroad would have the shared gardening resources clustered around the center near the truck access gate. The side nearer to the highway would have more public features, including an event space with an accessible pavilion and an accessible area with raised beds, some donation plots, and a portable toilet and handwashing station. She said they are planning for irrigation lines that are shallowly buried and then drained for the winter, and they will have more faucets and hoses than they currently do. She said the highway side will be fed from a rainwater cistern attached to building B. The new entryway will provide a focal point, and the compost bins will be screened from view by opaque fencing. She said the new sheds will be larger than what they have currently to reduce outdoor clutter, and they will use a modular design so they can be built incrementally if necessary. She said they may need additional funding, either from the City or from grants, to build all the structures. She said the fence designs are preliminary, and final selections will be determined by negotiations that are still ongoing. They are trying to balance functionality, durability, attractiveness, and cost. She said the most important requirement is that they exclude groundhogs, rabbits, and deer. That will improve attractiveness because it will reduce the need for interior fencing. She said the acoustic fencing they want is really expensive, but it’s desperately needed because of the traffic noise bouncing off the B&W restaurant building. Elliott asked if they had any renderings of the acoustic fence. Hiller said not yet. Director Cornish asked about the site selected for the compost, as opposed to closer to B&W. Hiller said the site they chose has afternoon shading; whereas, closer to B&W gets full sun. Glass asked for photographs of all the different types of fencing when they return. Fournier said they could provide those once the final sections are determined. She said they are going back and forth with the Gardens. Hiller said that they are looking at black powder coating in locations where it’s highly visible, galvanized where it’s not, and dark green screening to hide the compost. There being no more questions or comments from the Board, Chair Lewis thanked the applicants for their time. C. City Harbor, 101 Pier Road by Jessica Edger-Hillman. Architecture and Landscaping Details. The 10.35-acre project site consists of 8.33 acres of privately-owned land and 2.02 acres of adjacent City-owned parkland and road. The applicant proposes to redevelop the 8.33-acre project site and make improvements to 2.02 acres of adjacent City land. The project site consists of (3) privately-owned tax parcels. The building program will be a total of 316,280 SF consisting of (1) 60,000 SF medical office building, (2) five-story residential Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 9 structures with a total of 172,980 GSF and 111 housing units, (1) five-story mixed-use building with 77,800 GFA with 45 housing units, 4,500 SF of ground floor commercial (expected to be a restaurant), and (1) 5,500 SF Community Building to support golf, boating, and other recreational activities associated with the adjacent City-owned Newman Golf Course. Phase 1 includes the rebuilding of Pier Road to include sidewalks, street trees, a fire engine turnaround, and additional and reorganized parking, all improvements on private property with the exception of the construction of Point East Building (which will be used as greenspace and parking) and the temporary relocation of the fueling dock and tank. Phase 2 of the project will include the construction of the Point East Building, additional parking at the golf course, installation of the new fueling dock and tank, the 5,500 SF Newman Community Center, removal of the existing clubhouse and relocation of the Ninth green. Site improvements on private property to include a 1,570-foot publically-accessible promenade along Cascadilla Creek, including construction of a new seawall and replacement of existing docks, waterfront parks, a paddle park, internal circulation streets, bus stops, surface parking for 435 cars (in Phases 1 & 2), and landscaping. This has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(d), (h)(2), (i), (k) and (n) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(6)(iii) and (v). David Herrick of T.G. Miller and Kate Chesebrough of Whitham Planning & Design appeared in front of the Board to present project updates. Chesebrough shared section views and reviewed landscaping details. She said City Forester Jeanne Grace had reviewed their planting plans and they were taking her suggestions into consideration. Board and applicants discussed the materials and lighting along the waterfront promenade, and the rebuilding of the sea wall and boat slips. Director Cornish said that she understands the applicants had a meeting with Friends of Newman later in the week, and they had expressed concerns about the relocation of the 9th green and its proximity to the fire truck turnaround. She said they sounded positive about moving the green moved north about 150 feet for safety reasons. She encouraged them not to move it until Phase 2 is underway because you don’t want to have to move it twice. Herrick said the project team is committed to working with the Friends of Newman and prepared to help them with the costs of moving the 9th green. Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 10 D. Mixed-Use Student Apartments, 411-415 College Avenue by Whitham Planning & Design for Student Agencies. Determination of Environmental Significance. The applicant proposes to construct a six-story building with a 7,038 SF footprint, ground floor retail, and 56 student apartments on floors two through six. The project includes a partially covered outdoor plaza area on land partially owned by Cornell. Project development will require the removal of the existing four-story building known as the Chacona Block, as well as the existing outdoor patio and retaining walls. The parcel is in the MU-2 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and requires Design Review. This has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(h)(4), (k) and (n) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(9). Kate Chesebrough of Whitham Planning & Design, Steve Hugo of HOLT Architects, Frank Santelli of TG Miller and Sara Hayes, owner’s representative, appeared in front of the Board. They presented suggested revisions to the draft FEAF Part 3. Chesebrough said they are working with BERO Architecture to complete the HABS-level survey of the building, and that work is underway. Hayes said they would be doing vibration monitoring and elevation monitoring during demolition and foundation work. She said they were developing a transportation plan to control truck traffic. Hugo said they were still looking at options for the glass to minimize impacts on birds. Chesebrough said that they were in talks with the City and Cornell to find ways to improve the intersection (traffic circle). The Board next reviewed the Part 3. Adopted Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance On a motion by Jones, seconded by Johnston: WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Review