HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-14-14 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting AgendaPEDC Meeting
Planning and Economic Development Committee
Ithaca Common Council
DATE: May 14, 2014
TIME: 6pm
LOCATION: 3rd floor
City Hall Council Chambers
AGENDA ITEMS
Item Voting
Item?
Presenter(s) Time
Start
1) Call to Order/Agenda Review
2) Special Order of Business
a) Public Hearing – Proposed 2014 Action Plan,
HUD Entitlement Grant
b) Public Hearing – Planned Unit Development
Zoning District
3) Public Comment and Response from Committee
Members
4) Announcements, Updates, Reports
a) Noise Ordinance Reform
b) Cornell Heights Neighborhood Tour
5) Action items – Voting to Send on to Council
a) Public Art Commission Mural
b) 2014 Action Plan, HUD Entitlement Grant
c) Disposition of City Property: 707 E. Seneca St.
d) Planned Unit Development Zoning District
e) Addition of Orchard Place to East Hill Historic
District
f) Ban on Outdoor Wood‐Burning Furnaces
6) Action Items – Approval to Circulate
a) Unified Solar Ordinance
7) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) February 2014
b) April 2014
8) Adjournment
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Chair, Seph Murtagh
Megan Wilson, Planning Staff
Nels Bohn, IURA
Nels Bohn, IURA
Jennifer Kusznir, Planning Staff
Lynn Truame, Planning Staff
Cynthia Brock, Common Council
JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director
6:00
6:05
6:15
6:45
7:00
7:15
7:30
7:45
8:15
8:30
8:45
9:00
9:05
If you have a disability and require accommodation in order to fully participate, please contact the City Clerk at 274‐6570 by
12:00 noon on Tuesday, May 13, 2014.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Megan Wilson, Planner
DATE: May 6, 2014
RE: Public Art Commission Recommendation on Mural Proposal from Brandon Lazore
In 2010, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) created a mural and street art program to beautify
blank walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to
showcase their work. As part of this program, Onondaga Nation artist Brandon Lazore has submitted a
proposal for a mural on City-owned property.
The proposed mural, Women’s Nomination, is proposed for installation on the south side of the snow enclosure
of the Green Street Parking Garage. The mural would be located below the stairs leading to the upper stories
of the garage. This location is among the potential sites that the Board of Public Works approved for future
murals in May 2010. The PAC has sought public comment on the proposal through notification of adjacent
property owners, neighborhood associations, and City staff. A public comment period was also held at the
April 23rd PAC meeting to gather public input on the proposed design and location. The comments received
were mostly supportive of the project. After reviewing public comments, the PAC voted unanimously to
recommend the mural for selection by the Common Council.
A description and sketch of the proposed mural as well as a photo of the proposed location are attached for
your review. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 274-6560 or
mwilson@cityofithaca.org.
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Proposed Resolution
May 14, 2014
Resolution to Select Artwork for a Mural Installation on the
Snow Enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) has been established to, among
other duties, review and advise the Common Council on proposals for the exhibition and display
of public art in the City’s public spaces, and
WHEREAS, in 2010, the PAC created a mural and street art program to beautify blank walls
within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to
showcase their work, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved several locations for future murals and street
art, including walls in the City garages on Green Street and Seneca Street, by resolution on May
19, 2010, and
WHEREAS, Onondaga Nation artist Brandon Lazore has submitted his proposal for a mural
titled “Women’s Nomination” as part of PAC’s Mural and Street Art Program, and
WHEREAS, the PAC discussed Mr. Lazore’s mural proposal at its meeting on April 9, 2014
and, upon review of the potential mural sites pre-approved by the Board of Public Works, agreed
that the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage would be an
appropriate location for the proposed mural, and
WHEREAS, the PAC held a public comment period on the mural design and location at its
meeting on April 23, 2014 to gather input on the proposed installation, and the majority of the
responses to the proposal have been positive, and
WHEREAS, the artist will receive funding through the Downtown Ithaca Alliance’s Art in the
Heart program to install the mural, and the installation will be budget-neutral to the City, and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on April 23, 2014, the Public Art Commission unanimously voted to
recommend that the Common Council select Brandon Lazore’s “Women’s Nomination” mural to
be installed on the south side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council selects Brandon Lazore’s “Women’s
Nomination” mural, as recommended by the Public Art Commission, to be installed on the south
side of the snow enclosure of the Green Street Parking Garage and to be added to the City of
Ithaca’s public art collection; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the selected artist may proceed with the installation of his mural upon the
execution of an agreement with the City (as reviewed by the City Attorney).
318 Hawley Ave.Syracuse, NY 13203 (315) 466-1064Brandonlazore@yahoo.com
My name is Brandon Lazore. I am Snipe clan from the Onondaga Nation. I graduated Magna Cum Laude from Onondaga Community college where I studied art. My work celebrates Haudenosaunee culture and serves as a learn-ing tool for passersby. I’ve been painting murals since the mid 90’s in many NY cities, primarily my hometown Syra-cuse. Recently, I am becoming more and more well known for my paintings. As you may know, in the summer of 2013, I was chosen to paint a mural to honor of the 400 year anniversary of the Two row wampum. It can be seen there today on the south face of the Seneca street garage in Ithaca, NY. This summer, I will be painting a piece at the Iro-quois Indian museum in Howes Cave, NY.
My mural proposal is called “Women’s Nomination.” It is dedicated to all woman of the Haudenosaunee. In the top right corner of the painting is a silhouette of “Skywoman” a woman falling from Sky World. In moments, she will be caught in the air by flying geese and put on turtles back - “Turtle Island.” In her hands she holds roots of the three sis-ters - corn, beans, and squash. The elder woman in the green represents a Clan Mother, grandmother, elder. The woman in the purple blanket is her daughter and the baby is her daughter ’s daughter. The wampum belt is the Women’s Nomi-nation Belt which represents among other things the right that Haudenosaunee woman have to give their child a clan, to chose the names given to the children, and to choose who will be the chiefs in the confederacy. Strawberries represent medicine like a mother’s love is medicine to a child. The moon represents fertility and how it’s cycle plays a huge role in every woman’s life. The Sky Domes in the top left is inspired by traditional Haudenosaunee art decorating our cloth-ing for centuries. It represents the sky world and the plants that were given to us corn, beans, squash, and tobacco.
I will be painting this piece mainly in acrylic paint with some details in spray paint. My first choice is the wall under the red steps of the snow enclosure on Green St. Of course I will adjust the shape of the painting to fit the space you choose. The timeline I have available is flexible. I am simultaneously turning this proposal in as a submission for Art in the Heart. As needed, I am happy to work with the Public Art Commission to ensure this project is successful.
I feel this mural would be great for Ithaca because it is dedicated to the feminine side of the Haudenosaunee culture, and people can have a better understanding of how important the woman in our culture is to are society.
Thank you for your time,Brandon Lazore
Brandon Lazore 318 Hawley Ave.Syracuse, NY 13203 (315) 466-1064Brandonlazore@yahoo.com
“Women’s Nomination”
4/23/14
Sp
o
n
s
o
r
M
a
t
c
h
CD
B
G
C
D
B
G
P
I
H
O
M
E
N
H
I
B
O
N
D
To
t
a
l
Summary Description
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
$7
0
1
,
8
2
0
$
1
4
0
,
0
0
0
$
4
4
1
,
9
9
4
$
5
8
0
,
0
0
0
$1
,
8
6
3
,
8
1
4
#
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
T
r
u
s
t
N
e
w
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
It
h
a
c
a
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(IN
H
S
)
$1
,
4
8
7
,
8
2
4
$
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
2
7
3
,
8
6
9
.
0
0
$
4
5
4
,
1
2
7
.
0
0
$7
2
7
,
9
9
6
.
0
0
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
9
a
f
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
h
o
m
e
o
w
n
e
s
h
i
p
u
n
i
t
s
o
n
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
e
d
s
i
t
e
s
a
t
4
0
2
S
.
C
a
y
u
g
a
St
.
,
3
1
4
S
.
P
l
a
i
n
S
t
.
,
2
1
4
S
e
c
o
n
d
S
t
.
,
2
0
3
T
h
i
r
d
S
t
.
&
3
0
5
F
i
r
s
t
S
t
.
2
Ho
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
R
e
h
a
b
.
2
0
1
4
IN
H
S
$
3
2
,
1
7
5
$
1
2
3
,
2
5
9
.
6
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$1
2
3
,
2
5
9
.
6
0
Re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
4
o
w
n
e
r
-
o
c
c
u
p
i
e
d
h
o
m
e
s
3
Mi
n
i
R
e
p
a
i
r
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
0
1
4
IN
H
S
$
5
5
,
5
0
0
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
Sm
a
l
l
e
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
f
o
r
5
0
l
o
w
-
i
n
c
o
m
e
s
e
n
i
o
r
s
a
n
d
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
/
d
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
4
Se
c
u
r
i
t
y
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
Ca
t
h
o
l
i
c
C
h
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
$
7
,
0
1
8
$
3
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$3
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
70
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
s
f
o
r
l
o
w
-
i
n
c
o
m
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
5
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
S
c
h
o
l
a
r
s
h
i
p
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
Le
a
r
n
i
n
g
W
e
b
$
4
3
,
0
0
0
$
5
8
,
9
4
7
.
6
0
$5
8
,
9
4
7
.
6
0
Te
n
a
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
r
e
n
t
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
8
h
o
m
e
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
t
h
6
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
F
i
r
s
t
TC
A
c
t
i
o
n
$
0
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
Te
n
a
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
r
e
n
t
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
.
T
o
3
h
o
m
e
l
e
s
s
h
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
7
ED
L
o
a
n
F
u
n
d
IU
R
A
$
2
6
7
,
5
0
0
$
1
0
7
,
1
2
7
.
4
0
$
3
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$1
4
2
,
1
2
7
.
4
0
Ne
w
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
l
o
a
n
s
c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
t
l
e
a
s
t
e
i
g
h
t
(
8
)
F
T
E
j
o
b
s
8
Ho
s
p
i
t
a
l
i
t
y
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
*
Gr
e
a
t
e
r
I
t
h
a
c
a
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
Ce
n
t
e
r
(
G
I
A
C
)
$2
0
,
3
7
3
$
9
2
,
4
9
5
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$9
2
,
4
9
5
.
0
0
Jo
b
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
a
i
d
w
o
r
k
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
f
o
r
2
0
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
w
i
t
h
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
b
a
r
r
i
e
r
s
11
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
R
e
U
s
e
&
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
Fi
n
g
e
r
L
a
k
e
s
R
e
U
s
e
$
2
6
2
,
0
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
1
0
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$1
0
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
De
f
e
r
r
e
d
l
o
a
n
c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
t
h
r
e
e
(
3
)
F
T
E
j
o
b
s
i
n
n
e
w
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
c
e
n
t
e
r
a
t
2
1
4
El
m
i
r
a
R
d
.
12
Wo
r
k
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
J
o
b
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
*
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
I
t
h
a
c
a
$
7
1
,
7
5
0
$
8
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$8
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
En
t
r
y
l
e
v
e
l
j
o
b
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
&
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
f
o
r
2
0
y
o
u
n
g
a
d
u
l
t
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
13
La
k
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
r
i
d
g
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
Ci
t
y
o
f
I
t
h
a
c
a
$
1
6
5
,
0
0
0
$
3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$3
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
ma
t
c
h
i
n
g
c
h
a
l
l
e
n
g
e
g
r
a
n
t
:
s
a
f
e
t
y
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
t
o
L
a
k
e
S
t
.
B
r
i
d
g
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
14
2-
1
-
1
/
I
&
R
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
Hu
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
a
l
i
t
i
o
n
$
2
0
1
,
0
4
1
$
2
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$2
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
Su
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
2
-
1
-
1
c
a
l
l
c
e
n
t
e
r
15
Le
a
r
n
i
n
g
b
y
D
o
i
n
g
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
e
d
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
Le
a
r
n
i
n
g
W
e
b
$
9
,
0
0
0
$
3
9
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$3
9
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
Jo
b
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
&
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
o
f
1
0
y
o
u
n
g
a
d
u
l
t
s
i
n
u
n
s
u
b
s
i
d
i
z
e
d
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
;
di
s
b
u
r
s
e
m
e
n
t
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
m
e
e
t
i
n
g
1
s
t
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
y
e
a
r
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
o
u
t
c
o
m
e
s
17
Im
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
Ca
t
h
o
l
i
c
C
h
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
$
2
1
,
1
7
1
$
1
6
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$1
6
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
Ca
s
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
8
0
i
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
s
t
o
a
c
c
e
s
s
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
,
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
l
e
g
a
l
a
i
d
,
et
c
.
