HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-12-14 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting AgendaPEDC Meeting
Planning and Economic Development Committee
Ithaca Common Council
DATE: November 12, 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) Public comment and Response from Committee
Members
3) Special Order of Business
a) Presentation – Ithaca Form Based Code
Initiative
4) Announcements, Updates, Reports
a) Comprehensive Plan
b) CIITAP review
5) Action Items – Voting to Send on to Council
a) PAC Mural – Dryden Road Garage
b) Amendment to Mural Approval Process
c) Brindley Street Bridge Replacement
d) Noise Ordinance Reform
e) Disposition of City‐Owned Land at 617 Five
Mile Drive
6) Action Items – Approval to Circulate
a) Cornell Heights Rezoning
7) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) September 2014
b) October 2014 (sent under separate cover)
8) Adjournment
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Chair, Seph Murtagh
Project Organizers
JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director
Megan Wilson, Planning Staff
Megan Wilson, Planning Staff
Addisu Gebre, Bridge System Engineer
Ari Lavine, City Attorney
Nels Bohn, IURA
Jennifer Kusznir, Planning Staff
6:00
6:05
6:20
6:50
7:00
7:05
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:30
9:00
9:05
If you have a disability and require accommodations in order to fully participate, please contact the City Clerk at 274‐6570 by 12:00
noon on Tuesday, November 11, 2014.
TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Megan Wilson, Planner
Frank Nagy, Director of Parking
DATE: October 29, 2014
RE: Dryden Road Parking Garage Mural Project
Earlier this summer, Parking Director Frank Nagy requested that the Public Art Commission
(PAC) seek murals for the Dryden Road Parking Garage. The proposed murals would create a
brighter, more welcoming space for those parking within the garage. In addition, Parking
Division staff have spent a considerable amount of time and resources repainting the walls within
the garage and are concerned that the recently painted walls will quickly become locations for
graffiti again.
As a result of this discussion, the PAC has proposed the Dryden Road Parking Garage Mural
Project, which would feature multiple murals on the various levels of the garage. Because the
proposed murals are expected to significantly reduce ongoing maintenance and graffiti removal
costs, the Parking Division will provide $5,875 to fund the project. The Board of Public Works
approved the Dryden Road Parking Garage as a location for murals on July 14, 2014. In August
2014, the PAC issued a Call for Proposals and received 18 submissions. After reviewing all of
the submissions, the PAC voted to recommend that Common Council select the artwork
submitted by Dan Burgevin, Kellie Cox-Brady, Aindriais Dolan, the Junior Youth Group, Steav
Kim, Eric Lindstrom, Kurt Piller, Margaret Reed, and Nate Waterman, as shown in “Dryden
Road Parking Garage – Recommended Mural Proposals,” to be installed within the Dryden Road
Parking Garage.
Photos of the parking garage as well as images of the recommended proposals are attached for
your review. Staff will attend the November 12th Planning & Economic Development
Committee to discuss the project. If you have any questions, please contact me at (607) 274-
6560 or mwilson@cityofithaca.org.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic 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
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Proposed Resolution
November 12, 2014
Resolution to Select Artwork for the Dryden Road Parking Garage Mural Project
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 by resolution on May 19, 2010, and the City’s Dryden Road Parking Garage was added to
this list of approved locations by the Board on July 14, 2014, and
WHEREAS, the City’s Parking Division has requested that the PAC seek multiple murals for the
Dryden Road Parking Garage to enliven dark areas within the garage while also deterring graffiti
and reducing ongoing maintenance costs, and
WHEREAS, the PAC issued a Call for Proposals in August 2014 and received 18 submissions
for the project, and
WHEREAS, the PAC reviewed all of the submissions at its meetings on September 24, 2014 and
October 22, 2014 and voted to recommend that the Common Council select the artwork
submitted by nine artists, as shown in “Dryden Road Parking Garage – Recommended Mural
Proposals,” to be installed on walls within the Dryden Road Parking Garage, and
WHEREAS, the murals will be visible primarily to those within the parking garage, but the
selected proposals have been distributed for public comment, and
WHEREAS, the project will include nine murals and will be funded through the Parking
Division’s existing 2014 budget, in a total amount not to exceed $5,875; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council selects the submissions of the following
artists for the Dryden Road Parking Garage Mural Project, as recommended by the Public Art
Commission: Dan Burgevin, Kellie Cox-Brady, Aindriais Dolan, the Junior Youth Group, Steav
Kim, Eric Lindstrom, Kurt Piller, Margaret Reed, and Nate Waterman; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the selected artists may proceed with the installation of their murals at their
assigned locations within the Dryden Road Parking Garage upon the execution of an agreement
with the City (as reviewed by the City Attorney).
Dryden Road Parking Garage – Recommended Mural Proposals
October 2014
“Jewels Humans/Diatoms” by Dan Burgevin
“Magnolia grandiflora – Southern Magnolia” by Kellie Cox-Brady
“Ithaca Portal” by Aindriais Dolan
“Do We Still Have Time?” by Junior Youth Group
“Shutterfish” by Steav Kim
“Out to Dry” by Eric Lindstrom
“Severe Tiger Damage” by Kurt Piller
“I Would Like You” by Margaret Reed
“Playful Creatures & Tentacles” by Nate Waterman
Dryden Road Garage Photos
Dryden Road Garage Photos (con’t)
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: October 30, 2014
RE: Request to Amend the Mural Approval Process
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. To facilitate the program, the PAC approached the Board
of Public Works for approval to use City-owned property as sites for mural installations, and the
Board approved several potential sites for inclusion in the PAC’s Mural and Street Art Program.
The Mural and Street Art Program has led to the creation of many impressive murals throughout the
city. As public art has become more visible, the PAC has received an increasing number of
proposals. With a structured program in place and a highly motivated membership, the PAC is able
to work with artists to turn these proposals into works of public art.
The PAC is charged with reviewing and advising the Common Council on all proposals for the
exhibition and display of public art in the City’s public spaces, in public buildings, and on public
facilities and infrastructure. It is also responsible for advising the Common Council on the selection
of acquisitions and donations of public art. The Common Council is ultimately responsible for the
selection of public art. The PAC would like the Common Council to consider amending the
selection process to allow final approval of murals to occur at the committee level. Prior to
Common Council’s selection, the PAC thoroughly reviews each proposal that it receives. Potential
locations are carefully evaluated, and proposed designs are matched with the most appropriate site
to ensure a successful installation for the artist, the City, and the public. The PAC also holds public
comment on each proposal before final selections are passed on as recommendations to the
Common Council. The PAC believes that allowing the Planning & Economic Development
Committee to issue final approval of murals would streamline the selection process while still
ensuring adequate review.
Staff will attend the November 12th Planning & Economic Development Committee meeting to
discus the idea of amending the mural approval process. If you have any questions or comments
prior to the meeting, please contact me at 274-6560 or mwilson@cityofithaca.org.
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Proposed Resolution
November 12, 2014
Resolution to Amend the Approval Process for Murals on City Property
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 PAC’s Mural and Street Art Program has been very successful and has resulted
in the creation of more than 50 murals, including two phases of the 21 Boxes project, and
WHEREAS, the PAC is an advisory commission to the Common Council and among other
responsibilities, recommends pieces of public art for final approval by the Common Council, and
WHEREAS, prior to making a recommendation to the Common Council, the PAC carefully
evaluates each mural proposal and seeks public comment to inform its decision, and
WHEREAS, in an effort to streamline the process, the PAC has requested that Common Council
consider amending the approval process for murals to allow final approval to occur at the
committee level; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby amends the approval process for
murals on City-owned property to allow the Planning & Economic Development Committee to
grant final approval of murals, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Public Art Commission will continue to follow its established review
process of mural proposals prior to making a recommendation to the Planning & Economic
Development Committee.
Planning and Economic Development Committee
November 12, 2014
Bindley Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project Design Alternative Decision-Resolution
WHEREAS, the existing Brindley Street Bridge (“the Bridge ” ) is a single span, single lane multiple steel
girder bridge carrying Brindley Street over the Cayuga Inlet, and
WHEREAS, the Bridge has been posted for a 20 ton weight limit and has a condition rating of 3.9 out of 7,and
WHEREAS, currently, the City of Ithaca and project consultant (Delta Engineers, Architects, & Land
Surveyors, P.C.) are working on Brindley Street Bridge Replacement Project (“the Project”) ,and
WHEREAS, the project involves the replacement of the Brindley Street Bridge with two lane structure with
additional accommodations for bicyclists and pedestrians including necessary approach and intersection
improvement, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca established Capital Project #764 in the amount of $205,000 to cover scoping
and development phases of the project, and
WHEREAS, two possible alternatives for the replacement of this bridge are being considered: Bridge
Alternative 1,which includes replacement of the bridge in its existing alignment and Bridge Alternative
2,which would include the construction of new roadway and bridge on a relocated horizontal alignment that
would connect Taber Street with the West State Street/Taughnnock Boulevard intersection, and
WHEREAS, the alternatives for reconstruction of the Bridnley Street Bridge were presented to the City
Planning Board on September 23, 2014, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board prepared a memo in support of Bridge Alternative 2, which would realign the
bridge with Taughannock Boulevard, stating that this would improve a problematic intersection, and
WHEREAS, the alternatives for reconstruction of the Bridnley Street Bridge were presented to the City Board
of Public Works on September 22, 2014, and
WHEREAS, on October 6,2014, the Board of Public Works voted on a resolution in support of Bridge
Alternative 2, which would realign the bridge with Taughannock Boulevard, and
WHEREAS, Taughannock Boulevard Extension Project was included in “Six Point Traffic Plan” (City of
Ithaca,2001) and recommended as an alternative which has the greatest potential for helping to mitigate traffic
impacts on neighborhoods south of the creek, and therefore be it further
RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby accepts the recommendation of both the Board of Public
Works and Planning Board to proceed with developing a design for Brindley Bridge Alternative 2, which
includes the construction of a new roadway and a new bridge on a relocated horizontal alignment, , and be it
further
RESOLVED, that the Common Council here by authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to proceed with
the design of Brindley Street Bridge replacement on relocated horizontal and new roadway construction (Bridge
Alternative 2).
