Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-09-16 Planning & Economic Development Meeting AgendaPEDC Meeting  Planning and Economic Development Committee  Ithaca Common Council        DATE: March 9th, 2016  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: Chain Works Planned Unit  Development Zone    4) Announcements, Updates, Reports  a) IURA Consolidated Plan    5) Action Items (Voting to send on to Council)  a) Brindley Street Bridge Replacement: Lead  Agency Decision  b) Six‐Mile Creek Watershed Conservation  Easement   c) Proposed Small Revisions to PUD  Ordinance – sent under separate cover    6) Action items (Voting to Circulate)  a) (TM)PUD Application: Cherry Street Arts  Space  b) Incentive Zoning for Affordable Housing  c) Waterfowl Ordinance    7) Discussion  a) Community Investment Incentive Tax  Abatement Program (CIITAP) – next steps  b) Backyard Chickens    8) Review and Approval of Minutes  a) February 2016    9) Adjournment  No    No        No        No      Yes    Yes    Yes        Yes    Yes  Yes      No    No      Yes    Yes  Seph Murtagh, Chair            Lisa Nicholas, Planning Staff        Lynn Truame, IURA      Addisu Gebre, Bridge Engineer    Ari Lavine, City Attorney    JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director        Lisa Nicholas, Planning Staff    Lynn Truame, IURA  Josephine Martell, Common Council      Nels Bohn, IURA    Josephine Martell, Common Council  6:00    6:05        6:15        6:40      6:45    7:00    7:20        7:30    7:40  8:10      8:30    8:50      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, March 8th 2016.   Chain Works District Design Standards - 1 Applicant’s Note: The following draft Design Standards as well as the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Planned Development Zone (PDZ) Regulations are offered as part of the Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement (DGEIS) for adequacy and proposed by the Applicant to be considered by the City Common Council and Town Board when establishing the PUD and PDZ to create the Chain Works District. The Design Standards, PUD and PDZ are to deemed DRAFT and subject to revision under reviews by the City Common Council and Town Board, respectively. Draft Chain Works District Form and Use Regulations SCHEDULE B: DESIGN STANDARDS Town of Ithaca Planned Development Zone No. XX City of Ithaca Planned Unit Development Zone No. 1 Draft Revision: February 29, 2016 2 This Page Left Intentionally Blank Contents A - Introduction 4 B - Applicability 4 C - Design Review and Approval Required 4 D - Definitions 5 E - Sub Areas 10 1 – Natural Area / CW1 10 2 – Neighborhood General Area / CW2 12 3 – Neighborhood Central Area / CW3 11 4 – Manufacturing Area / CW4 11 F - Parking 12 G - Public Lighting 13 H - Thoroughfare Assemblies 15 I - Signage 23 J - Building Precedents 27 4 TO WATERLOO (42 MILES) CAYUGA LAKE UV34 UV34 UV VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS 930F V13 TO AUBURN (37 MILES) TO CORTLAND (32 MILES) UV 96 UV89 UV79 UV 13 TO WATKINS GLEN (24 MILES) CORNELL UNIVERSITY UV366 TOWN OF DRYDEN UV96B UV96B UV79 UV13A UV13 CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT ITHACA COLLEGE TO WHITNEY POINT (32 MILES) TO HORSEHEADS (28 MILES) TO WAVERLY (36 MILES) PROJECT LOCATION: CITY/TOWN OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY NEW YORK A - Introduction The following establishes the form and use regulations for the Chain Works District. “Figure 2 Chain Works District Location Map” on page 4 depicts the Chain Works District boundary and its location within the Town and City of Ithaca. The purpose of this document is to describe design standards intended to create a vibrant and walkable mixed-use district in a way that respects and enhances the form and character of the industrial heritage of this place. Figure 2 Chain Works District Location Map B - Applicability a) No Building or part thereof within the Chain Works District shall be erected, moved, or altered on its exterior unless in conformity with the regulations herein. b) In the event that provisions of the Chain Works District Form and Use Regulations conflict with other sections of the City Municipal Code or the Town Municipal Code, the Chain Works District Form and Use Regulations shall prevail. c) In cases of nonconforming uses, buildings, and lots, refer to Chapter 325 Zoning, Article VI for the City and Chapter 270, Article XXV of the Town. C - Design Review and Approval Required No building permit shall be issued or structure or Building shall be erected, and no Building or structure shall be enlarged or extended until site plan approval has been obtained. Site plan approval including the design review process set forth in the appropriate municipal code where the work is being proposed is required in the following situations: a) all new construction of Buildings or site infrastructure b) renovation and/or rehabilitation of existing Buildings involving a change of use including initial conversion from vacant industrial uses c) use changes not reflected in the Conceptual Site Layout Plan Chain Works District Design Standards - 5 Design review and site plan approval does not apply to interior work not visible from the Public Way, exterior paint colors, changes to existing windows or doors, or the addition of windows or doors to existing buildings in a pattern consistent with the existing windows and doors when deemed appropriate by the Director of Planning. D - Definitions The definitions of City of Ithaca Zoning Chapter §325-3 shall control in the portions of land lying within the City of Ithaca, except where a definition is provided below. The definitions of Town of Ithaca Zoning Chapter §270-5 shall control in the portions of land lying within the Town of Ithaca, except where a definition is provided below or otherwise specified herein. (1) Arcade A private Frontage conventional for retail use wherein the Facade is a colonnade supporting habitable space that overlaps the Sidewalk, while the Facade at Sidewalk level remains at the Frontage Line. (2) Blank Wall Length of Blank Wall area means a portion of the exterior Facade of the building that does not include: windows or doors; columns or pilasters; other articulation greater than 12 inches in depth; or a substantial material change to the Facade (paint color is not considered a substantial change). Maximum length of Blank Wall applies in both a vertical and horizontal direction on street-facing Facades. The shortest dimension of any rectangular area of Blank Wall shall not exceed the maximum length as indicated for each Sub Area. (3) Buffer An area of natural or maintained plantings and without primary Buildings, except as described below: a) Accessory Buildings b) Thoroughfares (4) Building A structure having a roof supported by columns or by walls and intended for shelter, housing, protection or enclosure of persons, animals or property including porches and open air pavilions. (5) Building Height Building Height is regulated using number of Building Stories. (6) Building Story The vertical distance from top to top of two successive finished floor surfaces; and, for the topmost story, from the top of the floor finish to the top of the ceiling joists or, where there is not a ceiling, to the top of the roof rafters. Blank Wall Blank Wall Blank Wall 6 (7) Building Projections No part of any building shall encroach into any Setback, except as described below: a) Overhanging eaves and bay windows may project up to 2 feet into any required Setback b) Awnings and balconies may extend up to 5 feet into any required Setback provided that such extension is at least 2 feet from the vertical plane of any edge of vehicular street. c) Arcades may overlap Sidewalks. (8) Design Speed The velocity at which a Thoroughfare tends to be driven without the constraints of signage or enforcement. There are four ranges of speed: Very Low: (below 20 MPH); Low: (20-25 MPH); Moderate: (25-35 MPH); High: (above 35 MPH). Lane width is determined by desired Design Speed. (9) Entry Door A public door or entry providing both ingress and egress, operable to residents or customers, is required to meet the street-facing entrance requirements. Additional entrances off another street, pedestrian area, parking area, or internal parking area are permitted. The street-facing entrance spacing requirements must be met for each building. (10) Facade The exterior wall of a building that is set along a Frontage Line. (11) Facade Length A measurement of the distance along an uninterrupted Facade without any changes in direction greater than 2 feet deep by 8 feet wide running continuously from the ground plane through the roof. (12) Frontage The area between a building Facade and the Thoroughfare, inclusive of its built and vegetated components. (13) Frontage Line An imaginary line bordering a public Thoroughfare. Facades facing Frontage Lines are visible from the Public Way and are therefore more regulated than the Facades facing other directions. (14) Front Porches If used: a Front Porch must be a minimum of 6 feet deep, not including steps. a Front Porch must cover at least 25% of the street-level story facade width of the unit that it serves. a Front Porch must be roofed and edged by balustrades (railings) or low walls, and posts that extend up to the roof. The entire front porch must be of open air construction with all exterior faces being at least 50% open. Chain Works District Design Standards - 7 (15) Front Stoops 6’ min If used, a Front Stoop shall be a maximum of 6 feet deep, not including steps, and a maximum of 8 feet wide. A Front Stoop may be roofed but not enclosed. 6’ max 5’ max (16) Glazing When required, Glazing is the minimum percentage of transparent windows and doors that must cover a street-level story’s street-facing Facade. (a) Glazing is considered transparent where it has a transparency higher than 80% and external reflectance of less than 15%. (b) Glazing is measured between 2 and 12 feet above the abutting sidewalk. 12’ 2’ (17) Liner Building A building specifically designed to mask a Parking Space, a Parking Lot or a Parking Structure from a Frontage. (18) Mixed-Use Multiple uses within the same building through superimposition or adjacency, or in multiple buildings by adjacency. Min 33% Gl a z i n g Se t b a c k Se t b ac k 8 (19) Open Space Land intended to remain undeveloped; it includes hardscapes within a Public Way such as Plazas and includes park pavilions or maintenance sheds. (20) Parking Area Resident, employee, customer and/or public parking: all or part of a lot or structure devoted to the parking of motor vehicles for occupants of or visitors to adjoining or nearby buildings. (21) Parking Setback A line which extends vertically and parallel to the street, in front of which parking on the site is not allowed. All surface parking areas shall be located behind the parking setback line the distance indicated in each Sub Area. The parking setback line does not apply to on-street parking or to Parking Structures. (22) Parking Space An area for the temporary parking of a motor vehicle 153 +/- square feet (SF) in size exclusive of Parking Area circulation. “Table 1 Example Parking Space sizes” on page 8 shows typical minimum sizes for a Parking Space. Other sizes may be allowed by the Planning Board. Table 1 Example Parking Space sizes 45-90 degree Parking Space 8.5 ft x 18 ft 153 SF Parallel Parking Space 7 ft x 22 ft 154 SF (23) Parking Structure A building or part thereof containing one or more Building Stories of Parking Spaces which is designed specifically for vehicle parking (24) Pedestrian Shed An area that is centered on a common destination. Its size is determined by the average walking distance of 1/4 to 1/2 mile or approximately a 5 to 10 minute walk. (25) Planning Board Either the Town or City of Ithaca Planning Board with jurisdiction over the land being developed (26) Plaza An outdoor area with a combination of hardscape and softscape dedicated for public use. (27) Public Way A Thoroughfare that has been deeded, dedicated or otherwise permanently appropriated to the public for public use and which has a clear width and height of not less than 10 feet. (28) Recessed Entry A functioning entry that is set back a minimum of 12 inches from the front Facade of the building. (29) Row House A residential structure composed of three or more attached modules with shared sidewalls, the facade of each module measuring no more than 25-feet in length. Modules within a row house may consist of a single dwelling unit or may contain multiple vertically-stacked dwelling units. Each module must have at least one street-facing functional entry. (30) Setback The distance between a Thoroughfare and a Facade, or between a Facade and an imaginary line equidistant between two Facades, or between a property line and a Facade, whichever is applicable. Chain Works District Design Standards - 9 (31) Sidewalk The portion of the Thoroughfare intended for the use of pedestrians. Unless the Thoroughfare has been designated primarily for pedestrian use the Sidewalk is that part of a Thoroughfare on the side intended for the use of pedestrians, improved by hard smooth surfacing. (32) Sub Area An area with a defined boundary line separating portions of the Chain Works District intended for differing intensities of development and uses (33) Thoroughfare A way for use by vehicular and pedestrian traffic and to provide access to Buildings, Plazas, and Open Spaces, consisting of vehicular lanes and the Frontage. (34) Thoroughfare Length The shortest length of Thoroughfare between two intersections measured at the Frontage Line. 10 – Chain Works District Design Standards E – Sub Areas 1 – Natural Area / CW1 The following Sub Areas are defined with their permitted uses and applicable definitions to be as of right: Figure 1 Sub Areas NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER SUB AREA (CW3) TOTAL ZONE AREA - 1,730,639 GSF / 39.73 ACRES +/- INDUSTRIAL SUB AREA (CW4) TOTAL ZONE AREA - 447,340 GSF / 10.27 ACRES +/- (1) Natural Area / CW1 These areas consist of lands approximating or reverting to a wilderness condition, including lands unsuitable for development due to topography, hydrology, or vegetation. The CW1 Sub Area is intended to permanently protect areas from development that would damage the contiguity, quality, character, and ecological function of natural areas. These are permanently preserved as natural, open space with the following permitted uses: passive recreation, stormwater management facilities which may consist of constructed wetland or other water cleansing and stormwater practices, gardens, walking trails / recreational trails that may provide pedestrian connectivity to other zones, and other alike or corresponding non-intrusive uses. New structures are only allowed if they serve as auxiliary to a permitted use. Sheds, park restrooms, pavilions, gazebos, visitor centers, or affiliated buildings needed to maintain this area, are examples of permitted auxiliary structures allowed in the Natural Area / CW1. I – Site a. Building Coverage Rate The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area may not exceed 2% of the total size of the Sub Area boundary. Individual buildings shall not exceed 2,000 sf. b. Maximum Building Density Maximum density is measured by the gross square footage of building floor area. The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area shall not exceed 20,000 sf. c. Building Setbacks and Separations The network of private Thoroughfares to be developed will define Frontages for the existing and proposed buildings. Building design and placement will also be determined by Setback requirements set forth below: CW2 CW1 CW3 CW4 CW1 NATURAL SUB AREA (CW1) TOTAL ZONE AREA - 1,039,404 GSF / 23.86 ACRES +/- NEIGHBORHOOD GENERAL SUB AREA (CW2) TOTAL ZONE AREA - 922,274 GSF / 21.17 ACRES +/- Chain Works District Design Standards - 11 Table ** Sub Area CW1 Building Setbacks Front 5 ft. minimum Side None Rear None d. Required Buffer Areas Not applicable for this Sub Area. e. Public Planting Areas Not applicable for this Sub Area. II – Buildings a. Allowable Uses Permitted Uses within the CW1 Sub Area include the following: • Public Passive Recreation; • Public and semi-Public Institution whose purpose is environmental education; • Public Pavilions; • Sheds related to the maintenance of the Sub Area. b. Building Heights No Building shall exceed one Building Story. Story height shall not exceed 15 feet in height. c. Maximum Façade Length Not applicable for this Sub Area. d. Minimum Frontage Build Out Not applicable for this Sub Area. e. Functional Entries Not applicable for this Sub Area. f. Glazing Requirements Not applicable for this Sub Area. g. Maximum Blank Wall Not applicable for this Sub Area. 12 – Chain Works District Design Standards (2) Neighborhood General Area / CW2 These areas will consist of primarily residential buildings. They may have a wide range of building types including detached single family, multi-family, and rowhouses. Setbacks and landscaping are variable. Streets with curbs and sidewalks define medium-sized blocks. Development is limited to 4 stories in height along the NYS Route 96B corridor to match existing adjacent residential zoning, an additional 1-2 stories are allowed on the downhill side west of NYS Route 96B consistent with the adjacent CW3 zone. NYS building codes will dictate side yard setbacks to allow for rowhouses (e.g. zero lot line ). I – Site a. Building Coverage Rate The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area may not exceed 60% of the total square footage of the Sub Area boundary. b. Maximum Building Density Maximum density is measured by the gross square footage of building floor area including multiple stories. The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area shall not exceed 700,000 sf. The aggregate gross square footage of all Sub Areas combined shall not exceed 1,706,150 sf. c. Building Setbacks and Separations The network of Thoroughfares to be developed will define Frontages for the existing and proposed buildings. Building design and placement will also be determined by Setback requirements set forth below: Table ** Sub Area CW2 Building Setbacks Front 5 ft. minimum and 18 ft. maximum Side NYS Building Codes for fire separation Rear NYS Building Codes for fire separation d. Required Buffer Areas Not applicable for this Sub Area. e. Public Planting Areas Public Plantings including street trees and plantings within the Public Way should comply with the latest publication entitled Recommended Urban Trees: Site Assessment and Tree Selection for Stress Tolerance by the Urban Horticulture Institute Department of Horticulture Cornell University Ithaca, New York. Provide street trees on both sides of at least 60% of new and existing streets within the project between the vehicle travel way and walkway, at intervals averaging no more than 40 feet (excluding driveways and utility vaults). II – Buildings a. Allowable Uses Chain Works District Design Standards - 13 Permitted Uses within the CW2 Sub Area include the following: • Any Residential use as defined by The Building Code of New York State; • Nursery school, child day care center; • Bed and Breakfast Homes and Inn; • In-home occupations with no more than 2 employees; • Neighborhood Scale Retail (< 2,500 sf); • Adult uses are excluded. b. Building Heights The CW2 Sub Area shall allow Buildings of up to four Building Stories with up to 2 additional stories allowed below the uphill grade’s 1st story. Story height of any new building shall not exceed 18 feet in height. c. Maximum Façade Length The Maximum Façade Length is 120 feet. d. Minimum Frontage Build Out No Building including Parking Areas shall be constructed in such a way that it would prevent the future build out of the Frontage of up to 50% of Thoroughfare length. e. Functional Entries Functional public Entry Doors to the Buildings must occur at an average of 85 feet or less along nonresidential or Mixed-Use buildings or blocks. f. Glazing Requirements The minimum glazing requirements is 30%. g. Maximum Blank Wall The maximum length for blank walls is 8 feet. (3) Neighborhood Center Area / CW3 These areas will consist of higher density mixed-use buildings that accommodate retail, office, and other commercial uses, rowhouses, apartments, and industrial uses. Adult uses are excluded. It has a tight network of streets, with sidewalks, and buildings set close to the sidewalks. Open spaces consist of Plazas in addition to green space. The CW3 Sub Area will limit development to 6 stories, and allow for an additional 1-2 stories on the downhill side. The NYS building codes will dictate building separation distances. Chain Works District Design Standards - 15 I – Site a. Building Coverage Rate The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area may not exceed 80% of the total size of the Sub Area boundary. b. Maximum Building Density Maximum density is measured by the gross square footage of building floor area including multiple stories. The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area shall not exceed 900,000 sf. The aggregate gross square footage of all Sub Areas combined shall not exceed 1,706,150 sf. c. Building