18
Re
S
E
T
J
o
b
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
Fi
n
g
e
r
L
a
k
e
s
R
e
U
s
e
$
1
5
2
,
7
0
0
$
2
6
,
3
3
0
.
0
0
$2
6
,
3
3
0
.
0
0
Tr
a
i
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
1
6
C
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
i
n
b
a
s
i
c
s
k
i
l
l
s
i
n
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
.
&
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
.
f
i
e
l
d
s
;
3
t
r
a
i
n
e
e
s
wi
l
l
g
o
o
n
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
a
p
p
r
e
n
t
i
c
e
s
h
i
p
s
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
22
CD
B
G
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
IU
R
A
$
0
$
1
3
5
,
1
0
8
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$1
3
5
,
1
0
8
.
0
0
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
C
D
B
G
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
23
HO
M
E
A
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
IU
R
A
$
0
$
4
4
,
1
7
7
.
4
0
$4
4
,
1
7
7
.
4
0
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
o
f
t
h
e
H
O
M
E
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
To
t
a
l
s
:
$2
,
7
9
6
,
0
5
2
$
7
0
1
,
8
2
0
.
0
0
$
1
4
0
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
4
4
1
,
9
9
4
.
0
0
$
4
5
4
,
1
2
7
.
0
0
$1
,
7
3
7
,
9
4
1
.
0
0
Fu
n
d
s
R
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
:
$
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
1
2
5
,
8
7
3
.
0
0
$
1
2
5
,
8
7
3
.
0
0
Mi
n
i
m
u
m
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
S
e
t
-
a
s
i
d
e
o
f
H
O
M
E
f
u
n
d
s
f
o
r
C
H
D
O
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
:
6
6
,
2
6
6
.
1
0
$1
0
1
,
3
3
1
CD
H
O
S
e
t
-
a
s
i
d
e
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
(
I
N
H
S
C
H
T
n
e
w
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
)
:
2
7
3
,
8
6
9
.
0
0
P
u
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
:
$
1
0
1
,
3
3
0
CH
D
O
S
e
t
a
s
i
d
e
c
o
m
p
i
a
n
c
e
:
Y
E
S
P
u
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
F
u
n
d
i
n
g
R
e
m
a
i
n
i
n
g
:
$
1
*
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
c
a
r
r
i
e
d
o
u
t
b
y
a
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
B
a
s
e
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
(
C
B
D
O
)
-
n
o
t
s
u
b
j
e
c
t
t
o
P
u
b
l
I
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
e
x
p
e
n
d
i
t
u
r
e
c
a
p
.
CD
B
G
=
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
e
n
t
B
l
o
c
k
G
r
a
n
t
C
D
B
G
P
I
=
C
D
B
G
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
I
n
c
o
m
e
(
l
o
a
n
r
e
p
a
y
m
e
n
t
s
)
HO
M
E
=
H
o
m
e
I
n
v
e
s
t
m
e
n
t
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
h
i
p
s
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
N
H
I
B
o
n
d
=
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
B
o
n
d
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
a
p
:
IU
R
A
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
e
d
2
0
1
4
A
c
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
HU
D
E
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
gra
m
, C
i
t
y o
f
I
t
h
a
c
a
, N
Y
FU
N
D
I
N
G
S
O
U
R
C
E
S
Pr
o
jec
t
Al
l
P
r
o
p
o
s
a
l
s
R
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
created March 21, 2014
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
Sp
o
n
s
o
r
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
M
a
t
c
h
C
D
B
G
H
O
M
E
N
H
I
B
O
N
D
T
o
t
a
l
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
D
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
$7
0
1
,
8
2
0
$
4
4
1
,
9
9
4
$
5
8
0
,
0
0
0
$
1
,
7
2
3
,
8
1
4
#
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
1
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
T
r
u
s
t
N
e
w
C
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
*
It
h
a
c
a
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
Ho
u
s
i
n
g S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(IN
H
S
)
$7
2
7
,
9
9
6
$1
,
4
8
7
,
8
2
4
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
9
p
e
r
m
a
n
e
n
t
l
y
a
f
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
h
o
m
e
s
f
o
r
l
o
w
-
i
n
c
o
m
e
b
u
y
e
r
s
o
n
5
s
c
a
t
t
e
r
e
d
s
i
t
e
s
2
H
o
m
e
o
w
n
e
r
R
e
h
a
b
2
0
1
4
I
N
H
S
$1
5
0
,
0
0
0
$4
8
,
7
5
0
Re
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
6
o
w
n
e
r
-
o
c
c
u
p
i
e
d
h
o
m
e
s
3
M
i
n
i
R
e
p
a
i
r
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
2
0
1
4
I
N
H
S
$3
0
,
0
0
0
$5
5
,
5
0
0
Sm
a
l
l
e
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
y
r
e
p
a
i
r
s
f
o
r
5
0
l
o
w
-
i
n
c
o
m
e
s
e
n
i
o
r
s
a
n
d
p
e
o
p
l
e
w
/
d
i
s
a
b
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
4
S
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
D
e
p
o
s
i
t
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
C
a
t
h
o
l
i
c
C
h
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
$4
0
,
6
7
0
$7
,
0
1
8
70
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
s
(
$
3
5
,
0
0
0
)
a
n
d
d
e
l
i
v
e
r
y
e
x
p
e
n
s
e
s
(
$
5
,
6
7
0
)
f
o
r
l
o
w
i
n
c
o
m
e
t
e
n
a
n
t
s
5
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
S
c
h
o
l
a
r
s
h
i
p
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
W
e
b
$6
4
,
8
0
0
$4
3
,
0
0
0
Te
n
a
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
r
e
n
t
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
t
o
8
h
o
m
e
l
e
s
s
y
o
u
t
h
6
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
F
i
r
s
t
T
C
A
c
t
i
o
n
$8
0
,
0
0
0
$0
Te
n
a
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
r
e
n
t
a
l
a
s
s
i
s
t
.
t
o
5
h
o
m
e
l
e
s
s
H
H
(
$
5
0
K
)
&
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
e
d
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
(
$
3
0
K
)
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
7
E
D
L
o
a
n
F
u
n
d
(
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
I
n
c
o
m
e
)
I
U
R
A
$1
4
2
,
0
0
0
$2
8
4
,
0
0
0
Ne
w
l
o
a
n
s
c
r
e
a
t
i
n
g
a
t
l
e
a
s
t
n
i
n
e
(
9
)
F
T
E
j
o
b
s
8
H
o
s
p
i
t
a
l
i
t
y
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
Gr
e
a
t
e
r
I
t
h
a
c
a
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
Ce
n
t
e
r
(
G
I
A
C
)
$9
2
,
4
9
5
$2
0
,
3
7
3
Jo
b
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
a
i
d
w
o
r
k
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
f
o
r
2
0
i
n
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
w
i
t
h
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
b
a
r
r
i
e
r
s
9
G
a
t
e
w
a
y
t
o
L
o
c
a
l
D
i
v
e
r
s
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
s
G
I
A
C
$5
7
,
1
5
4
$1
1
,
8
0
0
Cr
e
a
t
e
c
l
e
a
r
i
n
g
h
o
u
s
e
t
o
a
s
s
i
s
t
3
m
i
c
r
o
-
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
s
s
e
l
l
g
o
o
d
s
/
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
t
o
l
o
c
a
l
in
s
t
i
t
u
t
i
o
n
s
10
B
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
C
E
N
T
S
A
l
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
I
m
p
a
c
t
$2
9
,
2
6
0
$1
1
6
,
0
8
3
Pr
o
v
i
s
i
o
n
o
f
s
u
i
t
e
o
f
p
r
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
b
u
s
i
n
e
s
s
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
t
o
2
4
m
i
c
r
o
-
e
n
t
e
r
p
r
i
s
e
s
11
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
R
e
U
s
e
&
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
C
e
n
t
e
r
F
i
n
g
e
r
L
a
k
e
s
R
e
U
s
e
$1
0
4
,
9
9
0
$7
3
,
8
3
7
Cr
e
a
t
e
3
F
T
E
j
o
b
s
a
t
a
n
e
w
r
e
t
a
i
l
a
n
d
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
c
e
n
t
e
r
a
t
2
1
4
E
l
m
i
r
a
R
d
.
12
W
o
r
k
P
r
e
s
e
r
v
e
J
o
b
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
P
r
o
g
r
a
m
H
i
s
t
o
r
i
c
I
t
h
a
c
a
$8
2
,
5
0
0
$7
1
,
7
5
0
En
t
r
y
l
e
v
e
l
j
o
b
t
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
&
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
e
x
p
e
r
i
e
n
c
e
f
o
r
2
0
y
o
u
n
g
a
d
u
l
t
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
13
L
a
k
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
B
r
i
d
g
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
E
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
C
i
t
y
o
f
I
t
h
a
c
a
$1
9
5
,
0
0
0
$1
,
4
6
4
,
2
5
0
Sa
f
e
t
y
i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
a
e
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
e
n
h
a
n
c
e
m
e
n
t
t
o
L
a
k
e
S
t
.
B
r
i
d
g
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
P
l
a
z
a
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
14
2
-
1
-
1
/
I
&
R
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
H
u
m
a
n
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
o
a
l
i
t
i
o
n
$2
0
,
0
0
0
$2
0
1
,
0
4
1
Su
p
p
o
r
t
f
o
r
t
h
e
2
-
1
-
1
c
a
l
l
c
e
n
t
e
r
15
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
b
y
D
o
i
n
g
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
e
d
E
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
r
n
i
n
g
W
e
b
$5
2
,
9
9
4
$9
,
0
0
0
Jo
b
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
&
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
o
f
1
0
y
o
u
n
g
a
d
u
l
t
s
i
n
u
n
s
u
b
s
i
d
i
z
e
d
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
16
N
u
r
s
e
C
a
s
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
I
t
h
a
c
a
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
A
u
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
$2
5
,
0
0
0
$2
9
,
0
0
0
Nu
r
s
e
c
a
s
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
t
o
3
5
f
r
a
i
l
,
e
l
d
e
r
l
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
i
n
p
u
b
l
i
c
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
17
I
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
a
t
h
o
l
i
c
C
h
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
$1
6
,
0
0
0
$2
1
,
1
7
1
Ca
s
e
m
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
8
0
i
m
m
i
g
r
a
n
t
s
t
o
a
c
c
e
s
s
e
m
p
l
o
y
m
e
n
t
,
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
,
l
e
g
a
l
a
i
d
,
e
t
c
.
18
R
e
S
E
T
J
o
b
T
r
a
i
n
i
n
g
E
x
p
a
n
s
i
o
n
F
i
n
g
e
r
L
a
k
e
s
R
e
U
s
e
$4
4
,
2
4
7
$2
5
8
,
8
2
1
Tr
a
i
n
i
n
g
f
o
r
2
6
C
i
t
y
r
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
i
n
b
a
s
i
c
s
k
i
l
l
s
i
n
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
.
&
c
o
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
.
f
i
e
l
d
s
;
4
t
r
a
i
n
e
e
s
wi
l
l
g
o
o
n
t
o
c
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
a
p
p
r
e
n
t
i
c
e
s
h
i
p
s
19
H
o
u
s
i
n
g
S
t
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
S
u
p
p
o
r
t
C
a
t
h
o
l
i
c
C
h
a
r
i
t
i
e
s
$1
6
,
6
4
0
$1
8
,
5
0
0
Tr
a
c
k
i
n
g
/
s
u
p
p
o
r
t
s
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
f
o
r
5
0
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
r
e
c
i
p
i
e
n
t
s
t
o
r
e
t
a
i
n
s
t
a
b
l
e
h
o
u
s
i
n
g
20
N
L
I
J
o
b
R
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
I
n
t
e
r
n
s
h
i
p
C
C
E
-
T
o
m
p
k
i
n
s
$2
8
,
7
9
6
$7
,
7
6
9
Me
n
t
o
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
p
a
i
d
i
n
t
e
r
n
s
h
i
p
s
t
o
4
u
n
-
a
n
d
u
n
d
e
r
-
e
m
p
l
o
y
e
d
N
L
I
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
a
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
s
21
B
u
i
l
d
i
n
g
B
r
i
d
g
e
s
I
n
i
t
i
a
t
i
v
e
Ce
n
t
e
r
f
o
r
T
r
a
n
s
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
v
e
Ac
t
i
o
n
$1
6
,
0
0
0
$6
,
4
8
0
7
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
E
d
u
c
a
t
o
r
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
o
r
s
(
C
E
O
)
i
n
c
r
e
a
s
e
t
h
e
i
r
j
o
b
r
e
a
d
i
n
e
s
s
a
s
t
h
e
y
or
g
a
n
i
z
e
i
n
u
n
d
e
r
s
e
r
v
e
d
c
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
&
r
e
c
e
i
v
e
m
e
n
t
o
r
i
n
g
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
22
C
D
B
G
A
d
m
i
n
.
