HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-IURA-2011-11-18Approved 12/22/11
108 East Green Street
Ithaca
Urban
Renewal
Agency
Ithaca, New York 14850
(607) 274-6559
(607) 274-6558 (fax)
MINUTES
ITHACA URBAN RENEWAL AGENCY
Common Council Chambers, City Hall
8:30 A.M., Thursday, November 18, 2011
Members: Mayor Carolyn Peterson, Susan Cummings, Tracy Farrell, Ayana Richardson, Doug Dylla
Absent: J.R. Clairborne, Common Council Liaison
Press: Dialynn Dwyer, The Ithaca Times
Staff: JoAnn Cornish, Nels Bohn, Phyllisa DeSarno, Sue Kittel, Charles Pyott
I. Call to Order
Chairperson Peterson called the meeting to order at 8:49 A.M.
II. Agenda Additions/Deletions
None.
III. Public Comment – None
IV. Review of Draft Meeting Minutes: October 27, 2011
Dylla moved, seconded by Richardson, to approve the October 27, 2011 minutes, with two
minor modifications.
Carried Unanimously 5‐0
V. New Business
A. HUD Entitlement Program: Authorize Request to HUD to Extend 2012 Action Plan
Submission Deadline
As suggested at the last Board meeting, Kittel noted she has been in the process of determining
how to implement a limited round of grants, including a formal public outreach component.
Kittel indicated she consulted with HUD staff and determined the IURA could in fact receive a
three‐month extension until July 15, 2012 (the regular submission deadline would have been
April 15, 2012). This would permit the development of the 2012 Action Plan, once CDBG and
HOME funding levels have been determined. Kittel envisions issuing a call for proposals in
March or April 2012. She noted that an extension should not negatively impact the spend‐
down process. Other than the general uncertainty associated with the process, Kittel remarked
there is no substantial downside to obtaining an extension, since it is acceptable to HUD.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 2 of 13
Cummings suggested the IURA also explore funding from other, non‐HUD sources, to which
Kittel responded that she does not see any reason why that could not be done. Bohn added
that it would make sense to use the same process for more than one source of funding.
Dylla asked Bohn to present an updated report on the status of 2012 HUD funding. Bohn
indicated the U.S. Congress appears to remain inclined to reduce HOME funding by 39%,
although the 2012 CDBG funding level will be harder to anticipate (perhaps a 5‐15% reduction).
Bohn remarked that IURA staff had conferred internally on the subject and recommends
waiting to advertise for funding proposals after the funding allocation to the City is known or
after the holidays, whichever is later.
Peterson reiterated her concern that the Federal government is essentially balancing the
budget at the expense of those most in need.
Cummings noted it had previously been suggested the IURA generate some kind of high‐
visibility policy statement or take some other form of action, in response to the Federal cuts.
The most effective statement would probably include some specific language that paints a vivid
picture of the real‐life impact the cuts would have on individuals and groups of people, such as
seniors, etc.
Cummings asked what additional funding sources the IURA could explore. Bohn indicated staff
could examine a variety of additional appropriate sources of funding. Cummings added that
each IURA subcommittee ought to identify funding opportunities and the subject should appear
on every subcommittee’s next agenda.
Dylla cautioned that the IURA should seek to make sure it does not eliminate funding
opportunities for other local organizations.
Bohn remarked that IURA is a member of a local funders group and Kittel is investigating a
couple of possible projects right now. He noted, however, that local funding sources would be
highly unlikely to provide resources comparable to CDBG and HOME funding.
Kittel remarked that staff had also discussed instituting a common funding application form to
appeal to the greatest number of potential grantors and facilitate the process.
Bohn indicated that the Human Services Coalition (HSC) is currently trying to generate some
funding opportunities for local organizations. For example, it is trying to establish a non‐profit
center to house multiple organizations in a single building; although this kind of endeavor
would not be appropriate for every organization – approximately 40% of local non‐profits, for
example, receive either donated rent or do not have to pay rent at all.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 3 of 13
Dylla observed that whatever might be done, in terms of merging or downsizing, would be
helpful as well.