Setbacks and Separations The network of Thoroughfares to be developed will define Frontages for the existing and proposed buildings. Building design and placement will also be determined by Setback requirements set forth below: Table ** Sub Area CW3 Building Setbacks Front 0 ft. minimum and 12 ft. maximum Side NYS Building Codes for fire separation Rear NYS Building Codes for fire separation d. Required Buffer Areas • A minimum 30 foot Buffer from the property line, as located prior to January 1, 2016, is required for all primary structures adjacent to existing residential uses located outside the Chain Works District. • Accessory structures can be located within the required Buffer but must conform to required front, rear and side yard setbacks. • Vegetation within the required Buffer must be permanently maintained in a healthy growing condition at all times. e. Public Planting Areas Public Plantings including street trees and plantings within the Public Way should comply with the latest publication entitled Recommended Urban Trees: Site Assessment and Tree Selection for Stress Tolerance by the Urban Horticulture Institute Department of Horticulture Cornell University Ithaca, New York. Provide street trees on both sides of at least 60% of new and existing streets within the project between the vehicle travel way and walkway, at intervals averaging no more than 40 feet (excluding driveways and utility vaults). II – Buildings a. Allowable Uses Permitted Uses within the CW3 Sub Area include the same as CW2, excluding detached dwellings, and including the following: • Assembly use; • Business use; • Educational use; • Factory use; 16 • Mercantile use; • Utility or Storage; • Adult uses are excluded. All uses as defined by The Building Code of New York State. b. Building Heights The CW3 Sub Area shall allow Buildings of up to six Building Stories with up to 2 additional stories allowed below the uphill grade’s 1st story except within 100 feet of NYS Route 96B. All buildings within a 100 foot buffer of NYS Route 96B shall be limited to four Building Stories with up to 2 additional stories allowed below the uphill grade’s 1st story. Story height of any new building shall not exceed 24 feet in height. c. Maximum Façade Length The Maximum Façade Length is 120 feet. d. Minimum Frontage Build Out No Building including Parking Areas shall be constructed in such a way that it would prevent the future build out of the Frontage of up to 70% of Thoroughfare length. e. Functional Entries Functional public Entry Doors to the Buildings must occur at an average of 85 feet or less along nonresidential or Mixed-Use buildings or blocks. f. Glazing Requirements The minimum glazing requirements is 30% for non-retail uses and 70% for retail uses. g. Maximum Blank Wall The maximum length for blank walls for new building construction within the CW3 Sub Area is 20 feet. (4) Manufacturing Area / CW4 These areas will consist of industrial uses in 2-4 story buildings. Adult uses are excluded. I – Site a. Building Coverage Rate The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area may not exceed 90% of the total size of the Sub Area boundary. b. Maximum Building Density Maximum density is measured by the gross square footage of building floor area including multiple stories. The total area of all Buildings within the Sub Area shall not exceed 300,000 sf. The aggregate gross square footage of all Sub Areas combined shall not exceed 1,706,150 sf. c. Building Setbacks and Separations Chain Works District Design Standards - 17 The network of private Thoroughfares to be developed will define Frontages for the existing and proposed buildings. Building design and placement will also be determined by Setback requirements set forth below: Table ** Sub Area CW4 Building Setbacks Front In accordance with the NYS Building Code Side NYS Building Codes for fire separation Rear NYS Building Codes for fire separation d. Required Buffer Areas Not applicable for this Sub Area. e. Public Planting Areas Plantings within parking areas should comply with the latest publication entitled Recommended Urban Trees: Site Assessment and Tree Selection for Stress Tolerance by the Urban Horticulture Institute Department of Horticulture Cornell University Ithaca, New York. Provide shade by planting one (1) tree per ten (10) parking spaces in islands within the parking area. II – Buildings a. Allowable Uses Permitted Uses within the CW4 Sub Area are as follows: • Assembly use; • Factory use; • Utility or Storage; • Adult uses are excluded. All uses as defined by The Building Code of New York State. b. Building Heights The CW4 Sub Area shall allow Buildings of up to four Building Stories with up to 2 additional stories allowed below the uphill grade’s 1st story. Story height of any new building shall not exceed 30 feet in height. c. Maximum Façade Length Not applicable for this Sub Area. d. Minimum Frontage Build Out Not applicable for this Sub Area. e. Functional Entries Not applicable for this Sub Area. f. Glazing Requirements 18 The minimum glazing requirements is 70% for retail uses. g. Maximum Blank Wall Not applicable for this Sub Area. Chain Works District Design Standards - 19 F - Parking (1) General standards for all off-street Parking Areas, driveways and curb cuts. a) All parking must occur in approved Parking Spaces, Parking Areas or Parking Structures meeting the general standards herein. Parking is specifically not permitted on lawns, sidewalks, or other spaces not developed as a Parking Space. b) Clear boundaries. All Parking Areas, including associated driveways and vehicle maneuvering areas, shall have clearly defined boundaries. A “clearly defined boundary” shall mean, at a minimum, the existence of a distinct edge to the material used to pave the parking area, such that the yard area where parking is permitted is clearly distinguished from the yard area where parking is not permitted. Where approved parking areas are contiguous with sidewalks or other paved areas, there shall be a minimum four-inch-high curb or other equivalent continuous permanent barrier separating the Parking Area from other paving, except as required to allow for accessibility. c) Physical character of Parking Spaces. Each Parking Space shall be even-surfaced and internally unobstructed by structures, walls, landscape elements or other obstructing features, except that low curbs or wheel stops may be located within or adjoining a space if they do not impede vehicular access to or egress from the Parking Space. Acceptable surface materials include crushed stone, brick, concrete, asphalt, permeable pavement, or similar materials. d) Drainage. All newly constructed or enlarged Parking Areas, including associated driveways and vehicle maneuvering areas, shall have adequate provisions to prevent surface or runoff water from draining to or across adjoining properties, Sidewalks or streets during, at a minimum, a two-year storm event. Stormwater runoff shall not be designed to flow across any public Sidewalk as a primary method of delivering the runoff to a stormwater facility. All drainage systems in existing Parking Areas shall be maintained in good working order. e) Access requirements. The portion of access driveways extending from the street to the Sidewalk, or to the property line if no Sidewalk exists, must be hard-surfaced with concrete, brick, asphalt or other approved material, as required by the municipal engineer. f) Driveways. Where permitted, one-way driveways shall have a minimum width of 10 feet and a maximum width of 12 feet. Two-way driveway aisles shall have a minimum width of 20 feet and a maximum width of 24 feet. g) Parking Area aisles. All Parking Area aisles shall have a minimum width of 20 feet for both single and double loaded parking. (2) Parking Location Parking Spaces must be generally located within one Pedestrian Shed from the intended use. Alternatively, public or private transit may be provided to move people from Parking Areas to their destination. Parking Spaces including attached and detached garages must be behind the Parking Setback line as described in “Table 5 Required Parking Setback distance from street-facing Facades” on page 13. Internal Parking Areas must be wrapped by Liner Buildings on street-facing Facades and may not be visible from a 20 Public Way, except as described below: a) Entries/exits to Parking Areas b) Parking in stories below grade plane as defined by the Building Code of New York State. Table 5 Required Parking Setback distance from street-facing Facades CW1 n/a CW2 12 feet CW3 12 feet CW4 none (3) Off-Street Parking There is no minimum off-street parking requirement. G - Public Lighting Lighting varies in brightness and also in the character of the fixture according to the Sub Area. “Table 12 Lighting Standards by Sub Area” shows three sizes of street light that are appropriate for different contexts and building mounted light requirements. Maximum light levels measured at the building frontage line are described for each Sub Area. Chain Works District Design Standards - 21 Table 12 Lighting Standards by Sub Area CW1 CW2 CW3 CW4 SPECIFICATIONS Large * < 30’ and >20’ Tall - These lights should only be used in auto oriented areas: Arterial streets, industrial areas and large parking lots. Must comply with Town of Ithaca Lighting Ordinance Chapter 173. * May be used in existing parking lots that are more than 100’ from a building. Post < 20’ and >12’ Tall - Ideal for neighborhood streets and plazas. Eachfixturemusthaveabacklight-uplight-glare(BUG) rating (as defined in IES TM-15-11, Addendum A) of no more than B2-U2-G2. Must comply with Town of Ithaca Lighting Ordinance Chapter 173. Bollard < 12’ Tall - Focused on providing light for pedestrians. This light type should have an apearance that is interesting for pedestrians at close range. Eachfixturemusthaveabacklight-uplight-glare(BUG) rating (as defined in IES TM-15-11, Addendum A) of no more than B2-U2-G2. Must comply with Town of Ithaca Lighting Ordinance Chapter 173. Building Mounted Must comply with Town of Ithaca Lighting Ordinance Chapter 173 By Right Table 13 Light Standards by Task Area By Planning Board Approval Task Area Average Not to Exceed Active Building Entrance 2 fc 5 fc Active Building Approach 0.2 fc 5 fc Sidewalks 0.2 fc 5 fc Surface of Signs n/a 2 fc Parking Lots (Uniformity ratio 20:1 / 4:1) 0.8 fc (0.2 fc min.) 2 fc 22 H - Thoroughfare Assemblies The diagrams on the following pages define the public thoroughfares and their relationship to the public frontages. “Table 14 Thoroughfare Assemblies” on each page gives the Thoroughfare type followed by the right-of-way width, the pavement width, and other specialized transportation information. Chain Works District Design Standards - 23 Table 14 Thoroughfare Assemblies THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE A Perspective View 5'-0" 8'-0" 7'-0" 8'-0" 8'-0" 7'-0" 8'-0" 5'-0" 30'-0" 56'-0" Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type. Transportation Provision Street CW2, CW3 56 feet 30 feet Slow 25 MPH XX seconds 2 lanes Two sides @ 7 feet marked both sides 10 feet 4 foot sidewalk minimum, 8 foot at mixed-use 7 foot planter bump outs Granite curb Trees at 30’ o.c. avg. Bus route and Bikes share lane 24 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE B Perspective View Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type. Transportation Provision Street CW2, CW3 42 feet 16 feet Slow 25 MPH XX seconds 2 lanes None 10 feet 4 foot minimum sidewalk 8 foot continuous tree lawn Granite curb Trees at 30’ o.c. avg. Bikes share lane 4'-0" 8'-0" 8'-0" 8'-0" 4'-0" 8'-0" 16'-0" 42'-0" Chain Works District Design Standards - 25 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE C Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type. Transportation Provision Street CW2, CW3 36 feet minimum 15 feet Slow 25 MPH XX seconds 1 lane One-side @ 7 feet minimum un-marked 10 feet 4 foot minimum sidewalk 8 foot continuous planter Granite curb Trees at 30’ o.c. avg. Bikes share lane Perspective View 5'-0" 4'-0" 7'-0" 8'-0" 8'-0" 4'-0" 15'-0" 36'-0" 26 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE D Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type. Transportation Provision Parking alley CW2, CW3 N/A 36 feet Slow 25 MPH N/A 1 lane Reverse angled 10 feet 4-8 foot sidewalk 8 foot continuous tree lawn Granite curb Trees at 30’ o.c. avg. Bikes share lane Perspective View 8'-0" 8'-0" 16'-0" 20'-0" 36'-0" Chain Works District Design Standards - 27 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE E Perspective View Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type Transportation Provision Through alley CW2, CW3 N/A 21 feet +/- Slow 25 MPH N/A 1 lane None 10 feet 4-8 foot flush sidewalk None flush in-ground lights, bollards, or change of materials None Bikes share lane 21'-0" +/- 28 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE F Perspective View Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type Transportation Provision Woonerf CW3 20 feet +/- 20 feet +/- Slow 25 MPH N/A 2 lanes yield None, 15 minute loading 10 feet 3 foot minimum flush sidewalk 7 foot flush planters Flush granite curb Small trees @ 30 feet o.c. Bikes share lane 3'-0" 7'-0" 7'-0" 3'-0" 20'-0" Chain Works District Design Standards - 29 THOROUGHFARE ASSEMBLIES: TYPE G Thoroughfare Type Sub Area Assignment Right-of-Way Width Pavement Width Movement Design Speed Pedestrian Crossing Time Traffic Lanes Parking Lanes Curb Radius Walkway Type Planter Type Curb Type Landscape Type. Transportation Provision Industrial Acces CW4 N/A 20 feet w/ 4 foot shoulders Slow 30 MPH XX seconds 2 lanes None 30 feet 3 foot minimum sidewalk at buildings only 8 foot continuous tree lawn No curb Large trees @ 30 feet o.c. Bikes share lane Perspective View 3'-0" 8'-0" 4'-0" 10'-0" 10'-0" 4'-0" 30 I - Signage Signage is allowed by right in the general configurations and sizes according to the “Table 15 Signage Standards” on page 25. Monument signage at driveway entries and oversized building or pylon mounted signage may be appropriate as determined by the Planning Board to enhance the overall identity and character of the Chain Works District. Chain Works District Design Standards - 31 Table 15 Signage Standards CW1 CW2 CW3 CW4 SPECIFICATIONS Address Sign a. Quantity (max) b. Area c. Width d. Height e. Depth / Projection f. Clearance g. Apex h. Letter Height 1 per address max 2 sf max 24 in max 12 in max 3 in min 4.5 ft n/a max 6" Awning and Sign a. Quantity (max) b. Area c. Width d. Height e. Depth / Projection f. Clearance g. Apex h. Letter Height i. Valance Height j. Distance from Curb 1 per window n/a max equals width of Facade n/a min 4 ft min 8 ft n/a min 5 in, max 10 in max 12 in min. 2 ft. Band Sign a. Quantity (max) b. Area (max) c. Width d. Height e. Depth / Projection f. Clearance g. Apex h. Letter Height 1 (2 for corner buildings) 1.5 sf per linear ft Facade max 90% width of Facade max 3 ft max 7 in min 7 ft n/a max 18 in Blade Sign a. Quantity b. Area (max) c. Width d. Height f. Depth / Projection g. Clearance h. Apex i. Letter Height 1 per Facade, 2 max max 6 sf max 4 ft max 4 ft max 4 ft min 8 ft n/a max 8 in Marquee and Sign a. Quantity (max) b. Area c. Width (max) d. Height e. Depth / Projection f. Clearance g. Apex h. Letter Height i. Distance from Curb 1 per business n/a entrance plus 2' each side max 50% Story height min 4 ft, max 10 ft min 10 ft n/a n/a min 3 ft. By Right By Planning Board Approval 32 CW1 CW2 CW3 CW4 SPECIFICATIONS Nameplate Sign a. Quantity (max) 1 b. Area max 3 sf c. Width max 18 in d. Height max 2 ft e. Depth / Projection max 3 in f. Clearance min 4 ft g. Apex max 7 ft h. Letter Height n/a Outdoor Display Case a. Quantity 1 b. Area max 6 sf c. Width max 3.5 ft d. Height max 3.5 ft f. Depth / Projection max 5 in g. Clearance min 4 ft h. Apex n/a i. Letter Height n/a Shingle Sign a. Quantity 1 per facade, 2 max b. Area 4 sf c. Width max 2 ft d. Height max 3 ft f. Depth / Projection max 2 ft g. Clearance min 7 ft h. Apex n/a i. Letter Height max 8 in Sidewalk Sign a. Quantity 1 per business b. Area max 8 sf c. Width max 26 in d. Height max 42 in f. Depth / Projection n/a g. Clearance n/a h. Apex max 42 in i. Letter Height n/a Window Sign a. Quantity 1 per window b. Area max 25% of glass c. Width varies d. Height varies f. Depth / Projection n/a g. Clearance 4 ft h. Apex n/a i. Letter Height max 8 in 32 CW1 CW2 CW3 CW4 Specifications Yard Sign a. Quantity b. Area c. Width d. Height e. Depth / Projection f. Clearance g. Apex h. Letter Height 1 max per business max 6 sf max 3 ft (not counting post) max 2 ft (not counting post) n/a min 3 ft to sign edge max 6 ft to top of post max 8 in Chain Works District Design Standards - 33 J – Building Precedents Bindley Street Bridge Rehabilitation Project Design Alternative and Environmental Review Lead Agency 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, Brindley Street Bridge Replacement Project (“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, 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, on February 8, 2016, the Board of Public Works voted on a resolution that notify the Board’s intent to act as a lead agency for environmental review of the project focused on Alternative 2; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby accepts the recommendation of both the Board of Public Works and Planning Board to proceed with developing a detail design for Brindley Bridge Alternative 2;and ,be it further RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby concur with Board of Public Works on its intention to act as a lead agency for the environmental review of the project focused on Alternative 2 ;and, be it further RESOLVED, that, contingent upon environmental review outcome, the Common Council here by authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to proceed with the design of Brindley Street Bridge replacement on relocated horizontal alignment and new roadway construction (Bridge Alternative 2). Six Mile Creek Watershed Conservation Easement  WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received an application from the Finger Lakes Land Trust (FLLT) to  support the acquisition of approximately 125 acres of land within the Six Mile Creek Watershed located  at 471 Midline Road in the Town of Dryden (“the Petkov Property”), and   WHEREAS, the application meets the four criteria established in the Common Council Resolution “City  Watershed Conservation Easements Processes” passed on March 4, 2015, and  WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works and Assistant Superintendent of Public Works—Water  and Sewer have reviewed the application and believe that the property is of high value for protection of  the watershed, and   WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works passed a 2/22/16 resolution supporting the provision of $40,000  toward acquisition of the Petkov Property by the FLLT, now therefore be it   RESOLVED, that the Common Council authorizes the Mayor, on advice on the City attorney, to enter into  a funding agreement with the FLLT by which the City provides $40,000 to the FLLT and the FLLT  contractually commits to the preservation in perpetuity of the Petkov Property, thus protecting the  water quality of the watershed flowing into the City’s water filtration plant, and be it further  RESOLVED, that the Common Council authorizes funding in support of the same to be drawn from the  Water Fund, Water Shed Accounts; F8321‐5700 $20,000 (2015) and F8321‐5435 $20,000 (2016).  Six Mile Creek Watershed Conservation Easement—Resolution, as unanimously passed at 2/22/16 BPW WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has received an application from the Finger Lakes Land Trust to support the acquisition of approximately 125 acres of land within the Six Mile Creek Watershed located at 471 Midline Road in the Town of Dryden (known as the Petkov Property), and WHEREAS, the application meets the four criteria established in the Common Council Resolution “City Watershed Conservation Easements Processes” passed on March 4, 2015, and WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works and Assistant Superintendent of Public Works—Water and Sewer have reviewed the application and believe that the property is of high value for protection of the watershed, now therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Board of Public Works supports a grant of $40,000 toward acquisition of the Petkov Property by the Finger Lakes Land Trust, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Board of Public Works directs the Superintendent of Public Works to place the application on the upcoming agenda of the Planning and Economic Development Committee. OFFICIAL NOTICE OF MEETING A Regular meeting of the Common Council will be held on Wednesday, March 4, 2015, at 6:00 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Your attendance is requested. AGENDA 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 2. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: 3. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS: 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 5.1 Presentation of Quarterly Employee Recognition Award 6. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 7. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: City Administration Committee: 8.1 Attorney - Request to Change Retirement Tier for PBA Member - Resolution 8.2 DPW – Request to Establish Stewart Avenue Bridge Painting Capital Project - Resolution 8.3 Chamberlain - Request to Waive Penalty on Taxes – Resolution City Clerk-Department of Public Information & Technology: 8.4 Viva Taqueria & Cantina Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution 8.5 Woody’s Ladybugs, LLC – d/b/a Red’s Place Restaurant Alcohol Permit Request – Resolution 9. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 9.1 Declaration of Freedom from Domestic Violence as a Human Right – Resolution 9.2 DPW - Authorization for additional funding for Ithaca Skate Park Expansion, Capital Project #732 - Resolution 9.3 Mayor – Request for Contract with Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District for coordination and implementation of the Cayuga Lake Watershed Hydrilla Project in the Cayuga Inlet, Fall Creek and Southern Cayuga Lake for 2015 - Resolution 9.4 Attorney – Funding for Outreach Worker - Resolution 9.5 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 170 entitled “Use of City Real Property” 9.6 City Controller’s Report 10. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 10.1 An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 157 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled Commons” to Repeal and Replace the Chapter in its Entirety 10.2 City Watershed Conservation Easements Processes – Resolution Common Council Meeting Agenda March 4, 2015 Page 2 11. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES: 12. NEW BUSINESS: 12.1 Motion to Enter Into Executive Session to Discuss Collective Negotiations Pursuant to Article Fourteen of the Civil Service Law - Resolution 12.2 Approval and Authorization to Execute CSEA DPW Unit Contract - Resolution 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS: 14.1 Appointments/Reappointments to Various City Boards and Committees – Resolution 15. REPORTS OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS: 16. REPORT OF CITY CLERK: 17. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: 18. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: 18.1 Approval of the February 4, 2015 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution 19. ADJOURNMENT: If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC City Clerk Date: February 26, 2015 10.2 City Watershed Conservation Easements Processes – Resolution WHEREAS, a conservation easement is a set of legal restrictions that a property owner can voluntarily place on her or his own land, limiting use and development of the land forevermore; and WHEREAS, the City is currently constructing at substantial expense a new water filtration plant which is fed by a creek; and WHEREAS, the quality of the water fed by said creek is substantially dependent on the quality of water provided upstream of the plant by the creek’s watershed, predominantly outside City limits; and WHEREAS, overdevelopment of the watershed in the long term would increase the risk of water quality issues that could prove costly to remedy at the plant itself; and WHEREAS, the Common Council included in the Fiscal Year 2015 budget $20,000 in support of the initiative detailed in this resolution; and WHEREAS, the Common Council desires to establish via this resolution more specific procedures and guidelines for the disbursement of these funds and any future funds similarly budgeted for the purpose of watershed conservation easements; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That as part of the annual budget proposal of the Department of Public Works for the Water and Sewer Division, the Superintendent of Public Works, on consultation with the Director of Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development, make a recommendation as to what amount, if any, is recommended for inclusion in their annual budget for purposes of this program; and be it further RESOLVED, That any funds so budgeted be evaluated for expenditure on transaction costs necessary to the creation of conservation easements according to the procedures and requirements set out in this resolution, and such other procedures and requirements not in conflict with this resolution established by the Director of Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development and the Superintendent of Public Works; and, be it further RESOLVED, That applications for expenditure of these funds on particular conservation easement projects may be submitted by any member of the public, though most commonly by the Finger Lakes Land Trust, to the Director of Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development or her/his designee; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Director of Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development or her/his designee shall evaluate each application according to the minimum criteria specified in this resolution, among others, and if said minimum criteria are satisfied, shall circulate the application to the Superintendent of Public Works or his/her designee (expected generally to include either or both of the City Watershed Coordinator and the City Environmental Engineer), who in turn shall: add the application to an upcoming agenda of the Board of Public Works occurring not sooner than 30 days in the future, and email or mail notice of the application to all members of the City’s Common Council and to the Clerk of the Town or Village in which the contemplated conservation easement would be created; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Director of Planning, Building, Zoning and Economic Development, the Superintendent of Public Works, and/or each of their designees make a recommendation to the Board of Public Works as to their recommended action on the application under consideration; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Board of Public Works deliberate upon, and thereafter approve or deny, each application for funding of transaction costs of a conservation easement, and if approved specify the dollar amount, not to exceed $15,000 per application, authorized for use on the application-specific project to be drawn from the Council-budgeted funds available to this program at that time, abiding the following minimum criteria, all of which must be satisfied in support of any approved application: 1. The property owner(s) of the property impacted by the pending application is/are willing participant(s) in the project; 2. An outside funding match to City's contribution to the application-specific project is preferred, but not required; 3. Another party will be responsible for property management and stewardship of any conservation easement created under this program; 4. The project is located in the watershed of Six Mile Creek upstream of the current location of the sixty-foot dam, and the conservation of the project is deemed by the Board of Public Works, on the advice of relevant City staff, to be beneficial to long-term water quality for the City's water supply; And, be it further RESOLVED, That applications may be submitted seeking funding support of this program for fee-title purchases (rather than easements) in support of conservation of the City watershed, but that such applications shall, after being considered by the Board of Public Works as specified in this resolution, require a vote of Common Council before any approval of the application shall be effective. SIX MILE CREEK CORRIDOR PROTECTION PROJECT FINGER LAKES LAND TRUST The Finger Lakes Land Trust seeks an allocation of $40,000 from the City of Ithaca’s Six Mile Creek Watershed Protection Fund to support the acquisition of approximately 125 acres of environmentally sensitive watershed lands located on Midline Road in the Town of Dryden. The proposed acquisition features more than 900 feet of frontage on Six Mile Creek and more than two miles of frontage on perennial tributaries to the creek. The tract also features 12 acres of wetlands that filter runoff as well as several springs that contribute clean water to the creek. Due to these attributes, this property plays an important role in helping to maintain the quality of Ithaca’s drinking water supply. The proposed acquisition is also located within a growing network of conserved lands that includes the Land Trust’s Roy H. Park Preserve, Cornell University’s Old 600 Natural Area, Hammond Hill State Forest, and Yellow Barn State Forest. The site encompasses the entirety of county Unique Natural Area #118 – the Dryden-Slaterville Fir Tree Swamp as well as a portion of county Unique Natural Area #117 – the Slaterville Wildflower Preserve. It is also located within a “Natural Resource Focus Area” identified in Tompkins County’s comprehensive plan. The Land Trust has negotiated an agreement to purchase 125 acres from the Petkov family for $250,000 – leaving them with 15 acres along with their single family home. This is less than the proposed acquisition’s appraised value of $288,000. The Land Trust intends to retain the property as a nature preserve – to be managed in conjunction with its nearby Roy H. Park Preserve. A $300,000 fundraising campaign has been launched to cover the purchase price, associated transaction costs, and a contribution to the organization’s Stewardship Fund to provide for long term management and monitoring. While it is anticipated that the majority of funds for the project will come from private individuals, the Land Trust is also seeking grants from the City of Ithaca and from Tompkins County’s Capital Reserve Fund for Natural, Scenic and Recreational Resource Protection. Acquisition of this land will and its management as a nature preserve will provide the highest degree of protection for Six Mile Creek and the City of Ithaca’s drinking water supply. Completion of this project will ensure that this pristine property will continue to provide clean water while filtering runoff and retaining storm water during times of high runoff. The purchase contract calls for a closing in mid-April. At this time, the Land Trust will need to provide half of the total purchase price. The second half will be due in December 2016. The Finger Lakes Land Trust is a non-profit conservation organization that works cooperatively with landowners and local communities to conserve those lands that are vital to the integrity of the region. Since it was established in 1989, the Land Trust has protected more than 18,000 acres of significant open space, including more than 1,000 acres within the Six Mile Creek Watershed. The organization today owns and manages 36 conservation areas that are open to the public and holds more than 100 conservation easements on land that remains in private ownership. Additional information may be found at www.fllt.org. S i x M i l e C r e e k S i x M i l e C r e e k Midline Rd [0 1,000500 Feet Map prepared by Karen Edelstein, Finger Lakes Land Trust 15 December 2015 Petkov, potential acquisition Petkov property, excluded Streams Cornell Natural Area FLLT preserves tompkins_2012 Property of Marilyn and Theodore PetkovPortion of parcel #76.-1-24.114, 126 acres471 M idline RdTown of Dryden, Tompkins County, NYApril 2012 natural color aerial orthoimagery £¤79 £¤38 £¤13£¤366 £¤392 Town ofDryden Town ofCaroline Town ofRichford Town ofHarford Town ofVirgil [Map prepared by Karen Edelstein, Finger Lakes Land Trust 15 December 2015 Petkov property tompkins_2012 Property of Marilyn and Theodore PetkovConservation context471 M idline RdTown of Dryden, Tompkins County, NY Petkov, potential acquisition Cornell Natural Area FLLT preserves FLLT CEs State land Six Mile Creek watershed 0 21 Miles 1 | Page    TO: Common Council, Board of Public Works FROM: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development DATE: February 18, 2016 RE: Request to Contribute to the Purchase of 125-Acre Parcel in the Town of Dryden as part of the City’s Six Mile Creek Watershed Protection Funding Commitment The City has received a request from Andrew Zepp, Director of the Finger Lakes Land Trust (FLLT), to contribute the existing balance of the City’s watershed protection funding, in the amount of $40,000, to help in the purchase of a 125-acre parcel in the Town of Dryden as part of the City’s Six Mile Creek watershed protection funding commitment. The FLLT is proposing to purchase the property and to manage the site in perpetuity as a nature preserve and plans to launch a $300,000 fundraising campaign for the project. They are also pursuing a grant of $40,000 from the County’s capital reserve fund in addition to seeking $220,000 in private funding. The 125-acre parcel borders existing protected land and encompasses more than 900 feet of frontage on Six Mile Creek, more than two miles of frontage on tributaries to the creek, 12 acres of wetland, a county- designated Unique Natural Area, and more than 100 acres of mature forest. It is adjacent to the Roy H. Park Nature Preserve – Baldwin Tract, acquired by the Finger Lakes Land Trust, that together span 138 acres with more than 4,000 feet of frontage on Six-Mile Creek (separated from the 125-acres by only one parcel). In addition, the 125-acre parcel is adjacent to approximately 400 acres of a Cornell Natural Area. Since the late 1980’s, the City has provided funding for purchasing specific parcels and/or easements along Six Mile Creek that were chosen to complement the land already owned by the City. Parcels were identified primarily to protect the City's water supply and as an added bonus, for their proximity to the South Hill Recreation Way. Several of the desired parcels have frontage on major roads, (Route 79 and Coddington Road). The thought was for the City to purchase parcels between these two roads (as they became available), subdivide the parcels, sell the frontage piece, and maintain the rear parcels as part of the watershed acquisitions. (Thus getting the biggest “bang for our buck”). The proceeds from the sale of the frontages would cover some of the costs the City had incurred when it purchased the property or was to be put in reserve to pay for other properties as they became available. The 125-acre property proposed for purchase is nearly 8 miles from the City’s holdings in Six Mile Creek. While it is part of the Six Mile Creek watershed, it is not a parcel we have identified for acquisition. In addition, it is neither a fee title purchase nor a conservation easement, but a contribution to property that will not be owned by the City but by the FLLT. Additionally, since the land is a key tract bordering Six Mile Creek that has been identified by the County Planning Department as one of the highest priority parcels for protection, and is adjacent to over 500 acres of CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development Phone: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org 2 | Page    FLLT and Cornell Natural Areas lands, the likelihood of funding by outside sources seems promising while the likelihood of development on the parcel does not. In the adopted resolution, the sixth Resolved states: “that the Board of Public Works deliberate upon, and thereafter approve or deny, each application for funding of transaction costs of a conservation easement, and if approved specify the dollar amount, not to exceed $15,000 per application, authorized for use on the application-specific project to be drawn from the Council-budgeted funds available to this program at that time, abiding the following minimum criteria, all of which must be satisfied in support of any approved application: 1. The property owner(s) of the property impacted by the pending application is/are willing participant(s) in the project. The Land Trust has negotiated an agreement to purchase 125 acres from the Petkov family for $250,000, leaving them with 15 acres along with their single family home. This is less than the proposed acquisition’s appraised value of $288,000. 2. An outside funding match to City's contribution to the application-specific project is preferred, but not required. A $300,000 fundraising campaign has been launched by the FLLT to cover the purchase price, associated transaction costs, and a contribution to the organization’s Stewardship Fund to provide for long term management and monitoring. While it is anticipated that the majority of the funds for the project will come from private individuals, the Land Trust is also seeking grants from the City of Ithaca ($40,000 and from Tompkins County’s Capital Reserve Fund for Natural, Scenic and Recreational Resource Protection ($40,000). 3. Another party will be responsible for property management and stewardship of any conservation easement created under this program. This is not a conservation easement nor a fee title purchase, but a donation to the FLLT, who will own and retain the property as a nature preserve – to be managed in conjunction with its nearby Roy H. Park Preserve. 4. The project is located in the City watershed and the conservation of the project is deemed by the Board of Public Works, on the advice of relevant City staff, to be beneficial to long-term water quality for the City's water supply. The property is located in the Six Mile Creek Watershed and will be beneficial to long- term water quality for the City’s water supply. After evaluation of this request, and in accordance with the criteria specified above, it is my recommendation that the City match the contribution of the County, recently approved, in the amount of $25,000 to contribute to the sale price of the subject property. This will leave some funds in reserve should we have an opportunity to purchase one of the parcels identified by the City as a priority acquisition. 3 | Page    4 | Page    5 | Page    Below is a map showing the properties proposed for acquisition in both the City and the Town in order of priority.       1 Aaron Lavine From:Aaron Lavine Sent:Friday, February 19, 2016 3:11 PM To:Kathy Servoss; Board of Public Works Cc:JoAnn Cornish Subject:RE: Six Mile Creek Conservation Easement Thank you, JoAnn, for this constructive input. For BPW’s reference, I want to add two minor clarifications: 1. As you note, the March 2015 authorizing resolution for this program ends by setting out a procedure for considering “fee-title purchases (rather than easements)”. While the resolution could have been clearer, I believe it was authorizing the sort of fee-title purchase now before us: a fee-title purchase by an entity (here, the Land Trust) that will preserve the parcel of land in perpetuity, just as the City wouldn’t take title to conservation easements purchased under this program either, but would also entrust those to titling in the Land Trust’s name. 2. I can certainly see the logic in your suggestion that the City authorize $25,000 for this transaction rather than $40,000, and I really don’t think there’s a right and a wrong answer. I will note that to the extent that our motivation in picking a smaller number is to preserve funds for future watershed protection transactions, it’s worth keeping in mind that (so far) Council has funded this program at $20,000 per year out of the water fund. Thus, it’s a decent bet that some funding will be available to future transactions—which are in any event not available to us at this time—even if we devote the full $40,000 to this project now. Either way, these sums of money are a true drop in the proverbial bucket of $30+ million that we are spending on our new water plant, which will do us little good without high quality water for many decades to come. Thanks again, and have a good weekend. Ari Aaron (Ari) O. Lavine City Attorney, City of Ithaca 108 E. Green St. Ithaca, NY 14850 Tel: (607) 274-6504 Fax: (607) 274-6507 This e-mail contains information that may be privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this e-mail and notify us immediately by reply email, or at (607) 274-6504. From: Kathy Servoss Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 2:25 PM To: Board of Public Works <BPW@cityofithaca.org> Subject: FW: Six Mile Creek Conservation Easement Additional information for the agenda. - Kathy Servoss Executive Assistant Supt. of Public Works, Engineering, & Parking City of Ithaca 108 E. Green St. 1 To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Lynn C. Truame, IURA Community Development Planner Date: 2/17/16 RE: Proposal to Circulate a Draft Incentive Zoning for Affordable Housing Ordinance This memo provides information regarding a proposed Incentive Zoning Ordinance for the City of Ithaca. The purpose of the proposal is to address the increasing shortage of lower-income workforce housing in the city by providing incentives to induce the inclusion of affordable housing units in new residential and mixed-use developments within the city. Incentive zoning is authorized under GCL §81-d. Background At the May 2015 meeting of the Planning Committee the concept of inclusionary zoning as a means of ameliorating the city’s housing affordability problem was discussed. The Committee directed staff to research the idea and bring forward a proposal for consideration. Staff initially developed a proposal for a mandatory inclusionary zoning ordinance, but in response to the concern that a mandatory ordinance might depress overall development activity, and because a California case questioning the legality of mandatory inclusionary zoning has been appealed to the Supreme Court, staff were asked to develop a proposal for a voluntary, incentive-based ordinance instead. Summary of the proposed ordinance In its current form, the draft Incentive Zoning for Affordable Housing Ordinance would:  Be available citywide, to all developments that include the required minimum number of affordable units* and result in 1 or more residential units, including: o New residential construction, regardless of the type of dwelling unit o New mixed-use development with a residential component o Renovation of a multiple-family residential structure that increases the number of residential units from the number of units in the original structure o Conversion of an existing single-family residential structure to a multiple-family residential structure o Change of use of an existing building from nonresidential to residential o Change of use of a rental residential property to a condominium property.  