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850‐6590
COMMON COUNCIL
Joseph “Seph” Murtagh, Second Ward Alderperson
Email: jmurtagh@cityofithaca.org
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Seph Murtagh, Chair
Re: Noise Ordinance Reform
Date: November 5th, 2014
The purpose of this memo is to provide background information regarding a proposal to amend City
of Ithaca Code §240, City of Ithaca Noise Ordinance. In 2013, the City hired consultant Eric M.
Zwerling, M.S. from the Rutgers Noise Technical Assistance Center (Department of Environmental
Sciences, Rutgers ― The State University of New Jersey) to assist the City in revising its noise
ordinance. This effort was initiated in response to noise disputes that had been arising around the
city (especially between commercial and residential uses), as well as complaints about the
vagueness of the City’s current ordinance. Mr. Zwerling visited Ithaca, gathered public input, met
with interested parties, and conducted sound tests at various sites around the city. His main task
was to produce a draft of a new noise ordinance.
To summarize the major changes, the new ordinance would:
*add some new definitions to the code (e.g., “multiuse property,” “commercial use
property”)
*create new standards for the primary Commons and City parks
*establish city‐wide permissible noise levels
*establish special provisions for commercial establishments serving food and alcohol
*add new regulations for unamplified human voice and motor vehicles
Please find enclosed the draft ordinance. If the committee is willing, we will pass this along to
Common Council for possible adoption at our December Council meeting. If you have any
questions, feel free to contact me at 585‐703‐2582.
Sincerely,
Seph Murtagh
An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 240, Entitled “Noise,”
in Order to Incorporate Decibel Standards
ORDINANCE __-2014
WHEREAS, the City’s noise ordinance has long contained a useful, subjective standard for
identifying unreasonable noise; and
WHEREAS, that subjective standard continues to be applicable to many of the noise
determinations made by the City; and
WHEREAS, certain other noise determinations have posed difficult determinations for the City
that could be better resolved under an objective decibel-based standard for identifying
unreasonable noise; and
WHEREAS, the City retained an outside consultant to assist in the drafting of a noise ordinance
which, as presented herein, retains the subjective standard and supplements it with an objective
standard; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Common Council that the subjective standard herein be more
commonly applied by the City, and in particular its police officers, in the first instance, but that
said officers may select to employ the objective standard herein in the first or subsequent
instance, as in their judgment appropriate to a particular situation; 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 finds that, despite the continuing utility of
the City’s subjective standard for identifying unreasonable noise, certain noise determinations,
and particularly those situations of an ongoing or repetitive nature, may be better resolved under
an objective decibel-based standard for identifying unreasonable noise.
Section 2. Amendment. Chapter 240 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca shall be
amended in its entirety so as to read as follows:
§ 240-1Title.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the "City of Ithaca Noise Ordinance."
§ 240-2Purpose.
The purpose of this chapter is to preserve the public health, peace, welfare and good order by
suppressing the making, creation or maintenance of excessive, unnecessary, unnatural or
unusually loud noises which are prolonged, unusual and unnatural in their time, place and use
and which are detrimental to the environment. It is also the purpose of this chapter to allow all
residents of the City to coexist harmoniously in a manner which is mutually respectful of the
interests, rights and obligations of all persons.
§ 240-3Definitions.
[Amended 9-1-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-14]
Unless the context otherwise clearly indicates, the words and phrases used in this chapter are
defined as follows:
ANSI
The American National Standards Institute or its successor bodies.
A-WEIGHTED SOUND LEVEL
The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-
weighted network. The level so read is designated "dBA". All references to "decibel"
shall be presumed to mean "dBA" unless otherwise specified.
COMMERCIAL USE PROPERTY
Any premises containing businesses where sales, offices, professional services, or other
commercial use is legally permitted.
CONTINUOUS SOUND
Any sound that is not impulse sound.
DAYTIME HOURS
The hours between 7:30 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., local time, on any day.
dBA
The A-weighted sound level in decibels.
DECIBEL
A unit for measuring the volume of a sound, equal to the logarithm of the ratio of the
sound pressure of the sound to the sound pressure of a standard sound (0.0002
microbar); abbreviated "dB."
EMERGENCY WORK
Work made necessary to restore property to a safe condition following a public calamity
or work necessary to protect persons or property from an imminent exposure to danger.
IMPULSIVE SOUND
A sound of short duration, usually less than one second, and of high intensity, with an
abrupt onset and rapid decay.
INDUSTRIAL USE PROPERTY
Any premises engaged in the manufacturing, processing, production, or shipping, of
equipment or materials, including storage yards, shall be considered industrial use, where
legally permitted.
MOTOR VEHICLES
Includes but is not limited to automobiles, trucks, buses, mopeds, minibikes and any
other vehicles as defined by the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York, as it
may be amended from time to time.
MULTI-USE PROPERTY
Any distinct parcel of land that is used for more than one category of activity (e.g.,
commercial and residential).
NIGHTTIME HOURS
The hours between 10:00 p.m., local time, on any day and 7:30 a.m. on the following
day.
PERSON
Includes the singular and plural and also any individual; any property owner and/or
lessee; any firm; a corporation; a political subdivision; a government agency, including
any agency of the City of Ithaca; an association or an organization, including but not
limited to officers, directors, employees, agents and/or independent contractors thereof;
or any legal entity whatsoever.
REAL PROPERTY LINE
Means either (a) the vertical boundary that separates one parcel of property (i.e., lot and
block) from another residential or commercial property; (b) the vertical and horizontal
boundaries of a dwelling unit that is part of a multi-dwelling unit building; or (c) on a
multi-use property as defined herein, the vertical or horizontal boundaries between the
two portions of the properties on which different categories of activity are being
performed.
RESIDENTIAL USE PROPERTY
Any property used for human habitation, unless habitation is a condition of employment,
including, but not limited to:
1. Private property used for human habitation;
2. Commercial living accommodations and commercial property used for
human habitation;
3. Recreational and entertainment property used for human habitation;
4. Community service property used for human habitation.
SOUND-AMPLIFYING EQUIPMENT
Any machine or device for the amplification of the human voice, instrumental music or
any other sound. As used in this chapter, "sound-amplifying equipment" shall not include
warning devices on authorized emergency vehicles or horns or other warning devices on
any vehicle used only for traffic safety purposes or authorized fire horns or other
authorized emergency alarms.
SOUND-LEVEL METER
An instrument that conforms to ANSI S1.4-1983 or its successors.
SOUND SOURCE
Any person or thing from which sound is created.
UNREASONABLE NOISE
A level of sound that is injurious or annoying or disturbing to be heard.
§ 240-4Unreasonable noise prohibited.
[Amended 8-4-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-12]
A.
No person shall cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm or recklessly create a risk
thereof by making unreasonable noise or by causing unreasonable noise to be made.
B.
For the purpose of implementing and enforcing the standard set forth in Subsection A of this
section, "unreasonable noise" shall mean any sound created or caused to be created by any
person which either annoys, disturbs, injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace or
safety of the public or which causes injury to animal life or damages to property or business.
Factors to be considered in determining whether unreasonable noise exists in a given situation
include but are not limited to any or all of the following:
(1)
The intensity or volume of the noise.
(2)
Whether the nature of the noise is usual or unusual.
(3)
Whether the origin of the noise is associated with nature or human-made activity.
(4)
The intensity of the background noise, if any.
(5)
The proximity of the noise to sleeping facilities.
(6)
The nature and the zoning district of the area within which the noise emanates and of the area
within 500 feet of the source of the sound.
(7)
The time of the day or night the noise occurs.
(8)
The time duration of the noise.
(9)
Whether the sound source is temporary.
(10)
The existence of complaints concerning the noise from persons living or working in different
places or premises who are affected by the noise.
C.
This section shall not be interpreted to prevent the issuance of permits pursuant to § 240-14 that
will authorize particular sound sources.
D.
"Person" defined. For the purposes of this section:
(1)
For an offense that occurs on any public property where permission was obtained to use that
public property, a "person" shall include the person or persons who obtained permission to
utilize that property for that event.
(2)
For an offense that occurs on private property, a "person" shall include any adult person or
persons who live in or on the property that is involved in the offense.
(3)
For an offense that occurs after granting of a permit pursuant to Article III of this chapter, a
"person" shall include the person or persons who are listed on the permit.
