HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-12-12 Planning & EDC Meeting AgendaMEETING NOTICE
City of Ithaca Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, September 12, 2012 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
A. Agenda Review
B. Special Order of Business
1. Public Hearing – Proposed Amendment of Cayuga Green Purchase and Sale Contract
2. Public Hearing – Proposed Site Plan Review Ordinance Changes
C. Public Comment and Response from Committee Members (6:00 pm)
D. Announcements, Updates and Reports (6:10 pm)
1. Intermunicipal Planning Coordination
2. Dredging / Hydrilla
3. Emerson
4. Collegetown
5. Commons
6. Energy Action Plan
E. Action Items
1. Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Fund (NIIF) (6:15 pm)
(Southside Backpack event: memo, application, resolution)
2. Mural on North Wall of Green Street Garage (6:20 pm)
(program concept memo, Chilson mural selection memo, mural description, resolution)
3. Amendment to the Cayuga Green Purchase and Sale Agreement Timeline (6:30 pm)
(resolution, rendering; plans/elevations available at cityofithaca.org)
4. Neighborhood Housing Initiative Changes – Conversion to Financial Assistance
Program (6:40 pm)
(current policy, resolution to modify)
5. Exterior Property Maintenance Ordinance (7:00 pm)
(Rental Housing Advisory Commission letter, Chapter 178 and Chapter 258 ordinances)
6. Waterfront Zoning Ordinance – minor change (7:15 pm)
(memo, ordinance)
7. Community Investment Incentive Program – Amendment (7:25 pm)
(memo, resolution)
F. Discussion Items (direction for development of possible future action items)
1. Industrial (I) District – Allowing Housing (7:40 pm)
(concept memo, ordinance draft, comments received)
2. Agenda planning -- potential upcoming items (8:00 pm)
a. In development or circulation, expected back soon
Possible Elimination of Minimum Parking Requirements
G. Approval of Minutes
H. Adjournment (8:05 pm)
Direct questions about the agenda to Jennifer Dotson, Chairperson, (jdotson@cityofithaca.org or 351-5458) or the
appropriate staff person at the Department of Planning & Development (274-6550). Back-up material is available in
the office of the Department of Planning & Development. The agenda order is tentative and subject to change.
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, September 11, 2012.
Item # E1 a
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: planning@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee
From: Megan Wilson, Planner
RE: Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Fund
DATE: September 5, 2012
Attached is an application for the Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Fund (NIIF) and
other materials pertaining to this year’s Back to School Backpack Giveaway, scheduled
for Saturday, September 8, 2012. The applicant is Clara Butler, a Southside resident
who is submitting the application on behalf of a group of residents who have organized
this event. The residents are also working with the Southside Community Center and
Cornell Cooperative Extension. This year’s event will be the second Back to School
Backpack Giveaway, and last year’s event was a successful community celebration that
distributed over 50 backpacks filled with school supplies to local youth. Event
expenditures include various school supplies that will be donated at the event. The
residents have had success procuring donations of food, beverages, and supplies for the
celebration.
Item #E1 b
Item #E1 b
Item #E1 b
Item #E1 b
Item #E1 b
Item #E1 c
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
September 12, 2012
RESOLUTION: Request for Neighborhood Improvement Incentive Funds from Southside
Residents for the Back to School Backpack Giveaway, September 2012
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 Council as eligible for the funding include but are not limited
to items such as neighborhood clean-ups, planting in public places, and organizing
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 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, Clara Butler, on behalf of residents of the Southside neighborhood, has submitted a
completed application for reimbursement funds to off-set expenses that are estimated to
be in excess of $300 for the Back to School Backpack Giveaway, a community
celebration that will include the distribution of backpacks and school supplies to
approximately 50 elementary school children at the Southside Community Center, held
on Saturday September 8, 2012, and
WHEREAS, notice of the event was circulated throughout the neighborhood; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Planning and Economic Development Committee approves the request Clara
Butler in an amount up to $300.00 for reimbursement upon presentation of original
invoices and/or receipts.
Item #E2 a
Item E2 a
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Megan Wilson, Planner
DATE: September 5, 2012
RE: Selection of Murals and Street Art by Public Art Commission
In 2010, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) created a mural and street art program to beautify
blank walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to
showcase their work. To facilitate the program, the PAC approached the Board of Public Works for
approval to use City-owned property as sites for mural installations, and the Board approved the following
potential sites for inclusion in the PAC’s Mural and Street Art Program:
• Walls in the City garages on Green Street and Seneca Street
• Retaining wall along the Ithaca Hotel site
• DPW facilities next to the Sciencenter and across from the street from the Sciencenter
• Municipal electrical boxes throughout the city
• Retaining walls on West Spencer Street and downstream from the George Johnson Bridge
The Mural and Street Art Program has led to the creation of several impressive murals throughout the city.
As public art has become more visible, the PAC has received an increasing number of proposals. With a
structured program in place and a highly motivated membership, the PAC is able to work with artists to turn
these proposals into works of public art. In addition, the PAC has managed two successful public art projects
of its own and hopes to provide similar opportunities for artists in the future.
