Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2016-03-15TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Shirley A. Raffensperger Board Room, Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. March 15. 2016 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Campus to Campus Bus Shelter and Pull Off Reconstruction project located in the B-Lot parking lot along Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63.-1-3.1, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves demolishing the existing concrete bus shelter, constructing a new concrete pad and sidewalk, installing a new 10' x 10' bus shelter with lighting, and modifying the adjacent parking area to remove 13 parking spaces for the bus pull-off. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Tammi Aiken, P.E., Agent. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Cornell University Maplewood Apartments Redevelopment project located between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63.-2-10.2, 63.-2-1, 63.-2-2, 63.-2-14, and 63.-2-3, High Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing Maplewood housing complex and redeveloping the -i-/- 13 acre site with 500-600 residential units (studios and 1-4 bedroom units) in a mix of townhomes, stacked flats, and multi-family apartment buildings. The project will also include some small retail, new interior streets, parking areas, pedestrian facilities, open spaces, stormwater facilities, and a community center. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning & Design, LLC. 3. Persons to be heard 4. Approval of Minutes: March 1, 2016 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273-1747 or SPOLCE@T()\VN.ITHA( A.NY.llS. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) Accessing Meeting Materials Online Site Plan and Subdivision applications and associated project materials are accessible electronically on the Town's website under "Planning Board" on the "Meeting Agendas" page fbttD://www.town.ithacii.nv.tis/mectini2-aac'ndas). TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday. March 15.2016 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, March 15, 2016, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following time and on the following matter: 7:00 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Campus to Campus Bus Shelter and Pull Off Reconstruction project located in the B-Lot parking lot along Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63.-1-3.1, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves demolishing the existing concrete bus shelter, constructing a new concrete pad and sidewalk, installing a new 10' x 10' bus shelter with lighting, and modifying the adjacent parking area to remove 13 parking spaces for the bus pull-off. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Tammi Aiken, P.E., Agent. Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 Dated: Monday, March 7,2016 Publish: Wednesday, March 9,2016 TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Sandra Polce, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of Public Hearings to be held bv the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall. 215 North Tioga Street. Ithaca. New York, on Tuesday. March 15. 2016 commencing at 7:00 P.M.. as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board - 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting: March 7, 2016 Date of Publication: March 9, 2016 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9^*^ day of March 2016 Notary Public z: - -DEBORAH KELLEY 1- Notary'Public, State of New York No. 01KC3025073 Qualified in Schuyler Coun^ Commission,Expires May 17 umy .o , 20«O 5_ — iTHE ITHACA JOURNAL WEDNESDAY, MARCH 9, 2016 N<3llse:i^PUBLiC • HEARINGS- ' Tuesd^, March 15, 2016 By direction of the Chairper- BOfl of the Planning Board.' NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that a Public Hearing will be hM by the Planning Board oR the Town of Ithaca on Tues day, March IS, 2016, at 215 North Tioga Street, hhaca., N,Y.. at the foRowing dme. and on the fottowing matter: 7:00 P.M. Consideration' of l^eiiminary and Rnal Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cor nel University Campus to' Campus Bus Shelter and Pull Off Reconstruction project lo cated in the S-Lol parldng lot alorrg Dryden Road, Town of llheca Tax Parcel No. 63.-I- 3.1, Low Density Residential Zone, The project Involves' demolishing the existing con-| Crete bus shelter, construct ing a new concrete pad and sidewalk, installing a new 10 X10' bus shelter with lighting, and modifying the adjacent perking area to remove 13 parking spaces for the bus pul-off. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Tammi Aik- er*. P.E., Agent- Said Planning Board wA at said time and sad place hear persons In support of such matters or objections diera- to. Persons may appear agent or in person. Indnndu- als with visud Impairments, hearing impairmenta or other special needs, will be prcMd- ed with assistance as neces sary. upon request Petsoni desihng asslBtance must make such a request not teas thari 46 hours prior to the time of the public bean'ng, Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 3/9/2016 Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street March 15,2016 7:00 p.m, PLEASE SIGN-IN Please Print Clearly. Thank You Name [on u3aL J ^ TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, March 15, 2016 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Town Planning Board Members Present: Liebe Meier Swain (Vice Chair), Linda Collins, Joseph Haefeli, John Beach, Yvonne Fogarty Town Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Chris Balestra, Planner; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Creig Hebdon, Town Engineer; Dan Thaete, Engineer; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Ms. Meier Swain called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and accepted the secretary's posting and publication of the public hearing notice. AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Campus to Campus Bus Shelter and Pull Off Reconstruction project located in the B-Lot parking lot along Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63.-1-3.1, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves demolishing the existing concrete bus shelter, constructing a new concrete pad and sidewalk, installing a new 10' x 10' bus shelter with lighting, and modifying the adjacent parking area to remove 13 parking spaces for the bus pull-off. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Tammi Aiken, P.E., Agent Ms. Meier Swain opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. Ms. Aiken noted that the shelter will be fitted with an anti-vagrant bench with a cutout to accommo date a wheelchair. The drawing shows a different size unit. The proposed shelter has a fourth wall. Ms. Meier Swain closed the public hearing at 7:09 p.m. Ms. Fogarty asked why they're replacing the bus shelter. Ms. Aiken said that the concrete structures are falling apart and repair would be difficult. This shelter is smaller, but it will be sufficient to accommodate its ridership. She said that transportation would have ridership numbers if board members were interested. PB Resolution No. 2016-017: Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, Special Permit, Cornell University - Campus Bus Shelter Reconstruction, Tax Parcel No. 63.-1-3.1, "B-Lot" Parking Lot, Dryden Road Moved by Joseph Haefeli; seconded by Linda Collins WHEREAS: Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 2 of 16 1. This action involves consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Campus to Campus Bus Shelter and Pull-Off Reconstruction project located in the B-Lot parking lot along Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63.-I- 3.1, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves demolishing the existing concrete bus shelter, constructing a new concrete pad and sidewalk, installing a new 10' x 10' bus shelter with lighting, and modifying the adjacent parking area to remove 13 parking spaces for the bus pull-off. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Tammi Aiken, P.E., Agent, and 2. This is a Type 11 Action, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Sections 617.5(c)(2) and (c)(8) of the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, because the Action constitutes a "replacement, rehabili tation, or reconstruction of a structure or facility, in kind, on the same site, including upgrading buildings to meet building or fire codes," and also "routine activities of educational institutions, including expansion of existing facilities by less than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area and school closings, but not changes in use related to such closings." Thus, approval of the site plan and special permit are not subject to review under SEQR, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on March 15, 2016, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a project narrative, drawings titled "Campus to Campus (B-Lot) Bus Shelter Replace ment and Bus Pull Off Reconstruction," including Sheets TOOl, C-000, C-101, O301, C-302, E- 000, E-101 and E-400, all dated January 15, 2016 and prepared by Cornell University Facilities Engineering, and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby finds that the Special Permit standards of Article XXIV Section 270- 200, Subsections A - L, of the Town of Ithaca Code, have been met, specifically that: a. the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community in harmony with the general purpose of Town Code Chapter 270, Zoning are being promoted and such use will fill a neighborhood or community need, because for all public buildings and educational buildings wherein the principal use is research, administration, or instruction, the same is presumed to exist, b. the premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use because all publicly owned or educa tional buildings are deemed to be adapted to the proposed use, c. the proposed use and the location and design of the reconstructed shelter is consistent with the character of the district in which it is located, since there is no change in the use as a bus shelter and parking lot, the location of the shelter will be the same, and the new shelter design will match an existing shelter located on the other side of the same parking lot, d. the proposed use will not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devalue the neighborhood property or seriously inconvenience the neighboring inhabitants, as the parking lot character that exists will not change and the recon struction will create a more convenient bus pull off for drivers and users of the shelter. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 3 of 16 e. the presumed benefit of such a use is not outweighed by the objectionable impacts of such use on nearby properties, for the reasons stated above, f. community infrastructure and services, including but not limited to protective services, road ways, garbage collection, schools and water and sewer facilities are currently, or will be, of ad equate capacity to accommodate the proposed use, g. the proposed use, design and site layout comply with all provisions of Chapter 270, Zoning, and, to the extent considered by the Planning Board, with other regulations and ordinances of the Town, with the Building Code and all other state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and with the Town Comprehensive Plan, h. the proposed access and egress for all structures and uses are safely designed and the site lay out provides adequate access for emergency vehicles, i. the presumed benefit of such use is not outweighed by the detrimental effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the community, for reasons noted above, j. the lot area, access, parking, and loading facilities are sufficient for the proposed use and ac cess, parking, and loading facilities are adequately buffered to minimize their visual impact, k. natural surface water drainage is adequately managed in accordance with good engineering practices and in accordance with any applicable Town local law or ordinance, and existing drainageways are not altered in a manner that adversely affects other properties, and 1. the proposed use and structure comply with all the criteria applicable to site plan review set forth in Town Code Chapter 270, Zoning; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in a significant alteration of neither the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary &. Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Bus Shelter and Pull-Off Reconstruction project located in the B-Lot parking lot along Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63.-1-3.1, as described on the drawings listed above, subject to the following condition: a. submission of one set of the final site plan drawings on mylar, vellum, or paper, signed and sealed by the registered land surveyor, engineer, architect, or landscape architect who prepared the site plan material, prior to the issuance of a building permit. Vote Ayes: Meier Swain, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Fogarty Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 4 of 16 AGENDA ITEM Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Cornell University Maplewood Apartments Redevel opment project located between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63.