I
U
R
A
$1
3
5
,
1
0
8
$0
$
1
3
5
,
1
0
7
.
6
0
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
f
o
r
t
h
e
C
D
B
G
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
23
H
O
M
E
A
d
m
i
n
.
I
U
R
A
$4
4
,
1
7
7
$0
$
4
4
,
1
7
7
.
4
0
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
,
a
d
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
n
d
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
f
o
r
t
h
e
H
O
M
E
p
r
o
g
r
a
m
To
t
a
l
s
:
$
2
,
1
9
5
,
8
2
7
$
4
,
2
3
5
,
9
6
7
$
1
3
5
,
1
0
7
.
6
0
$
4
4
,
1
7
7
.
4
0
$
0
.
0
0
$
1
7
9
,
2
8
5
.
0
0
* e
l
i
g
i
b
l
e
C
H
D
O
s
e
t
-
a
s
i
d
e
a
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
To
t
a
l
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
:
$2
,
1
9
5
,
8
2
7
P
u
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
s
:
$2
5
5
,
3
4
7
CDB
G
&
H
O
M
E
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
:
$1
,
2
8
3
,
8
1
4
$1
0
1
,
3
3
1
$1
5
4
,
0
1
6
Pu
b
l
i
c
S
e
r
v
i
c
e
s
C
a
p
:
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
t
o
b
e
t
r
i
m
m
e
d
:
Fu
n
d
i
n
g
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
R
e
c
e
i
v
e
d
20
1
4
H
U
D
E
n
t
i
t
l
e
m
e
n
t
P
r
o
gra
m
,
C
i
t
y o
f
I
t
h
a
c
a
,
N
Y
FU
N
D
I
N
G
A
V
A
I
L
A
B
L
E
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
Proposed Ordinance
Planning & Economic Development Committee
May 14, 2014
Ordinance ___‐2014
Authorize Disposition of City‐Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of tax parcel #68.‐2‐9.2
located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (“Property”) for the highest marketable price, and
WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) will act as agent for the City
of Ithaca to market the Property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest
marketable price, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to §695 of General Municipal Law, the City may dispose of real property at
the highest marketable price, and
WHEREAS, the 2014 City budget includes projected revenues of $197,000 from the sale of
surplus City properties, and
WHEREAS, the Property is assessed at a value of $100,000, and
WHEREAS, the Property is vacant except for abandoned playground equipment installed at the
rear of the property prior to City acquisition in 1982, which equipment is only accessible only
via an unsafe, crumbling set of concrete stairs, and
WHEREAS, the approximately 7,128 square foot Property is a conforming lot located within the
R‐3a zoning district which permits single‐family or multi‐unit residential development, and
WHEREAS, the Property is located in the East Hill Historic District, where any new construction
requires a certificate of appropriateness issued by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission, and
WHEREAS, the Property is appropriate for in‐fill residential development, which would enhance
the residential character of the neighborhood, eliminate a City maintenance responsibility and
increase City revenues, and
WHEREAS, future use of the Property for a parking use without new residential development
would not fully achieve public goals for use of the property, and
WHEREAS, a deed restriction could prevent use of the Property for parking without new
residential construction on the site, and
WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the Board of Public Works determined that the Property is
surplus for public works purposes, and
WHEREAS, the City Charter requires approval by 3/4s of the Common Council to authorize sale
of real property, and
WHEREAS, the City Charter further requires notice of a proposed sale to be published no less
than once each week for three weeks, the first such notice being published no less than 30 days
prior to the approval vote; now, therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as follows:
Section 1. Findings of Fact. The Common Council makes the following findings of fact:
a. The Property is surplus for municipal purposes.
b. The Property is appropriate for in‐fill residential development, which would enhance
the residential character of the neighborhood, eliminate a City maintenance
responsibility, and increase City revenues.
Section 2. Authorization for Disposition.
a. The Common Council authorizes disposition of the Property for the highest
marketable price, subject to a restriction against use of the property for parking
without new residential construction on the Property. The Mayor, subject to advice
of the City Attorney, is authorized to execute agreements to implement this
resolution, including but not limited to a real estate brokerage agreement, a
purchase and sale agreement, and conveyance of deed.
b. The Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) is authorized to act as agent for the City to
market the Property for sale through a real estate broker. Expenses of the IURA
directly associated with marketing and sale of the property shall be reimbursed from
proceeds from the property disposition.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately.
j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\ordinance p&ed 707 e seneca st disposition ‐ action.doc
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
May 14, 2014
Disposition of City‐Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street – Declaration of Lead Agency
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of vacant property located at
707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.‐2‐9.2) for the highest marketable price, and
WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency will act as agent for the City of Ithaca
to market the property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest marketable price,
and
WHEREAS, the proposed sale of an approximately 7,128 square foot parcel of land is an
Unlisted action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (CEQRO), and
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176.6 of CEQRO require that a Lead Agency be established for
conducting environmental review of proposed actions in accordance with local and state
environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental review the Lead
Agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or
carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, no other agency has jurisdiction to fund, approve or undertake the proposed action;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby declare itself Lead Agency for
the environmental review of the proposed sale of vacant property located at 707 E. Seneca
Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.‐2‐9.2) for the highest marketable price.
j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\reso p&ed 707 e seneca disposition ‐ lead agency.doc
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
May 14, 2014
Disposition of City-Owned Property at 707 E. Seneca Street – Declaration of Lead
Agency
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of vacant property
located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY (tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest
marketable price, and
WHEREAS, as proposed, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency will act as agent for the City
of Ithaca to market the property for sale through a real estate broker for the highest
marketable price, and
WHEREAS, as proposed, the IURA will solicit competitive proposals to purchase and
develop the property for a residential use and develop a proposed property disposition
for Common Council approval, and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 2014, the City of Ithaca Common Council declared itself Lead
Agency for the environmental review of this proposed action, and
WHEREAS, such proposed action for the transfer or sale of less than 2.5 contiguous acres of
land is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance (“CEQR”) and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality
Review Act (“SEQR”), both of which require environmental review, and
WHEREAS, the Short Environmental Assessment Form (“SEAF”) and supporting
information has been provided to the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council for
review of the proposed action and no comments have been received to date, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council, acting as Lead Agency for the
environmental review, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form, Part 1 and Part 2, prepared by Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency staff;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby determines that the
proposed sale of vacant City-owned property located at 707 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY
(tax parcel #68.-2-9.2) for the highest marketable price 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.
j:\community development\dispositions\707 e seneca\reso p&ed 707 e seneca st - neg dec.doc
To: Svante Myrick, Mayor Ray Benjamin, Acting Superintendent of Public Works
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
Common Council Conservation Advisory Council
Julie Holcomb, City Clerk Planning & Development Board
Aaron Lavine, City Attorney Phyllis Radke, Director of Zoning Administration
Mike Niechwiadowicz, Acting Building Commissioner
JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning, Building, and Development
Edward Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: May 6, 2014
RE: Proposal to Create a Planned Unit Development Floating District
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to create a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) floating zoning district. Enclosed for your consideration is a draft ordinance.
A PUD is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within the City boundaries, anywhere deemed
appropriate by the Common Council. The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and
imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A PUD
allows for flexibility in planning and design, while through the process of review, discussion and law change,
ensures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of
community interest.
A property owner or developer wishing to have their project considered for a PUD will have to complete an
application and work with staff, Common Council and the Planning Board to be considered. The PUD can be
placed in any location within the City, however, no property is automatically eligible for a PUD. Common
Council will make the final decision on whether to accept the application. Enclosed is a draft application for a
PUD.
An environmental review of this action has been completed and the draft full environmental review form is enclosed,
along with the draft ordinances. A public hearing for this action will be held on May 14, 2014. Your comments are
respectfully requested prior to May 14, 2013. Common Council will consider this proposal on June 4, 2014. If you
have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 274-6410.
9
I. Objective
A Planned Unit Development (PUD) is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed
within the City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by the Common Council.
The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and imaginative
design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district
regulations. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while through the
process of review, discussion and law change, ensures efficient investment in public
improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest.
II. Requirements
With the approval of the City Common Council, a PUD may be established in any
zone within the City boundary. The establishment of any such zone shall lie in the
sole discretion of the Common Council, as a legislative body. It shall be established
by amending the Zoning Ordinance to permit such establishment. The enactment and
establishment of such a zone shall be a legislative act. No owner of land or other
person having an interest in land shall be entitled as a matter of right to the enactment
or establishment of any such zone.
In a PUD, buildings and land may be used for any lawful purpose permitted in the
zone where it is located, plus any other uses which the Common Council may
authorize upon findings that such additional uses:
Further the health and welfare of the community; and
Are in accordance with the City Comprehensive Plan.
All development restrictions, including, but not limited to, yard size, height
restriction, building coverage, and lot size, shall be as set forth in the legislation
rezoning the area to a PUD established by the City Common Council. In addition, the
Common Council may impose any conditions or limitations that are determined to be
necessary or desirable to ensure that the development conforms with the City
Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of
buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, and
requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as
part of the development.
The Planned Unit Development Zone is a floating zone, which is intended to allow flexibility in zoning
regulations for projects that are found to be beneficial to the community and that are expected to furt her the
goals of the City Comprehensive Plan.
2
No structure shall be erected or placed within a PUD, no building permit shall be
issued for a building or structure within a PUD, and no existing building, structure or
use in a PUD shall be changed, unless the proposed building and/or use is in
accordance with a site plan approval.
III. Application Process
A developer proposing a development that does not conform with the existing zoning
requirements may apply for a planned development zone to be placed on their
property. The application process is as follows:
1. Staff/Developer Pre-Application Meeting. A developer seeking alternate
zoning for their property must first contact the Department of Planning, Building,
Zoning, and Economic Development for a pre-application meeting. Staff will
explain the requirements, the application process, the timeline, and the fees
associated with a PDZ request.
2. Application Submission. Developer must submit a completed PDZ application
along with the required fee. The Application must include a conceptual
development plan, and an explanation of the request for alternate zoning.
3. Planning Committee. The Planning Committee of the Common Council will
consider the application for completion and review comments received at the
public information session. The developer will be expected to be present at this
meeting. The Planning Committee may also request additional information from
the developer at this time. The Planning Committee will schedule a legal public
hearing and authorize circulation of the proposal for review and comment from
City Boards/Committees, the Tompkins County Planning Department, and any
neighboring property owners.
4. Circulation. City staff will circulate the proposed PDZ materials for review and
comment and will forward comments and concerns to the developer and to the
Common Council.
5. Public Information Session. Within 30 days of receiving a completed
application the City will schedule a Public Information Session, at which the
developer will be responsible for presenting information about the project and
answering questions from the public. The City will advertise the public
information session with a press release to the local media. The developer is
responsible for posting the property at least 5 days prior to the Public Information
Session, with the date, time, and location of the meeting.
6. Committee Recommendation. Once the comments have been received the
Planning Committee will consider the proposal along with the comments and will
make a recommendation to the Common Council. The recommendation may
include additional requirements or limitations to either mitigate undesirable
impacts or to ensure that the development conforms with the goals of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan.
3
7. Conditional Approval. The Common Council will consider the request and may
pass a resolution granting a conditional approval subject to further site plan
review approval and instructing staff to take the project through the
environmental review process.
8. Site Plan Review Application—Applicant submits a site plan review application
and begins the environmental review process
9. Declaration of Intent to Act as Lead Agency—Planning Board declares its
intent to be the lead agency for the environmental review of the project and the
PUD and notifies all other involved agencies, including the Common Council.
10. Common Council Involvement—As a part of the environmental review process
for the project and the PUD, the Planning Board will update the Common Council
after each Planning Board meeting where the project is considered and will
request ongoing written comments from the Common Council.
11. Environmental Review/Site Plan Review—The Planning Board will be the lead
agency for the environmental review and site plan review of the project. The
project will undergo the normal site plan review process
12. Common Council Consideration of the PUD—When and if the project has
received a negative declaration of environmental significance and site plan
approval, it will return to the Common Council for final consideration of the
adoption of the PUD. Final Council approval, if any, shall be granted via
ordinance.