Offer a variety of ways in which the incentive may be accessed, including: o The inclusion of affordable units on-site in a new development o Providing affordable units off-site (within a limited radius of the new units) CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 2 o Converting existing off-site market rate units to affordable units o Paying a cash-in-lieu fee o Any combination of the above  Offer the following incentives: o Elimination of minimum parking requirements o Density bonus of one additional floor in height in those areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as Waterfront Mixed Use, Urban Mixed Use, and Enterprise o Exemption from Site Plan Review for projects in any zone for which Design Standards have been published and the Director of Planning & Development, or her designee, determines that the project is in compliance with those Design Standards. *To be eligible for the incentive, a development must include the following minimum number of affordable units: (1) for for-sale units, the greater of one unit or 15% of the total number of proposed units in the development (2) for for-rent units, either: (a) the greater of one unit or 15% of the total number of proposed units in the development, with rents set at levels that do not exceed rent levels that are affordable to families earning 60% of the family median income, or (b) the greater of one unit or 10% of the total number of proposed units in the development, with rents set at levels that do not exceed rent levels that are affordable to families earning 50% of the family median income Current 50% and 60% income and rent limits: Unit size: 0-bd 1-bd 2-bd 3-bd 4-bd 5-bd 6-bd 50% RENT LIMIT 690 739 887 1025 1143 1261 1379 60% RENT LIMIT 780 957 1146 1375 1515 1653 1791 Household size: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 50% INCOME LIMITS 27050 30900 34750 38600 41700 44800 47900 51000 60% INCOME LIMITS 32460 37080 41700 46320 50040 53760 57480 61200 Funds derived from payment of the cash-in-lieu fee would be deposited to the City’s Affordable Housing Fund, to be used solely to stimulate and support the development of affordable housing in the city. Next Steps The document submitted tonight is a starting point for discussion. If Council is interested in pursuing this approach there are important details that remain to be worked out, including an administrative structure for the program and effective enforcement mechanisms. Staff requests approval to circulate the proposal for review and comment.   1    DRAFT City of Ithaca Incentive Zoning for Affordable Housing Ordinance Section 1. Intent   The intent of this ordinance is to encourage the construction of affordable housing, or payment of fees-in-lieu to support such construction, as a portion of new residential development within the community for the purpose of:   A. Implementing the affordable housing goals, policies, and objectives contained in the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan and the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan;   B. Ensuring the opportunity of affordable housing for employees of businesses that are located in or will be located in the community;   C. Maintaining a balanced community that provides housing for people of all income levels.   Section 2. Definitions   A. Definitions of specific terms or words as used in this ordinance shall conform to the definitions of the same terms in the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 325, Section 325-3. B. In addition to the definitions in Chapter 325, the following words and terms, when used in this ordinance, shall have the following meanings:   Affordable Housing: In the case of dwelling units for sale, housing in which the principal, interest, taxes, insurance, and condominium or association fees, if any, constitute no more than 37 percent of gross annual family income for a household of the size that may occupy the unit in question, assuming a down-payment of no more than 5%. In the case of dwelling units for rent, housing for which combined rent and utility costs do not exceed the maximum amount allowed under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s HOME program. Affordable Housing Development Agreement: a written agreement between an applicant to develop an Affordable Housing Development, as defined in this ordinance, and the City of Ithaca, containing specific requirements to ensure the continuing affordability of housing included in the development.   Affordable Housing Unit: any dwelling unit subject to covenants or restrictions requiring such unit to be sold at prices preserving them as Affordable Housing for a period of at least 15 years, or rented at prices preserving them as Affordable Housing for a period of at least 50 years.   2    Affordable Housing Development: any housing subsidized by the federal or state government, including Low Income Housing Tax Credit projects; or any housing or mixed-use development in which Affordable Housing Units are included pursuant to this ordinance.   Affordable Housing Development Plan: a plan prepared and submitted by an applicant who proposes to develop an Affordable Housing Development, outlining and specifying the proposed project’s compliance with the applicable requirements of this ordinance.   Affordable Housing Trust Fund: the fund created by the City of Ithaca pursuant to Chapter 62 of the Municipal Code and referenced in Section 10 of this ordinance.   Certificate of Affordable Housing Compliance: the certificate issued by the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development that provides legal assurance that a developer’s obligations under this ordinance are being satisfied. High HOME Rent: as calculated and published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the maximum cost of combined rent and utilities that is affordable to a household earning 60% of the area median family income.   Low HOME Rent: as calculated and published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the maximum cost of combined rent and utilities that is affordable to a household earning 50% of the area median family income. Median Family Income: the median family income level for the Ithaca Metropolitan Statistical Area, as established and defined in the annual schedule published by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, adjusted for household size.   Renovation: physical improvement that adds to the value of real property, but that excludes painting, ordinary repairs, and normal maintenance. Section 3. Scope of Application; Density Bonus A. Any of the following types of development that result in, or contain, one or more Residential Dwelling Units and include sufficient numbers of Affordable Housing Units to constitute an Affordable Housing Development as determined by the calculation in paragraph 3.B. of this ordinance may elect to pursue designation as an Affordable Housing Development:   3      (1) New residential construction, regardless of the type of dwelling unit   (2) New mixed-use development with a residential component (3) Renovation of a multiple-family residential structure that increases the number of residential units from the number of units in the original structure (4) Conversion of an existing single-family residential structure to a multiple-family residential structure   (5) Change of use of an existing building from nonresidential to residential   (6) Change of use of a rental residential property to a condominium property.   B. The minimum number of Affordable Housing Units that must be included for any development listed in Section 3.A. of this ordinance to qualify as an Affordable Housing Development shall be calculated as follows: (1) for for-sale units, the greater of one unit or 15% of the total number of proposed Residential Dwelling Units. If this calculation results in a fraction, a fraction of 0.5 or more shall be rounded up to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than 0.5 shall be rounded down to the next lower whole number. (2) for for-rent units, either: (a) the greater of one unit or 15% of the total number of proposed Residential Dwelling Units, rounded as indicated above, with rents set at levels that do not exceed the High HOME Rent for the appropriate unit size, as published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, or (b) the greater of one unit or 10% of the total number of proposed Residential Dwelling Units, rounded as indicated above, with rents set at levels that do not exceed the Low HOME Rent for the appropriate unit size, as published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.   C. Any Affordable Housing Development as defined in this ordinance shall be entitled to receive the following incentives: (1) Elimination of minimum parking requirements. (2) For projects within the Waterfront Mixed Use, Urban Mixed Use, or Enterprise zones,   4    as identified on the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Map, a density bonus of one full story in height. Any such increase will be granted as of right and will not require review by the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission. (3) Any Affordable Housing Development, as defined in this ordinance, that is located in a zone for which Design Standards have been published by the City of Ithaca and that has been determined by the Director of Planning and Development to be in compliance with those Design Standards, shall be exempt from site plan review. Environmental review requirements continue to apply. Except as noted above, all aspects of any Affordable Housing Development remain subject to the normal review and approval requirements of the BZA, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, the Planning Board, and of all other applicable City Boards, Commissions, and Departments. Section 4. Cash Payment in Lieu of Housing Units   A. The applicant may elect to make a cash payment in lieu of constructing some or all of the Affordable Housing Units required for the project to constitute an Affordable Housing Development.   B. The City of Ithaca Common Council shall establish the in-lieu per-unit cash payment on written recommendation by the Director of Planning and Development and adopt it as part of the City of Ithaca’s schedule of fees. The per-unit amount shall be based on an estimate of the amount of local government subsidy required to create one new Affordable Housing Unit when other public funding and/or Low Income Housing Tax Credits are leveraged. The initial amount of this fee is $100,000 per unit. At least once every three years, the Common Council shall, with the written recommendation of the Director of Planning and Development, review the per-unit payment and amend the schedule of fees as needed to reflect changes in the cost of construction within the City of Ithaca.   C. For the purposes of determining the total in-lieu payment, the per-unit amount established by the Common Council pursuant to paragraph (1) above shall be multiplied by the greater of one or 20 percent of the number of units proposed in the development. For the purposes of such calculation, if 20 percent of the number of proposed units results in a fraction, the fraction shall not be rounded up or down. If the cash payment is in lieu of providing less than the full number of required Affordable Housing Units, the calculation shall be prorated. D. The full in-lieu cash payment must be received by the City prior to issuance of a building permit for the project.   5    E. All in-lieu cash payments received pursuant to this ordinance shall be deposited directly into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund established pursuant to Section 10 below, and will be used to support the construction of Affordable Housing Units within the City. Section 5. Provision of Affordable Units Off-Site A. Applicants may elect to provide all, or a portion of, the required number of Affordable Housing Units off-site, provided the proposed location of the off-site units is within one half mile of the Affordable Housing Development. B. The provision of off-site units may be accomplished by the construction of new units, or by the conversion of existing market-rate rental units to Affordable Housing Units. In either case, the off-site units must be, or must be renovated to be, comparable in size, type, and quality to the market-rate units in the Affordable Housing Development. C. If the applicant elects to provide the required Affordable Housing Units by the conversion of existing market-rate rental units, the applicant will be required to provide a third party Capital Needs Assessment, and to capitalize, and make annual contributions to, an appropriate replacement reserve to ensure the long-term availability and quality of the existing units. D. No Certificate of Occupancy will be issued for the Affordable Housing Development until the construction or renovation of all off-site units has been completed and a Certificate of Affordable Housing Compliance has been issued. Section 6. Criteria for Integration and Character of Affordable Housing Units   A. An Affordable Housing Development shall comply with the following criteria:   (1) In the case of on-site development of Affordable Housing Units in an Affordable Housing Development, those units shall be mixed with, and not clustered together or segregated in any way from, market-rate units. (2) If the Affordable Housing Development Plan, described in Section 7 below, contains a phasing plan, the phasing plan shall provide for the development of Affordable Housing Units concurrently with the market-rate units. No phasing plan shall provide that the Affordable Housing Units are the last units built in an Affordable Housing Development.     (3) The exterior appearance of Affordable Housing Units in an Affordable Housing   6    Development shall be made similar to market-rate units by the provision of building materials and finishes substantially the same in type and quality. (4) The floor area of a typical Affordable Housing Unit in an Affordable Housing Development must be no less than 80% of the floor area of a typical market-rate unit of the same type. The bedroom mix for Affordable Housing Units must be comparable to the bedroom mix of market-rate units within the Affordable Housing Development. Section 7. Application and Affordable Housing Development Plan   A. Applicants to develop an Affordable Housing Development pursuant to this ordinance shall complete and file an application on the prescribed form with the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development. The application shall require such information on the nature and the scope of the development as the City of Ithaca may determine is necessary to properly evaluate the proposal.   B. As part of the application required above, the applicant shall provide to the City of Ithaca an Affordable Housing Development Plan. This plan shall be subject to approval by the City of Ithaca and shall be incorporated into the Affordable Housing Development Agreement pursuant to Section 8 below. An Affordable Housing Development Plan is not required for developments in which the affordable housing obligation is satisfied by a cash payment in lieu of construction of Affordable Housing Units. The Affordable Housing Development Plan shall contain, at a minimum, the following information concerning the development:   (1) A general description of the development, including whether the development will contain units for rent or for sale (2) The total number of market-rate units and Affordable Housing Units     (3) The number of bedrooms in each market-rate unit and each Affordable Housing Unit     (4) The square footage of each market-rate unit and of each Affordable Housing Unit measured from the interior walls of the unit and including heated and unheated areas (5) The location in the development of each market-rate and Affordable Housing Unit, or the proposed off-site location of the Affordable Housing Units if the off-site option is selected   (6) If construction of dwelling units is to be phased, a phasing plan stating the number of market-rate and Affordable Housing Units in each phase   7      (7) The estimated monthly rent of each market-rate unit and each Affordable Housing Unit   (8) Documentation and plans regarding the exterior appearance, materials, and finishes of the Affordable Housing Development and each of its individual units, including a third party Capital Needs Assessment for any off-site market-rate rental units proposed for conversion to Affordable Housing Units   (9) The marketing plan that the applicant proposes to implement to promote the sale or rental of the Affordable Housing Units to eligible households (10) If the applicant intends to partner with another agency or organization for the management of the Affordable Housing Units, a letter of intent from this partnering organization must be attached Section 8. Affordable Housing Development Agreement A. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any units in an Affordable Housing Development, the applicant shall enter into an Affordable Housing Development Agreement with the City of Ithaca. The development agreement shall set forth the commitments and obligations of the City and the applicant, including, as necessary, cash in-lieu payments and replacement reserve requirements for any off-site conversion units, and shall incorporate, among other things, the approved Affordable Housing Plan.   B. The applicant shall execute any and all documents deemed necessary by the City in a form to be established by the City Attorney, including, without limitation, restrictive covenants, deed restrictions, and related instruments (including income qualification requirements for tenants of for-rent units) to ensure the continued affordability of the Affordable Housing Units in accordance with this ordinance.   C. Restrictive covenants or deed restrictions required for Affordable Housing Units shall specify that the title to the subject property may be transferred only with the written approval of the Director of Planning and Development, which approval may not be withheld unless the proposed transfer would result in a violation of the affordability requirements of this ordinance. Section 9. Enforcement of Affordable Housing Development Agreement; Affordability Controls   A. The Director of Planning and Development shall promulgate rules as necessary to   8    implement this ordinance. B. No Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Compliance for any unit in an Affordable Housing Development shall be granted unless and until a Certificate of Affordable Housing Compliance has been issued by the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development. C. On an annual basis, the Director of Planning and Development shall publish or make available copies of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development family income limits and HOME rental limits applicable to affordable housing within the local government’s jurisdiction. D. For all sales of for-sale Affordable Housing Units, the parties to the transaction shall execute and record such documentation as required by the Affordable Housing Development Agreement. Such documentation shall include the provisions of this ordinance and shall provide, at a minimum, each of the following: (1) That the affordable housing unit be sold to and occupied by eligible households for a period of 15 years from the date of conveyance of the property. Eligible households must have gross incomes that do not exceed 80 percent of the Median Family Income for households of the same size within the Ithaca Metropolitan Statistical Area. (2) That the Affordable Housing Unit must be conveyed subject to restrictions that shall maintain the affordability of such Affordable Housing Units for eligible households. (3) That should the property be sold prior to completion of the 15-year affordability period, the affordability period shall re-set and a new 15-year term, also subject to this same re-set provision, shall commence.   (4) That during the period of affordability, the maximum resale price of any for-sale affordable unit shall be calculated using the worksheet below. The unit must be sold to an income-qualified household.   