Pursuant to Chapter 5, Public Art Commission, of the City Code, the PAC is charged with reviewing and
advising the Common Council on all proposals for the exhibition and display of public art in the city’s public
spaces, in public buildings, and public facilities and infrastructure. It is also responsible for advising the
Common Council on the selection of acquisitions and donations of public art. The Common Council is
ultimately responsible for the selection of public art. The PAC would like the Common Council to consider
delegating the selection of murals to the Commission. While part of the City’s public art collection, murals
are temporary due to the nature of the medium and will be replaced over time. In addition, with the
popularity of the Mural and Street Art Program, more mural proposals will be brought to Common Council
for approval. Prior to Common Council’s selection, the PAC thoroughly reviews each proposal for a mural
that it receives. Potential locations are also carefully evaluated, and proposed designs are matched with the
most appropriate site to ensure a successful installation for the artist, the City, and the public. The PAC’s
final selections are passed on as recommendations to the Common Council. Since the Common Council
frequently accepts the PAC’s recommendations, the Commission believes that delegating the selection of
murals to the PAC would streamline the approval process.
Staff will attend the September 12th Planning & Economic Development Committee meeting to discus the
idea of delegating the selection of murals to the Public Art Commission. If the Committee is in agreement,
staff will circulate the proposal for comment and return next month for further discussion. If you have any
questions or comments prior to the meeting, please contact me at 274-6560 or mwilson@cityofithaca.org.
Item # E2 b
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee
FROM: Megan Wilson, Planner
DATE: September 6, 2012
RE: Public Art Commission Mural Recommendation – “Love Conquers All” by Sean Chilson
In 2010, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) created a mural and street art program to beautify
blank walls within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to
showcase their work. As part of this program, local artist Sean Chilson has submitted a proposal for a mural,
titled “Love Conquers All.” The PAC has reviewed Mr. Chilson’s proposal and at its meeting on August 9,
2012 voted unanimously to recommend it for selection by the Common Council. In consideration of the
mural design and the potential sites approved by the Board of Public Works, the PAC recommends that the
mural be install on the concrete block wall facing the surface-level parking lot of the Green Street Garage. In
this location, the mural will be visible primarily to users of the parking lot, pedestrians on Green Street, and
patrons of the surrounding businesses. The PAC has distributed the mural proposal to neighborhood
listservs, the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, and City staff for review and has held a comment period at its
meeting on September 6th to gather public input on the proposed design and location.
A description and sketch of the proposed mural as well as a photo of the proposed location are enclosed for
your review. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at 274-6560 or
mwilson@cityofithaca.org.
Proposed Design – “Love Conquers All”
Proposed Location
Item #E2 d
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Proposed Resolution
September 12, 2012
Resolution to Select Artwork for a Mural within the Green Street Parking Garage
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Public Art Commission (PAC) has been established to, among
other duties, review and advise the Common Council on proposals for the exhibition and display
of public art in the City’s public spaces, and
WHEREAS, in 2010, the PAC created a mural and street art program to beautify blank walls
within the city while providing local artists from all sections of the community an opportunity to
showcase their work, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved several locations for future murals and street
art, including walls in the City garages on Green Street and Seneca Street, by resolution on May
19, 2010, and
WHEREAS, local artist Sean Chilson submitted his proposal for a mural titled “Love Conquers
All” as part of the PAC’s Mural and Street Art Program, and
WHEREAS, the PAC unanimously approved Mr. Chilson’s mural proposal at its meeting on
August 9, 2012 and, upon review of the potential mural sites pre-approved by the Board of
Public Works, selected the concrete block wall facing the surface-level parking lot of the Green
Street Garage as the location for the proposed mural, and
WHEREAS, the PAC held a public comment period on the proposed mural design and
recommended location at its special meeting on September 6, 2012 to gather input on the
proposed installation, and
WHEREAS, the Public Art Commission recommends that the Common Council select the “Love
Conquers All” mural proposal submitted by Sean Chilson to be installed on the concrete block
wall facing the surface-level parking lot of the Green Street Garage; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council selects the mural “Love Conquers All”
mural by Sean Chilson to be installed within the Green Street Parking Garage and to be added to
the City of Ithaca’s public art collection; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the selected artist may proceed with the installation of his mural on the
concrete block wall facing the surface-level parking lot of the Green Street Garage upon the
execution of an agreement with the City (as reviewed by the City Attorney).