Cummings inquired into the state of the transition process for those organizations formerly
housed in the Women’s Community Building (WCB). They would seem to be good candidates
for some merging or shared facilities or staffing.
Cummings asked to what extent HUD provides assistance to displaced non‐commercial
organizations, to which Bohn replied that IURA HUD funding commitment to the project
triggers relocation assistance to any dislocated tenants, including non‐profit organizations,
technical assistance, moving expenses, and re‐establishment expenses.
Farrell asked if any kind of effort were being made to identify another multi‐use building for the
displaced WCB organizations, to which Bohn replied, yes, he believes the Park Foundation, the
Downtown Ithaca Alliance, and the HSC are all engaged in that kind of search. They have even
examined specific sites, but they need to complete an in‐progress feasibility study before
moving any further forward.
Farrell moved, seconded by Dylla:
HUD Entitlement Program, Postponement of 2012 Action Plan
WHEREAS, in the October 2012 meeting of the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, a resolution
was passed which authorized the development of a 2012 Action Plan only for projects
with prior commitments, with any surplus funds remaining "unallocated" in the Action
Plan, and
WHEREAS, this action was taken due to the very uncertain funding levels for both the
CDBG and HOME programs for 2012, and
WHEREAS, further discussions among staff and with HUD Buffalo have led to the
development of a new alternative in developing the 2012 Action Plan, and
WHEREAS, this alternative involves seeking an extension of three months for the
submission of an Action Plan to HUD, allowing for a competitive grant round in late
winter/early spring when the funding levels for the Entitlement Program should be
known; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the October 2011 resolution authorizing development of an Action Plan
consisting only of prior funding commitments be repealed, and be it further
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 4 of 13
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency authorizes the chairperson to seek an
extension of the Action Plan submittal deadline and to sign any and all documents
necessary to implement such an extension should it be granted by HUD.
Carried Unanimously 5‐0
Cummings asked how the grant cycle would be publicized, to which Kittel remarked that staff
had already contacted last year’s funding recipients and anyone else who had expressed an
interest at some point this year. Staff will plan on sending out a cautiously optimistic message
to potential grantees.
Cummings indicated she thinks the IURA should certainly be able to identify at least some
additional funding. Peterson cautioned that Ithaca is not necessarily perceived as a particularly
needy community, especially after the 2011 flooding event, when so many other New York
communities suffered.
Cummings also encouraged looking into any internal assets the IURA may have on‐hand.
B. Cayuga Green Project — Request for 3rd Amendment to Purchase & Sale Contract for
Parcel ‘D’ (Tax Map #81.‐2‐4)
Bohn noted the project sponsor has requested an amendment to the original resolution, since
the original language of the approval resolution was too narrowly constrained in terms of the
project description. He noted that the intent of the project is to introduce a commercial use to
the first floor (a commercial tenant has already been lined up), with five levels of housing above
the ground floor use, so the project is one floor lower than previously proposed. The project
sponsor is working on financing the project, so is requesting an additional 180 days to satisfy
the conditions of the purchase contract, which require submission of a final site plan, a building
permit, and financing documentation.
Richardson asked if there were anything in the proposal regarding affordable housing, to which
Bohn replied it had been discussed several times, but the amendment only concerns the private
portion of the project, at market‐rate prices. He observed that at the time of the original
proposal Ithaca had very little market‐rate housing downtown. He also noted that the proposed
housing project will not receive any subsidy or tax abatement. Peterson observed that the land
will be purchased at a market‐rate price, as well.
Cummings remarked there had been some discussion of establishing an affordable unit
component within the project, but this was decided against, for a wide range of reasons. She
noted all of this took place before the development of the Breckenridge Apartments project,
which will provide up to 50 units of affordable housing. Philosophically, Cummings remarked,
she believes every project should include an affordable housing component, however.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 5 of 13
Peterson observed that the state and federal program generally precludes mixed‐income
projects.
Richardson remarked mixed‐income projects often do not work for particular projects that
need to function within specific budget frameworks.