1. Homeowner's Purchase Price $ 2. Initial Appraised Value $ 3. Percentage of Homeowner's Purchase Price to initial Appraised Value (Divide line 1 by line 2)   4. Homebuyer's Initial Ownership Interest: (multiply line 2 by line 3) $   9    5. Appraised Value at time of resale $ 6. Homeowner's Ownership Interest at Resale: (multiply line 5 by line 3) $ 7. Preliminary increase in homeowner's ownership interest : (subtract line 4 from line 6) $ 8. Capital Improvement Credit (see below) $ 9. Final increase in homeowner's ownership interest: (subtract line 8 from line 7; if negative, enter 0) $ 10. Maximum annual amount of homeowner's ownership interest: (multiply line 4 by .02 or 2%) $ 11. Homeowner's Maximum Share of Increase in Ownership Interest: (Multiply line 10 by the number of years that the homeowner owned the home, using the decimal .08 to represent each full month of an incomplete year) $ 12. Maximum Resale Price: (add lines 1, 8, and the lesser of lines 9 and 11) $ 13 Homeowner's Share of Appreciation at Sale: (subtract line 4 from line 12) $ (a) The Capital Improvement Credit shall be capped at the lesser of the difference between the pre-construction appraised value and the post-construction appraised value of the dwelling, and the maximum amount that can be added to the chart above while allowing the resale to remain affordable to an eligible purchaser, in compliance with the affordability requirements of this ordinance. E. In the case of for-rent Affordable Housing Units, the owner of the Affordable Housing Development shall execute and record such documents as required by the Affordable Housing Development Agreement. Such documents shall include the provisions of this ordinance and shall provide, at a minimum, each of the following: (1) The Affordable Housing Units shall be leased to and occupied by eligible households. Eligible households must have gross incomes that do not exceed either 60 percent or 50 percent (as specified in the Affordable Housing Development Agreement) of the Median Family Income for households of the same size within the Ithaca Metropolitan Statistical Area. (2) Households comprised solely of full-time students do not qualify as eligible households with the following exceptions: at least one member of the household receives assistance under Title IV of the Social Security Act; or at least one member is enrolled in a job training program receiving assistance under the Work Force Investment Act or another similar   10    federal, state, or local program; or the household includes at least one single parent with minor children; or all adult members of the household are married and can file joint tax returns; or at least one member of the household has exited the foster care system. (3) The Affordable Housing Units shall be leased at a rate such that the combined cost of rent and utilities does not exceed either the High HOME Rent or the Low HOME Rent (as specified in the Affordable Housing Development Agreement) for a period of 50 years from the date of the initial Certificate of Occupancy.   (4) Subleasing of Affordable Housing Units shall be prohibited without the express written consent of the Director of Planning and Development, which consent may not be withheld unless the proposed sub-lease would result in a violation of the affordability requirements of this ordinance. F. The applicant or his or her agent shall manage and operate the Affordable Housing Development and shall submit an annual report to the City of Ithaca identifying which units in the Affordable Housing Development are Affordable Housing Units, the combined monthly rent and utilities cost, or sales cost, for each unit in the development, vacancy information for the prior year, monthly income for tenants of each for-rent Affordable Housing Unit, and other information as may be required by the City of Ithaca while ensuring the privacy of the tenants. The annual report shall contain information sufficient to determine whether tenants of for-rent units qualify as eligible households and whether for-sale units are affordable to, have been sold to, and are occupied by, eligible households. Section 10. Penalties for Non-compliance A. The City of Ithaca or its designee will audit each Affordable Housing Development annually for compliance with the approved Affordable Housing Development Agreement. B. Should the annual audit reveal non-compliance with the approved Affordable Housing Development Agreement, the applicant will immediately remedy the non-compliance as follows: (1) In the case of for-rent housing units, the project owner shall convert to an Affordable Housing Unit the first market-rate unit in the Affordable Housing Development that becomes vacant after discovery of the non-compliance. Should the property owner repeatedly be found in non-compliance, the City of Ithaca may require, at its sole option, that the property owner pay the applicable cash in-lieu payment that would have been required for the project, plus interest at the current federal short term interest rate plus 3%, accruing from the date of initial non-compliance.   11    (2) In the case of for-sale housing that is initially sold to an ineligible buyer, the applicant will pay the applicable cash in-lieu payment that would have been required for the project, plus interest at a rate of the current federal short term interest rate plus 3%, accruing from the date of approval of the Affordable Housing Development Plan. (3) In the case of for-sale housing that is sold by an income eligible owner to an ineligible buyer, the seller will pay to the City of Ithaca the difference between the net proceeds of the sale, as evidenced by the closing statement, and the Maximum Resale Price calculated using the worksheet in Section 9.D.(4) above. These funds will be deposited into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund created pursuant to Section 10 of this ordinance. (4) In the case of for-sale housing that is leased to another household in the absence of an approved Hardship Exemption pursuant to Section 10.C. below, or is otherwise utilized in a manner not consistent with the requirements of this ordinance, the violation shall be deemed an offense and shall be punishable as provided in Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code, General Provisions, Article 1. Each day’s continued breach shall constitute a separate additional violation. In addition, the City shall have such other remedies as are provided by law to enforce the provisions of this ordinance. C. Hardship Exemption for For-sale Units The income-eligible purchaser of an affordable for-sale unit must occupy the property as their principal residence. A one-time per owner exemption to this requirement, allowing the unit to be leased, under certain circumstances, to another household whose income does not exceed 80% of the Area Median Family Income, and at a rate such that combined rent and utility costs will not exceed 30% of the gross family income. These circumstances include: (1) Job or military transfer more than sixty (60) miles outside Ithaca city limits (2) Divorce resulting in an inability to pay the mortgage (3) Job loss as a result of firing or layoff (4) Major illness within the household resulting in financial hardship (5) Relocation to obtain medical care outside the Ithaca area (6) Inability to sell after good faith marketing effort All hardship exemption requests must be supported by appropriate documentation and will be granted solely at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Development. Section 10. Affordable Housing Trust Fund   12      All funds generated as a result of activities under this ordinance will be deposited into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund created pursuant to Chapter 62 of the Municipal Code and will be used to stimulate and support the development of affordable housing in the City of Ithaca. TO: Common Council FROM: Josephine Martell DATE: March 3, 2016 RE: No Feeding Geese Ordinance As part of a city-wide effort to better manage the Canada goose population and protect our wildlife, the City of Ithaca has been working to come up with a humane management plan that addresses the needs of our residents. Ithaca has increasingly struggled with a burgeoning geese population on all habitable lands, which has led to considerable human-wildlife conflict, especially around goose poop on playing fields and parklands where people like to recreate. Geese prefer wide-open, grassy spaces near water and Ithaca has these locations in abundance. Not only relegated to Ithaca, this has become a widespread problem in many states across the U.S. In the summer of 2015, a small working group was convened, as a sub group of the Ithaca City Parks Commission, to come up with a set of recommendations for how to address the issue of Canada Geese on city lands. Membership of the group included Josephine Martell, Common Council and Chair; Rick Manning, Friends of Stewart Park; Jim D’Alterio, Director of Cass Park; and Larry Fabbroni, Parks Commission member. The group met two times and had a series of e-mail discussions. After reviewing the literature on Canada Goose management, considering public opinion in Ithaca, reaching out to wildlife and management experts, and examining how other communities have dealt with this issue, the group proposed a 3-5 year pilot program. The proposed program consists of a three-prong approach that includes egg oiling, hazing and implementing a no feeding ordinance, as these are the three main components of any successful, non-lethal management program. This approach is supported by NY DEC, US FWS, and even The Humane Society of the Unites States. The primary goal of the program is to deter the geese from staying on City lands by making it unappealing for them and forcing them to go elsewhere. Ithaca cannot address the increasing geese population as a whole across the US, or even NYS, so this strategy focuses on keeping them off the City lands where they are causing the most human- wildlife conflict. Other management options are still being considered but this is the approach we are currently trying as information is gathered over the next few years. The group also held an initial stakeholder meeting in early January, 2016 with a variety of local stakeholders including NY DEC, Cornell Department of Natural Resources, Friends of Stewart Park, Ithaca College, Ithaca High School, the State Parks, Cornell Plantations, the Parks Commission, the City Forrester (who serves on the Parks Commission and has been very active in the discussion all along), the Ithaca Youth Bureau and the Director of a national program, Geese Peace. Other local stakeholders including the Lab of Ornithology and the Cayuga Bird Club were also invited, and are part of the discussion, but could not attend the meeting. As a result of that meeting, the following activities were identified for the first year: 1. Create and populate a GIS map of geese nests through volunteer partnerships 2. Draft a geese management plan for the City based on the agreed outcomes 3. Draft and propose a no feeding ordinance City wide. Install signs along our waterways and launch a PR campaign to educate public about the new rule. Parks staff to help educate public. 4. Work with DEC in summer 2016 to band and collar geese within the City to better determine their movements and population 5. Explore the possibility of a student intern for summer 2016 to test some hazing methods and identify key conflict areas, and work with DEC The No Feeding ordinance (#3) is currently before us for review. DEC strongly encourages communities to implement a no feeding ordinance as part of a Canada Geese management plan for a variety of reasons including that feeding water fowl leads to poor nutrition for the birds, encourages unnatural behavior (no fear of humans), causes over crowding, leads to costly management strategies and more. We hope to bring this ordinance before the May Council meeting as, due to goose biology, the bulk of goslings will hatch during the end of April and early May. If we can have signs installed, staff ready and some well framed media and social media placement on the issue prior to hatching, then we will be in a good position to change public- and goose- behavior on this issue. We hope to communicate to the public how feeding is currently hurting the geese by encouraging them to stay and providing them with poor nutrition, which causes a series of impacts and human conflict. We intend to emphasize that by not feeding geese, and discouraging them from public lands, the public can help us manage the geese population and hopefully decrease it over time. The City Forester, Jeanne Grace, feels that her staff can handle the majority of public education in the parks around this issue. 3/3/16 Page 1 of 2 An Ordinance to Amend The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 164, Entitled “Dogs and Other Animals” To Prohibit the Feeding of Waterfowl on City Property WHEREAS, the City has been struggling with considerable human-wildlife conflict resulting from a burgeoning geese population on habitable lands, and WHEREAS, the conflict between people and waterfowl is particularly pronounced on the City’s playing fields and parklands where people like to recreate, and WHEREAS, feeding of waterfowl contributes to the concentration of such birds in areas frequented by the public by encouraging birds to congregate for food, and WHEREAS, feeding of waterfowl can be detrimental to their health as waterfowl can suffer from nutritional disorders, such as calcium deficiencies and bone disease, as a result of the poor quality of food like bread and corn that is typically fed to geese in public settings, and WHEREAS, feeding of waterfowl causes behavioral changes in the geese by decreasing their fear of humans and encouraging to remain in locations where public feeding is taking place, and WHEREAS, the concentration of waterfowl can be destructive to lawns and can interfere with the planned use of parklands, and the resultant quantities of feces can create public health concerns and reduce the aesthetic and recreational value of parks and other public property; now, therefore, ORDINANCE NO. ____ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 164 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 164 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to add a new Article to be inserted as Article III, Waterfowl. Section 2. Chapter 164, Article III is hereby amended to read as follows: Article 3: Waterfowl §164-21 Applicability. This article shall apply to all areas of the City of Ithaca. §164-22 Definitions. As used in this article, the following words shall have the meanings indicated: 3/3/16 Page 2 of 2 WATERFOWL Members of any and all species of wild and domestic aquatic birds, including but not limited to ducks, geese, and swan. §164-23 Feeding prohibited. It shall be unlawful to provide feed, including, but not limited to, bread, corn, and other grains, to any waterfowl on public property. It shall be unlawful to provide feed, including, but not limited to, bread, corn, and other grains, to any waterfowl on private property without the prior approval of the owner of such property. §164-24 Enforcement; appearance ticket. All police officers in the City shall administer and enforce the provisions of this article and for such purpose shall have the authority to issue appearance tickets. §164-25 Penalties for offenses. Except as provided in the Agriculture and Markets Law, a violation of this article constitutes a civil offense punishable in accordance with §1-1 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code. These penalties shall be in addition to any other penalties provided by law. 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. To: Planning & Development Committee of Common Council From: Nels Bohn, Director of Community Development RE: CIITAP Reform – Status Report Date: March 3, 2016 In February, the IDA adopted the City’s revised local labor policy that requires solicitation of bids from local construction trades and tracking of local labor participation on all new CIITAP projects. It may be helpful to review the remaining issues that need to be resolved to finalize reforms to the CIITAP policy. Based on PEDC comments on the CIITAP Reform Committee’s proposal, it appears that the following issues should be addressed: 1. Incorporate and calibrate the CIITAP Community Benefit Fund in the standard incentive package (See separate memo) 2. Finalize the number and length of incentive packages (Reform Committee’s proposal contains a 7-year, a 10-year, and a 12-year tax abatement incentive package) 3. Decide if achieving at least one “enhanced” benefit is voluntary or mandatory (Enhanced benefits are voluntary in the Reform Committee’s proposal) 4. Confirm CIITAP Reform Committee’s recommendation regarding approaches to (a) energy sustainability, (b) diversity & inclusion and (c) living wages (Several written comments were submitted on these topics) 5. Determine if demonstration of financial need should be required for all CIITAP projects (Reform Committee required financial need for incentive packages exceeding 7 years) 6. Consider if certain types of projects should be exempted from certain CIITAP obligations (Very small projects or projects in locally-designated historic districts) Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency Mayor’s Charge to CIITAP Reform Committee Deliver recommended reforms to the CIITAP to the Common Council that will: 1. Retain the program as an effective tool to incentivize smart growth and discourage sprawl 2. Improve the program’s ability to deliver broad community benefits that may including: • An increased use of local labor • An increase in living wage job creation • More environmentally friendly building • Increased economic opportunities for people of all backgrounds Page 1 of 3 To: Seph Murtagh, Chairperson Planning & Economic Development Committee of Common Council From: Nels Bohn, Director of Community Development Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner RE: CIITAP Community Benefit Fund Date: March 4, 2016 At the January PEDC meeting, strong support was expressed to include a requirement that CIITAP projects contribute funding into a locally-controlled community benefit fund. Funds received would be competitively awarded as grants for a variety of community development activities, including childcare, transportation demand management, job readiness and skill development, affordable housing, and diversity & inclusion initiatives. The City Attorney has indicated that inclusion of a funding requirement into a community benefit fund is legally defensible as a component of the voluntary CIITAP program. Analysis Staff recommends that the contribution amount be pegged to a percentage of the project value, so that the contribution amount increases as the project value increases. Staff has analyzed contributions at 1% and 2% of project value in the tables below. The 2% level yields a substantially higher contribution, to address community needs, but a large upfront contribution may reduce financial feasibility of the project. To retain CIITAP as an effective incentive, the abatement schedule should be revised to increase the savings to the developer to offset the new cash contribution required in year #1. Therefore, the incentive package for a 2% contribution should provide a deeper subsidy than the package for a 1% contribution. Listed below are various alternative abatement schedule formulas examined. The tables below summarize the impact of each formula at a contribution level of 1% and 2%, respectively. Right- hand columns identify whether the upfront cash contribution will be recouped over the duration of the abatement and how the net financial incentive package compares to the standard 10-year declining abatement schedule. If the “Change in Net Present Value” column is negative, then the developer will not recoup the cash contribution via the enhanced abatement schedule. Alternative Abatement Schedule Formulas Option A: Status Quo, 10-Year Declining Abatement schedule – No Community Benefit Funding Option B: Community funding/10-Year Declining Abatement Schedule Option C: Community funding/2 Years @ 100% Abatement, then declining equally over 8 years Option D: Community funding/3 Years @ 100% abatement, then declining equally over 7 years Option E: Community funding/3 Years @ 100% abatement, then decline equally starting at 70% in year #4 Page 2 of 3 CIITAP Community Benefit Fund: 1% of Project Value Abatement Formula Cash Contribution Based on Project Value Years to Recoup Cash Contribution Change in Net Present Value of Inducement vs. Status Quo 10-Year Abatement $5MM $10MM $20MM A $0 $0 $0 NA 0 B $50,000 $100,000 $200,000 NO (6%) C $50,000 $100,000 $200,000 5 3% D $50,000 $100,000 $200,000 3 12% E $50,000 $100,000 $200,000 3 0% At a 1% contribution level, Option “E” is optimum as it allows the developer to recoup the contribution expense while yielding an equivalent financial benefit to a the current 10-year abatement without a cash contribution. CIITAP Community Benefit Fund: 2% of Project Value Abatement Formula Cash