IV. Expiration
A developer who receives PUD approval will have 24 months to begin construction of
their project. If construction on the property has not been developed in accordance with
the approved plan after 24 months, the PUD will automatically be revoked, unless
otherwise stated by the Common Council, and the property will return to the previously
approved zoning restrictions. In the case of extenuating circumstances the developer may
apply to the Common Council for an extension of PUD approval.
If the site plan changes significantly, as determined by the Director of Planning and
Development, it may require re-consideration by the Common Council. The Director of
Planning and Development may determine that the changes are minor and do not require
re-approval.
V. Application and Processing Fees
A developer wishing to apply for a PUD will pay a flat fee of $1,200 (twelve hundred
dollars). This fee will cover all advertising costs, as well as staff processing time. The
application fee is due at the time that the full application is submitted.
4
5
Part 1. – Applicant Information
Application Date:____/____/_____
1. Applicant Information
Applicant Name:______________________________________________________
Address:_______________________City:__________State:______Zip:________
Phone:___________________________Email:____________________________
Property Owner (If different from applicant):_______________________________________
Address:_________________________City:__________State:______Zip:______
Phone:___________________________Email:____________________________
2. Property Information
Property Street Address: _____________________________________________
Tax Parcel Number: ________________________________________________
Legal description of Property: ________________________________________
Zoning District :______Area: ________Width: ______ Depth: _____________
Current Uses: _____________________________________________________
3. Project Information
Project Name: _______________________________________________________
Project Description: ___________________________________________________
6
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Project Narrative:_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__
Project Location:________________________________________________________
Property Size (acres) – both existing & proposed:_____________________________
Building Size (square feet) – both existing & proposed:_________________________
Proposed Project Start & Completion Dates:_________________________________
7
Part 4. – Project Costs
Value of Land to Be Acquired (if any):_______________________________________
Value of Buildings to Be Acquired (if any):___________________________________
Cost of New Construction:___________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Value of Improvements:_____________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Value of Equipment to Be Acquired:__________% subject to local sales tax_______
Other:____________________________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Total:____________________
Part 5. – Criteria
Will the proposed project result in an increase to the tax roll value of new real
property by at least $500,000? ________
Does this project contain at least three occupiable stories? __________________
Proposed Height (in stories and feet):___________________
Does the project include a rehab of an existing structure? ____________
Is the project located in the City of Ithaca Density District? __________
Does the project contain the redevelopment of a Brownfield site? _________
8
VIII. Certification___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________deposes that he/she is the _______________
(name of chief executive officer of company submitting application) (title)
of ___________________ , the corporation named in the attached application; that he/she has
(company name)
read the foregoing application and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to
his/her knowledge. Deponent further says that the reason this verification is made by the
deponent and not by ____________________________ is because the said company is a corporation.
(company name)
The grounds of deponent’s belief relative to all matters in the said application, which are
not stated upon his own personal knowledge, are investigations which deponent has
caused to be made concerning the subject matter of this application , as well as
information acquired by deponent in the course of his duties as an officer of and from the
books and papers of said corporation.
As an officer of said corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant”), deponent
acknowledges and agrees that applicant shall be and is responsible for all costs incurred
by the non-profit Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency (hereinafter refer red
to as the “Agency”) acting on behalf of the attached application, whether or not the
application, the project it describes, the attendant negotiations, and ultimately the
necessary issue of bonds or transfer of title are ever carried to successful conclusion. If,
for any reason whatsoever, the Applicant fails to conclude or consummate necessary
negotiations or fails to act within a reasonable or specified period of time to take
reasonable, proper, or requested action, or withdraws, abandons, cancels, or neglects the
application, or if the Agency or Applicant are unable to find buyers willing to purchase
the total bond issue required or financing for the project, then, upon presentation of
invoice, the Applicant shall pay to the Agency, its agents, or assigns all actual costs
involved in conduct of the application, up to that date and time, including but not limited
to fees of bond counsel for the Agency and fees of general counsel for the Agency. Upon
successful conclusion and sale of the required bond issue or transfer of title, the
Applicant shall pay to the Agency an administrative fee set by the Agency, not to exceed
9
an amount equal to 1% of the total project cost. The cost incurred by the Agency and
paid by the Applicant, including bond counsel, the Agency’s general counsel’s fees and
the Agency’s administrative fees, may be considered as a cost of the project and included
as part of the resultant bond issue.
___________________________________________________
(signature of chief officer of company submitting application)
NOTARY
Sworn to before me this
_______ day of ______________, 20______
____________________________________
IX. Completion Status (to be completed by staff)
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA:
Size: ________________
Density: ________________
Location: ________________
Additional Documentation Submitted: _____________
Staff Review Date:______________
Mayor’s Endorsement Date:_____________
CITY OF ITHACA CITY OF ITHACA
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF) FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF)
Purpose: The Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly
manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to
answer. Frequently there are aspects of a proposed action that are subjective or immeasurable. It is also understood that those who
determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be aware of the broader concerns
affecting the question of significance.
Purpose: The Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly
manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to
answer. Frequently there are aspects of a proposed action that are subjective or immeasurable. It is also understood that those who
determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be aware of the broader concerns
affecting the question of significance.
The FEAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been
orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
The FEAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been
orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
FEAF Components: FEAF Components:
Part 1: Provide objective data and information about a given action and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists in
a review of the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focus on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to
whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially large impact. The form
also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is
actually important.
THIS AREA IS FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—TYPE I AND UNLISTED ACTIONS
Identify the Portions of FEAF completed for this action: Part 1 Part 2 Part 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this FEAF (Parts, 2, and 3, if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and
considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the Lead Agency that:
A. The Proposed Action will not result in any large and important impact(s) an is one that will not have a significant impact
on the environment; therefore, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
B. Although the proposed action could have a significant impact on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required; therefore, A
CONDITIONED NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. *
C. The proposed action may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the
environment; therefore, A POSITIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED.
*A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Name of Action: Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development (PUD) Floating Zone District
Name of Lead Agency: City of Ithaca
Name and Title of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency: Mayor Svante Myrick
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency:
Name and Title of Preparer: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Signature of Preparer:
Date: 5/6/14
FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM (FEAF)
PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a
significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these
questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification
and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) will be dependent on
information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information
requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance.
Name of Action: Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development (PUD) Floating Zone District
Location of Action: City of Ithaca
Name of Applicant/Sponsor: City of Ithaca
Address: 108 E. Green St. (City Hall)
City/Town/Village: Ithaca State: NY ZIP: 14850
Business Phone: 607-274-6550
Name of Owner(if different): n/a
Address: n/a
City/Town/Village: n/a State: n/a ZIP: n/a
Business Phone: n/a
Description of Action:
Proposal to Create Planned Unit Development (PUD) Floating Zone District:
A PUD is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within City boundaries, anywhere deemed
appropriate by Common Council. The purpose of the PUD is to encourage and allow more creative and
imaginative design of land development than is possible under standard zoning district regulations. A
PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while, through the process of review, discussion, and
law change, ensures efficient investment in public improvements, a more suitable environment, and
protection of community interest.
Page 2
Please Complete Each Question--Indicate N/A if not applicable
A. SITE DESCRIPTION
(Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.)
1. Present Land Use: X Urban Industrial Commercial Public Forest
Agricultural Other:
2. Total area of project area: ~6.1 sq. mi. (Chosen units apply to following section also)
Approximate Area (Units in question 2 apply to this section) Currently After Completion
2a. Meadow or Brushland (non-agricultural)
2b. Forested
2c. Agricultural
2d. Wetland [as per Articles 24 of Environmental Conservation Law (ECL)]
2e. Water Surface Area
2f. Public
2g. Water Surface Area
2h. Unvegetated (rock, earth or fill)
2i. Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces ~6.1 sq. mi. ~6.1 sq. mi.
2j. Other (indicate type)
3a. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site (e.g. HdB, silty loam, etc.): n/a
3b. Soil Drainage: n/a Well-Drained ______% of Site
Moderately Well Drained ______% of Site
Poorly Drained ______% of Site
4a. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? Yes X No N/A
4b. What is depth of bedrock? n/a (feet)
4c. What is depth to the water table? n/a (feet)
5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site
with slopes: n/a
0-10% % 10-15% %
15% or greater %
6a. Is project substantially contiguous to, or does it
contain a building, site or district, listed on or
eligible for the National or State Register of
Historic Places?
Yes No X N/A
6b. Or designated a local landmark or in a local
landmark district?
Yes X No N/A
7. Do hunting or fishing opportunities presently
exist in the project area? Yes X No N/A If yes, identify each species:
Page 3
SITE DESCRIPTION (Concluded)
8. Does project site contain any species of plant or
animal life that is identified as threatened or
endangered?
Yes X No N/A
According to:
Identify each Species:
9. Are there any unique or unusual landforms on the
project site? (i.e., cliffs, other geological
formations)
Yes X No N/A
Describe:
10. Is the project site presently used by the
community or neighborhood as an open space or
recreation area?
Yes X No N/A
If yes, explain:
11. Does the present site offer or include scenic views
known to be important to the community? Yes X No N/A
Describe:
12. Is project within or contiguous to a site
designated a Unique Natural Area (UNA) or
critical environmental area by a local or state
agency?
Yes X No N/A
Describe:
13. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Names of stream or name of river to which it is a
tributary: NA
14. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous
to project area: n/a
a. Name:
b. Size (in acres):
15. Has the site been used for land disposal of solid
or hazardous wastes? Yes X No N/A
Describe:
16. Is the site served by existing public utilities?
a. If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow
connection?
b. If Yes, will improvements be necessary to
allow connection?
X Yes No N/A
Yes No X N/A
Yes No X N/A
B. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
1a. Total contiguous area owned by project sponsor in acres:
1b. Project acreage developed: ~6.1 sq. mi. initially ~6.1 sq. mi. ultimately
1c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped: NA
1d. Length of project in miles: (if appropriate) NA or feet: NA
1e. If project is an expansion, indicate percent of change proposed: NA
1f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing: NA proposed: NA
1g.Maximum vehicular trips generated (upon completion of project) per day: NA and per hour: NA
Page 4
1h. Height of tallest proposed structure: feet. No structures are proposed, the proposed amendment
could allow for the construction of structures up to 140’ in height in some sections of the CBD districts.
1j. Linear feet of frontage along a public street or thoroughfare that the project will occupy? NA
2. Specify what type of natural material (i.e. rock, earth, etc.) and how much will be removed from the site:
NA or added to the site: NA
3. Specify what type of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground cover) and how much will be removed from the site:
acres: NA type of vegetation: NA
4. Will any mature trees or other locally important vegetation be removed by this project? NA
5. Are there any plans for re-vegetation to replace that removed during construction? NA
6. If single phase project, anticipated period of construction NAmonths, (including demolition)
7. If multi-phased project, anticipated period of construction NA months, (including demolition)
7a. Total number of phases anticipated: NA
7b. Anticipated date of commencement for first phase NA month year, (including demolition)
7c. Approximate completion date of final phase NA month year.
7d. Is phase one financially dependent on subsequent phases? Yes No X N/A
8. Will blasting occur during construction? Yes No X N/A; if yes, explain:
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction 0 after project is completed 0
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project: 0 Explain:
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? Yes X No N/A; if yes, explain:
12a. Is surface or subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? Yes X No N/A; if yes, explain:
12b. If #12a is yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc): NA
12c. If surface disposal, where specifically will effluent be discharged? NA
13. Will surface area of existing lakes, ponds, streams, or other surface waterways be increased or decreased
by proposal? Yes X No N/A; if yes, explain:
14a. Will project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to the 100 year flood
plain? Yes No X N/A
14b. Does project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to: Cayuga Inlet
Fall Creek, Cascadilla Creek, Cayuga Lake, Six Mile Creek, Silver Creek? (Circle all that apply) NA
14c. Does project or any portion of project occur wholly or partially within or contiguous to wetlands as
described in Article 24 Of the ECL? Yes X No N/A;
14d. If #14a, b or c is yes, explain: NA
15a. Does project involve disposal or solid waste? Yes X No N/A
15b. If #15a is yes, will an existing solid waste disposal facility be used? Yes No X N/A
15c. If #15b is yes, give name of disposal facility: NA and its location:
15d. Will there be any wastes that will not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill?