-2-I0.2, 63.-2-1, 63.-2-2, 63.-2-14, and 63.-2-3, High Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing Maplewood housing complex and redeveloping the +/-13 acre site with 500-600 residential units (studios and 1-4 bedroom units) in a mix of townhomes, stacked flats, and multi-family apartment buildings. The project will also include some small retail, new interior streets, parking areas, pedestrian facilities, open spaces, stormwater facilities, and a community center. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning (Sc Design, LLC Mr. Whitham introduced Murphy Antoine, architect, Torti Gallas and Partners. Mr. Whitham stated that this will be a long process with planning staff, the planning board, and others for many months to come. They've had a couple public meetings and have heard from the community. He also introduced Jeffrey Resetco, EdR Trust, developers, and John Gutenberger, Cornell Community Relations. Mr. Antoine said the firm is based out of Silver Spring, Maryland. They're known for their planning work in making neighborhoods. They're trying to craft something here to replace a development that has reached the end of its life. They work from conceptual design through implementation. There are currently 170 apartments with 375 beds for graduate and professional students. The development sticks out from its context. It is about half impervious surface today. They're planning a well- connected, affordable, sustainable neighborhood. Maplewood was built in 1989 and is already failing. What they've heard is that people are happy to see this project, but worry about the bigger buildings butting up to the South Hill Rec Way. They revised the plan to address that. They also increased the vegetative buffer near the trail. One of the most important aspects of this plan for Cornell is taking care of their professional and graduate students, so by taking the same footprint and raising the buildings, they're able to house more of those students. They've preserved the natural slopes along the eastern edge and the large trees and the cemetery. The existing development is all about cars; the new plan is about pedestrians, parking, porches, and architectural elements that engage the residents. The existing is all the same building stamped out versus a mix of buildings and architectural characters. Stormwater will be integrated into the landscape, not separated by chain link fences. There will be zero water runoff. This site is primarily in the town with a small corner in the northwest in the city. Mr. Whitham said they'll be back in a couple of weeks. The next public meeting will be the first or second week in April. A working meeting with the neighborhood will come. Ms. Collins wondered why the four-story buildings are located at the gateways and not in the center of the development. Mr. Antoine said they make a stronger edge. The big buildings are on streets with a larger capacity for traffic. On Maple, there is a current zone of larger buildings. On Mitchell, it's a bigger street, so it can accommodate bigger buildings. On the south side, there's a five-story lab building. Ms. Collins pointed out that there are also many single-family homes. She asked whether that had been taken into consideration. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 5 of 16 Mr. Antoine said it was; that's why the one apartment building was pulled away from the edge and more townhouses were pushed to the edge. Four stories seems big, but it's not. There are a lot of three-story homes with attics in the neighborhood, so this is only one story more. Mr. Haefeli said he's not so concerned about the north end, but he's concerned about the massing on the south end on Mitchell. He doesn't want it to be fortress-like. Mr. Antoine said that in the back of his mind, it's the future of East Hill Village - less parking and more pedestrian-centered. Ms. Ritter made the clarification that East Hill Village, which is now East Hill Plaza, is part of Cornell's master plan. Mr. Hebdon stated that the town had plans to replace the water tank that serves this area, but since receiving this plan, we've pushed it off. The planned tank probably can't serve this number of beds. They'll have discussions with Cornell. They'll also have to look at the sewer connection to ensure the capacity down on the flats. Mr. Beach asked about the timeline for total buildout. Mr. Antoine responded that they hope to have people moved in by fall of 2018. Ms. Fogarty said she was impressed by Mr. Antoine's familiarity with the neighborhoods in the area. This neighborhood has lots of potential. She commended them on meeting with neighbors. Ms. Collins said she always hears that Cornell isn't building its student body, and wondered whether there's a strategic move in increasing the density. Mr. Antoine responded that there's not been a great growth in the professional and graduate population, but rather that they're doing this to house the current population. Mr. Gutenberger said that Cornell houses quite a bit fewer of their students than other universities. This is one attempt to get in line with peer institutions. With this development, they'll be up to 12 percent, which is still lower than their peers. Mr. Resetco said this is designed with the purpose of graduate students. A faculty or staff member or another university-related student might be allowed to live there if the number of graduate students is exhausted. Mr. Antoine pointed out that a handful of units today are reserved for visiting faculty. Mr. Gutenberger said the university has just started a study of student housing needs. That will occur over the summer and into the fall and will gather a better vision of how the university wants to house its students. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 6 of 16 Mr. Resetco said that EdR will own the buildings and the university will maintain ownership of the land. EdR Trust is a publicly traded real estate investment trust with 51 years of experience with collegiate housing. EdR will own the buildings and lease the land from Cornell under a long-term ground lease of more than 50 years. The length of the ground lease has not yet been finalized. This is different from the current Maplewood development, where Cornell owns the buildings. EdR was selected by Cornell as part of the public RFP process. Mr. Gutenberger said he was not aware of Cornell's use of this type of development model before, with a company owning the buildings and leasing the land from Cornell. It will be faster and more economical for Cornell to use EdR Trust as the developer of the new buildings. Ms. Collins asked about affordability. She wondered how the rental rates were set. Mr. Resetco said the rate will be set by the developer in conjunction with Cornell, but they will have an agreement about the rates. The intent is that rates will be equivalent to what students are paying right now. Units will be below market rate. Mr. Haefeli asked why the current development had been built so cheaply that it would last only 25 years. Mr. Antoine said he doesn't know but, was shocked when he learned that it was built in 1989. Cornell owns the Maplewood now. He said the new development would be built to LEED or a similar sustainability metric. Ms. Brock asked if EdR Trust would pay real estate taxes on the development. Mr. Resetco said that determination has not yet been made. Ms. Brock asked what information is needed before the determination can be made. Mr. Resetco responded that they have all the information, and that Cornell and the taxing authority are working on the determination. Ms. Brock asked if EdR Trust pays real estate taxes on its other developments. Mr. Resetco said it does pay taxes on some developments but not on others, and that the require ment to pay taxes depends on the taxing authority and whether the project is on campus or off campus. Ms. Brock noted that Mr. Resetco had mentioned that EdR Trust is publicly traded, and she asked him to confirm that it is a for-profit corporation that distributes profits to its shareholders. Mr. Resetco confirmed that is correct. Ms. Brock asked whether Cornell would be using the Transportation-Focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (t-GEIS) that Cornell prepared a few years ago, or whether the information in that document was too out-of-date. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 7 of 16 Mr. Whitham responded that the t-GEIS will be used as a reference document. He expects a positive declaration of environmental impact and is already pulling together information, in terms of the geotechnical work and a transportation study, along with other information, in anticipation of the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement for this project. Ms. Brock said if Cornell agrees an EIS needs to be prepared, the planning board could issue a positive declaration resolution without the need for review as to whether an EIS is needed. The board did this for the Holochuck Homes project. Ms. Fogarty said she understood wanting to keep the units affordable and that was the rationale for not paying taxes, but would want to know what the rents are now, what's currently being generated in terms of revenue, and what the rents would be in the future and what revenues they expect to generate. She wondered how keeping the units at market rate would affect the neighbors. Ms. Brock said she'd have to look into whether the board can ask about that. Ms. Ritter said that there's a lot of support for Cornell to start building more housing for their students, because, hopefully, that would free up housing for other people. There's the hope that there would be the trickle effect of housing opening up by encouraging graduate students to be in this housing. Workers could fill any gaps where housing would be made available. Ms. Meier Swain said that she understands what Ms. Fogarty is saying in terms of the market rate, but potential revenue and profit is heading down a slippery slope. Ms. Collins asked what a stacked flat was. Mr. Antoine responded that when we think of a typical apartment, we think of shared stairs, a shared elevator, a corridor-loaded building. A stacked flat is stacked like an apartment building, but each tenant has an individual entry. At the ground floor, you go in your front door and up your stairs to your unit or in your front door to the ground-floor flat. Regarding the PDZ, Ms. Ritter said that the town board referred the rezoning request to the planning committee. They will work on draft language for the PDZ, and it will eventually come to the planning board for a recommendation. Ms. Meier Swain asked if 1500 square feet of commercial space for 600 units of residential was correct and how much square footage was estimated for the community center. Mr. Antoine said the commercial space will be up to 5000 square feet to add flexibility. It's neighbor hood convenience, small scale commercial, not a big grocery or market. The community center is between 3500 and 7500 square feet to give it some range. That will house leasing and management and maintenance and also a community room, probably a fitness center and a community kitchen so people in studio apartments can have a dinner party. Mr. Haefeli asked about daycare. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 8 of 16 Mr. Antoine responded that the initial PDZ language allows that to happen in the community center. Ms. Meier Swain invited the public to speak. Katherine Herleman, Cornell graduate student in geological sciences, said she sits on the university assembly and is a representative for the professional and graduate students on their assembly. Her comments are below. "Mr. Antoine stated that he envisions a "Longer, more sustainable, useful life" for these structures and the community as a whole; if this is the project team's vision then we need to have serious discussions about flexibility with energy resource planning, including utility sources; the current sketch - and 1 respect that it is a sketch which will undergo many changes - is completely dependent on natural gas; I don't think this sketch meets the goal of having a longer, more sustainable, and useful life for at least the 50 year time period in which EdR sees itself being involved; we need to consider alternative energy options during the very beginning of the design phase so we limit technical and financial difficulties of adapting the structure and utilities in the near future, definitely within the design lifetime of the structure; if we take President Emeritus Skorton's widely supported 2035 carbon neutral deadline seriously, this needs to be an essential component of design, and I know that LEED certification in and of itself does not guarantee adequate environmental outcomes. Graduate and professional students prefer sustainability and affordability to luxuries - we believe that it is important that we use this period of redevelopment to reaffirm the University's commitment to sustainability and 2035 carbon neutrality goal; also, from my position as a young environmental