Peterson noted the City does not have any incentive zoning, either, which would have helped
achieve some of that.
Farrell asked if the project was originally supposed to include more units on the first floor, to
which Bohn replied that the project referenced in the purchase contract requires at least 30
housing units. He noted that at one point the project included 47 units, but failed to gain
financing. The proposed project now is for 35 units with the ground floor devoted to
commercial space.
Cummings asked if there is anything to prevent building on top of the garage, to which Bohn
replied it had not been examined as an option, but he would look into it.
Cummings noted she would like to further explore the issue of increasing affordable housing
incentives. She observed that Seneca Way has planned to use New Market tax credits;
however, strictly speaking, those are only supposed to be made available to distressed
neighborhoods. It is hard to identify the real added benefit to the City of using the New Market
tax credits for that particular project. Cummings noted she would really like to know more
about the various funding packages for any projects that come before City agencies.
Cornish remarked that the New Market tax credits were never considered to be guaranteed, for
that project. Also, Seneca Way will be converting a non‐taxable piece of property back into a
taxable one. Cornish noted that, perhaps with a revision of Community Investment Incentive
Program (CIIP), the City could create more incentives.
Cummings moved, seconded by Dylla:
Cayuga Green Project, Approval of 3rd Amendment to Purchase
and Sale Contract for Parcel ‘D’
WHEREAS, Cayuga Green II, LLC, has submitted revised, preliminary plans for construction of
a 6‐story, 35‐unit rental housing project with ground floor commercial use at parcel ‘D’ (tax
map parcel #81.‐2‐4), located adjacent to the Cayuga Garage, that are consistent with the
original design goals for the Cayuga Green project, and
WHEREAS, the Purchase and Sale Contract between the IURA and Cayuga Green II, LLC
obligates the purchaser to undertake a project “anticipated to consist of construction of no
less than 30 rental and/or for‐sale housing units located adjacent to the Cayuga garage, or
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 6 of 13
such other uses approved by Seller and the Common Council of the City of Ithaca” (emphasis
added), and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney has determined that the proposed inclusion of ground floor
commercial use into the housing project requires Common Council approval to comply with
the terms of the Purchase and Sale Contract, and
WHEREAS, per correspondence dated November 7, 2011, Cayuga Green II, LLC, requests
approval to authorize inclusion of a commercial ground floor use with the proposed housing
project and a 180‐day extension of the purchase and sale contract to June 30, 2012, and
WHEREAS, the existing Purchase and Sale Contract requires the purchaser to satisfy the
following contingencies prior to December 31, 2011:
1. Submit proof of final site development plan approval;
2. Submit proof of issuance of a building permit for the project;
3. Submit proof that all project financing has been secured to complete the project, and
WHEREAS, the IURA previously amended the original Purchase and Sale Contract in 2009 to
allow construction of rental housing units as well as for‐sale housing units and to extend the
term of the agreement by 12 months to June 30, 2010, and approved a second amendment
in 2010 to modify the parcel boundaries to satisfy building code‐required building separation
distances and extend the term of the agreement to December 31, 2011 to allow the
purchaser to pursue project financing through the HUD 221(d) Insured Mortgage Financing
program, and
WHEREAS, the principals of Cayuga Green II, LLC, have utilized the U.S. Department of
Housing & Urban Development’s (HUD’s) 221(d)4 mortgage insurance program to secure
financing from a HUD‐approved private lender for a multi‐family rental housing project in
Ohio, but find the New York State process much more extensive and lengthy because their
project would be the first HUD 221(d) project in the Ithaca housing market, and
WHEREAS, the purchaser is continuing to complete the HUD 221(d) process but is uncertain
that a written loan commitment will be received by December 31, 2011, and
WHEREAS, the purchaser is additionally seeking conventional financing from private lenders
now that lenders are re‐entering the rental housing financing market and an independent
downtown Ithaca housing demand study suggests there is a robust demand for downtown
housing at all price points, and
WHEREAS, Cayuga Green II, LLC, seeks no property tax abatements for this market‐rate
project, and