Item #E3 a
1
Proposed Resolution
Common Council Planning & Economic Development Committee
September 12, 2012
Cayuga Green Project, Approval of 4th Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Contract for Parcel ‘D’
Whereas, on June 27, 2012, Cayuga Green II, LLC submitted a request for a 6‐month extension of
the purchase and sale contract (Sales Contract) between the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA)
and Cayuga Green II, LLC for purchase of Parcel ‘D’ (tax map parcel #81.‐2‐4) of the Cayuga Green
project, and
Whereas, Parcel ‘D’ is an approximately ½ acre, triangular‐shaped parcel located between the
Cayuga Garage and the Six Mile Creek Walk, and
Whereas, the Sales Contract agrees to a sales price of $270,000 and obligates the purchaser to
undertake a project “anticipated to consist of construction of no less than 30 rental and/or for‐sale
housing units located adjacent to the Cayuga Garage or such other uses approved by Seller and the
Common Council of the City of Ithaca”, and
Whereas, to enforce the future land use obligation, the Contract requires the purchaser to satisfy
the following seller contingencies prior to June 30, 2012 as a condition of conveyance of the
property:
1. Submit proof of final site development plan approval for a project containing at least 30
housing units;
2. Submit proof of issuance of a building permit for the project;
3. Submit proof that all project financing has been secured to complete the project, and
Whereas, the purchaser did not satisfy all of the above‐listed seller contingencies by June 30,
2012, and
Whereas, the purchaser has submitted revised project plans to the City of Ithaca Planning &
Development Board and indicated they have received an acceptable loan proposal to finance the
project from a regional lending source, and
Whereas, the purchaser has revised the project to eliminate a ground floor commercial use,
reduce the building footprint to provide a required 10‐foot rear yard along the Six Mile Creek
Walk, and now proposed construction of a 39‐unit, loft‐style, residential rental project, including
1‐bedroom, 2‐bedroom and 3‐bedroom units, and
Whereas, on August 28, 2012, the City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board granted modified
site plan approval for the project, and
Whereas, the purchaser indicated they have invested almost $200,000 in project predevelopment
costs to date, and
Item #E3 a
2
Whereas, each request to extend the Sales Contract results in a delay to realize anticipated public
benefits of the project, including revenues from permit fees, property taxes, and parking fees, and
requires staff and legal resources to administer, and
Whereas, Cayuga Green II, LLC, seeks no property tax abatements for this market‐rate project, and
Whereas, under §507 of Article 15 of General Municipal Law, the IURA’s proposed disposition of
real property requires Common Council approval following a public hearing, and
Whereas, contingent upon Common Council approval, the IURA approved a 4th amendment to the
Sales Contract subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The purchaser’s deadline to satisfy seller contingencies to secure final site plan approval,
project financing and issuance of a building permit is extended to December 31, 2012, and
2. Inclusion of a requirement for payment of a $20,000 non‐refundable deposit toward the
purchase price and/or City of Ithaca building permit fees be paid upon signing the
amendment, which shall be retained by the seller in the event seller contingencies are not
satisfied by December 31, 2012, and
Whereas, a public hearing on the proposed amendment to the Purchase and Sale Contract was
held on September 12, 2012, and
Whereas, the City wishes to facilitate the construction of additional housing units in downtown
Ithaca that will expand the range of housing opportunities and increase the property tax base, and
Whereas, a negative declaration was issued for an earlier 7‐story version of the project pursuant
to the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and
Whereas, the revised 4‐story loft‐style residential project and the action of approving the
proposed 4th amendment to the Sales Contract for parcel ‘D’ are no less protective of the
environment than the previously‐approved Contract and site plan, therefore requiring no
additional environmental review, and
Whereas, the revised 4‐story project and the action of approving the proposed 4th amendment to
the Sales Contract is no less protective of the environment than the previously approved project,
therefore no additional environmental review is required; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council hereby approves a 4th amendment to the
Purchase and Sale Contract with Cayuga Green II LLC for Parcel ‘D’ (tax map parcel # 81.‐2‐4)
subject to the following terms and conditions:
1. The purchaser’s deadline to satisfy seller contingencies to secure final site plan approval,
project financing and issuance of a building permit is extended to December 31, 2012, and
2. Inclusion of a requirement for payment of a $20,000 non‐refundable deposit toward the
purchase price and/or City of Ithaca building permit fees be paid upon signing the
amendment, which shall be retained by the seller in the event seller contingencies are not
satisfied by December 31, 2012.
j:\staff\nels\iura\city\cayuga green\phase ii\property dispositions\parcel d\reso iura 4th amend of p&s ‐ parcel d cayuga green ‐ 7‐26‐12.doc
It
e
m
#E
3
b
It
e
m
#E
3
b
It
e
m
#E
3
b
It
e
m
#E
3
b
It
e
m
#E
3
b
Neighborhood Housing Initiative
City of Ithaca, NY
(Originally Adopted by Common Council 12/5/00 and Amended 10/3/01.)
October 3, 2001
Summary
Capitalize a $2 million fund to establish a program to (1) acquire rental residential properties that negatively
effect a neighborhood, (2) renovate acquired properties, and (3) sell renovated properties to owner-
occupants. Proceeds from resale of the renovated properties will be reinvested back into the program to
fund acquisition and renovation of additional properties. The program will focus on rental properties that
can be rehabilitated for resale as single-family or duplex residences. Based on an estimated average
subsidy of $33,000 per dwelling unit, it is anticipated that 50 to 70 dwelling units will be renovated with 35 to
45 properties converted to owner-occupancy over five years as a result of the program. The actual number
of properties renovated is dependent on the location, size and condition of buildings selected for
acquisition.
* * * * *
Introduction
Low homeownership rates and a persistent amount of physically substandard housing in most of Ithaca’s
neighborhoods pose significant obstacles to ongoing neighborhood revitalization efforts throughout the City.
The City of Ithaca has an extraordinarily low, and declining, rate of homeownership. While nationwide, the
homeownership rate exceeds 66%, less than 29% of the housing units in Ithaca are owner-occupied,
according to the latest census. Between 1970 and 1990, the homeownership rate has slipped from 38% to
29%. Because a decision to purchase a home requires a significant and long-term financial and personal
commitment in a neighborhood, changes in the homeownership rate are often a strong indicator of
neighborhood stability.
A recent exterior housing condition survey conducted in 2000 by INHS revealed a troubling trend that City
housing conditions have slipped since 1990. For instance, the number of deteriorated or dilapidated
houses has increased from 18 residential structures in 1990 to 53 in 2000. The survey also confirmed that
owner-occupied dwellings, as a category, were maintained in better condition than rental properties.
