Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2012-05-22Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting Planning and Development Board Minutes May 22, 2012 Board Members Attending: Govind Acharya, Chair; McKenzie Jones-Rounds; Jane Marcham; Tessa Rudan; John Schroeder Board Members Absent: Meghan Thoreau Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development; Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Development; Megan Wilson, Planner, Department of Planning and Development; Charles Pyott, Office Assistant, Department of Planning and Development Applicants Attending: Cornell University Law School Addition (524 College Ave.) Andrew Magre, Associate University Architect, Cornell University; Michael S. Husar, Project Manager, Cornell University; Scott Aquilina, AnnBeha Architects Building Renovations & Site Improvements (902 Taber St.) Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, LLP; Scott Tobey, Owner Pier Road Properties (Johnson Boatyard Site) John Snyder, Architect; Scott Whitham, Landscape Architect; Andy Lavigne, Project Stakeholder; Jeff Cleveland, Owner, Johnson Boatyard Thurston Avenue Apartments (312 Thurston Avenue) Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, LLP; Graham Gillespie, HOLT Architects; Nathan Brown, HOLT Architects; Tom Hoard, HOLT Architects; Greg Martin, RABCO Highland House, LLC Chair Acharya called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 1. Agenda Review Chair Acharya proposed moving the proposed Landmarks Preservation Ordinance revisions discussion to the beginning of the meeting, as a courtesy to staff. No objections were raised. (However, for clarity, this item will appear in these minutes in its normal location.) 1 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting 2. Privilege of the Floor No public comments were made. 3. Site Plan Review A. Cornell Law School Expansion, 524 College Ave., Cornell University, Applicant & Owner. Consideration of Preliminary & Final Approval. The applicant is proposing to construct a new accessible entry to Myron Taylor Hall along College Ave., new windows and doors at the lower level of Myron Taylor Hall facing Purcell Court, 16,500 SF of new underground lecture space (under the existing College Ave. lawn panel), upgrades to Purcell Court, and associated interior improvements, landscaping, walkways and similar site improvements. The project includes the lowering and reconstruction of Purcell Court ― which will allow direct access from the underground addition. Site development will require the excavation of approximately 20,000 CY of existing site soils, the removal of the existing stone wall, walkways and trees along College Ave., and the removal of much of the structures and landscaping in Purcell Court. The project is in the U-1 Zoning District. This is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review. The project requires a Basic Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Architect Scott Aquilina recapitulated the salient details of the proposed project and outlined the changes made since the Board’s April 2012 meeting. A revised presentation of the project was displayed. Aquilina noted the classroom façade on the east side of Purcell Court would now include additional vertical 5” recessed slots in its walls, to mimic the narrow slots featured on the rest of the building. Downlights would also be incorporated into each slot, providing an additional ambient decorative element at night. Schroeder asked if the downlights would remain lit when the interior lights are off. Aquilina replied, yes, that is certainly something that could be arranged. Schroeder asked if all the proposed metal railings would be bronze, to which Aquilina replied, yes. Given that the railings are such an important detail, Schroeder indicated he would like the applicant to provide detailed drawings of them, to which Aquilina agreed. Rudan inquired into various existing stonework details on Myron Taylor Hall that do not appear on any of the drawings; she is concerned they would be removed. Aquilina replied that the applicant will not be changing any such stonework details. The stone here will only be cleaned and repaired. Schroeder indicated the record should reflect the applicant has confirmed that any portions of the building/site not explicitly included in the drawings as proposed modifications will not be altered in any way from their present state. 