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 7 of 13
WHEREAS, the IURA wishes to facilitate the construction of additional housing units in
downtown Ithaca that will expand the range of housing opportunities and increase the
property tax base; and
WHEREAS, under §507 of Article 15 of General Municipal Law, the Ithaca Urban Renewal
Agency’s proposed disposition of real property requires Common Council approval following
a public hearing, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Purchase and Sale
Agreement is scheduled before the Common Council on December 7, 2011, and
WHEREAS, the purchase and sale contract for parcel ‘D’ and site plan review for a proposed
7‐story housing project at parcel ‘D’ were the subject of environmental reviews under the
City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQRO) pursuant to which the lead agency
issued a negative declaration that the implementation of the action as proposed will not
result in any significant adverse environmental impacts, and
WHEREAS, the revised 6‐story project with ground floor commercial use and the action of
approving the proposed 3rd amendment to the Purchase and Sale Contract for parcel ‘D’ are
no less protective of the environment than the previously‐approved Contract and site plan,
therefore requiring no additional environmental review; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency hereby approves a 3rd amendment to the
Purchase and Sale Contract with Cayuga Green II, LLC for Parcel ‘D’ (tax map parcel #81.‐2‐4)
to:
1. authorize inclusion of a ground floor commercial use in addition to construction of at
least 30 rental and/or for‐sale housing units on Parcel ‘D’ of the Cayuga Green project,
and
2. extend the purchaser’s deadlines to secure final site plan approval, project financing and
issuance of a building permit to June 30, 2012, and be it further
RESOLVED, the above approvals are subject to Common Council approval of the property
disposition, and be it further
RESOLVED, the IURA Chairperson, upon the advice of IURA legal counsel, is hereby
authorized to execute all necessary and appropriate documents to implement this
resolution, including but not limited to executing an amended purchase and sale contract.
Carried Unanimously 5‐0
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 8 of 13
VI. Old Business
A. Proposed IURA Correspondence Regarding Spencer Rd. Residential Neighborhood
Zoning
Cummings noted the draft letter looks good. She noted the IURA has always believed it is
important to protect fragile residential neighborhoods adjacent to commercial zones.
The Southside neighborhood plan, Peterson observed, would have addressed some of those
issues, but it was unfortunately never completed.
Cummings indicated that her understanding from former Neighborhood Planner Leslie
Chatterton was that the primary subject of contention in the Southside Plan was the future of
traffic calming devices in the ‘south of the creek’ neighborhood. Cummings noted this should
be something that could be resolved reasonably quickly now.
Cornish remarked that it would probably make more sense to postpone any further action on
the Southside Plan until after the City has finalized its new Comprehensive Plan.
Regarding the proposed letter, Peterson suggested the language be strengthened to state,
“unanimously affirm.” No objections were raised.
Cummings moved, seconded by Dylla:
IURA Correspondence Regarding Zoning Along Spencer Road Corridor
WHEREAS, the IURA has reviewed the recent granting of use variances for the Fairfield Inn
project at 359 Elmira Road and the Odyssey Plaza project at 335‐337 Elmira Road that
allowed expansion of commercial uses in the R‐2a zoning district along the Spencer Road
corridor, and
WHEREAS, Planning Board discussion of the Fairfield Inn variance suggested there may be
interest in expanding the Elmira Rd.‐to‐Spencer Rd. commercial zoning district, and
WHEREAS, the IURA is concerned that further commercial encroachment may adversely
impact the Spencer Road residential neighborhood, and
WHEREAS, the Spencer Road residential neighborhood is located within the Urban Renewal
Project Boundary Area and contains a substantial amount of reasonably priced housing, and
WHEREAS, the IURA Governance Committee considered this matter at their October 21,
2011 meeting and recommends the following; now, therefore, be it
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 9 of 13
RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby authorizes the IURA Chairperson, upon advise of IURA legal
counsel, to send the attached correspondence (amended to state “unanimously affirm” in
the first sentence) strongly encouraging zoning protection of the Spencer Road residential
neighborhood from incompatible commercial encroachment.