Page 5
Yes No X N/A; if yes, explain:
15e. Will any solid waste be disposed of on site? Yes No X N/A; if yes, explain:
16. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? Yes No X N/A; if yes, specify:
17. Will project affect a building or site listed on or eligible for the National or State Register of Historic
Places or a local landmark or in a landmark district? Yes No X N/A; if yes, explain:
18. Will project produce odors? Yes No X N/A; if yes, explain:
19. Will project product operating noise exceed the local ambient noise level during construction?
Yes No X N/A; After construction? Yes No X N/A
20. Will project result in an increase of energy use? Yes No X N/A; if yes, indicate type(s) NA
21. Total anticipated water usage per day: gals/day. NA Source of water
C. ZONING AND PLANNING INFORMATION
1. Does the proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? X Yes No N/A; if yes, indicate
the decision required:
X Zoning Amendment Zoning Variance New/revision of master plan Subdivision
Site Plan Special Use Permit Resource Management Plan Other:
2. What is the current zoning classification of site? City-wide
3. If the site is developed as permitted by the present zoning, what is the maximum potential development?
NA
4. Is proposed use consistent with present zoning? Yes No X N/A
5. If #4 is no, indicate desired zoning:
6. If the site is developed by the proposed zoning, what is the maximum potential development of the site?
NA
7. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land-use plans?
X Yes No N/A; If no, explain:
8. What is the dominant land use and zoning classification within a ¼ mile radius of the project?
NA
9. Is the proposed action compatible with adjacent land uses? X Yes No N/A Explain:
10a. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? NA
Page 6
Page 7
10b. What is the minimum lot size proposed? NA
11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community-provided services? (recreation, education,
police, fire protection, etc.) ? Yes X No N/A Explain:
If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? Yes No X N/A
Explain: NA
12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels?
Yes X No N/A If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic?
Yes X No N/A Explain:
D. APPROVALS
1. Approvals: Common Council Adoption
2a. Is any Federal permit required? Yes X No N/A; Specify:
2b. Does project involve State or Federal funding or financing? Yes X No N/A; If Yes, Specify:
2c. Local and Regional approvals:
Agency
Yes or No
Type of
Approval Required
Submittal
Date
Approval
Date
Common Council Yes Adoption
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) No
Planning & Development Board No
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation
Commission (ILPC)
No
Board of Public Works (BPW) No
Fire Department No
Police Department No
Building Commissioner No
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
(IURA)
No
E. INFORMATIONAL DETAILS
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts
associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid
them.
F. VERIFICATION
I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Sponsor Name: City of Ithaca
Signature:
Title: Economic Development Planner
TO: Members of the Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Lynn Truame, Historic Preservation Planner
RE: Expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include Orchard Place
DATE: April 9, 2014
At the regular monthly meeting on Tuesday April 8, 2014, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission (ILPC) held a public hearing after which they recommended
expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include the properties at 109, 111,
112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place. Included in this packet is a copy of the resolution
adopted by the Commission. Full documentation of the historic and architectural
significance of Orchard Place and its individual properties is available for public review
at the City of Ithaca Department of Planning & Development, 3rd floor, City Hall, 108
East Green Street during regular business days between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m.
As set forth in the Municipal Code, the Board of Planning and Development has been
requested to file a report to the Common Council with respect to relation of the
designation of these five properties with the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws,
projected public improvements, and any plans for renewal of the site or area involved.
The Common Council is now requested to act to designate, veto, or refer the designation
back to the ILPC for modification. A resolution is included in this packet for the
Committee’s consideration. Also included in this packet is the letter from Tompkins
County (as required by GML §239-l–m). No reply was received from the Conservation
Advisory Council in response to our request (as required by CEQR §176-3-J) for their
comment on the proposal.
ILPC Meeting – April 8, 2014
Resolution - RE
RE: Expansion of the local East Hill Historic District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115
Orchard Place
RESOLUTION: Moved by D. Kramer, seconded by C. O’Malley
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission may designate landmarks and districts of historic and
cultural significance, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing has been concluded for the purpose of considering a proposal to
expand the existing East Hill Historic District to include the five properties along
Orchard Place that are not currently included within the district, the boundaries of
which are shown on the attached map, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted by the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission acting as Lead Agency and it has been determined that the
proposal will not have a significant environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines a HISTORIC DISTRICT as
follows:
A group of properties which:
1. Contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the
criteria for designation as an individual landmark; and
2. Constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of possessing those
qualities that would satisfy such criteria.
and,
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines the criteria for designation of an
individual landmark as follows:
1. Possessing special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as
part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality,
region, state, or nation; or
2. Being identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or
3. Embodying the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or
4. Being the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an
age; or
5. Representing an established and familiar visual feature of the community
by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics.
and,
WHEREAS, the Commission has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposed
designation:
Two portions of the East Hill neighborhood were first designated as local historic
districts in 1974 (the Fountain Place Historic District) and 1976 (the East Hill
Historic District). In 1986, the much larger present-day East Hill Historic District
was surveyed and listed on the National Register of Historic Places. In 1988, the
boundaries of the local East Hill Historic District were expanded to match those of
the National Register District, subsuming the two earlier local districts.
The period of significance for the East Hill Historic District is 1830-1932. The
district derives its greatest significance from the broad collection of
architecturally and historically significant 19th and early 20th century residential,
commercial, and institutional buildings contained within it.
The district includes many of Ithaca’s best and most intact examples of popular
American architectural styles and modes, including Greek Revival, Gothic
Revival, Italianate, Second Empire, Shingle, Queen Anne, Renaissance Revival,
Colonial Revival, and Arts and Crafts (or Craftsman). The architectural styles
employed reflect the neighborhood’s prestige and influence and the prominence
Ithaca gained after the founding of Cornell University and the New York State
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Constructed roughly between the
1830s and 1930s, this building stock reflects Ithaca’s growth from a small
industrial community to its 20th century role as an internationally known,
distinguished educational center.
The significance of the Orchard Place properties, which were constructed
between 1907 and 1913 in the Colonial Revival and Craftsman styles, is
consistent with that of the East Hill Historic District as a whole.
In keeping with Section 228-3 C.1 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the
Orchard Place properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more
appropriately define an area that contains primarily properties which meet one or
more of the criteria for designation as an individual landmark.
Per criterion #1 of Section 228-3 B, the Orchard Place properties possess a
special character, historical interest, and aesthetic interest and value as
part of the cultural, political, economic, and social history of the city.
The five properties at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place (as well
the two at 101 Orchard Place and 115 Eddy, which are already included
within the historic district) are significant for their association with the
residential growth of East Hill in the decades following the granting of a
City Charter to Ithaca in 1888.
Planned as single-family residential building lots that were sold to buyers
who then contracted with architects or builders to erect a house, the street
initially attracted non-Cornell affiliated middle-class business people and
professionals, and later, Cornell University faculty and staff.
Though planned as a distinct residential enclave, Orchard Place now
blends seamlessly into the larger East Hill neighborhood and helps define
the district’s edge where it abuts the more heavily student-oriented
development of the Collegetown neighborhood.
Per criterion #3 of Section 228-3 B, Orchard Place is also significant as a
collection of early-twentieth century houses embodying the
distinguishing characteristics of the popular architectural styles of the
era, including Craftsman and Colonial Revival.
The Commission has received expert opinion concerning the significance of
the Orchard Place buildings as a coherent early twentieth century
architectural grouping in the Craftsman and Colonial Revival styles.
Two of the five Orchard Place houses (#s 114 and 115) were constructed
in the Craftsman style, two (#s 109 and 112) feature elements of both the
Craftsman and Colonial Revival styles, and one (#111) is an excellent
example of the Dutch Colonial Revival style. 111 Orchard Place gains
additional significance for its association with the regionally prominent
architectural firm of Pierce & Bickford, Elmira, NY.
In keeping with Section 228-3 C.2 of the Municipal Code, the addition of the
Orchard Place properties to the existing East Hill Historic District will more
appropriately define an area that constitutes a distinct section of the city by
reason of possessing those qualities that would satisfy the criteria for
designation as an individual landmark.
The eastern boundary of the East Hill National Register district was
established at Eddy Street on the basis of that street having been the 1887
Village boundary. However, the selection of Eddy Street as the eastern
boundary was not consistent with the intent stated within the nomination
of delineating that part of the East Hill neighborhood that “retained the
architectural integrity of the 1870-1920 period”.
Recent research has revealed that when Eddy Street was selected as the
eastern boundary for the National Register district an historically unified,
early-twentieth century planned residential development on Orchard Place
was bisected, placing two of its seven architecturally and historically
related components within the district and the remaining five outside the
district. This created an inappropriate artificial distinction between these
related historic resources.
And,
WHEREAS, the Commission adopts as its own the documentation and information more fully set
forth in the report titled Proposed Expansion of the Local East Hill Historic District,
prepared by Secretary to the Commission, Lynn C. Truame, based upon material
submitted to the ILPC in 2012 by Sara Johnson and Kristen Olson of Historic Ithaca,
Inc, and reviewed by Mary Raddant Tomlan, City Historian, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission determines that 109, 111, 112,
114, and 115 Orchard Place meet criteria for inclusion within the local East Hill
Historic District, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks
Preservation, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby recommends expansion of the local East Hill Historic
District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place, altering the eastern
boundary of the local historic district as shown on the attached map.
RECORD OF VOTE: 7-0-0
Yes
S. Gibian
S. Stein
E. Finegan
D. Kramer
M. McGandy
C. O’Malley
K. Olson
No
Abstain
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Lisa Nicholas, AICP, Senior Planner
Date: May 8, 2014
RE: Planning Board Report Regarding the Proposed Expansion of the local East Hill Historic
District to include 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115 Orchard Place
On April 8, 2014, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission recommended expansion of
the local East Hill Historic District to include the properties at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115
Orchard Place. As set forth in the Municipal Code, the Board of Planning and Development
must file a report to the Common Council with respect to the relation of the designation of
these five properties with the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public
improvements, and any plans for renewal of the site or area involved.
The Planning and Development Board will finalize this report at their regularly scheduled
meeting on May 27, 2014, and forward it to Common Council before the June 4th 2014 meeting.
Common Council Meeting
June 4, 2014 - Resolution
RE: EXPANSION OF THE LOCAL EAST HILL HISTORIC DISTRICT TO INCLUDE 109,
111, 112, 114, and 115 ORCHARD PLACE
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission may recommend designation of individual landmarks and
districts of historic and cultural significance, and
WHEREAS, on April 8, 2014, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission conducted a public
hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to expand the local East Hill
Historic District to include the five above-referenced properties on Orchard Place,
and
WHEREAS, the proposal is a Type II Action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act
and an Unlisted Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and
after conducting appropriate environmental review the Ithaca Landmarks
Preservation Commission, acting as Lead Agency, has determined that the proposal
will not have a significant environmental impact, and
WHEREAS, the Commission finds that the proposal meets criteria under the Landmarks
Preservation Ordinance and has voted to expand the local East Hill Historic District
to include these five properties, and
WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code states that the Council shall within ninety days
of said recommendation to designate, approve, disapprove or refer back to the
Commission for modification, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall file a
report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the
comprehensive plan, the zoning law, projected public improvements, and any plans
for the renewal of the site or area involved, and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Planning Board's report and recommendation for approval of the
designation has been reviewed by the Common Council, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council finds that the designation of these five properties will
not conflict with the comprehensive plan, existing zoning, projected public
improvements, or any plans for renewal of the site and area involved, and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the East Hill Historic District, as expanded by the addition of these five
properties, continues to meet the definition of a local historic district as set forth in
the Municipal Code, as follows:
An area which contains primarily properties which meet one or more of the criteria
for designation as an individual landmark, namely:
1. Possessing special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as
part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality,
region, state, or nation; or
2. Being identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or
3. Embodying the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or
4. Being the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an
age; or
5. Representing an established and familiar visual feature of the community
by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics.
and is an area which constitutes a distinct section of the city by reason of
possessing those qualities that would satisfy such criteria.
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council approves the expansion of the local East Hill
Historic District to include the properties located at 109, 111, 112, 114, and 115
Orchard Place under Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR
Telephone: Planning – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org E-Mail: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
To: Svante Myrick, Mayor
Ari Lavine, City Attorney
Common Council
JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning, Building, Zoning, & Economic Development
Michael Niechwiadowicz, Director of Code Enforcement
Phyllis Radke, Director of Zoning Administration
Michael Thorne, Superintendent of Public Works
Julie Holcomb, City Clerk
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Planning & Development Board
Conservation Advisory Council (CAC)
Rental Housing Advisory Commission (RHAC)
Edward Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning
From: Cynthia Brock, First Ward Alderperson
Date: April 22, 2014
RE: Ordinance to Amend Chapter 178 of City Code to Impose Total Ban on Installation
& Operation of Outdoor Wood Boilers/Hydronic Heaters in All City Zones
The Nuisance Smoke Working Group (composed of Fire Chief Tom Parsons, Director of Code
Enforcement Mike Niechwiadowicz, Intern Lee Ann Hill, and me) recommends for passage a
total ban on the installation and operation of outdoor wood boilers (OWBs), officially known as
hydronic heaters. The City Administration Committee discussed and supported the creation of
this legislation at its September 25, 2013 meeting, and expressed the desire this legislation be put
in place prior to the installation of the first OWB within the City.