2 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting At this time, Cornish indicated the applicant should provide staff with the standard finalized details for the project (e.g., stone slab benches, building materials, window details, paving, etc.), which Aquilina agreed to provide. Adopted Resolution for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval: On a motion by Jones-Rounds, seconded by Schroeder: WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Review for the Cornell Law School Expansion, from Cornell University, applicant and owner, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to construct a new accessible entry to Myron Taylor Hall along College Ave., new windows and doors at the lower level of Myron Taylor Hall facing Purcell Court, 16,500 SF of new underground lecture space (under the existing College Ave. lawn panel), upgrades to Purcell Court, and associated interior improvements, landscaping, walkways, and similar site improvements. The project includes the lowering and reconstruction of Purcell Court ― which will allow direct access from the underground addition. Site development will require the excavation of approximately 20,000 CY of existing site soils, the removal of the existing stone wall, walkways and trees along College Ave., and the removal of much of the structures and landscaping in Purcell Court. The project is in the U-1 Zoning District and requires a Basic Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: on March 27, 2012, the City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board, being the agency that has the primary responsibility for approving this action, declared itself lead agency for this project, and WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and 176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required public hearing on March 27, 2012, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council and the Tompkins County Planning Department have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and all comments received to date have been considered, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has on April 24, 2012 reviewed and accepted as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3, prepared by planning staff, and revised by the Planning and Development Board; drawings entitled “Demo Plan (L101),” “Layout Plan (L201),” “Grading Plan (L301),” and “Planting Plan (L401),” all dated 2/10/12, and prepared by AnnBeha Architects and Trowbridge Wolf Michaels Landscape Architects; “Site Utility and Demolition Plan (C101),” “Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (C102),” “Foundation 3 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting Drainage Plan (C103),” “Site Utility and Drainage Plan (C104),” “Site Utility Details and Drainage Details (C201),” and “Site Survey Map (10F1),” all dated 2/17/12, and prepared by AnnBeha Architects and T.G. Miller, P.C.; “Exterior Elevations (A3.01)” and “Add Alternate (T0.3),” both dated 2/17/12 and prepared by AnnBeha Architects; a submission entitled “Updated Renderings as Follow-up to March 27th CLS Presentation,” dated 4/12/12 and prepared by AnnBeha Architects; a submission entitled, “Cornell Law School ― Phase 1 Expansion Municipal Site Plan Review,” dated 4/24/12, and prepared by AnnBeha Architects; a submission entitled, “Cornell Law School ― Phase 1 Expansion Municipal Site Plan Review,” dated 5/22/12, and prepared by AnnBeha Architects; and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has, in its Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 3, proposed the following mitigations to address impacts to “Aesthetic Resources,” “Historic Resources,” and “Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood,” identified in that Part 3: • Reuse/reinstallation of original architectural details ― notably finials from the existing staircase and the limestone headers and sills from the existing parapet wall, plus the use of new limestone coping on the rebuilt stairs and parapet wall that matches the existing coping (i.e., with bullnose edges and a slight upward swell at the top). • Design revisions to the staircase that descends to Purcell Court that include thicker masonry walls, limestone coping matching the original, and terminal ends on the lower baluster walls, thereby making the stairway appear more massive and proportionate to the existing architecture. • Applicant, Planning Board, and planning staff to engage in a dialogue to identify a revision to the proposed design of the lower portion of the north wall of Myron Taylor Hall (at south end of courtyard), and of the lower portion of the small section of the east courtyard wall south of the proposed rebuilt staircase, that addresses the concerns expressed by Planning Board members and the City’s Historic Preservation Officer about respecting the original architectural design of these areas. Potential solutions include: (1) the use of larger lights of glazing (rather than multiple small lights of glazing) within the proposed new openings; and/or (2) leaving at least two of the original small slit windows at the base of the north wall of Myron Taylor Hall intact. • Installation of light fixtures at new entry facing College Avenue that are reproductions, perhaps at a somewhat larger scale, of existing Purcell Court Collegiate Gothic lanterns. • The rebuilt east courtyard wall and its new projecting bays will be built of local Llenroc stone masonry, and the steel metalwork within these bays will be painted to emulate weathered bronze. • Drawing T0.3 to be revised to show no demolition of windows or decorative limestone trim at the second and law library levels of Myron Taylor Hall’s north elevation (at south end of courtyard), and 4 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, on April 24, 2012 did determine that the proposed Cornell Law School Expansion, with the incorporation of the mitigations listed above, would result in no significant impact on the environment, and