§ 240-5Purpose of article.
The provisions of this Article II complement and supplement the other provisions of this chapter
and shall be interpreted and applied in accordance with and in addition to and not in lieu of
those other provisions. The provisions of this article shall not be interpreted to prevent the
issuance of permits pursuant to § 240-14 that will authorize particular sound sources.
§ 240-6Radios, television sets and similar sound-amplifying devices. Devices for sound
amplification, production and reproduction.
A.
It shall be unlawful for any person anywhere in the City to use or to operate any radio or
receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, television set, any other machine or device for
the producing or reproducing of sound or any other sound-amplifying equipment in a loud,
annoying or offensive manner such that noise from the device interferes with the comfort,
repose, health or safety or members of the public or recklessly creates a risk thereof, within any
building or, outside of a building, at a distance of 25 feet or more from the source of such sound
or interferes with the conversation of members of the public who are 25 feet or more from the
source of such sound.
[Amended 9-1-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-13]
B.
"Person" defined. For the purposes of this section:
[Added 8-4-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-12]
(1)
For an offense that occurs on any public property where permission was obtained to use that
public property, a "person" shall include the person or persons who obtained permission to
utilize that property for that event.
(2)
For an offense that occurs on private property, a "person" shall include any adult person or
persons who live in or on the property that is involved in the offense.
(3)
For an offense that occurs after granting of a permit pursuant to Article III of this chapter, a
"person" shall include the person or persons who are listed on the permit.
§ 240-7 Parties and other social events.
A.
It shall be unlawful for any person in charge of a party or other social event that occurs on any
private or public property to allow that party or event to produce noise in a loud, annoying or
offensive manner such that noise from the party interferes with the comfort, repose, health or
safety of members of the public within any building or, outside of a building, or recklessly
creates the risk thereof, at a distance of 25 feet or more from the source of such sound.
[Amended 9-1-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-13]
B.
For the purposes of this section, a "person in charge of a party or other social event":
[Amended 9-1-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-13]
(1)
That occurs on any public property shall include the person or persons who obtained permission
to utilize that property for that event.
(2)
That occurs on private property shall include the person who owns the premises involved and
any adult person who lives in or on the premises involved in such party or social event.
(3)
Shall include the person who is listed on a permit granted pursuant to Article III of this chapter
with respect to such event.
C.
For any violation of this section where beer is being served from a keg on the premises, the
person to whom the keg is registered shall be presumed to be responsible for the violation, in
addition to any person designated in Subsection A or B above.
§ 240-8 Maximum Permissible Sound Levels.
In addition to prohibitions set forth elsewhere in this chapter, the following
genera le l prohibitions regarding sound levels shall apply in determining unreasonab
noise:
A. No person shall operate or cause to be operated any source of sound from any use
occupancy in such a manner as to create a sound level which exceeds the limits set forth in the
receiving use occupancy category in Table I, when measured at or within the real property line
of the receiving property.
(1) Continuous Sound
The limit in Table I may not be exceeded by any sound source during any three or more
sampling intervals the duration of which shall be no less than one half minute, within any one
hour period. If the total duration of the sound under investigation is less than one and one half
minute, the requirement for a minimum of three measurements shall be waived.
TABLE I
MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE SOUND LEVEL LIMITS
BY RECEIVING LAND USE
dBA
Residential1
7:00 a.m. - 10:00
p.m.
Residential2
7:00 a.m. -
10:00 p.m.
All Residential
10:00 p.m. –7:00 a.m.
Commercial
24 hours
Industrial
24 hours
OUTDOORS
60 65 50 65 75
INDOORS3
50 55 40 55 65
1. Residential receptor not within a commercial or industrial zone, or within 200 feet
of such a zone.
2. Residential receptor within a commercial or industrial zone, or within 200 feet of
such a zone, including but not limited to those zones designated CBD, Waterfront, B,
WDEZ, and Industrial.
3. The indoor permissible sound level limits only apply if the sound source is on or
within the same property as the receiving property, as in the case of a multi-dwelling unit
building or a multi-use property (e.g., sound generated within a commercial unit of a
multi-use property building and received within a residential unit of the same building). In
addition, indoor measurements shall be taken if the property line between the receiving
property and the source property is a common wall, floor or ceiling
(2) Impulsive Sound:
No person shall make, cause, allow or permit the operation of any impulsive source of sound
within any and all property in the city which has a maximum sound pressure level in excess of
eighty (80) dBA, when measured at or within the real property line of the receiver. If an
impulsive sound is the result of the normal operation of an industrial or commercial facility and
occurs more frequently than four (4) times in any hour the levels set forth in Table I shall apply.
B. Sources of Sound on Ithaca Primary Commons or Any City Park
In addition to those specific prohibition set forth in Table I of this Section, no person shall make,
cause, allow, or permit any source of sound on the Ithaca Primary Commons or any city park
that exceeds 70 dBA during daytime hours and 60 dBA during nighttime hours when measured
at a distance of 25 feet or more from the source.
C. Commercial establishments serving alcohol or food, or presenting live or recorded musical
performances
In addition to those specific prohibitions set forth in Table I of this Section, commercial
establishments such as bars, restaurants, cabarets, or performance venues shall conform to the
following standards:
(1) There shall be no sound production device on the exterior of the establishment or inside the
establishment at a distance of less than ten feet to an open door or window towards which it is
oriented, without a permit.
(2) There shall be no outdoor gaming devices.
§ 240-9 Other Prohibited Acts
A. Unamplified human voice.
(1) No person shall make, continue, or cause to be made or continued, any unreasonable noise by
use of the unamplified human voice. The unamplified human voice engaged at conversational
levels shall be exempt from this provision if such sound is not plainly audible beyond 100 feet or
does not infringe on the legitimate rights of others. Raised vocal effort, such as shouting, yelling
or screaming, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm or recklessly
causing a risk thereof or that serves no legitimate purpose, when audible at distances greater
than 100 feet, is prima facie evidence of a violation of this provision. This shall not apply to
spontaneous utterances such as laughter, exclamations of warning, or sporting events.
(2) It shall be unlawful for any person to advertise, promote or sell anything by outcry within any
area of the City zoned for residential uses, including all R and CR zones. The provisions of this
section shall not be construed to prohibit the selling by outcry of merchandise, food and
beverages at licensed sporting events, parades, fairs, circuses and other similar licensed public
entertainment events.
§ 240-9 B. Machinery.
It shall be unlawful for any person to operate or repair any machinery, motor vehicle,
construction equipment or other equipment, pump, fan, air-conditioning apparatus or similar
mechanical device or to engage in any commercial or industrial activity in any manner so as to
create unreasonable noise as defined in § 240-4 of this chapter. In making such determination
with respect to the matters governed by this section, additional factors to be considered shall
include:
A. (1)
The necessity of the work being done.
B. (2)
The ability of the creator of the noise to minimize or reduce the amount of noise created or to
otherwise minimize its adverse effects.
§ 240-10 C. Construction during nighttime hours.
A. (1)
Except for the purposes specified in Subsection B hereunder, during nighttime hours it shall be
unlawful for any person within a residential zone or within 500 feet of a residential zone to
operate construction equipment (including but not limited to any pile driver, steam shovel,
pneumatic hammer, derrick or steam or electric hoist) or perform any outside construction or
repair work so as to create noise. Any designated official of the City of Ithaca shall give a verbal
warning that the violation exists and of the penalties that may result if the violation continues.
B. (2)
This section shall not be deemed to prohibit:
(1) a.
Work of an emergency nature.
(2) b.
Work of a domestic nature on buildings, structures or projects being undertaken by a person(s)
residing in such premises; provided that, if any domestic power tool, including but not limited to
mechanically powered saws, sanders, grinders and lawn and garden tools used outdoors, is
operated during the nighttime hours, no person shall operate such machinery so as to cause
noise within a residential building or across a residential real property boundary where such
noise interferes with the comfort, repose, health or safety of members of the public within any
building or, outside of a building, at 25 feet or more from the source of the sound.
§ 240-10. Motor Vehicles
A. No person shall remove or render inoperative, or cause to be removed or rendered inoperative or
less effective than originally equipped, other than for the purposes of maintenance, repair, or
replacement, of any device or element of design incorporated in any motor vehicle for the
purpose of noise control. No person shall operate a motor vehicle or motorcycle which has been
so modified. A vehicle not meeting these requirements shall be deemed in violation of this
provision if it is operated stationary or in motion in any public space or public right-of-way.
B. No motorcycle shall be operated stationary or in motion unless it has a muffler that complies
with and is labeled in accordance with the Federal Noise Regulations under 40 CFR Part 205.
C No person shall operate any motor vehicle with an engine braking device engaged which does
not have a muffler in good working order.
D. Personal or commercial vehicular music amplification or reproduction equipment shall not be
operated in such a manner that it is plainly audible at distance of 25 feet in any direction from
the vehicle between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:30 a.m.
E. Personal or commercial vehicular music amplification or reproduction equipment shall not be
operated in such a manner that is plainly audible at a distance of 50 feet in any direction from
the operator between the hours of 7:30 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.
§ 240-11 Applicability of section.
Section 240-6, 240-7, 240-8 and 240-9 shall be applied in addition to § 240-4.