OWBs are large stand-alone wood-burning units installed for the purpose of creating hot water
radiant heat for buildings or homes. While considered an inexpensive heating method, OWBs’
design promotes a cooler, slow-burning fire that does not achieve peak combustion ― resulting
in high levels of smoke and creosote emissions, as well as nuisance smells.1 Owners of OWBs
sometimes burn trash, plastic, and other inappropriate materials in their units, which increases
smoke and pollutant levels.
It is estimated that when used properly OWBs produce 4 times the particulate pollution as
conventional wood stoves and 12 times that of EPA-certified wood stoves.2
1 http://www.woodheat.org/outdoor-boilers.html (accessed April 26, 2013)
2 “Smoke Gets in Your Lungs: Outdoor Wood Boilers in New York State,” NY State Office of Attorney General (August 2005)
http://www.health.state.mn.us/asthma/documents/05nysmokeyourlungs.pdf (accessed April 26, 2013)
Outdoor wood boilers are becoming increasingly popular regionally and nationwide, and it is the
position of the Working Group that the City should proactively prohibit the installation and
operation of outdoor wood boilers in an effort to protect and enhance Ithaca’s air quality in our
urban environment.3 While NYSDEC regulations for outdoor wood boilers require that
residential OWBs not be less than 100 feet from the nearest property line 4 , there are several
undeveloped properties within the City of an acre or more where OWBs could be installed under
NYSDEC regulations, necessitating the proposed legislation to ensure protection against OWB
installations.
Please find enclosed the draft ordinance. The Planning and Economic Development Committee
will consider this proposed ordinance at its regularly scheduled meeting on WEDNESDAY, MAY
14, 2014. Your comments are respectfully requested by that date.
3 Dean Solomon, “Should local governments regulate outdoor wood boilers? – Part 1,” Michigan State Extension (February 28, 2013),
http://msue.anr.msu.edu/news/should_local_governments_regulate_outdoor_wood_boilers_part_1 (accessed April 26, 2013)
4 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Part 247.5: Outdoor Wood Boilers, http://www.dec.ny.gov/regs/71720.html
(accessed January 2, 2014)
“An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification.”
April 22, 2014
An Ordinance to Amend City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 178 in Order to
Impose Total Ban of Outdoor Wood-Burning Furnaces within the City
WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that outdoor wood-burning furnaces can provide
an alternative to conventional heating systems, generating hot water heat through the use
of on-site wood fires rather than coal or gas, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council also finds that smoke from these outdoor furnaces
often contains unhealthy levels of particulate matter, dioxins, carbon monoxide, nitrogen
dioxide, sulfur dioxide, hydrochloric acid, formaldehyde, and other toxic pollutants, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that exposure to smoke from these furnaces can
cause adverse effects to respiratory and cardiovascular systems and exacerbate existing
asthmatic sensitivity and lung illness, especially among children and the elderly, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council finds that outdoor furnaces are intended to burn only
natural wood, but homeowners sometimes add other materials, which can produce toxic
air pollutants when burned, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council has determined the most effective way to ensure the
health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of the City in this instance is to prevent
the construction and operation of outdoor wood-burning furnaces, therefore
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 178-2, entitled “Definitions,” of the City of Ithaca Code, is hereby
amended to include an additional definition:
“Outdoor Wood-Burning Furnace: an exterior device or structure, designed or intended,
through the burning of wood, for the purpose of heating the principal structure, or any
other structure on the premises.”
Section 2. Chapter 178-4, entitled “Standards for exterior structures,” of the City Code is
hereby amended through the addition of a new subsection E, to be read as follows:
“E. No outdoor wood-burning burning furnace be installed, constructed, maintained or
operated on the exterior property of premises within the City.”
Section 3. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of
this ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this
ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion.
Section 4. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance
with law upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, February 12, 2014 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
Minutes
Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Graham
Kerslick, Vice Chair; Ellen McCollister,
Cynthia Brock, and Josephine Martell
Committee Members Absent: None
Other Elected Officials Attending: Mayor Svante Myrick, Alderpersons Donna
Fleming, George McGonigal, and Stephen
Smith
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Department of
Planning, Building, and Development;
Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Planner,
Planning, Building, and Development; Megan
Wilson, Planner, Department of Planning,
Building, and Development; Mike
Niechwiadowicz, Director of Code
Enforcement; and Debbie Grunder, Executive
Assistant, Department of Planning and
Development
Others Attending: Michael Kuo, Commons Project Manager; Tom
West, Director, Engineering Department
Chair Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.
1. Agenda Review
Chair Murtagh stated the Cornell Heights Rezoning would be discussed at the end
of the meeting.
2. Special Order of Business
Presentation: Tompkins County Housing Market Trends
2. Public Hearing – Collegetown Area Form Districts (CAFD)
Alderperson Kerslick motioned to open the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson McCollister. Passed Unanimously.
John Graves, 319 Pleasant Street, and Sheila Squier, 110 Columbia Street spoke on the
Collegetown Area Form Districts proposal. Mr. Graves read his comments to the group
regarding affordable housing in the Collegetown Area Form Districts. He stated a
Collegetown design review board is essential. Members would be chosen by the Mayor
and would consist of those who live in the Collegetown area.
Theresa Alt, 206 Eddy Street, Go ahead and adopt the form-based zoning. It’s a step in the
right direction. It removes the very ridiculous option of minimum parking requirements.
The Collegetown area is pedestrian friendly. Minimum off-street parking should be lifted
from other residential areas within the City especially in the historic districts.
Wayles Brown, 206 Eddy Street, seconds Theresa Alt’s comments on minimum parking
requirements. He would like to see more public transportation. He thinks the proposal
should be voted on. Don’t modify it now – vote now and modify after.
Nathan Lyman, 1322 E. State Street, spoke on behalf of Jason Fane who is in favor of the
new Collegetown plan. New buildings will be code compliant, safer, and more
comfortable. This will provide environmental pluses since it’s close to Cornell and will
encourage walking. New buildings will create new jobs which will increase spending and
the increase in sales tax is also a plus. It’s time for the City to adapt this ordinance.
Jane Marcham, 414 East Buffalo Street, spoke on the parking situation in Collegetown.
Her impression is the City has received numerous transportation plans. Rezoning will
increase growth which will increase parking demands. Where will overnight parking go?
The parking requirements need a further look.
Max Weisbrod, 207 Fall Creek, He encouraged the eight (8) parcels on Linden Street be
changed from CR4 to MU2. This would not derail the proposed rezoning on the table.
Ann Sullivan, 109 Irving Place, congratulated JoAnn Cornish for her recent award. She is
not in love with the plan, but does think it should be voted on. She doesn’t agree with
Weisbrod’s comments. The transition is crucial for this proposed zoning change. Don’t
tinker with it. She further spoke that affordable housing should be a focus rather than
focusing it on high-end development. That is only used eight (8) months out of the year by
privileged students.
Tessa Rudan, 226 Bryant Avenue, spoke on the Collegetown Rezoning proposal.
Affordable housing should be kept separate from the proposed Collegetown Area Form
Districts (CAFD) plan. She would like this to be looked at holistically and to
include all neighborhoods.
John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue, Apt. F., Ithaca, New York spoke on the history of the
Collegetown Plan. No one will be completely happy. That’s not a reason to delay the vote
on this tonight. The commercial development suggested on Linden Avenue as a MU zone
is not a good idea. He encourages us to move this forward.
Wendy Wallitt, 209 Valley Road, fully supports to the CAFD plan but the transportation
issues have not been sufficiently looked at. If developers are not required to provide
parking, whom does it benefit? Does it make the living arrangements better or does a
developer benefit?
Jan Rhodes Norman, 425 N. Aurora Street, spoke in favor of Collegetown Crossing
development which would include Green Star Markets.
Joanie Mackowski, 516 Dryden Road, has three concerns of the plan. (1) LEAD standards,
architecturally sustainability, (2) affordable housing is needed, and (3) the form is great,
but it lacks
Gail Patrice Lockert Anthony, 104 N. Cayuga Street, spoke in favor of Josh Lower’s
Collegetown project which includes the Green Star Market. Green Star will educate those
who shop there. The money stays here in Ithaca. The transition will allow Lower’s project
to move forward.
Seph Murtagh, read three (3) letters into the record that are attached to these minutes from
Alphonse Pieper, Mary Tomlan, and John Novarr.
Alderperson McCollister moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Alderperson
Brock. The public hearing was closed.
3. Public Comment.
John Schroeder, spoke in favor of RU rezoning in the Cornell Heights Historic District. He
urges the committee to do this.
4. Announcements, Updates, and Reports
Transition Regulations and Extension of Waterfront Zoning will return next month.
5. Action Items – Voting to Send on to Council
a) Collegetown Area Form Districts
An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325,
Entitled “Zoning,” to Establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and Rezone
Portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 Districts to Collegetown
Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU) – Declaration of Lead Agency for
Environmental Review
Moved by Alderperson McCollister; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed
Unanimously.
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be
established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and
state environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review,
the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving
and funding or carrying out the action, and
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendment is a “Type I” Action pursuant to the City
Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review
under CEQR; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself
lead agency for the environmental review of the adoption of an ordinance to amend the
Municipal Zoning Code to establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and to rezone
portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 districts to Collegetown
Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU).
An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325,
Entitled “Zoning,” to Establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and Rezone
Portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 Districts to Collegetown
Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU) – Determination of Environmental
Significance
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering an amendment to Chapter 325 of the
Municipal Code in order to (1) establish the Collegetown Area Form Districts and (2)
rezone portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1 districts to
Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU), and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the
preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), dated January 8, 2014, and
WHEREAS, these zoning amendments have been reviewed by the Tompkins County
Planning Department Pursuant to §239-l–m of the New York State General Municipal Law,
which requires that all actions within 500 feet of a county or state facility, including county
and state highways, be reviewed by the County Planning Department, and have also been
reviewed by the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council and the City of Ithaca
Planning and Development Board, and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is a “Type I” Action under the City Environmental
Quality Review Ordinance, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has
reviewed the FEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as
its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth in the Full Environmental
Assessment Form, dated January 8, 2014, and be it further
RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines
that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and
that further environmental review is unnecessary, and be it further
RESOLVED, that this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the
City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in
the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law.
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” To Establish the Collegetown Area Form
Districts and Rezone Portions of the R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, R-3b, B-2b, and U-1
Districts to Collegetown Residential (CR) and Mixed Use (MU)
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson McCollister. Passed
Unanimously.
WHEREAS, the “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design
Guidelines” was endorsed by the Common Council on August 5, 2009, and the
adoption of a form-based code has been considered to be a critical implementation
measure, and
WHEREAS, based on the advice of a consultant, the City has decided to pursue a
hybrid code rather than a true form-based code because
(1) the hybrid code includes regulations of density and use that are not included in true
form-based codes and density continues to be a critical issue in the Collegetown area
and (2) this type of zoning is new to the City and the hybrid code would ease the
transition from traditional zoning, and
WHEREAS, a working group consisting of Common Council members, a
Planning Board member, and City staff has revised a previous zoning proposal for
Collegetown to create a clarified proposal that reflects the goals of the “2009
Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines;” now, therefore,
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as
follows:
ORDINANCE NO. ____
Section 1. Declaration of Legislative Findings and Purpose
The “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines”
identifies several goals for future development in Collegetown. These goals include:
• To encourage exceptional urban design and high-quality construction;
• To regulate elements of building form to ensure a consistent transition between
districts;
• To concentrate development in the central areas of Collegetown and protect the
character of the established residential neighborhoods;
• To preserve and enhance green space that is a vital ecological, recreational, and
aesthetic component of the urban environment; and
• To promote attractive, walkable neighborhoods that prioritize
accommodation of alternate modes of transportation
The “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines”
recommends the adoption of a form-based code to regulate elements of building form
that are not addressed under traditional zoning. The Collegetown Area Form Districts
is a hybrid code that combines regulations of physical form with regulations of use and
density. The Common Council finds that the establishment of the Collegetown Area
Form Districts will advance the City’s goals for future development in Collegetown as
specified in the “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines.”