therefore did make a negative determination of environmental significance, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby grant preliminary and final approval to the Cornell Law School Expansion subject to the following conditions: i. Applicant to submit documentation that the City Historic Preservation Officer has reviewed the revised designs, and ii. Revised drawings showing limestone coping, as described in the first bullet point above, on all Llenroc site walls, including the Llenroc site walls proposed at the new Cornell Law School entrance facing College Avenue and in Purcell Court, and iii. Revised elevations showing no alteration to the two westernmost existing lower-level windows on the Purcell Court level of the north wall of Myron Taylor Hall, and iv. Applicant to submit detail drawings, for approval by the Board, of the bronze stair handrails proposed at several site locations, and v. All architectural and site plan drawings to be brought up-to-date, showing all changes agreed-upon by the applicant and Planning Board at all meetings, including: (1) changes presented at the May 22, 2012 Planning Board meeting (e.g., new light fixtures on east wall of Purcell Court); (2) architectural elevations keyed to chart of intended materials; and (3) site details (e.g., benches, pavement patterns and materials, etc.) for review by Planning Department staff. In Favor: Acharya, Jones-Rounds, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Absent: Thoreau B. Building Renovations & Site Improvements, 902 Taber Street, Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, Applicants for Owner, Sabattis Industries, LLC. Determination of Environmental Significance & Consideration of Preliminary & Final Approval. Applicant proposes interior and exterior renovations to existing commercial building and site improvements intended to create campus-like setting for business tenants of 902 Taber and adjacent buildings (one of which is known as the Aeroplane Factory) at 120- 140 Brindley Street. Exterior renovations include a new 524 SF arcade across the street façade, replacement of degraded portions of existing roofing, and new shingle siding and repainting. Site improvements include installation of new 21-car parking area at 902 Taber St., with one dedicated curbcut replacing existing continuous curbcut, 7 spaces adjacent to the Aeroplane Factory, an asphalt access drive between the two parcels, a stonedust pedestrian path linking two plaza areas and a gazebo along the waterfront, landscaping, bike racks, and limited exterior lighting. Project requires demolition of 5 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting existing residential structure and outbuilding, and removal of existing gravel parking areas, chain-link fencing on the two properties, and 5 mature trees. The applicant has also reserved an alignment for a potential future sidewalk and tree lawn on the project site. Project is in WF-1 Zoning District. This is a Type I Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review. Consultant Kathryn Wolf outlined the changes made since the Board’s April 2012 meeting (e.g., simplified looping walkway, addition of curbing on apron of new parking lot entrance, inclusion of curbstops and boulders to define parking areas and the internal drive, increased green space, allowances for a potential future sidewalk, etc.). Jones-Rounds asked if the tenants were notified, to which Tobey replied, yes, when the project was first proposed. Cornish inquired into the nature of the boulders proposed for the edges of the parking areas. Tobey replied the boulders would be 1-2 feet wide. Cornish asked for the boulder details, which the applicant agreed to provide. Adopted Resolution for City Environmental Quality Review: On a motion by Schroeder, seconded by Rudan: WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Review for Building Renovations and Site Improvements at 902 Taber Street, from Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, Landscape Architects, LLP, applicant for owner, Sabattis Industries, LLC, and WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing interior and exterior renovations to the existing commercial building and site improvements intended to create a campus-like setting for the business tenants of 902 Taber and the adjacent buildings (one of which is known as the Aeroplane Factory) at 120-140 Brindley Street. Exterior renovations include a new 524 SF arcade across the street façade, replacement of degraded portions of the existing roofing, and new shingle siding and repainting. Site improvements include the installation of a new 21-car parking area at 902 Taber Street, with one dedicated curbcut replacing the existing continuous curbcut, 7 spaces adjacent to the Aeroplane Factory, an asphalt access drive between the two parcels, a stonedust pedestrian path linking two plaza areas and a gazebo along the waterfront, landscaping, bike racks, and limited exterior lighting. The project requires the demolition of the existing residential structure and outbuilding, and the removal of existing gravel parking areas, chain-link fencing on the two properties, and 5 mature trees. The applicant has also reserved an