Among the very worst properties identified in the survey, 10 of the 11 properties rated “dilapidated” were
rental properties.
The residential rental market in Ithaca is being influenced by a significant increase in new housing units
oriented to the college student market. This increase in housing supply in the Collegetown neighborhood
and on campus is exerting a downward pressure on less competitive rental units further away from Cornell
and especially in downtown neighborhoods where there is a reported increase in the rental housing
Item # E4 a
Page 2 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
vacancy rate. The increased rental vacancy rate provides an opportunity to work with the market to convert
rental units to owner-occupied units without significantly impacting the affordability of housing for renters.
To remain a stable and healthy neighborhood requires on-going investments of time, energy and money.
Also important is the capacity of neighborhood groups to manage threats to quality-of-life. Several
neighborhoods in the City are at risk of disinvestment due to substandard rental housing that exerts a
blighting influence on the surrounding area. If the blighting influence goes unaddressed, it creates a chilling
influence on new investment in the immediate neighborhood. That, in turn, discourages investment in the
larger neighborhood.
Development of a program to renovate and convert blighting rental structures to owner-occupied homes will
significantly strengthen the health of City neighborhoods and encourage further investment. In addition, the
program adds an important tool to increase the capacity of resident groups to solve problems that threaten
the stability of their neighborhood. Following is a detailed framework for implementing such a program.
Goal
Increase neighborhood stability and improve neighborhood quality-of-life.
Objectives (in rank order)
1. Eliminate blighting conditions.
2. Increase the number and percentage of homeowners in the City of Ithaca.
3. Convert rental properties to owner-occupancy status.
4. Physically upgrade substandard housing.
5. Stimulate private sector investment in neighborhoods.
Revitalization Strategy
Stabilize and strengthen neighborhoods by selectively acquiring and renovating investor-owned residential
properties that exert a blighting influence on the surrounding neighborhood or hinder private sector
reinvestment in the neighborhood. Selected investor-owned properties must be in substandard physical
condition and exerting a blighting influence on the surrounding neighborhood. Properties included in the
program may also be abandoned, condemned, in violation of City housing standards (e.g., health, safety,
fire safety, infestation, etc …), unsightly, nonconforming with current zoning, contain perceived
environmental hazards or be substantially delinquent in property taxes.
Renovated homes will be sold at fair market value to individual homebuyers agreeing to a 25-year deed
restriction, or similar binding agreement, requiring owner-occupancy.
Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS) experience from over 75 house recycling projects
completed has shown there is very limited market demand by owner-occupants for properties exceeding
two housing units (duplex). Accordingly, every effort will be made to convert multiple-unit properties to
single-family or duplex status appropriate for owner-occupancy.
Target Area
Eligible properties must be located within the Urban Renewal Area as defined in the Common Council
adopted Urban Renewal Plan (see attached Community Development/Urban Renewal Project Boundary
Map with proposed amendments).
Item # E4 a
Page 3 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
Funding Source
The Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) will issue $2,000,000 in tax-exempt bonds to capitalize the
program. The IURA issued debt will be backed by the full faith and credit of the City of Ithaca. The City will
pay principal and interest payments to retire the bonds, similar to the manner in which capital projects are
funded. Net proceeds from sales of renovated properties will be reinvested in the program. No direct
federal funding is proposed to initially capitalize the fund.
Organizational Framework
• City of Ithaca Controller’s Office - City Department with principal responsibility for structuring program
debt financing, managing the capital project funding debt service obligations, and financial oversight of
City’s program funding.
• Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) – Administration and oversight of program on behalf of City.
IURA will issue bonds to capitalize the program, develop an agreement with the selected Contractor to
acquire, renovate, market and sell properties to homebuyers, and monitor the agreement. In addition,
the IURA will staff the Homeownership Investment Committee.
• Independent Contractor (Contractor) -- The selected Contractor will contract with the IURA to deliver
and implement the program, including developing property selection recommendations, property
inspection, preparation of cost estimates for rehabilitation and resale value, acquisition, design,
permitting, construction, property management, marketing, purchase negotiation and project
administration.
• Homeownership Investment Committee (HIC) – Mayoral-appointed five member committee, subject to
Common Council approval, to select candidate properties for inclusion in the program, approve
acquisition price and endorse proposed sales agreements with prospective homeowners of renovated
properties. The HIC shall also adjudicate administrative and technical issues arising during
implementation of the program and develop reporting procedures, including an annual report and
presentation to the planning committee of Common Council or its successor to keep the Common
Council updated on the program. Further, regular written reports will be made to the Planning
Committee or its successor to inform them of property acquisitions and dispositions. Composition of the
committee membership is:
Voting Members
– 1 Common Council member
– 1 Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency member, or an IURA appointee
– 1 real estate professional knowledgeable of the residential real estate market in the City
– 1 Director of Community Development, IURA
– 1 City of Ithaca Mayor
-------------
5
Ex-officio Non-Voting Members
– 1 Independent Contractor’s Executive Director, or equivalent
– 1 Construction manager, engineer or similarly skilled employee of the selected Contractor.
Ex-officio, non-voting members will attend and participate in all meeting and agenda items except for issues
involving the selection, oversight, remuneration, and management of Contractor.