§ 240-12 Severability
If any provision of this ordinance is held to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court
of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions of the ordinance shall not be invalidated.
§ 240-12Continuing noise.
It shall be unlawful for any person to make or continue or cause to be made or continued any
loud, unnecessary or unusual noise or sound which shall exceed the permitted noise levels
specified in this chapter. Any designated official of the City of Ithaca may issue a verbal warning
that the violation exists and of the penalties that may ensue.
§ 240-13Horns and alarms. Exceptions
This chapter shall not apply to fire horns or other alarms authorized by the Fire Department or
Police Department and operated in accord with that authorization.
The provisions of this chapter shall not apply to:
A. Sound and vibration emitted for the purpose of alerting people in an emergency or in the
performance of the response to an emergency.
B. Sounds connected with any authorized carnival, fair, exhibition, parade or community
celebration or from any municipally sponsored celebration, event, activity or individually
sponsored event where a permit or other relevant permission has been obtained from the City.
C. The operation or use of any bell, chimes, or other instrument from any church, synagogue,
temple, mosque or school licensed or chartered by the State of New York, provided such
operation or use does not occur during nighttime hours.
D. Sounds created by any government agency by the use of public warning devices.
E. Noise from domestic power tools, lawn mowers, leaf blowers and agricultural equipment
when operated with a muffler between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekdays and
9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. on weekends and legal holidays, provided they produce less than 75
dBA at or within any real property line of a receiving residential property.
F. Noise from snow blowers, snow throwers, and snow plows when operated with a muffler for
the purpose of snow removal.
G. Noise from an exterior burglar alarm of any building or motor vehicle provided such burglar
alarm shall terminate its operation within five (5) minutes after it has been activated.
H. Sounds created by any governmental agency or railroad agency by the use of public
warning devices or created by public utilities in carrying out the normal operations of their
franchises.
§ 240-14 Permit procedures for certain activities.
[Amended 9-1-2004 by Ord. No. 2004-14; 5-4-2005 by Ord. No. 2005-06]
Except as provided for in § 157-8 of the City Code regarding the Ithaca Commons:
A.
Where a sound source exists, is planned, installed or intended to be installed or modified by any
person in a manner that such source will create or is likely to create unreasonable noise or
otherwise fail to comply with the provisions of this chapter, such person must secure a permit
pursuant to Subsection D of this section.
B.
Where any person uses or plans to use any sound-amplifying equipment in such a way that
such equipment is or will be heard outside of any building or vehicle between 10:00 p.m. of any
day and 7:30 a.m. of the next day, such person must secure a permit pursuant to
Subsection D of this section.
C.
Where any person uses or plans to use a public-address system that will make sound outside of
a building, such person must secure a permit pursuant to Subsection D of this section.
D.
Applications shall be submitted at least 72 hours in advance of an event. The application for the
permit shall provide the following information:
(1)
The reasons for such usage, including a demonstration why it is desirable or necessary that the
sound source involved be authorized by a permit pursuant to this section.
(2)
Plans and specifications of the use.
(3)
Noise-abatement and -control methods to be used with respect to the sound source involved.
(4)
The period of time during which the permit shall apply.
(5)
The name of the person(s) who is responsible for ensuring that the activity complies with any
permit issued for it pursuant to this section.
(6)
If required by the party issuing the permit, proof that notification of the application for the permit
has been given to each person reasonably expected to be affected by the noise, the content of
such notification and the manner in which such notification has been given, if the event is not a
community-wide or public event. The notification shall state that any person objecting to the
granting of such permit may contact the appropriate city department to which the application is
being made to express his/her opposition to the granting of the permit.
E.
The application shall be made to the Superintendent of Public Works, or his/her designee, in
connection with construction work on public rights-of-way or in parks; to the Director of Planning
and Development, or his/her designee, for all other construction projects; and for others to the
Mayor or his/her designee. The issuance of permits shall be discretionary, and a permit shall be
issued only where the responsible official determines that such permit is reasonable and
necessary and will allow an activity that is consistent with the general purposes of this chapter,
as stated in § 240-2. When determining if a permit should be issued, factors the official shall
consider shall include but are not limited to the volume of the noise, the proximity of the noise to
sleeping facilities, the time of the day or night the noise occurs, the time duration of the noise,
and the impact of the noise on persons living or working in different places or premises who are
affected by the noise. Any permit granted shall state that the permit only applies to this chapter,
and that § 240.20, Subdivision 2, of the Penal Law of the State of New York, Disorderly
Conduct, provides that “a person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public
inconvenience, annoyance or alarm or recklessly creating a risk thereof: . . . he makes
unreasonable noise."
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[1]]
[1]:
Editor's Note: This ordinance provided for an effective date of 1-1-2014.
F.
In order to further the purposes of this chapter and to facilitate its implementation and
enforcement, the Superintendent of Public Works, the Director of Planning and Development
and the Mayor, or their designees, shall have authority to impose such conditions as they
determine are reasonable and necessary on permits they issue pursuant to this section. Such
conditions may govern factors which include but are not limited to the time and location the
involved sound source may be utilized.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[2]]
[2]:
Editor's Note: This ordinance provided for an effective date of 1-1-2014.
G.
The Superintendent of Public Works, the Director of Planning and Development and the Mayor
or their designees shall provide the Chief of Police with a copy of any permit issued pursuant to
this section.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[3]]
[3]:
Editor's Note: This ordinance provided for an effective date of 1-1-2014.
§ 240-15 Variances The Mayor or his/her designee may grant for a sustained duration an
individual variance from the limitations prescribed in this article whenever it is found, after a
noticed public hearing before the Mayor, or his/her designee and upon presentation of adequate
proof, that compliance with any part of this article will impose an undue economic burden upon
any lawful business, occupation or activity, and that the granting of the variance will not result in
a condition injurious to health or safety.
A. Any variance, or renewal thereof, shall be granted within the requirements of division (A) of
this section and for time periods and under conditions consistent with the reasons therefore,
and within the following limitations:
1. If the variance is granted on the grounds that compliance with the particular
requirement or requirements will necessitate the taking of measures which, because
of their extent or cost, must be spread over a considerable period of time, it shall be
for a period not to exceed such reasonable time as, in the view of the Mayor or
his/her designee, is requisite for taking of the necessary measures. A variance
granted on the ground specified in this division shall contain a timetable for taking of
action in an expeditious manner and shall be conditioned on adherence to the
timetable; or
2. If the variance is granted on the ground that it is justified to relieve or prevent
hardship of a kind other than that provided for in division (1) of this division (B), it
shall be for not more than one year.
B. Any person seeking a variance shall file a petition for variance and a $50 filing fee with the
Mayor or his/her designee. The Mayor or his/her designee shall thereafter conduct a noticed
public hearing in accordance with this section, accept documentary and testimonial
evidence in accordance with accepted administrative hearing procedures, and make a final
decision regarding the granting of the variance.
C. Written notice of the public hearing, the time and place of which shall be set by the Mayor or
his/her designee, shall be mailed by the petitioner at least 10 days prior to the hearing, with
proof of mailing provided to the Mayor at least 8 days prior to the hearing, to:
1. the owners as shown by the records of the County Assessor of lots comprising the
site of the variance and lots within 100 feet, excluding public right-of-way, of the site
of the variance;
2. any neighborhood association if the site of the variance is within the neighborhood
association’s boundaries or within 100 feet of the neighborhood association’s
boundaries, excluding public right-of way.
3. any other person or entity that has filed with the Mayor a request to receive a notice
of the variance proceeding.
D. The notice of hearing shall set forth the name and address of the petitioner, the location of
the site of the variance, that the petitioner has requested a variance from this ordinance, the
nature of the requested variance, and that part of the ordinance that would be-waived if
approved.
E. Following the hearing, the Mayor or his/her designee shall render a written final decision
including findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Mayor or his/her designee shall mail
the decision to all parties of record.
§ 240-16 Penalties for offenses; presumptions.
A.
Any person who shall violate any provision of this chapter shall be punishable by a fine not to
exceed $500 or imprisonment of not more than 15 days, or not more than 100 hours of
community service or any combination of such fine and imprisonment and not less than $100 or
25 hours of community service; provided, however, that a person who shall violate any provision
of this chapter after having been convicted of a violation of any provision of this chapter within
the preceding three years shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed $750 or by imprisonment
of not more than 15 days, or not more than 125 hours of community service or, any combination
of such fine and imprisonment and not less than $200 or 40 hours of community service; and
further provided that any person who shall violate any provision of this chapter after having been
convicted two or more times of a violation of any provision of this chapter within the preceding
three years shall be punishable by a fine not to exceed $1,000 or by imprisonment of not more
than 15 days, or not more than 125 hours of community service, or any combination of such fine
and imprisonment, and not less than $300 or 50 hours of community service. For any penalties
of community service, the court may accept community service from people other than the
defendant whom the court deems appropriate, such as other residents of the premises or others
who choose to accept responsibility for the violation. In assessment of the above penalties,
aggravating factors shall include but not be limited to the presence of the following factors:
(1)
A common source of alcohol such as a keg;
(2)
A live band or disc jockey or other live entertainment;
(3)
Amplified sound emanating from speakers placed or directed outside of the building;
(4)
A charge to gain entrance into the premises or to consume alcohol;
(5)
A violation of § 250.8 (public urination) of this Code on the premises;
(6)
The offense takes place after midnight on weekdays and 1:00 a.m. on weekends and before the
following 6:00 a.m.;
(7)
More than 25 guests on the premises, "guests" being defined for the purposes of this section as
any people who do not reside at the premises;
(8)
Any underage person or persons possessing or consuming alcohol on the premises, each
underage person constituting a separate aggravating circumstance;
(9)
More than one complaint made to the police about the noise, each complaint after the first being
a separate aggravating circumstance.