alignment for a potential future sidewalk and tree lawn on the project site. The project is in the WF-1 Zoning District, and WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review, and 6 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested agencies have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and all comments received have been considered, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, has on May 22, 2012 reviewed and accepted as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 2, prepared by Planning staff; drawings entitled “Boundary and Topographic Map, No. 120-140 Brindley Street and 902 Taber Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,” dated 1/17/12, and prepared by T.G. Miller; and “Demolition and Erosion Control Plan (L101),” “Layout Plan (L201),” “Grading Plan (L301),” “Planting Plan (L401),” and “Details (L501),” all dated 3/21/12, with revision dates of 4/12/12, 5/4/12, and 5/17/12, and all prepared by Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, Landscape Architects, LLP; and “Plan Level 1 (A01),” “Plan Level 2 (A02),” “Elevations (A11),” and “Mechanical Electrical Plans/Specifications (M/E 01),” all dated 3/19/12 and prepared by Allan McLane Chambliss, Jr., Architect; and an un-attributed elevation drawing, “Renovations to 902 Taber Street,” dated April 2012; and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the Tompkins County Planning Department, pursuant to §239-1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law, has recommended that the proposed site plan be modified to: (1) create a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the Cayuga Inlet and Flood Control Channel; and (2) extend the proposed internal walkway to both Brindley and Taber Streets to better facilitate movement through the site, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has determined that because the project is a rehabilitation project and not new construction, and because the applicant has proposed significant improvements that enhance and correct existing drainage conditions (such as the removal of a compacted gravel road and parking area adjacent to the waterway, consolidation and organization of the parking area to the center of the site, extensive landscaping, and overall grading plan that directs run-off to two infiltration basins), such a buffer is not necessary, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has determined that, given the proposed removal of the existing fence and installation of the proposed internal walkways, pedestrians will be able to traverse the site from Brindley to Taber Streets without the applicant extending the internal walkways, and the Board has required the applicant to reserve an alignment for a future proposed sidewalk and tree lawn on the property, and WHEREAS: the Board, in a resolution dated May 22, 2012, recommends that the Board of Public Works identify a need, layout, and implementation plan for a future sidewalk or comprehensive multi-modal transportation system in the Cherry Street Industrial area, including Cherry, Brindley, and Taber Streets and Cecil A. Malone Drive, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determines that the proposed Building Renovations and Site Improvements located on 902 Taber Street in the City of Ithaca 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. 7 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting In Favor: Acharya, Jones-Rounds, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Absent: Thoreau Adopted Resolution for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval: On a motion by Jones-Rounds, seconded by Schroeder: WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Review for Building Renovations and Site Improvements at 902 Taber Street, from Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, Landscape Architects, LLP, applicant for owner, Sabattis Industries, LLC, and WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing interior and exterior renovations to the existing commercial building and site improvements intended to create a campus-like setting for the business tenants of 902 Taber and the adjacent buildings (one of which is known as the Aeroplane Factory) at 120-140 Brindley Street. Exterior renovations include a new 524 SF arcade across the street façade, replacement of degraded portions of the existing roofing, and new shingle siding and repainting. Site improvements include the installation of a new 21-car parking area at 902 Taber Street, with one dedicated curbcut replacing the existing continuous curbcut, 7 spaces adjacent to the Aeroplane Factory, an asphalt access drive between the two parcels, a stonedust pedestrian path linking two plaza areas and a gazebo along the waterfront, landscaping, bike racks and limited exterior lighting. The project requires the demolition of the existing residential structure and outbuilding, and the removal of existing gravel parking areas, chain-link fencing on the two properties, and 5 mature trees. The applicant has also reserved an alignment for a potential future sidewalk and tree lawn on the project site. The project is in the WF-1 Zoning District, and WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: on March 27, 2012, the City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board, being the agency that has the primary responsibility for approving this action, declared itself lead agency for this project, and WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and 176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required public hearing on April 24, 2012, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested agencies have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and all comments received have been considered, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, has on May 22, 2012 reviewed and accepted as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 2, prepared by Planning staff; drawings entitled 8 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting “Boundary and Topographic Map, No. 120-140 Brindley Street and 902 Taber Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,” dated 1/17/12, and prepared by T.G. Miller; and “Demolition and Erosion Control Plan (L101),” “Layout Plan (L201),” “Grading Plan (L301),” “Planting Plan (L401),” and “Details (L501),” all dated 3/21/12, with revision dates of 4/12/12, 5/4/12, and 5/17/12, and all prepared by Trowbridge Wolf Michaels, Landscape Architects, LLP; and “Plan Level 1 (A01),” “Plan Level 2 (A02),” “Elevations (A11),” and “Mechanical Electrical Plans/Specifications (M/E 01),” all dated 3/19/12 and prepared by Allan McLane Chambliss, Jr., Architect; and an un-attributed elevation drawing, “Renovations to 902 Taber Street,” dated April 2012; and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the Tompkins County Planning Department, pursuant to §239-1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law, has recommended that the proposed site plan be modified to: (1) create a 50-foot vegetated buffer along the Cayuga Inlet and Flood Control Channel; and (2) extend the proposed internal walkway to both Brindley and Taber Streets to better facilitate movement through the site, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has determined that, because the project is a rehabilitation project and not new construction, and because the applicant has proposed significant improvements that enhance and correct existing drainage conditions (such as the removal of a compacted gravel road and parking area adjacent to the waterway, consolidation and organization of the parking area to the center of the site, extensive landscaping, and overall grading plan that directs runoff to two infiltration basins), such a buffer is not necessary, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board has determined that given the proposed removal of the existing fence and installation of the proposed internal walkways, pedestrians will be able to traverse the site from Brindley to Taber Streets without the applicant extending the internal walkways and the Board has required the applicant to reserve an alignment for a future proposed sidewalk and tree lawn on the property, and WHEREAS: the Board, in a resolution dated May 22, 2012, recommends that the Board of Public Works identify a need, layout, and implementation plan for a future sidewalk or comprehensive multi-modal transportation system in the Cherry Street Industrial area, including Cherry, Brindley, and Taber Streets and Cecil A. Malone Drive, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did on May 22, 2012 declare that the proposed Building Renovations and Site Improvements, located on 902 Taber Street in the City of Ithaca, will result in no significant impact on the environment, and WHEREAS: the Board recognizes that ― although the permanent removal of a single- family home is normally discouraged ― the existing home slated for demolition is out of character with adjacent industrial land uses and its location on the site impedes other desirable site improvements proposed by the applicant, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the Planning and Development Board does hereby grant preliminary and final site plan approval to the proposed Building Renovations and Site Improvements to be located at 902 Taber Street, subject to the following conditions: 9 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting i. Submission of building materials samples, including stone type of proposed boulders, for approval by Planning Department staff, and ii. Bicycle racks must be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, and iii. Noise-producing construction shall take place only from the hours of 7:30 a.m. through 7:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. In Favor: Acharya, Jones-Rounds, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Absent: Thoreau C. Pier Road Properties Project (Johnson’s Boatyard) – Update Architect John Snyder recapitulated the salient details of the proposed project and outlined the changes made since the Board’s January 2012 meeting (e.g., a new entry road to the project, the addition of some plaza space, the removal of some buildings on the north side of the main boulevard, etc.). Landscape architect Scott Whitham then walked the Board through a presentation of the project. Cornish remarked it would be wonderful if Pier Road could