Item # E4 a
Page 4 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
The Homeownership Investment Committee, through its bylaws, will establish terms of not more than three
years and a staggered system of appointments to retain continuity and institutional memory. A member
shall continue to hold office until a successor is appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Common
Council.
Project Budget
The City of Ithaca is expected to provide an average subsidy of approximately $33,000 per dwelling unit
($50,000 per property), the difference between total development costs and the final purchase price of
rehabilitated property. The $2,000,000 program is anticipated to result in conversion of 35 to 45 properties
to owner-occupancy and the renovation of 50 to 70 dwelling units.
The costs of this project are highly dependent on the site-specific characteristics for each building that is
acquired and rehabilitated. The amount of necessary subsidy per property will generally be higher for 2-
dwelling properties and 3-unit properties, than at one-family dwellings, but will result in more dwelling units
being renovated. It is expected that a typical scenario for a one-family dwelling in the program will require a
total project cost of $100,000 (acquisition, renovation, carrying costs, resale for owner-occupancy) and a
net sales price of $60,000, resulting in a subsidy of $40,000. For a typical 2-dwelling property, the project
costs are expected to average $133,000 and yield a net sales price of $80,000, resulting in a subsidy of
$53,000 per duplex property or $26,500 per dwelling unit.
Program funds will be used for the following purposes:
• Financing costs and fees to capitalize the $2 million program
• Property acquisition
• Design
• Interim costs ( insurance, utilities, taxes, property management)
• Construction costs
• Marketing
• Program delivery
• Oversight/Monitoring
IURA out-of-pocket and staff expenses will be reimbursed from program funds for staffing the
Homeownership Investment Committee, oversight of the independent contractor, and other costs
associated with administering and implementing the program.
The selected Contractor will develop a list of recommended properties for inclusion in the program, perform
property inspections, conduct initial appraisals, develop cost estimates, negotiate and acquire property,
provide property management services, pay interim costs (insurance, utilities, etc..), prepare renovation
designs, secure permits, complete rehabilitation, market properties for resale, offer loan structuring
assistance to prospective homebuyers, negotiate sales agreements, offer homebuyer technical assistance
and other program delivery services.
Implementation
IURA will act as the City’s agent to administer and implement the program. The IURA will contract with the
selected Contractor to act in the capacity of the City’s developer. In that role, the Contractor will facilitate
Item # E4 a
Page 5 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
all phases of the successful completion of the project including, acquisition, design, construction oversight,
financing, marketing and sales negotiations. The Homeownership Investment Committee will identify target
properties to be acquired for inclusion in the program. Purchase agreements that exceed fair market value
based on an appraisal will require Homeownership Investment Committee approval. Net proceeds from
sale of renovated properties will be reinvested back into the fund to acquire additional properties for
renovation and resale.
The separate components of this process are described in more detail below.
Property Selection
The Independent Contractor will recommend candidate properties for inclusion in the program to
the Homeownership Investment Committee (HIC). The HIC will use the goal and rank-ordered
objectives of this Initiative as the criteria to select top priority properties to be acquired for inclusion
in the program. Each property must be physically in substandard condition and exerting a
blighting influence on the surrounding neighborhood.
Property Acquisition
The chief means of acquiring properties for the program is through a negotiated purchase
agreement. Upon identification of candidate properties by the Homeownership Investment
Committee, the Contractor will contact the property owners to negotiate an acceptable purchase
price. The purchase price will be based upon two factors: a current appraisal of the property’s
value by a certified appraiser and a preliminary housing condition inspection of the property. The
preliminary inspection will form the basis for rehabilitation cost estimates and an estimate of the
project’s market value after rehabilitation. Generally, the purchase price will not exceed the
appraised value of the property.
When appropriate, the HIC may incorporate provisions in the negotiated purchase agreement that
restrict the seller from any future purchase of new residential rental property within the City for a
period of time as a condition of the purchase.
A second means of acquiring property is through the property tax foreclosure process. Properties
targeted for inclusion in the program that are controlled by the City due to failure to pay property
taxes may be conveyed for inclusion in the program.
In some cases a bargain sale may be negotiated with the seller in which a portion of the value of
the property is donated as a charitable donation to the Contractor, presumably a 501(c)(3)
corporation. Similarly, City-owned properties may be transferred for inclusion in the program.
In other cases, an acceptable purchase price may not be successfully negotiated at the appraised
value. If the property is of high priority for attention due to its negative impact on the neighborhood,
then, upon advice of the Contractor and consideration of the estimated renovation cost and
projected sales price, a higher purchase price may be paid to acquire the property with the
approval the Homeownership Investment Committee or alternative means of acquiring the property
investigated.
Item # E4 a
Page 6 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
Property Management
As part of the legal agreement with the IURA, the Contractor will manage and maintain properties
acquired through the program until resale. The Contractor will also be responsible for interim costs
such as taxes, utilities and insurance. Property acquisitions will be timed and designed to avoid
tenant dislocation and long-term property management responsibilities.
Design and Permits
The Contractor will conduct a thorough evaluation of the condition of the building and develop
construction plans and cost estimates for rehabilitation, with an eye towards conversion to owner-
occupancy use. Rehabilitation plans will then be prepared. These plans are then further developed
into construction documents, which are then used as the basis for bidding.