professional, I think that graduate students in environmental fields want the opportunity to live out our professional and personal environmental values. Also of note are continuing concerns voiced by current graduate and professional students about the affordability of the units. It is my assessment that these concerns have not been sufficiently addressed by Cornell University representatives or the project team. Our concern: • The current stipend rate for graduate and professional students ranges from $24,000 to $28,000 pre-tax annual salary, as of this year's 2% increase in stipend rates. • A common estimate for the amount of salary that an individual should spend on housing is 33%. If EdR intends to make the housing affordable, that translates to, in this market: • At 33%, the total housing expenditure should amount to $660 to $770 per month. • At 40%, the total housing expenditure should amount to $800 to $933 per month. • My understanding is that a projection is available (but I have not seen one in the documents available to me) which shows that the smallest unit may cost in excess of $1,000 per month, ex cluding utilities. • If that estimated expenditure is, in fact, in excess of 40% of pre-tax income of the intended tenants, I am concerned about whether we will achieve full occupancy by graduate and profes sional students. If the current project costs do not line up with the financial realities of future tenants, I would like to bring up that concern about maintaining occupancy if the units are over priced. Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 9 of 16 I think we need to be very clear about the type of occupants who are eligible; I don't want to worry about future graduate and professional students being displaced by postdoctoral associates or assistant professors looking to save money if that's not the intent of the design of the community. Thank you for your time. I look forward to future conversations and hope you will take these concerns of key stakeholders into consideration." Joe Wilson, 75 Hunt Hill Road, said he's a fan of planning and a fan of the town's Comprehensive Plan, the county's Energy Roadmap, and the city's Comprehensive Plan, all of which include emphasis on addressing the challenges of global warming in a serious way by moving our economy and our development toward the use of renewable sources of energy, a reduction of greenhouse gases, and moving away from the uses of fossil fuel, in particular, methane or natural gas. Regarding the possible tax exemption, he who lives in this community knows we are trading away services to meet the tax cap, and to see a for-profit entity come in and charge market-rate rent and not contribute taxes to support the services their residents are going to demand is an abomination. He also encouraged the planning board to look into a tradeoff off that EdR is representing elsewhere right now; that is, in order to keep rents affordable, they might not be able to provide renewable sources of energy for their HVAC systems. But if they charge market-rate rents, they can afford renewably sourced technologies, they can afford highly efficient envelopes for their buildings, and they can afford to provide the energy from wind and solar on the site. His statement follows; "We applaud the commitments which Cornell, the Town of Ithaca, the City of Ithaca, and Tompkins County have made to be leaders in reducing energy consumption, reducing greenhouse gas (OHO) emissions, to facilitate the generation of local, renewable energy, and to mitigate the effects of global warming. We have taken action in our personal lives to do the same things. The Maplewood development is an $80-million project and will set the precedent for additional hundreds of acres and hundreds of millions of dollars in development in the East Hill area. It will affect thousands of us nearby residents as well as the City of Ithaca, our Town of Dryden, and the entire County. Maplewood presents an extraordinary opportunity to achieve the goals announced by the Town, the City, and County for the creation of buildings and infrastructure which reduce energy consumption and OHO emissions, the reduction of energy consumption and OHO emissions in transportation, the facilitation of the production and use of renewable energy, and the cutting of energy-related contributions to pollution and global warming. Maplewood also gives you on the Planning Board an awesome responsibility to conduct the sketch and Site Plan Reviews to ensure that Maplewood conforms to the Town's Comprehensive Plan Goals. Along with your other challenges, this means addressing the following issues which come from EdR's already announced plans: 1. EdR's plan to use methane gas contradicts the Town and County's energy goals: The Town's Energy Goals and the County's draft Energy Road Map each say in a variety of ways that fossil fuel consumption and GHG emissions must be reduced while renewable energy and related technolo gies should replace them. EdR, however, has indicated it intends to use methane gas in the pro ject. Concurrently NYSEG has made public its contention that it cannot support new develop- Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 10 of 16 ment with gas without first increasing the amount of gas and pressure in this area's gas network by building a new connecting gas pipe through Dryden and Lansing, a. Increasing the use of methane contradicts Town's Energy Goals EC-2, 5, and 7. b. Increasing the use of methane contradicts the principles in the County's Energy Roadmap. c. Credible estimates are that the methane now in local pipes comes primarily (as high as 70%) from fracking, a practice which the Town has banned. By allowing EdR to go forward using gas, the Planning Board and Town Board will in effect be endorsing the increased use of fracked gas in the Town, d. Cornell Professor Emeritus Tony Ingraffea and current Cornell Professor Bob Howarth have already estimated that the emissions to be generated by the Dryden-Lansing Pipe will destroy any chance of meeting the County's OHO reduction goal of 80% reduction by 2050, e. Likely, it will do the same to Cornell's carbon neutrality goal since this project will be on Cor nell land and is, therefore, part of its campus, f. Professor Ingraffea has also found considerable leakage in the current gas infrastructure. If indeed the current gas pipes are leaking, they create public safety, public health, air pollution, and emergency services concerns for the Maplewood project as well as across the entire area served by this gas network. The Planning Board will have to obtain the facts and address the resulting