Contribution Based on Project Value (2-year pay out) Years to Recoup Cash Contribution % Change in Net Present Value of Developer Savings vs. Status Quo 10-Year Abatement $5MM $10MM $20MM A $0 $0 $0 NA 0 B $100,000 $200,000 $400,000 NO (11%) C $100,000 $200,000 $400,000 NO (2%) D $100,000 $200,000 $400,000 5 6% E $100,000 $200,000 $400,000 NO (5%) At a 2% contribution level, Option “C” best achieves the objective to recoup the contribution through an enhanced abatement schedule without increasing the developer’s savings. It should be noted, that applying the Option “C” formula with a 2% cash contribution, the developer never recoups the full value of their cash contribution and the tax savings in the first year is reduced by the size of the cash contribution, just at the time when a typical project is leasing up and at greatest risk of experience a cash flow problem. For this reason, it would make sense to allow a 2% cash contribution to be paid out over two years instead of a full payment in year #1. Recommendation Staff recommends that the developer be required to make a contribution equal to 1% of project value to the CIITAP Community Benefit Fund and the tax abatement schedule be enhanced to offset the upfront project expense to ensure that the program continues to act as an effective tool to incentivize smart growth. We recommend the abatement schedule be revised to provide 100% abatement on new value for the first 3 years, reset to a 70% abatement level in year #4 then declining in equal increments for the remainder of the abatement term. Page 3 of 3 A $10 million CIITAP project would generate a $100,000 contribution from the developer under this recommendation. Following is the recommended 10-year abatement schedule (Option “E”) for a 1% contribution: Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 % Taxes Abated 100% 100% 100% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% A 2% contribution level would yield twice as much funding to support community needs, but a large upfront cash contribution may also decrease economic feasibility of the project. This would be especially problematic if new additional costly requirements are required on the project beyond what has been recommended by the CIITAP Reform Committee. Should no further significant project expenses be imposed, then it may be appropriate to increase the contribution level to 2% of project value (and adopt the Option “C” abatement schedule). END Attachments: detailed scenario comparisons CIITAP Community Benefit Fund = 1% of Project Value Duration: 10 years Community Funding: none Net Present Formula: decline equally over duration Value Year 12345678910Total(5% discount rate)  % Taxes Abated 100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%  Total New Taxes Paid ‐$                18,289$      36,577$      54,866$      73,155$     91,444$     109,732$  128,021$  146,310$  164,599$   822,994$             City New Taxes Paid ‐$                6,445$        12,890$      19,335$      25,780$     32,225$     38,670$     45,115$     51,560$     58,005$      290,025$             CIITAP Community Benefit  Fund (none) ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                          Savings to Applicant  182,887$   164,599$   146,310$   128,021$   109,732$  91,444$     73,155$     54,866$     36,577$     18,289$      1,005,881$        $833,332 Duration: 10 years Community Funding: yes Net Present Formula: decline equally over duration Value Year 12345678910Total(5% discount rate)  % Taxes Abated 100%90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%  Total New Taxes Paid ‐$                18,289$      36,577$      54,866$      73,155$     91,444$     109,732$  128,021$  146,310$  164,599$   822,994$             City New Taxes Paid ‐$                6,445$        12,890$      19,335$      25,780$     32,225$     38,670$     45,115$     51,560$     58,005$      290,025$             CIITAP Community Benefit  Fund  (1% of project value) 50,000$      ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                50,000$               Savings to Applicant  132,887$   164,599$   146,310$   128,021$   109,732$  91,444$     73,155$     54,866$     36,577$     18,289$      955,881$           $785,713 Years to Recoup CIITAP Community Benefit Fund Payment: NO Duration: 10 years Community Funding: yes Net Present Formula: 2 Years at 100%, then decline equally over 8 years Value Year 12345678910Total(5% discount rate)  % Taxes Abated 100%100%89%78%67%56%44%33%22%11%  Total New Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                20,118$      40,235$      60,353$     80,470$     102,417$  122,535$  142,652$  162,770$   731,550$             City Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                7,090$        14,179$      21,269$     28,358$     36,092$     43,182$     50,271$     57,361$      257,800$             CIITAP Community Benefit  Fund  (1% of project value) 50,000$      ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                50,000$               Savings to Applicant  132,887$   182,887$   162,770$   142,652$   122,535$  102,417$  80,470$     60,353$     40,235$     20,118$      1,047,325$        $859,170  Change from Status Quo (50,000)$    18,289$      16,460$      14,631$      12,802$     10,973$     7,315$       5,487$       3,658$       1,829$        41,444$             Years to Recoup CIITAP Community Benefit Fund Payment: 5 Duration: 10 years Community Funding: yes Net Present Formula: 3 Years at 100%, then decline equally over 7 years Value Year 12345678910Total(5% discount rate)  % Taxes Abated 100%100%100%88%75%63%50%38%25%13%  Total New Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                21,946$      45,722$     67,668$     91,444$     113,390$  137,166$  159,112$   636,448$             City New Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                7,734$        16,113$     23,847$     32,225$     39,959$     48,338$     56,072$      224,286$             CIITAP Community Benefit  Fund  (1% of project value) 50,000$      ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                50,000$               Savings to Applicant  132,887$   182,887$   182,887$   160,941$   137,166$  115,219$  91,444$     69,497$     45,722$     23,775$      1,142,426$        $932,381  Change from Status Quo (50,000)$    18,289$      36,577$      32,920$      27,433$     23,775$     18,289$     14,631$     9,144$       5,487$        136,545$            Years to Recoup CIITAP Community Benefit Fund Payment: 3 Duration: 10 years Community Funding: yes Net Present Formula: 3 Years at 100%, then decline equally starting at 70%  in year #4 Value Year 12345678910Total(5% discount rate)  % Taxes Abated 100%100%100%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%  Total New Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                54,866$      73,155$     91,444$     109,732$  128,021$  146,310$  164,599$   768,127$             City New Taxes Paid ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                19,335$      25,780$     32,225$     38,670$     45,115$     51,560$     58,005$      270,690$             CIITAP Community Benefit  Fund  (1% of project value) 50,000$      ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                ‐$                50,000$               Savings to Applicant  132,887$   182,887$   182,887$   128,021$   109,732$  91,444$     73,155$     54,866$     36,577$     18,289$      1,010,747$        $833,899  Change from Status Quo (50,000)$    18,289$      36,577$      ‐$               ‐$               ‐$               ‐$               ‐$               ‐$               ‐$                4,866$               Years to Recoup CIITAP Community Benefit Fund Payment: 3 Prepared by N. Bohn, 2/29/16 Option E ‐ 3 Years @ 100% Abatement plus Community Funding Alternative 10‐Year Abatement Formulas to Incorporate a CIITAP Community Benefit Fund  5 Million Dollar Project Option A ‐ Status Quo, 10‐Year Declining Abatement Option B ‐ Status Quo plus Community Funding Option C ‐ 2 Years @ 100% Abatement plus Community Funding Option D ‐ 3 Years @ 100% Abatement plus Community Funding Backyard Chickens The city of Ithaca is considering a two-year pilot program that would allow 20 City of Ithaca residences to keep backyard chickens. Regulation Summary  Maximum of four hens per 3,000 square foot lot  Roosters and Guinea Fowl are prohibited  Chickens must always be contained within a coop or enclosure  Chickens are not allowed to run at large  Chicken coops must be at least 20 feet from the primary lot structure and at least 5 feet from any abutting residential property line  Applicants must complete a seminar regarding the care of backyard chickens from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office  Applicants must sign an affidavit through the City Clerk’s office as part of the registration  If at any time a permit is revoked, or the owner is unable to care for their hens, the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office will work with the owners to rehome the hens. Additional information for residences in the pilot program: Permit Process:  There is a one-time $35 registration fee, paid to the Ithaca City Clerk’s office  It is recommended to work with Cornell Cooperative Extension Office staff for any questions or guidance related to coop construction and general chicken keeping. City of Ithaca Chicken Keeping Registration Formz 108 E Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 607-274-6570 Owner’s Name________________________________________________________Phone ______________________ (Owner must be 18 years of age or over) Address _______________________________________________________City__________________Zip__________ Date of completion of chicken keeping seminar: (Attach copy of certificate) [ ] Chicken Keeping Registration Fee: $35.00 Make checks payable to: City of Ithaca Affidavit 1. I agree that I will only keep 4 hens per 3,000 square foot lot. 2. I understand that this registration is valid for the duration of the two year pilot program and no longer. 3. I understand that any violations of the City’s chicken keeping legislation constitutes a civil offense enforceable by the Ithaca Police Department. 4. I understand that 3 or more complaints can result in a revocation of my registration, as determined by Cornell Cooperative Extension staff who will notify me, and informt the City Clerk, and may be in consultation with Cornell Cooperative Extension staff and the Ithaca Police Department. of the revocation. 5. I understand that the Cornell Cooperative Extension can assist me in re-homing my chickens if necessary to do so for any reason. 6. I certify that I have completed the chicken keeping seminar conducted by the Cornell Cooperative Extension. 7. I understand that any complaints resulting from my chicken keeping will be referred to the Ithaca Police Department. 8. I understand that any questions I may have or my neighbors may have about general chicken keeping and management will be directed to the Cornell Cooperative Extension. 9. If spayed or neutered, a veterinarian’s certificate is required. If you have acquired an older dog and have no records, a veterinarian can examine the animal and sign an affidavit as to whether it was spayed or neutered. 10.9. Chickens can be registered in person during regular office hours: 8:30 am – 4:30 pm, Monday - Friday, or by mail with a copy of the chicken keeping seminar certificate and a check in the amount of $35. If registering by mail, please make checks payable to the City of Ithaca, include a self- addressed, stamped envelope, and mail to the City Clerk’s Office, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850. Owners Signature:_____________________________________________________________ Date:_______________ ORDINANCE __-2015 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code WHEREAS, Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code prohibits the keeping of chickens in the City, and; WHEREAS, the City has received requests from citizens to allow chickens in backyard coops and there is an active backyard chicken movement within the City, and; WHEREAS, chicken keeping is part of a larger sustainability trend to allow citizens to grow their own foods – including fruits, vegetables and honey production – by reducing barriers, which restrict local food production. These sustainability trends are congruent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan goals, such as support for our community gardens and active living initiatives, and; WHEREAS, the Common Council desires to enable the keeping of backyard chickens in the City; 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 backyard chickens, if properly maintained, can prove a positive initiative for the City, promoting food sustainability, increasing animal welfare and providing fresh eggs free from pesticides and chemicals, without presenting a nuisance to neighboring residents or properties. Section 2. Amendments to Section 164-2(B). Section 164-2(B) shall be amended to read as follows: Exception. This section shall not apply to the keeping of chickens to the extent authorized by Article III of this Chapter, nor to any educational, scientific or research institution maintaining, with adequate safeguards as to public health, safety, comfort and convenience, any animals or other creatures for scientific, medical or other research purposes. Section 3. Amendments to Section 164-4 Section 164-4 shall be amended to read as follows: Except as provided in the Agriculture and Markets Law, a violation of this article constitutes a civil offense punishable in accordance with § 1-1 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code except that the unlawful keeping of chickens in the City shall be punishable as follows: (a) $250 for the first violation: (b) $500 for the second violation: and (c) $750 for the third or subsequent violation. These penalties shall be in addition to any other penalties provided by law. Section 4. Creation of Article III to Chapter 164 An Article III of Chapter 164 is hereby created as follows: Article III: Backyard Chickens 164-21: Definitions Lot: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Lot Square Footage: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Property Class Code: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Rear Yard: As defined in section 325-3 of the City Code. 164-22 Backyard Chickens The prohibition against keeping chickens in this Chapter shall, during a two-year pilot program that shall expire on May 1, 2018, not apply to up to twenty pilot applicants approved for the keeping of up to four female chickens (hens) per 3,000 Square Foot Lot while the animals are kept in such a manner that all requirements of this Article are satisfied. 164-23: Requirements for Keeping Chickens A. Chickens may only be kept on those Lots with a Property Class Code of 210, 215, 220, 240, 250, or substantially identical successor designations. B. Chickens may only be kept on those Lots possessing a Lot Square Footage of not less than 3,000 square feet. C. No chicken facility or any structure that houses chickens or any fenced pen area, either temporarily or permanently, shall be located within any of the following prohibited areas: 1. Within the setback requirements of the zone in which it is located; 2. Within twenty feet of any adjacent Lot’s residential principal structure or accessory structure that contains a residential unit, or within five feet of any principal structure on the Lot housing the chickens; and 3. Within five feet from any abutting residential property line, unless the adjacent owner agrees in writing to a lesser setback. D. Chickens may only be kept by a domiciliary of a dwelling unit located on the Lot on which the chickens are kept. E. Chickens must be kept in and confined in a properly designed and constructed coop or chickenhouse, or a fenced and covered enclosure, that is at least 4 square feet per chicken in size, which additionally includes a run. Each covered coop Commented [AL1]: Using PCC's here will be very exact‐ ‐which is good‐‐but recognize that various PCC‐classified single‐ and two‐family homes do house 3+ families (and perfectly legally so). Commented [AL2]: Using PCC's here will be very exact‐ ‐which is good‐‐but recognize that note that various PCC‐ classified single‐ and two‐family homes do house 3+multiple families (and perfectly legally so). Commented [AL3]: For definitions, see http://www.tax.ny.gov/research/property/assess/manu als/prclas.htm#residential. Commented [AL4]: This means it must be their primary residence… and run combined shall be located in, and shall not cover more than 50% of, the Rear Yard of the Lot. F. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow hens to run at large upon the streets, alleys or other public places of the City, or upon the property of any other person. G. During daylight hours the adult chickens shall have access to the chicken coop and, weather permitting, shall have access to an outdoor enclosure on the subject property, adequately fenced to contain the chickens and to prevent access to the chickens by dogs and other predators. H. Chicken feed must be in rodent resistant and weather proof containers. I. A chicken coop, and the premises where the chicken coop is located, shall be maintained in a condition such that the facility or chickens do not produce noise or odor that creates a nuisance for adjoining Lots and the responsible domiciliary and the owner shall remove any odorous or unsanitary condition. The Lot owner shall be responsible for the repair on any adjoining Lot of any damage caused by the chickens, including but not limited to damage to dwellings, structures and yards, and shall be responsible for any unsafe condition. J. The person keeping the chickens shall abide by all Solid Waste Storage and Collection standards of the City's Exterior Property Maintenance Code, §331-7. K. Roosters and Guinea Fowl are expressly prohibited, regardless of the age or maturity of the bird. L. Pilot registration pursuant to Section 164-24 is required for the keeping of chickens. M. Approved pilot registrants must complete a seminar regarding the care of chickens in an urban environment from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office, or similarly qualified organization acceptable to the Clerks Office. 164-24: Pilot Registration Process and Parameters. A. No more than twenty pilot registrations for the keeping of chickens shall be approved under this Article III. B. Registration shall take place at the City of Ithaca Clerk’s Office upon submission of a $35 registration fee, and verification of a completed chicken-keeping seminar. C. The City Clerk may revoke registration for a specific site via written notice to the property owner when the City Clerk or designee finds, at his or her sole discretion, that any requirements of this Article are not met, a rebuttable presumption of which shall be created by (a) a record of three or more complaints to the Ithaca Police Department about a specific site’s chickens, (b) on the recommendation of Cornell Cooperative Extension, or (c) on the recommendation of the Ithaca Police Department. Upon revocation, the City Clerk shall notify the owner in writing of the same, in compliance with sub-section 164-25, and if the revocation stands, the owner must remove the hens from the property in coordination with such assistance as may be available from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office, who may assist with rehoming them. D. The City Clerk and Police Department shall, at least three months prior to the expiration of the pilot program, report to a Committee of the Common Council on the status of the pilot program. E. Should the pilot program not be extended after the two-year period, Cornell Cooperative Extension Office may help rehome the hens in the program. 