Carried Unanimously 5‐0
B. City Comprehensive Plan (“Comp. Plan”), Possible IURA Comment on Development of
Comp. Plan
Cummings indicated she is not sure if the IURA is prepared to submit its final comments
regarding the Comp. Plan at this time.
Peterson asked if the intent was to submit comments today, to which Cornish replied, the
sooner the better. Peterson agreed, observing, however, that nothing precludes the IURA from
submitting additional comments later.
Cummings expressed concern with the comments captured in the Economic Development
Committee (“EDC”) portion of the document, regarding the development review process. Bohn
stressed the comments he documented merely represent an approximate summary of the
various comments made at the EDC and Neighborhood Investment Committee (“NIC”)
meetings.
Peterson remarked that, in recent Tompkins County Area Development and Tompkins County
Council of Governments meetings, planning and building processes would be reviewed for
efficiencies, timeliness, and clarity.
Cummings would like to somehow ensure City procedures and requirements are as consistent
and transparent as possible, for both community members and developers alike. For example,
Cummings noted, when those residents impacted by the Seneca Way project met with the
Building Commissioner they believed they had submitted their appeal in accordance with City
requirements, but they subsequently received a letter from the Building Commissioner stating
it was too late.
Dylla remarked it may be best for the IURA to focus on communicating a key set of overarching
principles to the Comp. Plan Committee, rather than specific requirements or other details.
Peterson remarked that one issue the Planning and Economic Development Committee is
working on is to find ways to improve City public outreach mechanisms. Over the past 24 years,
Cornish observed, the City’s public outreach efforts have improved tremendously.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 10 of 13
Farrell asked why The Ithaca Times was not identified as one of the media contacts, to which
Cornish replied it is The Ithaca Journal that is considered the official newspaper‐of‐record for
the City.
Farrell moved, seconded by Dylla:
IURA Comment on Development of City of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan
Whereas, the City is developing a Comprehensive Plan, and
Whereas, the City’s planning consultant, Clarion Associates, solicited verbal and written
comment from the IURA on development of the Comprehensive Plan, and
Whereas, the Economic Development Committee and the Neighborhood Investment
Committee discussed this matter; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the IURA hereby authorizes the IURA Chairperson to send the attached
comments to the Comprehensive Plan Committee and Clarion Associates.
Carried Unanimously 5‐0
IURA Comment/Identification of Issues on Initiation of Comprehensive Plan
Public Outreach Strategy
• It is essential to maximize outreach to neighborhood associations, listservs and
neighborhood representatives.
• Outreach should be as racially and economically diverse as possible. Reaching all
economic tiers may require outreach through an oral network rather than relying on
technology‐based or media‐based approaches.
Comprehensive Plan Committee meetings
• All meetings should be open public meetings and include an opportunity for brief
public comment.
• All meetings should be noticed broadly, including but not limited to, e‐mailing of the
agenda to City advisory board members, neighborhood associations and allow
members of the public to sign up to receive agenda and other electronic materials.
• Move meetings geographically around the community to increase awareness and
engagement by residents and stakeholders of various neighborhoods.
Urban Renewal Agency Principles
• Neighborhood preservation ‐ Preserve the existing neighborhood fabric, scale of
housing stock and sense of community. Protect edges of residential neighborhoods
that abut commercial areas from adverse impacts of incompatible development.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 11 of 13
• Owner‐occupancy ‐ Increase the percentage of owner‐occupied homes (currently
approximately 30%) and owner‐occupied commercial properties as a means to
increase stakeholder interest in the community. Particularly, seek to increase
affordable owner‐occupancy opportunities.
Transparency of Development Review Process
• Consider the development review and permitting process – is it transparent &
understandable, predictable, timely for developers and residents.
IURA Engagement
• Solicit on‐going IURA input and dialogue throughout the process of developing the
plan. Clarion Associates and Comprehensive Plan Committee members are
encouraged to attend future IURA meetings.