B.
For purposes of this chapter, for any offense that takes place on private property, if the person
or persons directly responsible for the activity that violates any provision of this chapter cannot
be determined, then all residents of the property on which the activity takes place shall be
presumed to be responsible for the violation.
Section 3. 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 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect June 1, 2015, and in accordance
with law after publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
November 12, 2014
Disposition of City‐Owned Land at 617 Five Mile Drive – Declaration of Lead Agency
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of an approximately 3‐acre,
unimproved sub‐parcel of land located at 617 Five Mile Drive in the Town of Ithaca, NY (part of
tax parcel #31.‐2‐6) through a competitive sealed bid process to New Earth Living, LLC, and
WHEREAS, the proposed sale of more than 2.5 acres of contiguous land is a Type 1 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 than the City of Ithaca Common Council has jurisdiction to 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 an approximately 3‐acre, unimproved sub‐
parcel of land located at 617 Five Mile Drive in the Town of Ithaca, NY (part of tax parcel #31.‐2‐
6) to New Earth Living, LLC.
j:\community development\dispositions\617 five mile drive\reso p&ed 617 five mile dr subparcel disposition ‐ lead agency.doc
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
November 12, 2014
Disposition of City‐Owned Land at 617 Five Mile Drive to New Earth Living LLC –
Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of an approximately 3‐
acre, unimproved sub‐parcel of land located at 617 Five Mile Drive in the Town of
Ithaca, NY (part of tax parcel #31.‐2‐6) through a competitive sealed bid process to New
Earth Living, LLC, and
WHEREAS, 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 more than 2.5 contiguous acres of
land is a Type 1 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, a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) and supporting information
has been provided to the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council and Natural Areas
Commission for review of the proposed action and no comments have been received to
date, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council for the city of Ithaca, acting as Lead Agency, has
reviewed the FEAF prepared by IURA and City planning staff; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council for the City of Ithaca, as Lead Agency in this
matter, adopts as its own, the findings and conclusions more fully set forth in the FEAF,
and be it further
RESOLVED, that the Lead Agency 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.
j:\community development\dispositions\617 five mile drive\reso p&ed 617 five mile dr ‐ neg dec 11‐12‐14.doc
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
November 12, 2014
Disposition of City‐Owned Land at 617 Five Mile Drive to New Earth Living LLC ‐ Authorization
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council is considering sale of an approximately 3‐acre,
unimproved sub‐parcel of land located at 617 Five Mile Drive in the Town of Ithaca, NY (part of
tax parcel #31.‐2‐6) to New Earth Living LLC, and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2013 the Common Council authorized a competitive sealed bid
process to offer for sale a 3‐acre sub‐parcel (City Property), subject to the following terms:
Minimum Price: Fair Market Value to be determined by appraisal to be
conducted after receipt of bids.
Compliance with
Subdivision & Zoning
Regulations:
Purchaser must identify how conveyance of the 3‐acre sub‐
parcel will comply with Town of Ithaca subdivision and zoning
regulations. As the sub‐parcel lacks street frontage, it
appears that consolidation with an existing adjoining parcel
will be required.
Future Use: Open space, agricultural and/or residential use.
Easement: Sale will be subject to retention of a public easement across
the sub‐parcel for access by vehicles and pedestrians to the
City‐owned Southwest Natural Area located east of the
railroad tracks.
Additional Purchaser
Expenses:
Appraisal and lot consolidation expenses.
Disclaimer: City reserves the right to reject any and all bids.
WHEREAS, the Common Council further stipulated that the bid award is subject to completion
of environmental review, including advice of the Natural Areas Commission, and approval by
the Common Council, and
WHEREAS, on May 6, 2014 the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) issued and publicly
advertised an Invitation For Bids for the City Property, and
WHEREAS, one bid at $10,000 was received from New Earth Living LLC to purchase the City
Property, and
WHEREAS, an appraisal was conducted at the expense of the prospective purchaser that
concluded the fair market value of the City Property is $16,875, so the initial bid was rejected,
and
WHEREAS, a revised sealed bid offering that established the minimum acceptable bid at
$16,875 was issued on July 30, 2014, and
WHEREAS, one bid at $16,875 was received from New Earth Living LLC to purchase the City
Property, and
WHEREAS, New Earth Living LLC developed the Aurora Street pocket neighborhood project at
the 500 block of Aurora Street, and
WHEREAS, New Earth Living LLC proposes to consolidate the City Property with an adjacent
parcel located at 619 Five Mile Drive for development of an approximately 30‐unit clustered
residential subdivision known as Amabel, and
WHEREAS, the City Property is proposed to be used as a natural area for storm water
management and a dog park for residents, though final plans for the project may evolve as the
project proceeds through the Town’s approval process, and
WHEREAS, environmental review for sale of this land has been completed, and
WHEREAS, the City Charter requires approval by 3/4s of the Common Council to authorize sale
of real property; now, therefore, be it,
RESOLVED, that the Common Council for the City of Ithaca hereby authorizes disposition of an
approximately 3‐acre, unimproved, sub‐parcel of land located at 617 Five Mile Drive in the
Town of Ithaca NY (part of tax parcel 31.‐2‐6) to New Earth Living LLC at a sales price of
$16,875, subject to the following conditions:
1. Subdivision and consolidation of the sub‐parcel with an adjacent parcel in conformance
with Town of Ithaca land use regulations;
2. Retention of a public easement across the sub‐parcel for access by vehicles and
pedestrians to the City‐owned Southwest Natural Area located east of the railroad
tracks bounding the sub‐parcel; and
3. Purchaser shall be responsible for the following costs in addition to the bid purchase
price:
• Lot subdivision and consolidation
• Sellers closing cost expenses, including legal, title and boundary survey as
applicable.
RESOLVED, that the Mayor, subject to advice of the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to
execute agreements to implement this resolution, including but not limited to a purchase and
sale agreement and conveyance of deed, and be it further
RESOLVED, that expenses of the IURA directly associated with marketing and sale of the
property shall be reimbursed from sale proceeds.
j:\community development\dispositions\617 five mile drive\reso p&ed 617 five mile dr subparcel disposition ‐ action.doc
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC 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 and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: November 4, 2014
Re: Proposal to Amend R-U Zoning District
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to amend the RU zoning
district.
This proposal was previously discussed by this Committee at their meeting on October 8th. At that
meeting staff was directed to circulate a concept memo for comments. Enclosed are comments that
were received from Historic Ithaca. In addition to circulating the memo, staff and Common Council
members met with some of the residents of the neighborhood to discuss the proposed zoning
amendments. Several of the residents expressed a desire to move forward with the proposed
changes, but were concerned that the proposed ordinance would not offer protection for the portions
of the historic district that were not located within the RU zoning district. Enclosed for your
consideration is a draft ordinance. The proposed changes to the RU zoning district are intended to
allow for future development that will preserve the open space, park-like character, and historic
quality of the neighborhood. In addition, staff has agreed to evaluate the entire historic district to
see if there are options to protect the remaining portion of the historic neighborhood that is not
located in the RU zoning district.
If the Committee is in agreement, staff will draft the environmental review of this action and
circulate it along with the draft ordinance and return next month with any comments that are
received. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 274-6410.
Historic Ithaca
212 Center Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
To: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: November 6, 2014
Re: Proposal to Amend R-U Zoning District
Please find comments from Historic Ithaca below for the proposed amendments to the R-U
Zoning District. These comments can be entered into the record.
1. The circulated proposal only addressed changes to the District Regulations Chart. Is the
intent to make changes as well to the text of the Zoning Ordinance itself (Chapter 325 of
the City Code) - e.g., to define or explain new terms)?
2. Under the first section "Permitted Uses 3-8 are restricted to 1 every 500'" This phrasing
seems vague. Is it "1 every 500'" beginning at the property line? Is it measured from the
road curb? From another point? It seems that it needs more specific wording to avoid any
legal confusion. The proposed rule is not sufficiently protective of existing character and
the goal of "low-density." It could encourage the development of larger or consolidated
multiple dwellings designed to maximize size and lot coverage. A more protective
approach would be to allow multiple dwellings (of any sort) only by special permit.
3. Maximum Building Height: Height in Feet is stated as 40. Where does this measurement
begin and end? Is it from the lowest visible portion of the building to the topmost portion
of the roof? Again, some specific wording seems desirable.
4. Maximum Percent Lot Coverage by Buildings "50% of the developable lot area, after the
required setbacks have been calculated, must be retained as green space." Again, how
will this be defined? Green space as interpreted to mean a lawn grass, treed area, planted
area that is strictly unavailable for any vehicle parking?
5. Yard Dimensions - this section does not specify width or length and needs to be
expressed more clearly.