164-25: Remedies Not Exclusive. The remedies provided by this Article are cumulative and not mutually exclusive and are in addition to any other rights, remedies, and penalties available to the City under any other provision of law. A. Any chickens that are not kept as required in this Article shall be deemed a public nuisance and the owner or custodian shall be given thirty days to rectify the conditions creating the public nuisance. In any case in which the City intends to correct a violation of this chapter, including removing and confiscating any chickens present, and then bill the property owner for the correction of the violation, the City Clerk or his/her designee shall notify the owner of the property and, where relevant, the registered agent who has assumed responsibility as outlined in § 178-5 of this Code, in writing, of any violation of this chapter. B. Any notice required by this section shall be served in person or by mail to the address appearing on the City tax roll, requiring such person, within a time specified in such notice but in no event less than thirty days from the service or mailing thereof, to comply with this chapter and to abate the nuisance and, as appropriate, to remove the chickens. Such notice shall also state that the property owner may contest the finding of the City Clerk by making a written request to have a hearing on the matter held at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Public Works. C. Any request for such a hearing must be mailed and postmarked or personally delivered to the City Clerk within fourteen days of the service or mailing of notice, and any such written request for a hearing shall automatically stay further enforcement concerning the alleged violation pending such hearing. The decision of the Board of Public Works, by majority vote, shall be binding, subject to any further judicial review available to either the City or the property owner. D. Upon the failure of a property owner to comply with the notice of violation of this chapter (or, alternatively, to request a hearing as aforesaid within the time limit stated in such notice, or upon a Board of Public Works’ determination, after such a hearing, that a violation exists), the City Clerk shall refer the matter, by memorandum, to the Superintendent of Public Works, who shall cause such premises to be put in such condition as will comply and shall charge the cost thereof to the owner of said premises, including a charge of 50% for supervision and administration. The minimum charge to the property owner for such work shall be $50. E. The City Chamberlain shall promptly present to the owner of any parcel so corrected a bill rendered for such services, as certified by the Superintendent of Public Works. If not paid within 30 days, the cost thereof shall be assessed against the property, added to its tax and become a lien thereon, collectible in the same manner as delinquent City taxes. Appeals from this section shall only be permitted if written notice of appeal is received by the Ithaca City Clerk within 45 days after the mailing of the bill from the Chamberlain, and such appeals shall be taken to the Board of Public Works. Section 5. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this Ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon publication as provided for in the City Charter. City of Ithaca Planning & Economic Development Committee Wednesday, February 10, 2016 – 6:00 p.m. Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street Minutes Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Graham Kerslick, Ducson Nguyen, Cynthia Brock, and Josephine Martell Committee Members Absent: None Other Elected Officials Attending: Mayor Svante Myrick (arrived at 6:15 p.m.) Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Department of Planning, Building, Zoning, and Economic Development; Jennifer Kusznir, Senior Planner; Megan Wilson, Senior Planner; Addisu Gebre, City Bridge Engineer; Mike Thorne, Superintendent of Public Works; Debbie Grunder, Executive Assistant Others Attending: Delta Engineers Chair Seph Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 1) Call to Order/Agenda Review There were no changes made to the agenda. 2) Public Comment and Response from Committee Members Tom Schelley, 118 East Court Street, is a CAC member. Their group supports Alternative 2 for the Brindley Street Project. He also stated again his support of the backyard chicken pilot program. He also encouraged the City to allow those who are already raising chickens in the City be allowed to keep doing so. Alderperson Brock reported on a public meeting where the City will reveal results of a traffic study on Spencer Road and surrounding streets that will take place on Thursday, February 11, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. at the Oasis Fellowship Church at 808 East Meadow Street Extension. The City’s Engineering Office will present a number of sketches and ideas developed from findings of a public meeting a year ago. 3) Special Order of Business a) Public Hearing – Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development for the Waterfront Alderperson Brock moved to open the public hearing; Alderperson Kerslick seconded it. Passed unanimously. No one from the public spoke during the public hearing. Alderperson Brock moved to close the public hearing; Alderperson Kerslick seconded it. Passed unanimously. b) Public Hearing – Changes to Cell Tower Ordinance Alderperson Brock moved to open the public hearing; Alderperson Martell seconded it. Passed unanimously. Chair Murtagh read into the record a letter submitted by David Lubin also attached to these minutes. Alderperson Brock moved to close the public hearing; Alderperson Martell seconded it. Passed unanimously. c) Presentation – Brindley Street Bridge Delta Engineers and the City Engineering Office presented the Brindley Street Bridge project. The current bridge will be converted to a two-lane bridge with sidewalks. The old bridge will remain for bicycles and walkers. Two alternative approaches to the project were suggested in December 2015. Alternative 1 uses the current route with a $2.43M price tag; Alternative 2 plans to extend Taughannock Boulevard and bypass Brindley Street entirely and carries a price tag of $2.59M. This Alternative would require a longer bridge with structured support and improvements to the intersection. Alternative 2 will be carried forward for site-plan review. The environmental review will be completed at the end of summer 2016. Construction will take place in 2018. Alderperson Kerslick recalled an Alternative III which is not being considered this go round. The two alternatives are the two shortest in span of completion. Alderperson Brock stated that Alternative 1 is $2.4M and Alternative 2 is $2.6M. She asked whether any utilities, etc. will be replaced during this project. Alternative 2 is highway-like which is not a favorite of many people. The fear is this may be used as a buy pass to get around Buffalo St. There is a change in funding source since the last time the project was reviewed. 80% federal, some state money not yet determined, and some from the City. The current Brindley bridge will be changed to just a pedestrian bridge. 4) Announcements, Updates, and Reports CIITAP will be coming back to this committee next month. Inclusionary zoning will also be brought forward next month. There are a few vacancies on the Natural Areas Commission. A community meeting for the Western MLK project will be coming soon as well as a community meeting for the pedestrian walk way. 5) Action Items (Voting to Send onto Council) a) Request for Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Funds – South Hall Civic Association Website Moved by Alderperson Martell; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Failed 5-0. This is no longer a ‘funded’ program as in the past. The program is funded now from the Planning Development Department. This request is not a typical funding request since in the past, funding was provided for community events, etc., not hiring a consultant to design website. Alderperson Brock stated that websites take a time commitment to keep up-to- date and maintained. When neighborhoods change over time, this may not remain active. It was suggested that a social media page would provide exactly what a website can without the cost involved. RESOLUTION: Request for Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Funds for the South Hill Civic Association Website 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 the South Hill Civic Association (SHCA), John Graves has submitted an application for reimbursement funds to offset $300.00 in expenses from the creation of the SHCA’s website, and WHEREAS, the creation of the SHCA website will further the group’s efforts to communicate with diverse groups of residents and encourage their involvement in neighborhood activities; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Planning and Economic Development Committee approves the funding request from John Graves in the amount of $300.00 for reimbursement upon presentation of original invoices and/or receipts. b) Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development for the Waterfront An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Create a Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) Zone in the Waterfront Study Area – Declaration of Lead Agency Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. 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 the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the proposal to Create a Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) Zone in the Waterfront Study Area. Draft Resolution 1/28/16 An Ordinance to Amend the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Create a Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) Zone in the Waterfront Study Area – Declaration of Environmental Significance Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Passed unanimously. 1. WHEREAS, The Common Council is considering a proposal to create a Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) Zone in the Waterfront Study Area, and 2. WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), dated January 26, 2016, and 3. WHEREAS, the proposed action is a “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and 4. WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the FEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it 1. 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 Full Environmental Assessment Form, dated January 26, 2016, and be it further 2. 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 3. 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 Martell; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Passed Unanimously. Any project first comes to the Planning Committee for approval of the concept. Then the Planning Board will handle the site-plan view process with Common Council having the final say. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that the City does hereby establish a Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) District for the Waterfront Study Area as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code is hereby amended to add the following section: § 325-13. Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development (TMPUD) District 7) Declaration of Legislative Authority. This Planned Unit Development (PUD) Ordinance is being enacted pursuant to the authority established in the New York State General City Law § 81-f. 8) Purpose and Intent.A Temporary Mandatory Planned Unit Development District (TMPUD) is hereby established, for a period up to 18 months from the effective date of this ordinance, it being the intent of the Common Council that during that time the City will adopt land use regulations to implement a waterfront plan, the adoption of which regulations shall repeal this ordinance, or shall amend this ordinance to render the TMPUD non-mandatory. The purpose of this TMPUD is to provide the Common Council with transitional oversight for potential development projects in order to ensure that development in the waterfront study area supports the goals of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which may differ from the pre-existing zoning in this area. This is intended to allow the Common Council a reasonable period of time in which to establish a plan for the waterfront study area and to adopt compatible zoning standards. Under this ordinance, the Common Council intends to employ the recommendations established in the Comprehensive Plan when determining whether to approve a proposed development in the waterfront study area. The TMPUD will mandatorily apply to proposals for new construction or for development proposals that will change an existing building footprint by more than 50%, but shall not apply to any other construction or development, which shall remain subject to otherwise-applicable zoning ordinance. 9) Background. 1. In September of 2015, the Common Council adopted Plan Ithaca, as Phase I of the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan. This plan identifies the desired future land uses in the City, as well as areas where development is anticipated and encouraged, identifying community goals and recommendations for achieving these goals. 2. On August 17, 2015, the City of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Committee submitted a written recommendation to the City that included developing a plan for the waterfront as a priority for the next phase of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. 3. In November of 2015, the Planning and Economic Development Committee of the Common Council directed Planning Staff to begin working on a waterfront development plan as a part of the next phase for the Comprehensive Plan. The existing developable land along the City’s waterfront is currently zoned WF-1, WF-2, SW-2, P-1, and I-1. The City Comprehensive Plan identifies the goals for the Waterfront Mixed Use area as the creation of a mixed use district, including commercial, and housing, with an emphasis on uses that create an active waterfront environment. The City Comprehensive Plan further notes that “new development should protect view sheds and allow public access to the waterfront. Pedestrian and bicycle connections should be improved, particularly to adjacent mixed use areas. Developable space in the waterfront area is at a premium and reducing the impacts of parking in new development should be carefully considered.” The City Comprehensive Plan also identifies the adjacent areas that are currently zoned industrial as having potential for additional development and employment opportunities. The waterfront study is intended to guide the City’s decisions as to where and what type of development is appropriate, which will be determined by the Waterfront Development Plan currently being undertaken. 4. In 2014, the City adopted a floating PUD that could be used in any I-1 Zoning District. A PUD allows for flexibility in planning and design, while through the process of review and discussion, ensures efficient investment in development that, among others, forwards a City’s comprehensive plan. Because the zoning in this area is in transition, the temporary mandatory PUD will enable development to continue during the crafting of new land use regulations, subject to Common Council’s oversight. 10) Effective Period This TMPUD shall be in effect, within the boundaries described in Subsection E, herein, for a period of eighteen (18) months from the effective date of this ordinance, as described in Section 4, herein. 11) Affected Properties and Boundaries of the TMPUD 1. All new construction and any construction that enlarges the footprint or total floor space of an existing building by 50% or more will be subject to the TMPUD under this ordinance, and—absent compliance with the TMPUD—shall not be entitled to proceed in reliance on pre-existing land use regulations, which absent the TMPUD might or would have enabled their construction. Any changes to existing structures that do not enlarge the footprint or total floor space of an existing building by 50% are not subject to the TMPUD and remain subject to the pre-existing underlying zoning. 2. The TMPUD shall be located in the waterfront study area, whose boundaries can be seen on the map entitled Proposed Waterfront Study Area-dated 12/9/2015. 12) Permitted Principal and Accessory Uses. In the TMPUD, buildings and land may be for uses which the Common Council may pursuant to TMPUD application authorize, including Council’s consideration and potential authorization of development restrictions such as yard size, height restriction, building coverage, and lot size,. In addition, the Common Council may impose any conditions or limitations that are determined to be necessary or desirable to ensure that the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, requiring acoustical or visual screening, construction sequencing, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of the development. 13) Site Plan Approval. No structure shall be erected or placed within the TMPUD, no building permit shall be issued for a building or structure within the TMPUD, and no existing building, structure, or use in the TMPUD shall be changed, unless the proposed building and/or use is in accordance with a site plan approved pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 276 of the City of Ithaca Code. 14) Criteria. Common Council will consider an application for any development within the TMPUD on the following criteria, among others: 1. Is the project in accordance with the City Comprehensive Plan, which specifically lists the following: i. Promoting mixed use development, including commercial and housing ii. Emphasizing waterfront activities iii. Reducing impacts of parking iv. Providing for additional employment opportunities v. Promoting public access to the waterfront vi. Enhancing and preserving any environmentally sensitive areas 15) Application Process. Any applicant seeking approval of a TMPUD, will be subject to the application process established in Subsection 12(G) of this Chapter, without regard therein to any references to underlying zoning or alternate processes. 16) Additional Requirements. For any new construction in the TMPUD, the Common Council may impose such conditions or limitations that the Council, in its legislative discretion, may determine to be necessary or desirable to ensure that the development conforms with the City Comprehensive Plan, including limiting the permitted uses, location and size of buildings and structures, providing for open space and recreational areas, and requiring bonds or other assurances of completion of any infrastructure to be built as part of the development. 17) Expiration. A developer who receives PUD approval will have 24 months to begin construction of their project. If construction on the property has not been developed in accordance with the approved plan after 24 months, the PUD will automatically be revoked, unless otherwise stated by the Common Council. In the case of extenuating circumstances the developer may apply to the Common Council for an extension of PUD approval. If the site plan changes significantly, said significance as determined by the Director of Planning and Development, it may require re-consideration by the Common Council. The Director of Planning and Development may determine that the changes are minor and do not require re-approval. 18) Exemptions. Construction, alterations or demolition authorized by building permits which were issued on or before the effective date of this Section shall be exempt from the provisions of this TMPUD. Section 2. Supersession. This Section 325-13 is intended to supersede any provision of the City Code insofar as said provision is inconsistent with Subsection 325-13(E)(1) herein. Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Section 325-13 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 immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notice as provided in the Ithaca City Charter, and shall expire 18 months after the effective date, except as to any application for any development within the TMPUD that is filed under this ordinance prior to its expiration and not thereafter withdrawn by the applicant. The Mayor left the meeting at 7:05 before this vote. c) Street Level Active Uses Chair Murtagh read into record the comments made by the Downtown Ithaca Alliance which is also attached to these minutes. JoAnn Cornish stated that the Commons and Collegetown should be handled in the same way. It was the consensus of the group to give examples that are considered a non-active use such as residential use. Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Nguyen. Passed Unanimously. An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” To Create a Requirement for Street Level Active Uses on the Primary Commons ORDINANCE NO. ____ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325, Zoning, be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-8D.(“Zoning Regulations-Additional Restriction in the CBD Districts”) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to add a new subsection 325-8D(3), that will establish a requirement for active street level uses for any establishment that opens on to the Primary Commons. Section 325-8D(3), shall read as follows: 325-8 D. (3) All properties located in the CBD district that contain a storefront that fronts on the Primary Commons, must contain an active use on the street level, for that portion of the building that fronts onto the Primary Commons. Active uses are defined as uses that encourage high levels of pedestrian activity and enliven the streetscape, and create well-lit spaces with ample visibility into the storefront area. Active uses include, but are not limited to the following:  Retail Store or Service Commercial Facility  Restaurant, Fast Food Establishment, or Tavern  Theater, Bowling Alley, Auditorium, or Other Similar Public Place of Assembly  Hotel  Bank or Monetary Institution  Confectionary, millinery, dressmaking and other activities involving light hand fabrication as well as sales. Additional uses may be permitted if the Planning and Development Board determines them to be an active use and grants special approval for the use. The Planning Board may also grant a special approval of a non-active use if a property owner is able to show that the physical structure is not easily adaptable to be used as one of the above listed active uses. Section 3. The City Planning and Development Board, the City Clerk, and the Planning and Economic Development Division shall amend the District Regulations Chart to add street level active uses as a requirement under the permitted primary uses, in accordance with the amendments made by this ordinance. Section 4. 