Rehabilitation
Each project will be bid separately to a general contractor for rehabilitation who will be responsible
for the selection of subcontractors and the supervision of construction. As part of this process, the
Contractor will be required to conduct outreach to minority- and women-owned businesses and
seek to employ local firms. All general contractors must be qualified with respect to construction
and business skills. Each general contractor must also carry a minimum of $100,000 in liability
insurance in order to qualify to bid.
Alternative procurement methods, such as long-term contracts with selected firms may be
appropriate based on the expected volume and pace of rehabilitation work.
Construction Management
The Contractor will assume the role of construction manager: conducting inspections of the work
being done, overseeing changes to the original plans, approving payments to general contractors,
coordinating inspections by the Building Department, and solving problems as they arise.
Marketing and Sale of Properties
As projects approach completion, the Contractor will market the rehabilitated houses and seek
qualified buyers through the multiple listing service, requiring a commission averaging 5 - 7% of the
purchase price. A special effort shall be made to market the homes to police officers, City
employees and teachers. Many homes available for purchase through the program will be
available without income restrictions.
Loan Packaging and Approval
The Contractor will work with prospective buyers to put together an affordable financing package
that is suited to the resources available to the buyers.
Technical Assistance to Homebuyers
The Contractor will provide homebuyer education classes to prospective buyers, as well as offer
technical assistance in home maintenance and construction issues. Technical assistance can be
obtained through either one-on-one sessions or in a home maintenance class. Home maintenance
classes are designed to supplement the information learned in homebuyer education classes by
offering hands-on experience in a variety of typical home maintenance issues.
Item # E4 a
Page 7 of 7 Neighborhood Housing Initiative
Approved Policy City of Ithaca, NY
In addition, a special landlord training program will be developed for owner-occupants of duplexes.
Alternative Owner-Builder Implementation
The Contractor will work with the Home Ownership Investment committee to develop policies to
allow owner-builders to purchase and rehabilitate high priority properties. This alternative model to
implement the program will allow owner-builders to conduct a substantial amount of the
rehabilitation themselves under program oversight at a savings to both the program and the owner-
builder homebuyer.
End
Attachment – Urban Renewal Boundary Map, with IURA-proposed amendments
Prepared by N. Bohn, latest revision 9.20.01
q:\planning\staff\sue\housing\approved policy 10.3..01.doc
Item # E4 a
Item # E4 b
Proposed Resolution
Common Council Planning & Economic Development Committee
September 12, 2012
Neighborhood Housing Initiative Program, Approve Change in Method to Delivery the
Program
WHEREAS, in 2002, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca and the Ithaca Urban Renewal
Agency adopted the Neighborhood Housing Initiative (NHI) program, and authorized up to $2
million in bonding authority to finance the program, and
WHEREAS, the goal of the NHI program is to improve neighborhood stability by converting
substandard rental residential properties blighting a neighborhood into renovated owner‐
occupied homes, and
WHEREAS, the objectives of the program include eliminating blighting conditions; increasing
the number and percentage of homeowners in the City; converting rental properties to owner‐
occupancy status; and stimulating private sector investment in neighborhoods, and
WHEREAS, the NHI program operates by (1) acquiring blighting properties; (2) rehabilitating the
building for home ownership, or demolition with new construction if rehabilitation is not
feasible; (3) sale of the property at a fair market price to an owner‐occupant with a deed
restriction requiring owner‐occupancy for 25 years, and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) administers the program on behalf of the
City, and
WHEREAS, $1,050,000 of bond funding has been issued to complete six homes at an average
subsidy of approximately $70,000 per property, and
WHEREAS, approximately $600,000 in NHI bond proceeds are on account from sale of
rehabilitated homes, and
WHEREAS, the Homeownership Investment Committee (HIC) was established to oversee and
implement the NHI program to acquire properties, rehabilitate and sell homes, and
WHEREAS, in 2011 the HIC concluded that the program as configured was no longer meeting
the cost objectives of the program to rehabilitate and sell 17‐23 homes per $1 million of
bonding at an average subsidy of approximately $50,000 per property. The HIC raised concerns
about:
• the significantly higher acquisition costs due to a stronger housing market;
• high rehabilitation costs resulting in higher subsidies;
• the lack of incentives for the contractor to complete projects in a timely fashion;
Item # E4 b
• high holding expenses caused by holding ownership of the property for extended
periods of time during the design, permitting, rehabilitation, and resale phases of
the project, and
WHEREAS, the IURA finds that there is still a need to convert vacant and substandard rental
housing to owner‐occupied housing, particularly for affordable home ownership, and
recommends reforming the NHI program in a two‐stage process:
Stage 1 ‐ Change Method of Program Delivery
Convert the program to a financial subsidy program open to application from housing
developers to seek gap funding in an amount necessary to acquire and rehabilitate/replace
blighting substandard non‐owner‐occupied housing and sell them at fair market value to
homebuyers with a 25‐year owner‐occupancy deed restriction.