Section 2. Chapter 325, Sections 325-4 and 325-5 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Ithaca are hereby amended to establish and add the Collegetown Area Form Districts
which include the following zoning districts: Collegetown Residential 1 (CR-1),
Collegetown Residential 2 (CR-2), Collegetown Residential (CR-3), Collegetown
Residential (CR-4), Mixed Use 1 (MU-1), and Mixed Use 2 (MU-2).
Section 3. Chapter 325 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to
add a new Article to be inserted as Article IX, entitled “Collegetown Zoning,” and all
subsequent articles and sections shall be hereby renumbered accordingly. Ҥ325-45
Collegetown Area Form Districts,” dated January 6, 2014, shall be inserted in its entirety
into said Article IX as §325-45.
Section 4. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change
the designation from R-1b, and R-3a to CR-1 for the following tax parcels: 64.-6-1;
64.-6-2.2; 64.-6-3; 64.-7-1; 64.-7-2; 64.-7-3; 64.-7-4; 64.-7-5; 64.-7-6; 65.-2-1; 65.-2-2;
65.-2-3; 65.-2-4; 65.-2-5; 67.-2-8; 67.-2-9; 67.-2-10; 67.-2-11; 67.-3-18; 67.-3-19; 67.-
3-20; 67.-3-21; 67.-3-22; 83.-6-2; and 84.-1-1.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled “Collegetown Area Form
Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in the City Clerk’s office.
Section 5. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change the
designation from R-2a, R-2b, and R-3a to CR-2 for the following tax parcels: 64.-1-1; 64.-
1-2; 64.-1-4; 64.-3-1; 64.-3-2; 64.-3-3; 64.-3-4; 64.-3-5; 64.-3-6; 64.-3-7; 64.-3-8; 64.-4-1;
64.-4-2; 64.-4-3; 64.-4-4; 64.-4-5; 64.-5-1; 64.-5-2; 64.-5-3; 64.-5-4; 64.-8-7; 64.-8-8; 64.-8-
9; 64.-8-10; 65.-1-1; 65.-1-2; 65.-1-3; 65.-1-4; 65.-1-5; 68.-6-12; 68.-6-13; 68.-6-14; 68.-6-
15; 68.-7-2; 68.-7-3; 68.-7-4; 68.-7-5; 68.-7-6; 68.-7-7; 68.-7-8; 68.-8-6; 68.-8-9; 83.-3-2;
83.-3-3; 83.-3-4; 83.-3-5; 83.-3-6.1; 83.-3-6.2; 83.-3-7; 83.-3-8; 83.-3-9; 83.-4-1; 83.-4-3;
83.-4-4; 83.-4-5; 83.-4-6; 83.-6-1; and 83.-6-3.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled
“Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in
the City Clerk’s office.
Section 6. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change
the designation from R-2a, R-2b, R-3a, and R-3b to CR-3 for the following tax parcels:
64.-2-7; 64.-2-8; 64.-2-9; 64.-2-11; 64.-2-13; 64.-8-1; 64.-8-2; 64.-8-3; 64.-8-4; 64.-8-5;
64.-8-6; 64.-8-11; 64.-9-3; 64.-9-4; 64.-9-5; 64.-9-7; 64.-9-8; 64.-9-9; 67.-2-3; 67.-2-4;
67.-2-5; 67.-3-2; 67.-3-3; 67.-3-23; 67.-3-24; 67.-3-25; 67.-3-26; 68.-5-14; 68.-5-15;
68.-5-16; 68.-5-17; 68.-5-18; 68.-5-19; 68.-6-1; 68.-6-16; 68.-6-17; 68.-6-18; and 68.-6-
19.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled
“Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in
the City Clerk’s office.
Section 7. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby
amended to change the designation from R-1b, R-3a, and R-3b to CR-4 for the
following tax parcels: 64.-2-2; 64.-2-4; 64.-2-5; 64.-2-6; 64.-2-14; 64.-2-15; 64.-2-17;
64.-2-18; 64.-2-19; 64.-2-20; 64.-2-22; 64.-9-1; 64.-9-2; 64.-9-6; 64.-9-10; 64.-10-7;
64.-10-8; 64.-10-9; 64.-10-10; 64.-10-11; 64.-10-13; 67.-1-4; 67.-1-5; 67.-1-6; 67.-1-7;
67.-1-8; 67.-2-1; 67.-2-2; 67.-2-12; 67.-2-13; 67.-2-14; 67.-2-15; 67.-2-16; 67.-2-17;
67.-2-18; 67.-3-1; 67.-3-29; 67.-3-30; 67.-3-31; 68.-4-3; 68.-4-9; 68.-4-10; 68.-4-11;
68.-4-12; 68.-4-13; 68.-4-14; 68.-4-15; 68.-5-2; 68.-5-3; 68.-5-4; 68.-5-5; 68.-5-6; 68.-
5-7; 68.-5-8; 68.-5-9; 68.-6-2; 68.-6-3; 68.-6-4; 68.-6-5; 68.-6-6; 68.-6-7; 68.-6-8; 68.-6-
9; 68.-6-10; 68.-6-11; 83.-4-2; and portions of 64.-10-15; 67.-1-1; and 67.-1-3.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled
“Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in
the City Clerk’s office.
Section 8. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change
the designation from R-3b to MU-1 for the following tax parcels: 67.-1-9; 67.-1-10; 67.-
1-11; 67.-1-12; 68.-5-10; 68.-5-11; 68.-5-12; 68.-5-13; and a portion of 67.-1-3.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled
“Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in
the City Clerk’s office.
Section 9. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to change
the designation from R-3a, R-3b, U-1 and B-2b to MU-2 for the following tax parcels:
63.-5-2; 63.-5-3; 63.-5-5; 63.-5-7; 63.-5-8; 63.-5-9; 63.-6-1; 63.-6-2; 63.-6-3; 63.-6-4;
63.-6-5; 63.-6-8; 63.-6-14; 63.-6-17; 63.-6-19; 63.-6-20; 63.-6-21; 63.-6-23; 63.-6-24;
63.-6-25; 63.-6-26; 64.-2-1; 64.-2-23; 64.-2-24; 64.-2-26; 64.-2-27; 64.-2-28; 64.-2-29;
64.-2-30; 64.-2-31; 64.-2-32; 64.-10-1; 64.-10-2; 64.-10-3; 64.-10-4; 64.-10-5; 64.-10-6;
64.-10-17.2; 64.-10-18; 64.-10-19; 64.-10-20; 64.-10-21; 68.-4-6; 68.-4-7; 68.-4-8; and
portions of 64.-10-15; and 67.-1-1.
The boundaries of this amendment are shown on the map entitled
“Collegetown Area Form Districts - January 2014,” a copy of which shall be on file in
the City Clerk’s office.
Section 10. All applicable sections within the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca shall
be updated in accordance with the amendments made herewith.
Section 11. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence,
clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a
court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 12. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the
Ithaca City Charter.
b) Amendment to Capital Project 724 – Ithaca Commons Repair and Upgrade Project
Amendment to Capital Project 724- Ithaca Commons Repair and Upgrade Project
- Resolution
Moved by Alderperson Martell; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Passed Unanimously.
1. WHEREAS, in 2007, the Common Council authorized, as a part of the 2008 capital budget,
$250,000 to begin preliminary design on repairs and upgrades to the Ithaca Commons, and
Capital project 724, Ithaca Commons Design and Construction, was established, and
2. WHEREAS, in June of 2009, the City hired Sasaki Associates, a Boston based planning,
design, and architectural firm, to design upgrades and repairs for the Commons, and
3. WHEREAS, after extensive analysis it was determined that due to the necessary repairs to
the surfaces and the underground utilities the entire Commons would need to be
reconstructed, and
4. WHEREAS, in October of 2010, the Common Council authorized, as part of the 2011
capital budget an amendment to capital project 724, to add an additional $800,000 to
complete the full design and preparation of construction drawings for the full redesign of the
Commons, and
5. WHEREAS, in March of 2012, the Common Council passed a resolution authorizing staff
to apply for a federal grant to fund the reconstruction of the Commons and confirmed its
intent to commit the City to matching funds of $3,500,000 towards this project, and
6. WHEREAS, in July of 2012, the City was notified that the US Federal Transit
Administration(FTA) was awarding the City a $4,500,000 grant towards the reconstruction
of the Ithaca Commons, and
7. WHEREAS, in November of 2012, Common Council authorized, as part of the 2013 capital
budget, an amendment to capital project 724 to cover the upfront costs of the
reconstruction, including the $3,500,000 that the Common Council had pledged to commit
to this project and the $4,500,000 in funds to be reimbursed by the FTA at the completion of
the project, and
8. WHEREAS, in July of 2012, the City submitted a Consolidated Funding Application to the
New York State Southern Tier Regional Council for additional funding assistance for the
reconstruction of the Commons, and in December was notified that the they would be
receiving $1,800,000, in reimbursable funds to be used towards the reconstruction of the
Commons, and
9. WHEREAS, on February 6, 2013, the City received one bid on the general construction
contract for the Commons with a cost that was significantly higher than the budget estimates
that were prepared by the City’ s design firm, and
10. WHEREAS, if the City chooses to execute all of the contract deducts, which include, the
removal of the fountain, the pavilion, the two gateway structures, a reduction in the amount
of structural soil, a substitution of concrete pavers in place of granite pavers, the removal of
movable planters, the substitution of the semi-movable chairs with movable chairs, and the
removal of the play structure, the cost will still exceed the budget by nearly $2,000,000, and
11. WHEREAS, in order to award the general construction contract, the City must elect to
execute all of the bid deducts and must also amend capital project 724, by adding an
additional $3,800,000, to include the upfront cost of the CFA funds, and the $2,000,000, in
additional expenses, and
12. WHEREAS, once the City awards a contract for the general construction there may be an
opportunity to negotiate some additional savings for the project in order to recoup the
additional expenses or to reincorporate some of the removed elements, and
13. WHEREAS, in order to complete construction in 2013, the contractor must be given notice
to proceed by March 7, 2013, and therefore now be it
14. RESOLVED, that the Common Council approves an addition to Capital Project 724 in an
amount not to exceed $3,800,000, for a total authorization of $13,850,000.
6. Action Items – Voting to Send to Council
a) Planned Development Zones Legislation
Moved By Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Passed
Unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. ____
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF
ITHACA, CHAPTER 325, ENTITLED “ZONING” IN ORDER TO CREATE A
FLOATING PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca that Chapter 325, of the Municipal Code of the City of
Ithaca be amended in as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Article IV is hereby amended to
change the title from “Cluster Subdivision Development” to
“Cluster Sub-division, Floating Zones and Planned Development
Zones” and to be re-numbered to read as follows:
Article IV. Cluster Subdivision Development, Floating Zones and Planned Development Zones
§ 325-11. Cluster Subdivisions
A. Purpose and intent. This article authorizes the Planning and Development Board, during
the process of subdivision plat approval pursuant to Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the
Code, to make reasonable changes in the existing zoning regulations for the property affected so
as to enable the development of a cluster subdivision. This authorization permits deviations in the
district regulations applicable to the affected property, subject to the limitations contained in this
section. Cluster subdivisions may be approved in order to promote the following purposes:
(1.) The preservation and enhancement of open spaces, watercourses, wetlands and areas
designated as critical environmental areas.
(2.) The development of active and passive recreation areas.
(3.) The development of residential dwelling units in forms which are consistent with the
public welfare and which provide reasonable safeguards to the appropriate use of adjoining
land.
(4.) Efficient and cost-effective development of roads, sidewalks, utilities, water-and
sewer lines and other forms of public and private infrastructure.
(5.) The development of housing that is more affordable than that normally developed
under conventional zoning regulations.
B. Authorization and Minimum Requirements. The Planning and Development Board is
authorized, upon petition by an applicant for subdivision approval, to approve a cluster
subdivision that includes reasonable deviations from the existing regulations of that zoning
district in which the subdivision is located in accordance with the following limitations:
(1.) Cluster subdivisions may only be permitted in the R-1a, R-1b, R-2a, R-2b, R-3a and
R-3b Zoning Districts.
(2.) Cluster subdivisions shall contain only those primary uses and accessory uses which
are permitted in the zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is proposed, except as
permitted by Subsection 325-11B.(3).