6. In the first page Summary of General Intent: Is the aim of the R-U zone still to provide a
walkable location for student housing development as part of maintaining the open space,
park-like character, and historic quality of the existing neighborhood?
7. Maximum Lot Coverage: Suggest a "sliding scale" where maximum allowable coverage
% decreases as lot size increases (to limit the possibility of massive projects).
"Developable lot area" needs to be defined. What counts as "developable," what doesn't?
General comment: If the City's intent truly is for Cornell Heights to be a "low density
neighborhood," as proposed in the new Comprehensive Plan, allowing new multiple dwellings,
as of right, would appear to be inconsistent with this goal. Density can be gauged not just by the
proximity of buildings, but also by population and intensity of use.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide our comments.
Sincerely,
Christine O’Malley
Preservation Services Coordinator
Historic Ithaca
11/7/2014
Page 1 of 3
ORDINANCE NO. ____
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca that Chapter 325, Zoning, be amended as follows:
1. WHEREAS, in 2013, the City received a development proposal
for a residential project located in the Cornell Heights
historic district, and
2. WHERAS, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, in
their review of the project, found that the allowable
development by the existing zoning largely conflicted with
what the Commission would permit in order to protect the
historic character of the district, and
3. WHEREAS, the Cornell Heights Historic District, unlike
Ithaca’s other Historic Districts, was developed as a
planned “residence park,” with significant amounts of green
space and informal landscaping in the Romantic tradition
intentionally retained around its expansive homes to create
a unique neighborhood identity, and
4. WHEREAS, this neighborhood is also designated as a low-
density neighborhood in the City of Ithaca’s forthcoming
Comprehensive Plan, and
5. WHEREAS, in order to explore alternate zoning options that
would better reflect the desired development for this area,
a working group consisting of staff from the planning,
zoning, and building departments and members of the Common
Council, and
6. WHEREAS, prior to developing a zoning proposal, a walking
tour of the neighborhood was held and the working group
also had meetings with the residents of the area, and
7. WHEREAS, the working group has identified amendments to the
use and area requirements in the RU zoning district that
would allow for responsibly developing this area, while
preserving the original intent for the district and
protecting the important qualities of this neighborhood,
and
8. WHEREAS, in addition to the amendments that have been
proposed to the RU zoning district, residents have
requested that the Common Council also explore options for
11/7/2014
Page 2 of 3
offering additional protections to the entire historic
district, therefore
BE IT NOW ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City
of Ithaca as follows:
Section 1. Section 325-8 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Ithaca, entitled District Regulations, is hereby amended to add
the following underlined language:
Section 325-8: District Regulations Chart, R-U Use District
Permitted Primary Uses
1. One-family detached, semi-detached, or attached dwelling.
2. Any use permitted in R-1 and R-2.
Permitted Uses 3-8 are restricted to 1 every 500’, measured from
the edge of the property line
3. Multiple dwelling.
4. Rooming or boardinghouse.
5. Cooperative household.
6. Fraternity, sorority or group house.
7. Dormitory.
8. Townhouse or garden apartment housing.
By Special Permit of Board of Appeals:
9. Uses 5-7 under R-1*
10. Nursery school, child day care center.
11. Bed and Breakfast Homes and Inns.
* Cemetery and Related Building, Public Utility Structures,
except offices, All School and Related Buildings
Minimum Lot Size (Area in Square Feet)
1. One-family detached dwelling: 10,000
2. One-family semi-detached or two-family dwelling: 15,000.
3. One-family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1-3 units plus
1,500 for each additional unit.
4. Multiple dwelling: 16,500 for first 1-3 units +1,500 for each
additional unit.
5. Fraternity, sorority, or group house: 30,000 (was 25,000).
6. Other uses: 30,000 (was 10,000).
Width in Feet at Street Line
1. One-family detached dwelling: 75.
2. One-family semi-detached or two-family dwelling: 100.
11/7/2014
Page 3 of 3
3. One-family attached dwelling: 125.
4. Multiple dwelling: 125.
5. Fraternity, sorority or group house: 125.
6. Other uses: 125 (was 75).
Maximum Building Height
Number of Stories: 3 (was 4).
Height in Feet – 40.
Maximum Percent Lot Coverage by Buildings
Lot Coverage: 25% (was 30%).
50% of the developable lot area, after the required setbacks
have been calculated, must be retained as green space.
Yard Dimensions
Front Required Minimum – 25’
Side Minimum – 10’
Other Side Minimum – 10’
Rear Minimum – 50’ or at least 25%, but not less than 30’
Section 2. The City Planning and Development Board, the City
Clerk and the Planning Department shall amend the district
regulations chart in accordance with the amendments made
herewith.
Section 3. Severability. Severability is intended throughout
and within the provisions of this local law. If any section,
subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local
law 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 affect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of
notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, September 10, 2014 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
Minutes
Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Graham
Kerslick, Cynthia Brock, and Josephine Martell
Committee Members Absent: Ellen McCollister
Other Elected Officials Attending: None
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Department of
Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic
Development; Debbie Grunder, Executive
Assistant, Department of Planning, Building,
Zoning, and Economic Development, and Nels
Bohn, Director, Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
(IURA); Ari Lavine, City Attorney
Others Attending: Jay Franklin, Tompkins County Assessment
Office
Chair Seph Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:00p.m.
1) Call to Order/Agenda Review
There were no changes to the agenda.
2) Special Order of Business
a) Public Hearing – Lot Coverage Amendment, Decks
Alderperson Kerslick moved to open the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson Martell. Passed Unanimously.
Sheryl Swink, 321 North Albany Street, spoke on the lot coverage
amendments. She thinks it’s something that has been able to do, and it is
taking away. What is the purpose?
Alderperson Kerslick moved to close the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson Brock. Passed unanimously.
b) Special Presentation – Assessments
Jay Franklin, Director of Assessment, Tompkins County Department of
Assessment, provided the Committee with a presentation on the subject of
County assessments. A copy of this report is attached to these minutes.
c) Special Presentation – Conservation Easements in City Watershed
City Attorney Ari Lavine explained what a small group of employees have
been working on. He anticipates a new budget line added for this new
program.
A Conservation Easement is a set of legal restrictions on a piece of property.
There are certain things that are allowed and not allowed. A $30M water
plant is currently being built. This group was inspired by a past Alderperson
Chris Proulx and currently includes Alderperson Donna Fleming; Assistant
Superintendent of Water and Sewer, Erik Whitney; the President of the Land
Trust; and Ari Lavine, Ithaca City Attorney.
We are looking at undeveloped land that feeds our water supply. Current
landowners can voluntary give up a portion of their land for this use.
The land trust will help the City identify the owners who will donate this land.
This will give them a tax break as well as maintain their land as they choose
to even though they’ve donated the property.
This process will not create any additional workload to City employees as the
Land Trust will be responsible for it all.
Process wise, the committee is proposing an annual budget line to support
this project. Departments such as Planning and Development and the
Department of Public Works may have an important part in this.
Alderperson Brock asked for clarification of what budget dollars will be used.
Attorney Lavine responded that this program will be funded by the Water and
Sewer budget which is not the general fund. It will be funded by the revenue
Water and Sewer brings in based on their water and sewer rates collected by
Ithaca City residents.
Alderperson Kerslick asked whether a map of the water shed would be made
available when reviewing each easement. He would like reassurance that the
Water Plant and Water and Sewer employees are definitely on board.
Attorney Lavine stated that Erik Whitney is in full support of this process. It
will be reviewed during the annual budget process and budgeted in the Water
and Sewer budget of the general fund.
The Cayuga Lake Watershed has a huge collection of watershed maps.
JoAnn Cornish stated that some of the property that have road frontage may
also be more valuable entering into these easements.
Cornish also asked whether a transfer of development rights would be
available to these landowners with other municipalities.
Cornish further stated that a few years back there was a capital project
regarding this very topic or similar topic.
It was also clarified that this would be eligible for rate funding.
Lavine encouraged that if Council is interested in agreeing to this and to fund
it, it would be important to pass a resolution outlining the process’ steps.
Alderperson Brock stated it would be an important that the Department of
Public Works be included in the approval process.
JoAnn stated she would be interested to know whether the Land Trust
already has current easements in the Watershed.
3) Public Comment and Response from Committee Members
Michael Culotta, 701 North Tioga Street, spoke in favor of conversation
easements. He stated that these easements will remain on the tax rolls and
these municipalities should be made aware of this since these easements will be
most often in areas outside of the City limits.
Alderperson Brock thanked Sheryl Swink for coming out and speaking on the lot
coverage amendments. She stated the amendments are being made for a better
clarification of definitions.
4) Announcements, Updates, and Reports
JoAnn Cornish stated that there will be a meeting set regarding Cornell Heights
for later this month.
JoAnn Cornish informed the group that she and Sue Ritter have been in touch
and have had multiple conversations, and it was suggested that the Planning
Committee attend the Town Planning Board on September, 25, 2014 at 4:30 p.m.
The members present stated they were in agreement and would check their
schedules.
There will be a public information session on September 18, 2014 in the Borg
Warner Room, Tompkins County Public Library, at 5:00 p.m. to discuss a CIITAP
application for a new housing project on Clinton Street.
Brindley Street Bridge will be presented on September 22, 2014 at 3:45 p.m. in
the Second Floor Conference. Addisu Gebre, Bridge System Engineer, will lead
this meeting.