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 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. 6) Action Items (Voting to Circulate) a) Backyard Chickens – Pilot Program Backyard Chickens The City of Ithaca is considering a two-year pilot program that would allow 20 City of Ithaca residences to keep backyard chickens. Regulation Summary  Maximum of four hens  Roosters prohibited  Slaughtering of chickens prohibited  Chickens must always be contained within a coop or enclosure  Chickens are not allowed to run at large  Chicken coops must be at least 20 feet from the primary lot structure and at least 5 feet from any abutting residential property line  Applicants must complete a seminar regarding the care of backyard chickens from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office  A building permit must be obtained prior to constructing a chicken coop or enclosure  If at any time a permit is revoked, or the owner is unable to care for their hens, the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office will work with the owners to rehome the hens. Additional information for residences in the pilot program: Permit Process:  There is a one-time $70 permit application fee, paid at the time that the permit is issued to the Building Department.  It is recommended to work with Cornell Cooperative Extension Office staff and the Building Department to make sure ones’ property meets the minimum requirements. Owners are also required to submit plans for their coop and enclosure construction. Alderperson Martell requested that Guinea Hens be added as not prohibited. Those that are already raising chickens would be able to be the first to apply for the permits. Alderperson Brock stated that nuisance complaints are difficult to enforce because the homeowner has the right not to allow access. Once a resident applies for a permit, it will allow building inspectors to investigate any of these complaints. Moved by Alderperson Martell; seconded by Alderperson Kerslick. Passed unanimously to circulate. ORDINANCE __-2015 An Ordinance Amending Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code WHEREAS, Chapter 164 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code prohibits the keeping of chickens in the City, and; WHEREAS, the City has received requests from citizens to allow chickens in backyard coops and there is an active backyard chicken movement within the City, and; WHEREAS, chicken keeping is part of a larger sustainability trend to allow citizens to grow their own foods – including fruits, vegetables and honey production – by reducing barriers, which restrict local food production. These sustainability trends are congruent with the City’s Comprehensive Plan goals, such as support for our community gardens and active living initiatives, and; WHEREAS, the Common Council desires to enable the keeping of backyard chickens in the City; 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 backyard chickens, if properly maintained, can prove a positive initiative for the City, promoting food sustainability, increasing animal welfare and providing fresh eggs free from pesticides and chemicals, without presenting a nuisance to neighboring residents or properties. Section 2. Amendments to Section 164-2(B). Section 164-2(B) shall be amended to read as follows: Exception. This section shall not apply to the keeping of chickens to the extent authorized by Article III of this Chapter, nor to any educational, scientific or research institution maintaining, with adequate safeguards as to public health, safety, comfort and convenience, any animals or other creatures for scientific, medical or other research purposes. Section 3. Amendments to Section 164-4 Section 164-4 shall be amended to read as follows: Except as provided in the Agriculture and Markets Law, a violation of this article constitutes a civil offense punishable in accordance with § 1-1 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code except that the unlawful keeping of chickens in the City shall be punishable as follows: (a) $250 for the first violation: (b) $500 for the second violation: and (c) $750 for the third or subsequent violation. These penalties shall be in addition to any other penalties provided by law. Section 4. Creation of Article III to Chapter 164 An Article III of Chapter 164 is hereby created as follows: Article III: Backyard Chickens 164-21: Definitions Lot: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Lot Square Footage: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Property Class Code: As defined in section C-73(C)(1) of the City Charter. Rear Yard: As defined in section 325-3 of the City Code. 164-22 Backyard Chickens The prohibition against keeping chickens in this Chapter shall, during a two-year pilot program that shall expire on May 1, 2018, not apply to up to twenty pilot applicants approved for the keeping of up to four female chickens (hens) per Lot while the animals are kept in such a manner that all requirements of this Article are satisfied. 164-23: Requirements for Keeping Chickens A. Chickens may only be kept on those Lots with a Property Class Code of 210, 215, 220, 240, 250, or substantially identical successor designations. B. Chickens may only be kept on those Lots possessing a Lot Square Footage of not less than 3,000 square feet. C. No chicken facility or any structure that houses chickens or any fenced pen area, either temporarily or permanently, shall be located within any of the following prohibited areas: 1. Within the setback requirements of the zone in which it is located; 2. Within twenty feet of any adjacent Lot’s residential principal structure or accessory structure that contains a residential unit,, or within five feet of any principal structure on the Lot housing the chickens; and 3. Within five feet from any abutting residential property line, unless the adjacent owner agrees in writing to a lesser setback. D. Chickens may only be kept by a domiciliary of a dwelling unit located on the Lot on which the chickens are kept. E. Chickens must be kept in and confined in a properly designed and constructed coop or chickenhouse, or a fenced and covered enclosure that is at least 4 square feet per chicken in size, which additionally includes a run. Each covered coop and run combined shall be located in, and shall not cover more than 50% of, the Rear Yard of the Lot. F. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow hens to run at large upon the streets, alleys or other public places of the City, or upon the property of any other person. G. During daylight hours the adult chickens shall have access to the chicken coop and, weather permitting, shall have access to an outdoor enclosure on the subject property, adequately fenced to contain the chickens and to prevent access to the chickens by dogs and other predators. H. Chicken feed must be in rodent resistant and weather proof containers. I. Chickens may not be butchered, slaughtered, or otherwise killed, for any reason or any purpose, on any real property on which chickens are kept pursuant to this Article. J. A chicken coop, and the premises where the chicken coop is located, shall be maintained in a condition such that the facility or chickens do not produce noise or odor that creates a nuisance for adjoining Lots and the responsible domiciliary and the owner shall remove any odorous or unsanitary condition. The Lot owner shall be responsible for the repair on any adjoining Lot of any damage caused by the chickens, including but not limited to damage to dwellings, structures and yards, and shall be responsible for any unsafe condition. K. The person keeping the chickens shall abide by all Solid Waste Storage and Collection standards of the City's Exterior Property Maintenance Code, §331-7. L. Roosters are expressly prohibited, regardless of the age or maturity of the bird. M. Pilot application approval pursuant to Section 164-24 is required for the keeping of chickens. N. Approved pilot applicants must complete a seminar regarding the care of chickens in an urban environment from the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office, or similarly qualified organization acceptable to the Planning Department. 164-24: Pilot Application Process and Parameters. A. No more than twenty pilot applications for the keeping of chickens shall be approved under this Article III. B. Applications shall be made to, and approved or rejected by, the City of Ithaca Planning Department upon submission of a $70 application fee, an application, site survey, verification of a completed chicken keeping seminar and preliminary plans for a covered coop. C. If electricity is provided to the coop, a separate electrical permit will be required. D. A Planning Department representative will perform a site visit, review the application and interview the applicant prior to Planning Department approval. E. The Planning Department may revoke application approval for a specific site via written notice to the property owner when the Director of Planning or designee finds, at his or her sole discretion, that any requirements of this Article are not met. Upon revocation, the owner must remove the hens from the property in coordination with the Cornell Cooperative Extension Office who will assist with rehoming them. F. The Planning Department shall, at least three months prior to the expiration of the pilot program, report to a Committee of the Common Council on the status of the pilot program. 164-25: Remedies Not Exclusive. The remedies provided by this Article are cumulative and not mutually exclusive and are in addition to any other rights, remedies, and penalties available to the City under any other provision of law. A. Any chickens that are not kept as required in this Article shall be deemed a public nuisance and the owner or custodian shall be given thirty days to rectify the conditions creating the public nuisance. In any case in which the City intends to correct a violation of this chapter, including removing and confiscating any chickens present, and then bill the property owner for the correction of the violation, the Director of Planning and Development or his/her designee shall notify the owner of the property and, where relevant, the registered agent who has assumed responsibility as outlined in § 178-5 of this Code, in writing, of any violation of this chapter. B. Any notice required by this section shall be served in person or by mail to the address appearing on the City tax roll, requiring such person, within a time specified in such notice but in no event less than thirty days from the service or mailing thereof, to comply with this chapter and to abate the nuisance and, as appropriate, to remove the chickens. Such notice shall also state that the property owner may contest the finding of the Director of Planning and Development or designee by making a written request to have a hearing on the matter held at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of Public Works. C. Any request for such a hearing must be mailed and postmarked or personally delivered to the Director of Planning and Development or designee within fourteen days of the service or mailing of notice, and any such written request for a hearing shall automatically stay further enforcement concerning the alleged violation pending such hearing. The decision of the Board of Public Works, by majority vote, shall be binding, subject to any further judicial review available to either the City or the property owner. D. Upon the failure of a property owner to comply with the notice of violation of this chapter (or, alternatively, to request a hearing as aforesaid within the time limit stated in such notice, or upon a Board of Public Works’ determination, after such a hearing, that a violation exists), the Director of Planning and Development or designee shall refer the matter, by memorandum, to the Superintendent of Public Works, who shall cause such premises to be put in such condition as will comply and shall charge the cost thereof to the owner of said premises, including a charge of 50% for supervision and administration. The minimum charge to the property owner for such work shall be $50. E. The City Chamberlain shall promptly present to the owner of any parcel so corrected a bill rendered for such services, as certified by the Superintendent of Public Works. If not paid within 30 days, the cost thereof shall be assessed against the property, added to its tax and become a lien thereon, collectible in the same manner as delinquent City taxes. Appeals from this section shall only be permitted if written notice of appeal is received by the Ithaca City Clerk within 45 days after the mailing of the bill from the Chamberlain, and such appeals shall be taken to the Board of Public Works. Section 5. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this Ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon publication as provided for in the City Charter. b) Proposed Small Revisions to PUD Ordinance Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Nguyen. Passed Unanimously. An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” Article IV, Section 325-12, in Order to Amend the Approval Process for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) ORDINANCE NO. 2016-____ The way the PUD process is written now, the developer would come back to the Planning Board throughout the different phases of the project. The proposed changes include allowing Common Council Common Council to approve a PUD for a multi phased project based on the final site plan approval of the first phase of the project and preliminary site plan approval of subsequent phases of the project. Alderperson Brock moved to circulate; seconded by Alderperson Nguyen. Passed unanimously. Since this a minor change, an environmental review is not necessary. BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325, Article IV, Section 325-12G.(12) be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Article IV, section 325- 12G.(12) is hereby amended to change the approval process for a Planned Unit Development Zone to allow the Common Council to approve a PUD for a multi phased project based on the final site plan approval of the first phase of the project and preliminary site plan approval of subsequent phases of the project, and shall read as follows: §325-12. G.(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 CEQRO and has issued a contingent site plan approval or in the case of a multi-phase project has issued a preliminary contingent site plan approval of multiple phases along with a final contingent site plan approval of at least one phase, the project will return to the Common Council for final consideration of the adoption of the PUD, which in Council’s discretion may be authorized for one or all phases of a multi-phase project. Final Council approval, if any, shall be granted via ordinance.” 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. 7) Discussion a) Changes to Cell Tower Ordinance Alderperson Kerslick agrees with Phyllis Radke’s and Lisa Nicholas’ comments that this cell tower be replaced with a new less intrusive tower. The group agreed to research on how to move forward with this. It will be brought back to this committee in April. b) Cayuga Watershed Restoration and Protection Plan Alderperson Brock is asking the committee and municipalities for their input on this project. Her hope is to get all the input back by March 15th to consolidate into one report to be submitted. 8) Review and Approval of Minutes a) January 2016 Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed unanimously. 9) Adjournment Moved by Alderperson Kerslick; seconded by Alderperson Brock. All agreed to adjourn at 8:15 p.m. February 5, 2016 TO: Seph Murtagh, Joann Cornish, Jennifer Kusznir, Phyllisa DeSarno FROM: Gary Ferguson RE: STREET –LEVEL ACTIVE USE PROPOSAL FOR THE PRIMARY COMMONS: SUGGESTIONS AND FEEDBACK FROM THE BUSINESS RETENTION & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE The city of Ithaca’s proposal to require street-level active uses on the primary Commons was addressed at a recent meeting of the Business Retention & Development Committee of the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA). This standing committee of the DIA consists of downtown landlords, developers, and businesses, along with a representative from the City. This DIA Committee offered the following observations and suggestions to the City’s Planning and Economic Development Committee: (1) The Committee argued that the proposal was too broad in scope and would not successfully address the  concerns about preserving active street‐level use.   (2) The retail landscape is changing nationally, regionally, and locally. This proposal does not reflect or  adequately consider these changes to the retail marketplace that landlords must navigate as they seek  to fill vacancies.     (3) Further restricting use was deemed problematic. The proposal has too many contradictions, among  them:  a. Bars— They now open at 5:00 pm; They generally closed all day. They qualify as active use but  are detriments to active use during peak shopping hours.   b. Churches‐  They are allowed in the proposal, but again are only open 1‐2 days a week for very  limited times. Otherwise, they are detriments to active use.  c. The current IC art gallery is an example of a qualifying use that is only open 1‐2 days/month and  otherwise is a detriment to active street‐level use.  d. What constitutes active use? How many people need to go in and out a doorway? Some stores  may only get 1 customer a day.   e. A leasing office/mgt. office for a housing project would have much more traffic but is not  permitted.  The Committee worried that there were so many inconsistencies that the proposal would not be  effective and would only create hardship and confusion for property owners and the City.    (4) The Committee suggested that office tenants will tend to self‐select to other upper level or off‐ Commons spaces, due to cost and other practical concerns.    (5) The Committee worried that the Planning Board is best constituted to deal with design and site planning  issues, not economic and business issues raised by this proposal. Any question about eligibility or any  request for variance is to be adjudicated by the Planning Board.     (6) The Committee further worried that leasing decisions cannot be stretched over extended periods of  time and often need to be made quickly. By referring requests to the Planning Board, this will put  Commons property owners at a competitive disadvantage in negotiating with and leasing to prospective  tenants.    (7) The Committee also wanted to understand the underlying need for the ordinance. The principal reasons  for the proposal relate to preserving ground floor space for active uses that are compatible with retail  pedestrian traffic. In particular the proposal would help by  a. Prohibiting residential on ground floor.  b. Prohibit window shades that block seeing in or seeing out.  c. Promote night time lights from storefronts  that would illuminate the pedestrian way    (8)   Suggestions from the Committee:  a. The market should accomplish the desired result without regulation.  b. If revisions are desired, they should directly address the reasons listed in (5).  ‐ Mandate that residential use on the ground floor is prohibited;  ‐  Mandate that businesses cannot have window shades that block seeing in and seeing out.  ‐ Fix broken street light around the Commons that are already deterring pedestrian traffic,  particularly the broken lights on the 100 South Cayuga Street block.  ‐ Ask business tenants to voluntarily leave lights on overnight to create more light for the  streetscape.  Recognize that leaving lights on overnight is a cost borne by the tenant and not  the building owner or the City.    Cc:  Chris Hyde, Business Retention & Development Committee Chair        February 3, 2016 JoAnn Cornish Dir. Of Planning and Development City of Ithaca  Ms. Cornish,  Please consider this a letter of support for revising the City Zoning Ordinance Article VA, Telecommunication  Facilities to lower the required fall zone.  I believe that restricting development around a cell tower limits the property development rights of the  owners and decreases their property value as well as the City’s tax revenues.  I believe that cell towers are a reality of today’s world.  I may agree that they do not improve the landscape,  but they do offer public services and are depended on by the public at large.  I believe that the size of these towers will be reduced in the future as innovation continues to increase the  range while minimizing the size of these towers.  In the near future I believe that cellular towers will be  hidden in flag poles and street lights and will not be as noticeable as they are today.  I support the revision of the required fall zone to 120% of its height.            David Lubin            Managing Member          Unchained Properties, LLC