be removed altogether, which would open the site up considerably. Whitham replied that the applicant has no control over the use of Pier Road, although the suggestion could certainly be explored. Cornish said she would initiate some conversations regarding this idea. Jones-Rounds asked if some of the parking lots could instead be converted to green space. Snyder replied the project would genuinely need ground-level parking to support the number of residents. Schroeder agreed that adding a defined central green space for the use of the residents would greatly benefit the project. Cornish asked about the possibility of installing screening of some kind adjacent to the top-right parking lot, near the property line (adjacent to Phase III). Whitham replied the applicant would be willing to explore that option, but the fire department would need to be consulted. Given the project’s proximity to the TCAT bus depot, Acharya observed, it would make a great deal of sense to work with TCAT to create a bus stop for the project. Snyder remarked he had already discussed the possibility with TCAT General Manager Joe Turcotte. Jones-Rounds suggested also working with Ithaca Carshare. D. Thurston Avenue Apartments – Sketch Plan Consultant Peter Trowbridge introduced the proposed project, which would consist of five four-story apartment buildings on a currently vacant sloping lot at 312 Thurston Avenue. 10 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting Acharya asked if the project was in the Cornell Heights Historic District, to which Gillespie replied, yes. The applicant has already begun the process of applying for Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) approval. Gillespie indicated the ILPC asked the applicant to explore reducing the height of the proposed buildings, as well as possibly breaking up the buildings more significantly from one another. The applicant did explore these suggestions, but concluded there is little that could be done, without substantially elongating the buildings or adding altogether new buildings, thus pushing the entire project closer to the street and making the perceived height of the buildings appear proportionately greater. Schroeder observed that the surrounding neighborhood is comprised primarily of small, differentiated buildings. As a result, he is not sure why the project’s buildings all share the same color scheme. Different color schemes would help make the buildings ‘read’ more as separate structures. Gillespie replied the applicant is moving in that direction. Acharya remarked he does not see how zoning requirements in a historic district could possibly require parking; and he is not sure how the ILPC could approve a project with so much parking associated with it. Cornish indicated she believes some existing parking already exists adjacent to the site. Trowbridge replied, yes, but it is only unofficial, unpaved parking; and he is not sure if off-site parking would be permitted, in this case. Schroeder indicated he likes the idea of eliminating the parking area and using the existing adjacent parking area; and he would strongly support approval of a variance to that effect, if required. Trowbridge observed the project would still require complete fire access to the site, to the depth shown; so there would need to be a fire travel lane of some kind, even if the parking were removed. Nonetheless, the applicant would be happy to explore the parking issue. Rudan asked if the upper story could be composed of darker materials (e.g., cedar shakes), to diminish the overall appearance of height. Jones-Rounds suggested planting more trees near the parking lot area, along with benches and other enhancements, to create more of a neighborhood feeling. Schroeder suggested eliminating the top-story connection between the two halves of the long buildings, to help create the appearance of separate buildings. Rudan recommended plantings closer to the buildings, as well. Trowbridge indicated he could explore all these suggestions. At this point, Cornish suggested that ― because of the ILPC’s role in the approval process ― the Planning Board defer its own final approval of the project, until the ILPC issues its Certificate of Appropriateness. 11 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting Trowbridge indicated the applicant hopes to receive approval by no later than June or July 2012. Nicholas remarked the applicant should certainly feel free to submit its application to the Planning Board as early as it would like ― although she urged the applicant to obtain the ILPC’s tentative or conceptual approval, beforehand. Schroeder strongly recommended scheduling a joint Planning Board and ILPC meeting. 