Stage 2 – Change Objective to Create Affordable Homeownership
Modify the objective of the program to create affordable homeownership opportunities
through either rehabilitation of substandard non‐owner‐occupied housing or through new
construction of compatible homes on existing vacant lots, and
WHEREAS, implementing the stage 2 reform will require bond counsel review and issuance of
an authorizing opinion that has not been completed to date, but stage 1 reform only changes
the delivery methodology of the existing authorized program, and
WHEREAS, a housing developer has proposed an NHI‐eligible homeownership project to the
IURA; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby concurs with the IURA to modify the method of
delivering the Neighborhood Housing Initiative (NHI) program and hereby authorizes the IURA
to undertake the stage 1 reform of the NHI program to make available existing NHI bond
proceeds to provide gap funding to housing developers to implement the NHI program for
rehabilitation/replacement of blighting, substandard, non‐owner‐occupied housing and sale to
homebuyers with a 25‐year owner‐occupancy deed restriction.
j:\community development\housing initiative\reso p&ed convert to financial asst program 9‐12‐12.doc
To: Planning & Economic Development Committee
From: Rental Housing Advisory Commission
Re: Exterior Property Maintenance Ordinance
Date: 25 July 2012
After a thorough review and discussion of the proposed changes to the Exterior Property Maintenance
Ordinance, the Rental Housing Advisory Commission submits the following thoughts and
recommendations. The rental-housing sector represents 70% of the City’s dwelling units, and is a
substantial small business sector. The RHAC appreciates the Council examining the city charter for
issues that affect the rental-housing sector. Because the RHAC is made up of both landlords, renters and
non-profit housing providers, we have tried to represent all sides of the issue.
1) Establish a fine range. Given the variety of offenses that a fine under this ordinance might entail from
a trash can lid askew to piles of scrap, the RHAC suggests that establishing a fine range from $25 - 300
would be a more fair process. This would allow the discretion of the City prosecutor and Court to
acknowledge the severity of a citation, while still providing for a clean and sanitary environment.
2) Revise the increasing fine levels. If the PEDC and/or the Common Council find it inappropriate to
establish a fine range, the RHAC recommends that smaller fines would be more equitable.
3) Reset fine clock for new tenants. Because turnover is high among some populations of the rental
housing sector, the Commission recommends that the escalating fine structure, if the Council opts to
maintain it, should reset with new tenants instead of after 12 months. The RHAC is concerned about the
fairness of a new tenant being saddled with the highest fine because of actions resulting from the
previous tenant. The current charter language states that the fine escalation shall reset after 12 months.
The RHAC suggests having a reset after new tenants move in OR 12 months with the same tenant.
4) Establish notification requirements for landlords/agents. Even though responsibility of resolving fines
may be established in leases, the property owners still receive the fines accrued and passes them on to
the tenant in some fashion. Unfortunately, notification can take time and the tenant thus can be saddled
with further tickets if the problem is not resolved. A requirement of a time frame of 30 days past the
ticket issuance for notice of tickets should be set in place.
5) Establish an “opportunity to cure.” Since the fines that result from the EPMO are meant as a deterrent
for unsightly properties, the Commission recommends that Common Council create an opportunity to
cure the problem for first-time offenders.
Thank you for your consideration.
Rental Housing Advisory Commission
Larry Beck, co-chair
Mitch Paine, co-chair
Item # E5 a
Item # E6 a
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: August 28, 2012
Re: Proposed Minor Non-Substantive Waterfront Zoning Amendment
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposed minor non
substantive zoning amendment to the Waterfront Zoning Districts.
The existing waterfront zoning ordinance lists a maximum height limit of 5 stories. The
ordinance also lists a maximum height per floor, for a total maximum height limit of 63
feet. The City has recently been approached by a developer interested in constructing a
building within the waterfront zone that is within the allowable height limit (63’), but
exceeds 5 stories. The City attorney has advised that the zoning ordinance may be
clarified to state 5 stories, with a maximum of 15’ for the first floor and a maximum of
12’ per additional story or 63’ maximum. Given that the maximum height requirement
will not change, and therefore the overall intent of the regulation will not change, the City
attorney has advised that this is a non substantive change and can be put through an
expedited process. The expedited process requires an action by the Common Council,
but does not require an environmental review.
Enclosed for your consideration is a draft ordinance. If you have any questions, feel free
to contact me at 274-6410.
9/7/2012
Item # E6 b
C:\Documents and Settings\dgrunder\My Documents\Dropbox\PEDC 120912 for Deb\E6b 2012-WFOrdinance-08-29.docPage 1 of 1
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF
ITHACA, CHAPTER 325, ENTITLED “ZONING” TO AMEND THE WATERFRONT
ZONING DISTRICT.
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the
City of Ithaca that Chapter 325, Section 325-8 Waterfront Zoning
Amendment be amended as follows.
Section 1. Section 325-8 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Ithaca is hereby amended as follows to correct the maximum
building height to read as follows:
Maximum Building Heights:
Waterfront – WF-1a, no building allowed.
Waterfront –WF-1b, one story, 12 - 15 feet with an
additional 5 feet for cornice
allowed.
Waterfront – WF-1c, Maximum 3 stories with 12 – 15 feet for
the first story measured from grade, 12
feet for each additional story, with an
additional 5 feet for cornice allowed
or a maximum building height of 39’.
Waterfront – WF-1d, Maximum 5 stories with 12 – 15 feet for
first story measured from grade, 12
feet for each additional story, with an
additional 5 feet for cornice allowed,
or a maximum building height of 63’.
Section 2. The City Planning and Development Board, the City
Clerk and the Planning Department shall amend the zoning map and
the district regulations chart in accordance with the amendments
made herewith.
Section 3. Effective date. This ordinance shall take affect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of
notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Deleted: .
Deleted: ,
Item # E7 a
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning Committee
FROM: Jennifer Kusznir
Economic Development Planner
DATE: September 6, 2012
RE: Proposed Amendments to the City of Ithaca Community Investment Incentive
Program
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to revise the City’s
Community Investment Incentive Program (CIIP).