A public hearing will be held on the amendments to the City noise ordinance in
October. City Attorney Ari Lavine will be attending.
5) Action Items – Voting to Send onto Council
a) Neighborhood Improvement Incentive (NIIF) Application
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed
unanimously.
RESOLUTION: Request for Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Funds for the Fall
Creek Neighborhood Block Party, August 2014
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council established the Neighborhood
Improvement Incentive Fund in 1995 to provide financial assistance to city residents
seeking to improve the quality of life in their neighborhoods, and
WHEREAS, the fund is intended to support residents' interest in community
improvement and to encourage, not replace volunteerism, and
WHEREAS, the funds are intended to be used for projects or events that provide a
general neighborhood benefit and not for the limited benefit of individuals or a select few
residents, and
WHEREAS, activities specified by the Common Council as eligible for the funding
include but are not limited to neighborhood clean-ups, plantings in public places, and
neighborhood events like neighborhood block parties or meetings, and
WHEREAS, neighborhood groups are required to submit a completed application
specifying other project donations, estimated volunteer hours, estimated costs to be
covered by the fund and signatures of residents in the immediate neighborhood, and
WHEREAS, to streamline the process the Common Council has delegated authority to
approve applications to the Planning & Economic Development Committee, and
WHEREAS, each neighborhood group is eligible to receive up to $300 per year as a
reimbursement award payable on the submission of original receipts or invoices for
approved activities, and
WHEREAS, the City cannot reimburse residents for sales tax expenses, and
WHEREAS, on behalf of neighborhood residents, Maria Costanzo and Sara Schaffzin
have submitted an application for reimbursement funds to off-set $189.73 in expenses
from the Fall Creek neighborhood’s annual block party, and
WHEREAS, notice of the block party was circulated throughout the neighborhood, and
the event provided an opportunity for socializing with diverse groups of residents; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Planning and Economic Development Committee approves the
funding request from Maria Costanzo and Sara Schaffzin in the amount of $189.73 for
reimbursement upon presentation of original invoices and/or receipts.
b) Non-substantive Changes to Planned Unit Development Ordinance
An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter
325, Entitled “Zoning,” Article IV, Section 325-12, in Order to
Make Minor Non Substantive Changes Regarding the Common Council
Approval Process for Planned Unit Developments (PUDs)
City Attorney Ari Lavine informed the group what the amendments to this resolution are:
Section 1 should include changes to [8], [9], [11], and [12] as stated in the resolution
being acting on tonight.
Alderperson Brock moved the amendments; Kerslick seconded it. Passed Unanimously
Alderperson Kerslick moved to approve as amended; seconded by Alderperson Brock
seconded it. Passed unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-____
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2014, the Common Council adopted legislation
allowing for the City to establish Planned Unit Development
districts on any property in the City currently zoned for
industrial uses, and
WHEREAS, the adopted Planned Unit Development Ordinance
contained language that would require the Planning Board to
serve as lead agency on the associated environmental review and
require a project to receive a negative declaration of
environmental significance in order to be considered eligible
for a Planned Unit development, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board may not serve as lead agency in all
instances, because, for example, Common Council could choose to
serve as lead agency, and a proposed project may complete its
environmental review even if it receives a positive declaration
of environmental significance as long as it is able to mitigate
the impacts of the environmental impacts, and
WHEREAS, in order to allow for these projects to be eligible for
planned unit developments, the language of the ordinance must be
amended to allow for projects that have adequately completed
environmental review, so that the project can progress through
construction, to be considered by the Common Council for PUD
approval; now therefore
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of
Ithaca that Chapter 325, Article IV, Section 325-12 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca be amended as follows:
Section 1 Chapter §325-12.G.[8], [9], [11], and [12] shall be
deleted in their entirety and replaced, respectively, with:
[1.] Site Plan Review Application - Applicant
submits a site plan review application. The
Planning Board commences the environmental
review process in compliance with the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and
the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
(CEQRA) and conducts the normal site plan
review process. To the extent that the
Planning Board declares its intent to be the
lead agency for the environmental review of the
project and the PUD, the Planning Board
notifies all other involved agencies including
the Common Council.
[2.] RESERVED.
[11.] RESERVED.
[12.] Common Council Consideration of the PUD
- When and if the Planning Board has completed
its environmental review of the project to the
extent required under SEQRA and CEQRA and has
issued a contingent site plan approval, the
project 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.
[13.]
Section 2. 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 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of
notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
c) Lot Coverage Amendment, decks
JoAnn Cornish stated that in practice this is already in place, but has not
been adequately stated in the Code. This is an effort to reduce the
amount of structure on the lots.
She further stated that in the Fall Creek area where the lots are much
smaller than other areas in the City, if the proposed deck being built will
often require a variance.
Declaration of Lead Agency for Environmental Review for –
An Ordinance to Amend The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325,
Entitled “Zoning” To correct inconsistencies so that the area of deck(s), balconies
projecting more than two feet from the face of a building, ramps, and landings, in
addition to buildings and accessory structures, is included in determining the
maximum percentage of lot coverage, a District Regulation requirement.
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; 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 an “Unlisted” Action pursuant to the City
Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review
under CEQR; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that 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 in order to correct inconsistencies pertaining to maximum
percentage of lot coverage.
Determination of Environmental Significance for –
An Ordinance to Amend The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325,
Entitled “Zoning” To correct inconsistencies so that the area of deck(s), balconies
projecting more than two feet from the face of a building, ramps, and landings, in
addition to buildings and accessory structures, is included in determining the
maximum percentage of lot coverage, a District Regulation requirement.
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed
unanimously.
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is considering an amendment to Chapter 325 of the
Municipal Zoning Code in order to correct inconsistencies pertaining to maximum
percentage of lot coverage, and
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the
preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), and
WHEREAS, this zoning amendment has 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 has
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 an “Unlisted” 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 SEAF 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 on the Short Environmental
Assessment Form, 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.
ORDINANCE NO. ____
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed
unanimously.
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, entitled Zoning, be amended
as follows:
Section 1. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-3, entitled, “Definitions and word usage”
is hereby amended to add additional clarifying language to the definitions of “Building”,
“Building area”, and “Structure” to read as follows:
“Building” -Any structure wholly or partially enclosed within exterior walls or within
external and/or party walls and a roof, affording shelter to persons, animals or property,
including porches, (See “structures”.)
“Building Area” – The total area (taken on a horizontal plane at the main grade level)
of the principal building and all accessory buildings, including porches, attached or free
standing decks, balconies projecting more than two feet from a building or structures,
ramps, and/or landings. The total building area shall be used for determining required
yards and maximum percentage of allowed lot coverage but shall not include parking
areas and parking spaces. Pergolas, and terraces and patios shall be exempt from total
lot coverage requirements. However, neither pergolas or terraces and patios above
grade shall be located in a required yard.
“Structure” – Anything constructed or erected on the ground or is attached to another
structure or building. Structures shall not include patios or terraces.
Section 2. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-3, entitled, “Definitions and word
usage” is hereby amended to add the following new definitions for “Deck”, “Pergola”,
“Porch”, and Terrace or Patio”:
“Deck”- a “structure” freestanding or attached to a building or an above ground
swimming pool, consisting of one or more planes constructed of wood, metal, and/or
other materials including a support system of footings and foundation walls and/or,
piers, pilasters, columns, and posts, joists, beams, stringers, floor boards, and/or similar
structural members, and including, any open enclosure, ramps, and/or landings with the
ground and/or an adjourning structure and, if required by building code, balusters and
railings.
“Pergola” – an arbor or passageway for climbing plants with an overhead frame
supporting open lattice work.
“Porch” – a structure projecting from the wall or walls of a building, with a roof, that
may be open to weather or wholly or partially enclosed with walls. A porch shall be
deemed part of the building.
“Terrace or patio” – a level plane or surfaced patio that is less than 18 inches above
grade, without a roof, and not supported by any permanent structure. Terraces and
patios above grade shall not encroach into required yards.
Section 3. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-8A.(10) “Column (10): Maximum
Percentage of Lot Coverage by Building”, be amended to read as follows:
On a lot hereafter used, no greater percentage of total lot area may be covered by
principal and accessory buildings above ground. For this purpose, the area covered by
principal and accessory buildings shall include all porches, attached or freestanding
decks, balconies projecting more than two feet from a building or structure, ramps,
and/or landings. This sum, divided by the total lot area, shall not exceed the maximum
allowed percentage of lot coverage specified in this column.
Section 4. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-18, entitled “Yard regulations” is hereby
amended to add clarifying language to section 325-18A., entitled “Porches”, to read as
follows:
Section 325-18A. Porches and structures.
All porches, attached or freestanding decks, balconies projecting more than two feet
from a building or structure, ramps, and/or landings shall be considered a part of the
building in both the determination of required yards and lot coverage.
d) Amendment to Community Investment Incentive Tax Abatement
Program (CIITAP)
Nels Bohn, IURA Director, explained the changes made to this resolution after
the packet was distributed. It was to clarify that applicants if owning other
properties in the City, it can be checked whether that property is in good
standing.
CIITAP - Municipal Compliance Amendment
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Passed unanimously.