4. Zoning Appeals Appeal #2881 ― 815 Taber St.: Area Variance Appeal of Frederic Bouché for an area variance from Section 325-8, Column 6, lot area, Column 7, lot width, Column 12/13, side yard requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant would like to construct a new addition at the property located at 815 Taber Street. The existing building, which is known as Ports of New York Winery, was granted a variance in 2006, allowing the applicant to renovate the building and construct a storage building in the rear of the property. The applicant now proposes to construct a semi-enclosed addition linking the existing building to the storage building. The proposed new addition will be placed in line with the existing storage building, exacerbating the existing side yard deficiencies. The new addition will be 3’2” from the west property line and 9’2” from the east property line. The ordinance requires 6’ and 12’ respectively, for the required side yard dimensions. The property is located in an I-1 industrial use district in which the proposed use is permitted; however, Section 325-38 requires a variance be granted before a building permit may be issued. Members of the Board feel the applicant has proposed a design that harmonizes the old and new construction. The Planning Board did not identify any long-term planning issues with this project and recommends granting the appeal. 5. New Business A. Planning Board Membership Nicholas informed the Board that Bob Boothroyd recently resigned from the Board, creating a vacancy. Any recommendations to fill the vacancy would be welcome. Schroeder noted it is traditional for the Board to have at least one member from each ward, and to have members drawn from diverse geographic areas of the City. He noted that the Board currently has no member who lives on either South Hill or West Hill, and no member who lives downtown south of Court Street. He also pointed out that, prior to Boothroyd’s resignation, the Board had four Fifth Ward members. B. Planning Board Recommendations to Board of Public Works (BPW) Regarding: (1) Holiday Inn Project Curbcut & (2) Taber/Cherry Streets Industrial Area Sidewalks (1) Holiday Inn Expansion 12 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting Nicholas indicated the applicant held a series of ongoing conversations with City Transportation Engineer Tim Logue, to whom the applicant submitted two separate proposals, which were both rejected. At this point, the applicant is appealing the rejection to the BPW. Cornish remarked this should just be a curbcut issue. Schroeder agreed, and questioned Logue’s rationale for rejecting both proposals. Nicholas replied she believes Logue would prefer to have on-street loading. Schroeder said he does not understand what the objection could be, given the applicant is not requesting an additional curbcut. Rudan agreed, calling the applicant’s most recent proposal a reasonable compromise. Adopted Resolution Supporting Holiday Inn Expansion Project’s Appeal of Decision by City Transportation Engineer On a motion by Jones-Rounds, seconded by Schroeder: • The project is important to downtown Ithaca for the following reasons: o A conference center is much needed in the downtown area o The proposed project is in an appropriate location and its construction will be minimally disruptive (rare for downtown projects) o The project has the potential to enliven the block and attract tenants to Cayuga Garage retail space o The project offers the potential to use excess capacity in parking garage o A conference center will bring thousands of people per year to the downtown area o The locations will attract a large number of pedestrians to the west end of the Commons. • The applicant has incorporated the following design elements, many of which will be developed further during final site plan approval, that address urban design issues, including those to enhance the pedestrian experience. o Landscaping and new ground signage will be added to the northwest corner of S. Cayuga and Clinton Streets, including a stacked llenroc stone fence that extends west and north from the corner o The new tower, in which the restaurant and rooftop terrace are located, is pulled back from corner o The applicant is proposing higher quality building materials o The applicant is proposing rooftop sound attenuation. • The applicant is not requesting an additional/new curbcut. • The applicant has been responsive to comments from the Board as well as the original comments of the Transportation Engineer and did, in good faith, propose solutions to address all concerns. 13 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting • The Board finds that the applicant’s stated need that an off-street drop off area is crucial to the convention center, is rational. now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the Board recommends that the Board of Public Works grant the appeal of the decision of the Transportation Engineer, to allow for the existing curbcut to accommodate an off-street drop-off area for the proposed conference center. In Favor: Acharya, Jones-Rounds, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Absent: Thoreau (2) Taber/Cherry Streets Industrial Area Sidewalks Marcham remarked she does not believe every section of the city actually needs sidewalks ― it would be more important to her to see existing sidewalks repaired, than new sidewalks installed. She would not support instituting a city-wide requirement for sidewalks, without some kind of comprehensive examination of the issue. Adopted Resolution Recommending That BPW Plan for a Future Sidewalk or Comprehensive Multi Modal Transportation System in Cherry Street Industrial Area On a motion by