for a new mixed use apartment building located at 411-415 College Ave by Whitham Planning & Design for Student Agencies, owner, and WHEREAS: The applicant proposes to construct a six-story building with a 7,038 SF footprint, ground floor retail, and 56 student apartments on floors two through six. The project includes a partially covered outdoor plaza area on land partially owned by Cornell. Project development will require the removal of the existing four-story building known as the Chacona Block, as well as the existing outdoor patio and retaining walls. The parcel is in the MU-2 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and requires Design Review, and Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 11 WHEREAS: this has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(h)(4), (k) and (n) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(9), and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on September 24 2019, declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project, and WHEREAS: this Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, has on January 28, 2020, reviewed and accepted as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 & 3 prepared by Planning staff; drawings titled: “Boundary & Topographic Map No. 411-415 College Avenue, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York” dated 3-21-17 and “Existing Site Conditions (C101)”, “Site Demolition Plan (C201)”, “Site Utility Demolition Plan (C202)”, ‘Site Layout Plan Alternative Curb Line (C301)”, “Grading and Drainage Plan (C302)”, “Site Utility Plan (C303)”, “Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (C401)”, and “Site Utility Details (C501)” all dated 11/18/19 and “Work Zone Traffic Controls (C601)” dated 12-20-19, and “Roof Plan” dated 10-28-19 and “Design Development Plan (L-1.0) dated 11-19-19, the following undated drawings labeled November Planning Board Updates “Site Plan”, ‘Stepback Perspective Comparison”, “5’ Stepback Plan View”, “7’ Stepback Plan View” and “12’Stepback Plan View” and the following undated drawings labeled December Planning Board Updates: “Street Level Perspective”, “Aerial Perspective”, “Aerial Perspective – Plaza Zoom In” “Site and Building Lighting Information’, “Blank Wall in Plaza”, “College Avenue Elevation”, “Oak Avenue Elevation”, “7’ Stepback Perspective”, “Perspectives of Oak Avenue” “Conceptual Sections”, and “Analysis of Building Height from Context” and “Design Development Plan” dated 11-19-19, “Conceptual Seating Studies” dated 12-4-19, “Site Plan” dated 10-22-19 and “Site Disturbance Plan” dated 9-3-19 and “Exterior Photometric Study (001)” dated 01-15-20, all prepared by Holt Architecture et al., and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determines the proposed project will result in no significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act Moved by: Jones Seconded by: Johnston In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina Against: None Abstain: None Absent: None Vacancies: None Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 12 E. Student Apartments at 126 College Avenue by 126 C-Town LLC (Visum Development). Design Review & Review Amended Negative Declaration. This project was approved on January 24, 2017. The project was not constructed, and the approval expired in January 2019. The applicant now seeks re-approval for the project with a few changes. The applicant is proposing to construct a four-story (with occupied basement) apartment building with a total of five units (one on each floor) and 27 bedrooms (28 originally proposed) on the .0908 acres (3,957 SF) project site. Site improvements include walkways, landscaping and a retaining wall with an upper terrace accessible from the basement apartment. All above-ground apartments will have a balcony facing College Avenue. Site development will require the removal of the existing house, with its associated retaining walls, driveway curbcut and walkways. Five mature trees in the rear of the property that were originally retained are now proposed to be removed. The project site is in the CR-4 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and received Design Review in 2017. As no parking is proposed for the project, the applicant will submit a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) for approval by the Planning Board in accordance with district regulations. This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), and is subject to Environmental Review for which the Lead Agency made a negative determination of environmental significance in 12-20-16. The Neg Dec will be amended to include new information regarding project changes. Craig Modisher of Stream Collaborative and Marissa Reilly of Visum Development appeared in front of the Board to present project updates/ design changes for the project previously approved in 2017 and for which approval is expiring. The Board next reviewed revisions to the Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. Applicants will return the following month to vote on the revised Neg Dec, receive public comments, and F. 120 E Green Street – Green Garage Redevelopment – Asteri – Sketch Plan Bruce Adib-Yazdi of Vecino Group and Kate Chesebrough of Whitham Planning and Design appeared in front of the Board to present a sketch plan of the Green Street Garage redesign. 4. Recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals • # 3150 – 238 Dryden Road, Area Variance The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal. This is appropriate and attractive infill housing that is consistent with the Collegetown Area Form Districts and the Collegetown Design Guidelines. The rear yard setback does not have an impact because the rear yard of the building backs up to Summit Ave. Approved by the Planning and Development Board May 26, 2020 13 • # 3151 – 214 Eddy Street, Area Variance The Planning Board The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal. The Board supports the use of an existing historic building to provide more housing and trusts the decision of the ILPC. 5. Reports A. Planning Board Chair Chair Lewis had no report. B. Board of Public Works Liaison BPW Liaison Blalock said that NYSEG owns the streetlights in the City and charges incredibly high rents to lease their use. He said they have recently been required by law to offer them for sale, and not surprisingly, they have been dragging their feet, but it looks like by this summer the City might be able to arrange to purchase them, and only be required to pay for the electricity. The Board next had a discussion about the City’s licensure requirements for plumbers and electricians doing business within the City, and how it increases the cost of those services by limiting the pool of eligible. The Board next revisited the discussion the possible owner occupancy requirement for the draft ADU ordinance. Elliott made the case for an owner occupancy requirement. After heated discussion, Chair Lewis asked him to read the recommendation memo previously drafted by the Board, and he cut the discussion short. C. Director of Planning & Development No report. 6. Adjournment: On a motion by Johnston, seconded by Jones, the meeting was adjourned at 9:51 p.m.