Whereas, the Community Investment Incentive Tax Abatement Program (CIITAP) provides
financial incentives through the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency (IDA) to
encourage appropriate real estate and business investment in the core areas of the City and
redevelopment of environmentally contaminated sites, and
Whereas, the CIITAP program requires a two-step application process whereby applications
must first satisfy minimum City of Ithaca eligibility requirements to advance for consideration by
the IDA, and
Whereas, there are currently three eligibility criteria for a CIITAP application to be approved by
the City for IDA consideration:
1. Project size – project will increase the assessed value of property by at least $500,000;
2. Project density – project will contain a minimum of 3 stories or constitute a major
restoration of an existing building; and
3. Project location – project is located within the Density District or includes a DEC-listed
inactive hazardous waste site, and
Whereas, a CIITAP applicant who is delinquent on taxes, assessments, fees or penalties due to
the City or owns one or more properties with one or more violations of local laws or regulations
should not be eligible for special assistance through the CIITAP program until the applicant and
all properties owned by the applicant come into compliance, and
Whereas, requiring a CIITAP applicant to remedy existing violations or delinquencies as a
condition of eligibility may bring eliminate violations and bring properties into voluntary
compliance without expending enforcement resources; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby amends its Community Investment
Incentive Tax Abatement Program policy to include the following fourth eligibility criteria:
4. Municipal compliance – all each property in the City of Ithaca owned by the applicant
Applicant must be in full compliance with all applicable local laws and regulations,
consent agreements, and orders of the Director of Code Enforcement, and current on all
local taxes, assessments, fees and penalties due to the City, and be it further
RESOLVED, for the purposes of the CIITAP municipal compliance requirement, an the
Applicant shall be deemed to include the following, whether they are natural persons, business
entities, or other forms of organization:
• For a sole proprietorship, the sole proprietor;
• For a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC), all members owning 20% or more of the
companyentity;
• For a partnership, all general partners and all limited partners owning 20% or more of
the equity of the firm; and
• For a corporation, all owners of 20% or more of the corporation and each officer and
director, ; and be it further
RESOLVED, for the purposes of the CIITAP municipal compliance requirement, properties
owned by the Applicant in the City of Ithaca shall include any property for which an Applicant
has an ownership interest of 20% or more.
Alderperson Brock recommended the last Resolved be added to the application.
6) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) August 2014 – Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson
Martell as amended with Alderperson Brock’s recommendations. Passed
unanimously.
A brief conversation took place about the number of projects currently in the
“hoper”. JoAnn agreed to send the group the list of projects.
7) Adjournment
Moved by Alderperson Murtagh; seconded by Alderperson. The meeting was
adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, October 8, 2014 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
Minutes
Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Graham
Kerslick, Cynthia Brock, Josephine Martell and
Ellen McCollister
Committee Members Absent: None
Other Elected Officials Attending: Alderpersons Donna Fleming and George
McGonigal; Mayor Svante Myrick
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Department of
Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic
Development; Jennifer Kusznir, Senior
Economic Development Planner; and Ari
Lavine, City Attorney
Others Attending: Bruce Stoff, Director, Tompkins County
Convention & Visitors Bureau
Chair Seph Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:00p.m.
1) Call to Order/Agenda Review
There were no changes to the agenda.
2) Special Order of Business
a) Public Hearing – Revisions to Noise Ordinance
Alderperson Kerslick moved to open the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson McCollister. Passed unanimously.
Simon Wheeler, of Ithaca, New York spoke on the revisions to the Noise
Ordinance. He noted a number of concerns which were received via email
and were read into the public record by Chair Murtagh and are attached here
as part of the minutes.
Rajit Manohar, East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York spoke on the revisions
to the Noise Ordinance. His comments, which noted a number of his
concerns, were received via email and read into the public record by Chair
Murtagh and are attached here as part of the minutes.
Barbara Lantz, 411 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York spoke on the
revisions to the Noise Ordinance. Her concerns were received via email and
read into the public record by Chair Murtagh and are attached here as part of
the minutes.
Benjamin Piekut and Ann Lewandowski, 417 East Seneca Street, spoke in
opposition of the revisions to the Noise Ordinance. Their comments were
received via email and read into the public record by Chair Murtagh and are
attached here as part of the minutes.
Matthew Clark, 419 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York spoke in
opposition of the revisions to the Noise Ordinance. His comments were
received via email and read into the public record by Chair Murtagh and are
attached here as part of the minutes.
Julie Newhouse, 204 Ridgedale Road, Ithaca, New York spoke in opposition
of the revisions to the Noise Ordinance.
Alderperson Kerslick moved to close the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson Brock. Passed unanimously.
b) Special Presentation – Local Hotel Market
Bruce Stoff, Tompkins County Visitors Bureau, provided the Committee with a
presentation on the subject of the local hotel market. A copy of this report is
attached to these minutes.
3) Public Comment and Response from Committee Members
Walter Hang, 218 Waite Avenue, spoke in opposition to the Cornell Heights
Rezoning. He read from his written comments which are also attached to these
minutes.
Bill Demo, 121 Heights Court, spoke in opposition to the Cornell Heights
Rezoning.
Michael Decatur, 125 Heights Court, spoke in opposition of the Cornell Heights
Rezoning.
Catherine Penner, 121 Kelvin Place, spoke in opposition of the Cornell Heights
Rezoning.
4) Announcements, Updates, and Reports
a) Noise Ordinance Reform
b) CIITAP Review
5) Action Items – Approval to Circulate
a) Cornell Heights Rezoning
Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Passed
unanimously.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & ECONOMIC 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 and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: September 30, 2014
Re: Proposal to Amend R-U Zoning District
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to make amendments to the RU Zoning
District.
For several months a working group of Common Council, Planning, and Building Staff members has been meeting
to discuss the RU Zoning District. Recent development proposals have highlighted the fact that the allowable build
out according to the existing zoning is in conflict with the desire to maintain the historic qualities and existing
character of this neighborhood. This particular district, unlike Ithaca’s other historic districts, was developed as a
planned “residence park,” with significant amounts of informal landscaping and green space in the Romantic
tradition, intentionally included around its substantial homes to create a unique neighborhood identity and is zoned
as a low density neighborhood in the new comprehensive plan. The working group has begun to identify use and
area requirements for responsibly developing the area that will uphold these intents and preserve these important
qualities.
The following amendments in red are the proposed amendments to the RU Zoning District:
General Intent
The intent of the amendments to the RU Zoning District are to allow for future development that will preserve the
open space, park like character and historic quality of the existing neighborhood and will create a natural transition
to the adjacent R-2b Zoning District.
Permitted Primary Uses
1. One-family detached, semi-detached or attached dwelling.
2. Any use permitted in R-1 and R-2.
Permitted Uses 3-8 are restricted to 1 every 500’
3. Multiple dwelling.
4. Rooming or boardinghouse.
5. Cooperative household.
6. Fraternity, sorority or group house.
7. Dormitory.
8. Townhouse or garden apartment housing.
By Special Permit of Board of Appeals:
9. Uses 5-7 under R-1 *
10. Nursery school, child day care center.
11. Bed and Breakfast Homes and Inns.
* Cemetery and Related Building, Public Utility Structures, except offices, All School and Related
Buildings)
Minimum Lot Size
Area in Square Feet
1. One-family detached dwelling: 10,000
2. One-family semi-detached or two-family dwelling: 15,000.
3. One-family attached dwelling: 16,500 for first 1-3 units plus 1,500 for each additional unit.
4. Multiple dwelling: 16,500 for first 1-3 units +1,500 for each additional unit.
5. Fraternity, sorority or group house: 30,000 (was 25,000).
6. Other uses: 30,000 (was 10,000).
Width in Feet at Street Line
1. One-family detached dwelling: 75.
2. One-family semi-detached or two-family dwelling: 100.
3. One-family attached dwelling: 125.
4. Multiple dwelling: 125.
5. Fraternity, sorority or group house: 125.
6. Other uses: 125 (was 75).
Maximum Building Height
Number of Stories- 3 (was 4).
Height in Feet – 40.
Maximum Percent Lot Coverage by Buildings
Lot Coverage 25% (was 30%).
50% of the developable lot area, after the required setbacks have been calculated must be retained as green
space.
Yard Dimensions
Front Required Minimum - 25’
Side Minimum – 10’
Other Side Minimum – 10’
Rear Minimum – 50’ or at least 25%, but not less than 30’
If the Committee is in agreement with this concept, staff will circulate a concept memo and will return next month
with any comments that are received. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 274-6410.
6) Discussion
a) Housing and Development in Ithaca
Alderperson Kerslick mentioned he would like the City to look at owner-occupied
housing losing out to rentals because it is so lucrative.
Change zoning in the R1 and R2 to owner-occupied only with an allowance for
accessory apartments. This will enable healthy mix of renters and owner
occupied.
JoAnn Cornish stated there are a number of other areas or topics in the works.
To name a few: Collegetown construction is on the increase, we are looking at a
parking system for all of Bell Sherman and Collegetown.
Maintaining communication between the Board of Public Works (BPW), TCAT,
and Collegetown business owners is crucial.
Permanent pedestrian routes are also being discussed.
7) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) September 2014
The September 2014 will not available for review. They will be voted on at the
next meeting.
8) Adjournment