issues during its process, g. Leaky NYSEG gas pipes added months or years to the renovation of the Commons, It follows that addressing such concerns as they apply to Maplewood could have the same effect on its construction schedule. If such delays are likely, it makes the Town's commitments to expand ing the use of renewable energy and GHG reduction in new construction even more compel ling. Reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions in buildings; facilitating production and use of renewable energy: The Town's Goal EC 2 calls for reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions in buildings and infrastructure. The Town's Goal EC-5 calls for encouraging AND facilitating the production and use of renewable energy. Therefore, rather than supporting gas use, shouldn't the Planning Board (or the Town in its legislative capacity) require EdR to heat and cool Maplewood with air or ground source heating, ventilation, cooling (HVAC) units AND require EdR to provide electricity for their operation from renewable sources like solar or wind? Green building techniques and specific energy standards: The Town's Goal EC-2-B and C speak to "all new construction projects incorporating green building techniques and achieving specific energy efficiency standards" and of the Town's partnering to make this happen. Isn't this the perfect opportunity for the Planning Board (or the Town in its legislative capacity) to require and support EdR to meet specific standards at the highest levels of efficiency in all Maplewood build ings? Energy consumption and GHG reduction in the transportation sector: EdR plans for 700 parking places. On its face, this contradicts the Town's Goal EC-4 to reduce energy consumption and GHG emissions in the transportation sector. Shouldn't the Planning Board (or the Town, exercis ing its legislative powers) require mitigation of the increased energy use, GHG emissions, and pollution caused by a 700 car increase by requiring a subsidy for TCAT, electric car charging stations on site, providing residents bicycles, or the like? Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 11 of 16 We know we are not alone in looking forward to the Town, its agencies, and Cornell to take this gigantic opportunity to turn their promises of energy and climate leadership into something real and concrete, now." Brian Eaton stated that he was on the Town of Ithaca energy action plan advisory committee, he's the town representative on the Solar Tompkins board, he's the chair of the energy committee of the EMC, and he was on the steering committee of the Tompkins County Roadmap. February was the warmest month recorded on earth and it had the greatest increase over the previous warmest month. He's here to raise the profile of this issue. In the energy action plan of the town, the title is "Reduce Greenhouse Emissions by 40 percent by 2025." It is still in progress. Goal 4 is to improve energy efficiency of new construction. They did a greenhouse gas inventory in 2009 and 2010. In the community sector, 17% of greenhouse gases are from residential and 32% from commercial, and that's generated by 28% natural gas. If we follow a business-as-usual model and don't do anything between now and 2025, our carbon footprint will increase by 7.5%, and that's before we consider adding more structures in the East Hill area. The Energy Roadmap is a feasibility study on how to achieve the 80% reduction we promised to do by 2050. We can get 2 to 3 times the efficiency from heat pumps than we can get from natural gas generation. "Building and Heating with the Climate in Mind" is a combination of case studies and it has data that shows how we can use the technology of heat pumps and how they are cost effective. As far as construction, passive house is an 80 to 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gases. "We do this study to support the town. To help you make your decisions. We want you to look at these documents and be aware of them because you're going to have scores of people coming to talk to you about this issue. We go around the county and talk to many people, and there's a lot of enthusiasm for doing our share of reducing greenhouse gases." Kay Wagner, read from the following statement: "The Maplewood Apartment Project presents a wonderful opportunity for both the Town of Ithaca and Cornell University to set an example of construction designed for the future not the past. It is clear there is a strong need for more local apartments, especially ones that are within walking distance from Cornell. It is also clear that natural gas prices will not remain low. If we look ahead 10 years they may in fact become-unaffordable. So building for the future and incorporating the best design features from day one concerning environmental issues can be a win for the developer as well as the community and the environment. Net zero housing is indeed possible. Tompkins County, the Town of Ithaca and Cornell University have all committed to reducing their greenhouse gas emissions dramatically. All are also committed to supporting a healthy local economy. In its comprehensive plan Ithaca has written that "Climate change is one of the most urgent, pressing issues faced by the global community. With its April 2009 resolution to participate in the New York State Department of environ mental Conservation 'Climate Smart Communities Initiative,' the Ithaca Town Board recog nized that climate change is a threat not only globally, but also locally, and likely to affect our water supply, food sources, infrastructure, sensitive ecosystems, economy, and quality of life. The Town Board resolved to promote sustainability, reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and adapt to climate change by implementing the following strategies..." Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 12 of 16 The statement includes several initiatives and in particular states it is to "Implement land use planning that supports Smart Growth principles and OHO emissions reductions." 