(3.) The following types of deviations from the zoning regulations of the district in
which the cluster subdivision is proposed are permitted:
Building type for residential uses, provided that, in the R-1a and R-1b Districts, only
one-family detached dwellings are permitted as primary uses, and in the R-2a and R-
2b Districts, no more than two dwelling units may be attached to form a single
building, provided that each dwelling unit shall have a separate ground-level entrance.
Lot area.
Lot width at street line.
Maximum percentage of land coverage by buildings on any individual lot within the
cluster subdivision, provided that the total percentage of land coverage by all
buildings in the cluster subdivision shall not exceed the following percentages for the
zoning district in which the cluster subdivision is located:
Maximum Land Coverage District (percent)
R-1a 20
R-1b 25
R-2a 30
R-2b 35
R-3a 35
R-3b 40
e. Front, side and rear yard dimensions, provided that all buildings in a cluster
subdivision shall have a front yard of at least 25 feet in the R-1a, R-1b, and R-2a
Zones and 10 feet in the R-2b, R-3a and R-3b Zones, and further provided that all
buildings in a cluster subdivision shall be at least the following number of feet from
the boundary of a cluster subdivision where it abuts land, other than a public right-of-
way, that is not part of the cluster subdivision:
[1] In the R-1 Districts: 40 feet.
[2] In the R-2 and R-3 Districts: 20 feet.
(4.) The maximum number of dwelling units permitted in a cluster subdivision shall not
exceed the number of dwelling units that would be permitted on the site in a conventional
subdivision under the conventional zoning regulations for the zoning district in which the
cluster subdivision is proposed, subject to all applicable development regulations applying
to the property in question plus any other restriction which the Planning and Development
Board has the authority to impose pursuant to Chapter 290, Subdivision of Land, of the
Code.
(5.) Any reduction in the lot area for buildings in a cluster subdivision beyond the
minimum allowed in the zoning district in which the subdivision is located shall require the
reservation of an equivalent amount of land as open space, passive recreation area or active
recreation area. Wetlands, floodplains, steep slopes or
other areas not normally appropriate for building construction shall not account for
more than 50% of the land area reserved.
(6.) All open space or recreation areas reserved in accordance with Subsection 32511B.
(5) shall be dedicated as common land for the benefit of the members of the subdivision.
The development, operation and maintenance of this property shall be in accordance with
the approved site development plan and in a manner that is consistent with the public
welfare
C. Approval; information to be submitted.
(1.) The Planning and Development Board may consider a developer's request for
approval of a cluster subdivision or may require that a developer prepare and submit plans
for a cluster subdivision that contain no greater number of dwelling units than that proposed
by the developer. The Board shall adopt rules and regulations setting forth the criteria
pursuant to which such an application may be required. The approval of a cluster
subdivision shall follow the rules and procedures contained in Chapter 290, Subdivision of
Land, of the City of Ithaca Code.
(2.) Developers submitting a cluster subdivision plan shall submit two subdivision plans,
one showing the land developed under the conventional zoning regulations and the other
showing development under the cluster option. In addition to the requirements of Chapter
290, Subdivision of Land, of the Code, the developer shall submit the following information
on or with the cluster subdivision plan:
An area plan showing the proposed cluster subdivision and all existing land
use and major natural features of the land within 500 feet of the project site.
A site development plan showing the location, size, use and physical features
of all proposed buildings and accessory uses, the location and design of vehicular and
pedestrian access and the location of proposed parking areas.
A landscaping plan showing the type and location of all existing trees,
vegetation and natural features on the site; the identification of all existing vegetation
to be preserved; the identification of all new vegetation to be added; and the location
and type of fences, berms or buffer areas.
A plan showing the boundaries of common areas to be reserved and the
proposed use, development and maintenance of those spaces.
Elevations of typical dwelling units to be constructed in the cluster
subdivision.
Environmental review of the project at a level deemed appropriate by the
Planning and Development Board.
Any other information that the Planning and Development Board may
reasonably require.
(3.) The approval of a cluster subdivision shall constitute the approval of a site
development plan for the affected area. No development shall occur on the site that is not in
strict conformance with the elements of the approved site development plan, nor shall the
plan be modified without the approval of the Planning and Development Board.
(4.) A cluster subdivision shall not be approved unless the Planning and Development
Board makes the following affirmative findings and states, in writing, the facts that support
those findings:
That the development is found to be compatible in terms of appearance,
character and overall density with both the existing and potential development in the
surrounding area.
That the development will not place an unreasonable burden on the public
roads or utilities that will service the project.
That the development will promote the preservation of open space and natural
resources within the neighborhood to a greater degree than would conventional
development
That the development is consistent with the public welfare and that the
appropriate use of adjoining land is reasonably safeguarded.
That the development will not have an undue adverse impact on the critical
area listed in § 176-5(B)(1)(a) of the Code.
That the development complies with the approved Street Plan and Master
Plan, if any, for the area.
Section 2 Chapter 325.(“Zoning”), Section § 325-12, is hereby amended to replace all existing
text with the following new language regarding Planned Development Zones:
Section § 325-12 Planned Development Zones (PDZ)
A. Declaration of Legislative Authority. This Planned Development Zone (PDZ) being
established pursuant to the authority established in the New York State general City Law § 81-f.
B. Purpose and Intent. A PDZ is a floating overlay zone, which may be placed within the
City boundaries, anywhere deemed appropriate by the Common Council. The PDZ is a tool
intended to be used to encourage mixed-use or unique single use projects that require more
creative and imaginative design of land development than is possible
under standard zoning district regulations. A PDZ allows for flexibility in planning and
design, while through the process of review and discussion, insures efficient investment in
public improvements, a more suitable environment, and protection of community interest. A
PDZ should be used only when long-term community benefits will be achieved through
high quality development, including, but not limited to, reduced traffic demands, greater
quality and quantity of public and/or private open space, community recreational amenities,
needed housing types and/or mix, innovative designs; and for the protection and/or
preservation of natural resources.
This article is intended to relate to both residential and nonresidential development, as well
as mixed forms of development. There may be uses, now or in the future, which are not
expressly permitted by the other terms of this chapter but which uses would not contravene
the long range Comprehensive Plan objectives if they adhere to certain predetermined
performance and design conditions. The PDZ is intended to be used to enable these
developments to occur even though they may not be specifically authorized by the City
Zoning District Regulations. Areas may be zoned as a PDZ by the Common Council, all in
accordance with the normal rezoning procedures. The enactment and establishment of such
a zone shall be a legislative act. No owner of land or other person having an interest in land
shall be entitled as a matter of right to the enactment or establishment of any such zone.
C. Establishment and location. Because the intention is to create self-contained,
architecturally consistent and compatible buildings, many times with diverse but related uses, and
because the creation of a PDZ will entail sufficient review to assure the uses within the zone will
have negligible or no adverse effects upon properties surrounding the zone, a PDZ may be created
in any zone within the City. In reaching its decision on whether to rezone to a PDZ, the Common
Council shall consider the general criteria set forth in this chapter, the most current
Comprehensive Plan for the City, and this statement of purpose
D. Permitted principal and accessory uses. In a PDZ buildings and land may be used for
any lawful purpose permitted in the zone where it is located, plus any other uses which the
Common Council may authorize.
All development restrictions, including, but not limited to, yard size, height restriction,
building coverage, and lot size, shall be as set forth in the legislation rezoning the area to a
PDZ established by the Common Council. In addition, the Common Council may impose
any conditions or limitations that are determined to be necessary or desirable to insure that
the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the
permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and
recreational areas, requiring acoustical or visual screening, construction sequencing, and
requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of
the development.
E. Site Plan Approval. No structure shall be erected or placed within a PDZ, no building
permit shall be issued for a building or structure within a PDZ, and no existing building, structure
or use in a PDZ be changed, unless the proposed building and/or use
is in accordance with a site plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 276 of the
City of Ithaca Code.
F. Criteria. Common Council will consider an application for PDZ on the following criteria:
•
Is the
project
accord
ce with
the City
in
an
Compreh
ensive
Plan
Does
the
project
term
communi
ty benefit [1] Staff/Developer Pre-Application Meeting. A developer seeking alternate zoning for
their property must first contact the City Planning Division for a pre-application meeting.
Staff will explain the requirements, the application process, the timeline, and the fees
associated with a PDZ request.
create at
least one
long
G. Application Process. An applicant proposing a development that does not conform with
the existing zoning requirements may apply for a PDZ to be placed on their property. The
application process is as follows:
[2] Application Submission. Developer must submit a completed PDZ Application along
with the required fee. The Application must include a conceptual development plan and
an explanation of the request for alternate zoning.
[3] Public Information Session. Within 30 days of receiving a completed application the
City will schedule a public information session, at which the developer will be responsible
for presenting information about the project and answering questions from the public. The
City will advertise the public information session with a press release to the local media.
The developer is responsible for posting the property at least 5 days prior to the public
information session, with the date, time, and location of the meeting.
[4] Planning Committee. The Planning Committee of the Common Council will
consider the application for a planned development zone, will schedule a legal public
hearing and authorize circulation of the proposal for review and comment from City
Boards/Committees, the Tompkins County Planning Department, and any neighboring
property owners located within 200 feet of the property requesting the PDZ.
[5] Circulation. City staff will circulate the proposed PDZ materials for review and
comment and will forward comments and concerns to the developer and to the Common
Council.
[6] Committee Recommendation. Once the comments have been received the Planning
Committee will consider the proposal along with the comments and will make a
recommendation to the Common Council. The recommendation may include additional
requirements or limitations to either mitigate undesirable impacts or to ensure that the
development conforms with the goals of the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
[7] Conditional Approval. The Common Council will consider the request and may
grant a conditional approval subject to further site plan review approval. Unless otherwise
stated in the resolution, the developer will not be required to return to the Common
Council for further approval, if they meet all of the requirements of the Planning Board
during the site plan review process.
[8] Final Approval. Upon receiving final site plan approval, the Planning Board will also
grant the project a final PDZ designation. The Planning Board will notify the Planning
Division to update the Official City Zoning Map, by designating the proposed area as
“Planned Development Zone District Number___” and the zoning requirements will stand
as established by the Common Council ordinance, unless the PDZ designation is revoked
for failure to comply with the requirements also established by the Common Council
ordinance.
H. Additional Requirements. In any rezoning to a PDZ the Common Council may impose
such conditions or limitations that the Council, in its legislative discretion, may determine to be
necessary or desirable to insure the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan,
including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for
open space and recreational areas, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any
infrastructure to be built as part of the development.
I. Expiration. A developer who receives PDZ approval will have 18 months from the time
that they receive final site plan approval to begin construction of their project. If construction on
the property has not begun in accordance with the approved plan after 18 months, the Common
Council may revoke the PDZ status and the property will return to the previously approved
zoning restrictions. In the case of extenuating circumstances the developer may apply to the
Common Council for an extension of PDZ approval.
If the site plan changes significantly, as determined by the Director of Planning and
Development, it may require re-consideration by the Common Council. The Director of
Planning and Development may determine that the changes are minor and do not require re-
approval.
Section 3. Chapter 325.(“Zoning”), Section § 325-13, is hereby
amended to delete all existing text, which has been relocated to §
325-11 C. Approval; Information to be submitted.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence,
clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then
that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this ordinance.
7) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) December 2013 - Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson
Martell. Minutes were approved.
8) Adjournment
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson McCollister. The meeting
was adjourned at 9:02 p.m.
Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of
notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Recommended Guidelines for Consideration of a PDZ Application
1. In considering an application for a Planned Unit Development district, particularly as
regards the intensity of land use, Common Council shall consider the following questions:
a) What are the proposed land uses in the proposed location? b) Is the PUD a
desirable way to regulate the development of the proposed site? c) What are the
heights of buildings? How do building masses and locations
compare to each other and to other structures in the vicinity?
d) Are there available and adequate transportation systems within the PUD for
pedestrians, bicycles, and motor vehicles, including transit? What is the impact on the
external transportation network?
e) What is the character of the neighborhood in which the PUD is being proposed?
Are there safeguards provided to minimize possible detrimental effects of the proposed
use on adjacent properties and the neighborhood in general?
f) How do the proposed open space and recreational systems function within the PUD
and in relation to the City’s overall open space and recreational systems? g) What is the
general ability of the land to support the development, including such factors as slope,
depth to bedrock, depth to water table and soil type? h) What potential impacts are there
on environmental, historical, and architectural
resources? Does the proposed PUD serve to protect these resources? i) What
potential impacts are there on local government services? j) Is there available
and adequate water service? k) Is there available and adequate sewer service? l)
Other questions as may be deemed appropriate by the Common Council.