Jones-Rounds, seconded by Schroeder: • The Cherry Street Industrial Area is an important pedestrian and bike route due for: o Access from West Hill housing to Wegmans and southwest area retail o Access to the future Black Diamond Trail o Access to the Flood Control Channel and Southwest Natural Area. • Providing sidewalks, wherever feasible, along all streets is a sound principle of urban planning. • In the absence of a comprehensive plan for sidewalks/complete streets, it is difficult to determine the best sidewalk layout for individual projects during Site Plan Review. now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the Board recommends that the Board of Public Works determine the layout and implementation plan for a future sidewalk, or comprehensive multi-modal system, in the Cherry Street Industrial area, including Cherry, Brindley, and Taber Streets, and Cecil A. Malone Drive. In Favor: Acharya, Jones-Rounds, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Absent: Thoreau 14 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting 6. Old Business A. Landmarks Preservation Ordinance Revisions Wilson recapitulated the purpose of the proposed changes to the ordinance. No objections were raised to any of the proposed revisions and the Board expressed its support for the revised ordinance, which is scheduled for review by the Planning and Economic Development Committee on June 13, 2012. B. Site Plan Review Ordinance Revisions Nicholas remarked the current proposed revisions represent several years of accumulated Board and staff discussion; they have already been reviewed by both the City Attorney and the Building Commissioner. Nicholas noted the single most substantial change involves instituting a requirement for site plan review of new single- and two-family residences. Acharya suggested organizing a working group to address green practices. Jones-Rounds volunteered to lead the group, to which there were no objections. Cornish remarked that a good place to start would be the LEED certification checklist. Acharya indicated the working group could aim to present its conclusions at the July 2012 Planning Board meeting. The Board conducted a page-by-page review of the latest ordinance draft. At the conclusion of this review, Nicholas indicated she would incorporate the changes to the ordinance discussed today and recirculate the document, prior to presenting it at the June Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. C. Planning Board Recommendation on Off-Street Parking Ordinance Revisions Schroeder remarked that the proposed changes essentially seek to address the current conflicts in the zoning ordinance that promote excessive rear-yard and side-yard parking. He recommended that the Planning Board urge Common Council to approve the revisions. No objections were raised. 7. Reports A. Planning Board Chair Acharya remarked that he has been concerned recently regarding the Conservation Advisory Council’s (CAC) role in providing its input to the Planning Board. He believes that body could be more actively involved in the work of the Planning Board and would suggest inviting CAC members to future Planning Board meetings, to facilitate that process. The suggestion was met with general approval. B. Director of Planning and Development 15 Approved at the June 26, 2012 Planning and Development Board Meeting 16 (1) Proposed Tour of 312 College Avenue Subterranean Parking Facility Cornish remarked that the Planning Board was recently invited to tour the 312 College Avenue subterranean parking facility by the property owner. Several Board members expressed possible interest in doing so, assuming it can be reasonably easily arranged. They also expressed interest in viewing an existing apartment in the building. Cornish indicated staff would follow up on the matter. C. Board of Public Works Liaison No written report was submitted. Acharya indicated the BPW continues to move forward in examining potential revisions to the City’s sidewalk laws; and there is considerable momentum behind this effort. The result will likely be that the City would take over responsibility for sidewalk repair and maintenance, but require sidewalks throughout a much larger portion of the City. Property owners would be required to pay for initial sidewalk installation. In a related matter, Acharya noted the BPW recently ordered that a new sidewalk be built on an existing City block (the first time in 12 years); this will need to be treated as a capital project, requiring Common Council approval. 8. Approval of Minutes On a motion by Rudan, seconded by Acharya, the February 28, 2012 meeting minutes were re-approved, to incorporate one minor modification since their initial approval. In Favor: Acharya, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Opposed: None Abstain: Jones-Rounds Absent: Thoreau Review of the March 22, 2011, April 10, 2012 (special meeting), and April 24, 2012 minutes was deferred to the June 2012 meeting. It was requested that future minutes be written in a somewhat more concise manner. 9. Adjournment On a motion by Jones-Rounds, seconded by Schroeder, and unanimously approved, the meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.