1 am here today to ask the board to apply these principles to the proposed Maplewood Apartment project. As stated above, Cornell University and the Town of Ithaca have a unique opportunity to create a vision for the future. The rebuilding of the Maplewood Apartments and the likely future construction in East Hill Plaza provide the chance to demonstrate the commitments lhave men tioned and provide an example of what can be done to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build with sustainability in mind. The following stand out as important aspects of both the construction and initial planning stages. Note that if planning and construction are done the right way from the start, the return on invest ment for the developers will also be higher. • Construction should be done to the highest standards w.r.t. energy efficiency. • Use heat pumps and air exchange systems, supplemented as needed with electricity, instead of natural gas or propane based systems. Also make use of solar panel technology. This is not a fan tasy since it has already been done elsewhere. A specific analysis of this type of construction has been presented by Prof. Brice Smith, Dept. of Physics, SUNY Cortland, at meetings with several groups of local public officials. • Parking areas should have charging stations for residents who have electric vehicles. • Storm-water run-off problems must be considered in all planning. We hear about materials that can be used for parking areas that allow water to soak into the ground below rather than collect ing elsewhere. It is supposed to be viable even in this climate. I hope that the developers will look into this option. • All construction and occupancy phases should use local labor. Remember that money paid to local labor remains in the community. Money paid to workers brought in from elsewhere mostly leaves the community. • During the construction and occupancy phases all workers must be paid at least living wages. • Planning needs-to account for impacts on local residents during construction and occupancy phases, including an evaluation of traffic issues. One may ask why a business or institution should be willing to spend money to do the type of construction just described. There are two answers. The first is that when buildings are designed for low carbon heating and cooling from step one in the design process, many building costs are reduced making a pay-back time cost effective within the first decade. The second is that with climate change looming and already having its effects, the Town of Ithaca and Cornell have a moral obligation to show that we can indeed wean ourselves from fossil fuels in the near future. This is the time to lead by example and do the planning and construction in ways that are best for the environment, the economy and the future of our community." Kevin Miller, Ithaca High School, said he attended the meeting for government class. He's in AP environmental science. He noticed the amount of impervious surface created as a result of this project Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 13 of 16 and the increased runoff. He hopes they institute a vegetative area to ameliorate the runoff and to make a better aesthetic. Louis Billera, Mitchell Street, said he thinks the current development isn't so bad; he's been walking through it for about 27 years. He has two major concerns. The first is that bordering the Mitchell Street side with four-story apartment buildings will impact the character of the neighborhood. These are one-story houses up from the city at Cornell Street, then beyond there are maybe ten addresses in the town of Ithaca. Then it becomes rural with the cemetery on one side and the woods on the other. If you come through this one-block corridor with a four-story apartment building on one side and an unsightly Cornell building, he thinks it will be terrible. He hopes the people who have the power to approve this project will be able to look at a 3-D elevation to see what it will look like. His other concern is how this area is going to absorb 500 more people on this one street, tripling the current population of Maplewood. He doesn't object to having more people in the area, it will probably help the commercial component at East Hill Plaza, which Cornell has stifled ever since they bought East Hill Plaza and limited it to mainly offices. It's the most limited part of town as far as commercial. He doesn't know if the proposed East Hill Village will make this more of a vibrant commercial area. He thinks the development will mean more cars, many going onto Mitchell Street. Adam Jacobstein, Clover Lane, said he has young children. He was impressed by most of the presentation, especially the green space right off the path; the chain link fence there now is terrible. He didn't hear any discussion on pedestrian safety. That's a big concern already. There are a lot of children on their street and at the current Maplewood and down to Belle Sherman. The city put a cross walk on Mitchell, but it didn't do much. It's a sketchy situation for kids walking. An increased number of people will mean an increased number of children. The cars start going very fast coming up the hill. There are no stop signs, no speed bumps. A more minor concern is the bikeability of the path from Mitchell up to East Hill Plaza. Currently you can't really bike it because the curbs are so huge. He also has concerns about sustainability. He did a petition of neighbors earlier this year regarding pedestrian safety and hasn't heard back. David Marsh, president of the Tompkins-Cortland Building Trades Council, stated that he hopes the town will consider changing the speed limit on that section of road. He said that this is not a traditional Cornell project. He has spoken once to Mr. Resetco about this project and will continue discussions. He helped build the current development. At the time, Maplewood was considered low- end construction. They built it and maintain it. Under this agreement, Cornell has decided that the local building trades are not going to be a part of this partnership. He's talking directly with EdR about the possibility of refreshing that arrangement so that the local tradespeople get an opportunity to work on the project. He stated that they're not supporting the project until that is worked out. Katherine Russell, representative from the Tompkins County Workers' Center to the Coalition for Sustainable Economic Development, stressed the importance of EdR working with the local building trades council. The Workers' Center will withhold support until EdR has a commitment to work with local tradespeople. Brian Crandall writes a lot about this project and he says that it is going to be tax exempt. He also claims that Cornell is friendly to labor. We cannot assume that Cornell is friendly to labor. If they're trying to get cost effectiveness, it's often the workers who suffer. She stressed the need for local labor and a living wage. She's happy to hear about a possible childcare center. She had her first child while attending grad school and knows the difficulties. She would like to encourage EdR to Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 14 of 16 incorporate childcare into the plans. What does sustainable mean? She encouraged the board to check out the United Nations sustainable development goals: #1 is to end poverty and #2 is to end hunger. Sustainability is not just the envelope of the buildings and the physical surroundings. The broad nature of sustainability is supporting the well-being of our whole community: women, children, and workers. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - Nobody came forward to address the board. AGENDA ITEM Approval of Minutes PB Resolution No. 2016-018: Minutes of March 1, 2016 Moved by John Beach; seconded by Linda Collins RESOLVED, the Planning Board approves the minutes of March 1, 2016, as amended. Vote Ayes: Meier Swain, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Fogarty AGENDA ITEM Other Business Ms. Balestra noted that the city planning board declared the Chainworks draft DGEIS adequate. There were very few changes. Because it's now adequate for public comment, people have until May 10'*' to get comments to them. Ms. Ritter said the planning board can make comments as a whole and members can also make personal comments. Ms. Balestra reported that Clare Bridge went through our SEQR process and said no excavated materials would leave the site. Then when she returned from vacation, Mr. Thaete reported that they're removing soil. Our public works staff looked into it, talked to the contractor, and it was determined that a certain number of truckloads of soil needed to leave the site with no truck routing plan. Ms. Balestra made it very clear to the applicant that this should have been discussed during the SEQR process. Mr. Thaete said that during a pre-construction meeting, the contractor talked about removing soils from the site, and public works staff realized that it would reach the threshold of the road preserva tion law. The law gives a lot of jurisdiction to the public works department. The contractor originally wanted the trucks to travel from the west down Bundy Road to the site, but public works came to the conclusion that Bundy would not hold up - it's an old county road. We routed them, instead, east down Route 96. They complied. Public works surveyed the road; we took video to make sure the Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 15 of 16 truck traffic wasn't going to damage the road. If it did, they were going to need to repair the road immediately in a temporary fashion. At the end of the project, any permanent repairs would be tied to the certificate of occupancy for the new building. The contractor proceeded with earth work. The developer was asking why this hadn't all been worked out beforehand, and when Ms. Balestra got back from vacation, it was determined that they hadn't filled out their SEQR form properly. Working with the planning department, engineering got a list of changes that were required to update the SEQR form. They responded quickly, gave us all the answers we needed, and updated the SEQR. Ms. Balestra said they're going to three places; 149 Southgate Road in Enfield, which is a landscaping business, 3225 Aagard Road in Trumansburg, which is Cayuga Compost, and another site in Ulysses. Ms. Meier Swain asked if there was any penalty. Ms. Balestra said she and Ms. Ritter had discussed the issue. The question is, if we brought them back to the board, what would we tell them? More than 80 percent of the job is already done in terms of removing the soils. Ms. Fogarty said the dump trucks are enormous. There are at least six per hour, every hour, all day long. It has been going on for a month. That's at least 250 truckloads per week. She couldn't imagine that these places would have room for that much material. Ms. Ritter explained that municipalities talk to one another about the soil being moved from one municipality to another. She said that Cayuga Compost has lots of room; they've got big piles of soil. Ms. Balestra said she believed there were several mistakes made by the architect that filled out the SEQR form, one being that he did not check with the engineer on the project. She and Ms. Ritter weren't sure what would be gained by bringing them back to the planning board. Would this have risen to the level of a significant environmental impact to require an EIS? Mr. Haefeli was satisfied that the road component was taken care of, which is the most obvious impact. Mr. Thaete said they were forthcoming about hauling material; they just came to a pre-construction meeting and we started talking about the number of trucks. Ms. Brock asked whether there were other things they missed on the form, considering that the architect didn't check with the engineer on this item. She suggested bringing the architect and the engineer in so they could verify that all the other information on the form is correct. Ms. Balestra said she quadruple checks the forms for accuracy on elements she has expertise in, such as historic resources, wetlands, endangered species, but this is one thing she doesn't have expertise in. Ms. Ritter said the most important thing now is that they've applied for a building permit, and if there's any discrepancy between what's being built and the building permit, that will be caught immediately and will slow them down significantly. There are no other SEQR issues. The blasting is Planning Board Minutes 03-15-2016 Page 16 of 16 done. She also pointed out that 10-wheeler dump trucks are the norm on projects, and that we would normally do the estimate using 10 wheelers. Mr. Thaete added that the stormwater plan is fine. They're doing a great job controlling runoff and are totally in compliance and cooperative. Board members agreed that it would have been a different discussion if they had known about the 1500 truckloads of material being removed. Ms. Collins stated that she had felt flat-footed by the presentation of the Cornell project. As it unfolded, she thought that the people in the audience knew more about the project than she did. She thought it was a bit shady, the way they presented it. When they clarified that Cornell would own the land and the developer would own the buildings, it became a whole different ballgame. She didn't have the information she would have liked to have had going into the meeting. Ms. Brock agreed that their narrative didn't make it clear. It talks about the developer, but says nothing about the owner, so you might think they hired the company to be the construction manager. Ms. Ritter noted this is the arrangement for East Hill Village as well. AGENDA ITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Liebe Meier Swain, the meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, a DeAugistincrDeputy Town Cler