• All meetings should be noticed broadly, including but not limited to, e‐mailing of the
agenda to City advisory board members, neighborhood associations and allow
members of the public to sign up to receive agenda and other electronic materials.
• Move meetings geographically around the community to increase awareness and
engagement by residents and stakeholders of various neighborhoods.
VII. Other New/Old Business
A. Next Meeting: December 22nd
Participants discussed the best date for the next meeting. Bohn recommended the Board
definitely plan on meeting in December, at least briefly, given that the Economic
Development Committee has an important pending issue, requiring resolution.
Cummings expressed her concern that IURA meetings recently seem to have been frequently
rescheduled, sometimes making it difficult for some Board members to participate. She also
recommended Board members try to ensure the Governance Committee always meets
before the full Board meeting. A proposed December 15th IURA meeting date, for example,
would have precluded the Governance Committee from providing input to the full Board.
B. IURA Chairperson Report
Peterson indicated she recently participated in a workshop, examining new ways to
approach economic development in a more community‐based manner. The workshop was
led by Michael Shuman, director of research and economic development at the Business
Alliance for Local Living Economies (BALLE) and a Fellow of the Post Carbon Institute. Fifty or
sixty people participated from a wide variety of organizations and the workshop was
organized by Local First. Many case studies from other communities were cited.
Dylla added that the workshop explored identifying opportunities to build on the strengths
of local entrepreneurs and examined the added value of local agricultural enterprises.
Shuman will return in spring of 2012 to focus more on Ithaca‐specific subjects.
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 12 of 13
C. Review of IURA Financials, October 2011
Bohn indicated that older 2007 projects have now been completed. The GIAC gymnasium
had finally had its air conditioning installation approved for final construction. The 528
Chestnut Street project has also completed its expenditures. Bohn noted the financials
report still reflects a remaining balance of less than $100 for some projects, since the IURA
would have to report on the beneficiary characteristics (e.g., homebuyers) within 90 days,
were they to be completely zeroed out.
Regarding the upcoming Mayoral transition and its impact on the IURA, Bohn indicated that,
while the Mayor is automatically a member of the IURA, the Mayor is not automatically
designated Chair, so a new Chair will need to be elected.
Bohn reported that the tax foreclosure delinquency process for 2012 is well underway and
several properties are being monitored for an alternative disposition method from the
annual County auction. Notices will be sent requiring payment be received by March 15,
2012 or the properties will proceed to foreclosure and possible inclusion in the June auction.
He reported an updated list after March 15th will be available for IURA review.
In response to a question about the Diane’s Downtown Automotive loan, Bohn replied the
owner has met with David Sprague (Sprague & Janowsky accountants) and Bohn plans on
following up on it.
D. Staff report
Bohn reported that the Board of Public Works is considering whether several underutilized
City‐owned properties are needed for public works purposes. Dylla remarked that the EDC
discussed the Cherry Street Extension property and supports sale of this property for
economic development use.
Cummings remarked that multiple discussions had taken place over the years about that
particular parcel. She is not entirely satisfied with the Industrial zoning of the property,
since it would be best if it could be developed with mixed‐uses.
Cornish remarked that industrial zoning permits all uses, except residential ones. She added
the BPW had explored selling a portion of the Cherry Street property, up to the portion that
borders the wetlands.
Cummings observed that selling it would certainly make sense, since it would provide the
buyer with extra lot size.
Cornish noted the group should explore whether any other City‐owned properties (e.g.,
Strawberry Fields) may be well‐suited for placing back on the City tax rolls. Cummings
indicated this should be the subject of a very broad discussion. She asked if this kind of issue
IURA Minutes
November 18, 2011
Page 13 of 13
would be incorporated into the Comp. Plan development process, to which Cornish replied,
yes, she believes so. Cornish added that the Planning Department is the keeper of the lists
of City‐owned properties and can serve as a useful resource.
IX. Motion to Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned by consensus at 10:31 AM.
— END —
Minutes prepared by C. Pyott, edited by N. Bohn.