The proposed revisions to the CIIP application were previously discussed at the July Planning
Committee meeting. The draft application has been circulated and the enclosed comments have
been received from Tompkins County Area Development. I have also enclosed the draft
application with the suggested revisions from TCAD highlighted in yellow.
The draft application also contains several options for the review of these criteria. It has not been
decided whether the review of applications should take place by the Mayor, by Common Council,
or by a small committee consisting of the Mayor and several members of Common Council, or of
City staff.
Adoption of the CIIP program is not considered a CEQR action and therefore does not require
additional review. Enclosed is a draft resolution for the Committee’s consideration. If you have
any concerns or questions regarding any of this information, please feel free to contact me at 274-
6410, jkusznir@cityofithaca.org.
Item # E7 b
1
I. Objective
In conjunction with the goals of the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan, the
objective of the CIIP is to encourage development in the City that would increase
jobs, increase the tax base, promote density in the City core, to encourage
rehabilitation and redevelopment of underutilized sites and to help create a vibrant
downtown center. Specifically the goals, as stated in the Tompkins County
Comprehensive Plan, are as follows:
■ Strengthen and enhance the City of Ithaca’s downtown area as the
urban center of the county.
■ Increase the amount and density of housing and business space in the
central business districts throughout the county.
■ Promote greater density by encouraging development of existing
“gaps” left by abandoned buildings and vacant parcels.
II. Eligibility Criteria
Project sponsors applying for tax abatement(s) under the City of Ithaca Community
Investment Incentive Program must meet the following size, density, and location
requirements:
1.) Project Size Requirement - In order to meet the minimum project size
requirement to be eligible for tax abatements under the CIIP program, a project
must provide a letter from the Tompkins County Assessment Office that states
that the project will result in an estimated increase in the assessed value of the
property by at least $500,000.
2.) Project Density Requirement - In order to meet the minimum density
requirement to be eligible for tax abatement under the CIIP program, a project
must either:
Contain a minimum of 3 occupiable stories in
height.
or
Must be a major restoration of an existing
structure.
The Community Investment Incentive Program (CIIP) is a property tax abatement program that allows property
owners to apply for abatement for a portion of their property taxes for a period of up to 7 years. Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Item # E7 b
2
3.) Project Location Requirement - In order to meet the location requirement to
be eligible for tax abatement under the CIIP program, a project must either:
Be located in the City of Ithaca Density District
or
Be a redevelopment of a Brownfield site that is
registered as a DEC inactive hazardous waste
site.
http://www.dec.ny.gov/cfmx/extapps/derexterna
l/index.cfm?pageid=3
Eligibility is determined by the Mayor of the City of Ithaca, based on the above-stated
criteria. Once eligibility has been determined, the Mayor will provide a letter of
endorsement to the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency (IDA). (See
Section IV for complete application process.)
II. Density District Boundary
Item # E7 b
3
III. Incentive Package
Property Tax Abatement – The standard CIIP property tax abatement will begin at 90%
in year one and decrease in equal increments over seven (7) years. Applicants may
request a enhanced property tax abatement that begins at 100% in year one and decreases
in equal increments over ten (10) years if the applicant can demonstrate financial need as
determined by a review by IDA administrative staff of the project pro forma and
demonstration of a return on investment less than 20% in the first five years. The
abatement will only impact taxes on improvements to the property and not taxes on the
existing value.
The IDA retains the ability to offer more than the standard abatement package based on
an analysis of the impact on the economy, the needs of the business, and input from the
City of Ithaca. The IDA may negotiate additional abatements based on financial need.
• Sales Tax Abatement – The applicant will be exempt from both the
local and State portion of sales tax on construction materials,
equipment, and furnishings associated with the project.
• Mortgage Recording Tax – The applicant will be exempt from the
State portion of the Mortgage Recording Tax ($2.50 per $1,000)
IV. Application Process
Tompkins County Area Development, Inc. (TCAD) provides administrative and
marketing services to the IDA. Potential applicants should contact the City Planning
Department to schedule a meeting with Planning Staff and TCAD staff to determine
project eligibility.
If the project appears to be eligible, TCAD will assist with completing the application for
assistance. It is strongly advised that potential applicants schedule the initial eligibility
determination meeting as early in the process as possible in order to determine if the
dollar value of the proposed incentives exceeds the associated fees.
Based on the nature of the project and the incentives requested, the following will occur:
1. Eligibility Determination Meeting - A developer seeking a tax abatement
under this program must first have a joint meeting with staff from
TCAD and the City Planning Department.
2. CIIP Application - A developer must submit a completed CIIP
application to the City of Ithaca Planning Department. The application
will be reviewed for completeness and will be submitted to the Mayor
for consideration.
3. Public Information Session – The City will schedule a public
information session, at which the developer will be responsible for
presenting information about the project and answering questions from
the public. The City will advertise the public information session with a
press release to the local media. The developer is responsible for
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Yellow)
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light
Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Border: Bottom: (Single
solid line, Dark Red, 1.5 pt Line
width)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Deleted: The standard CIIP property
tax abatement program will begin with
100% abatement of all property taxes in
the first year and will decrease in equal
increments over seven (7) years. The
abatement will only impact taxes on
improvements to the property and not
taxes on the existing value.
Item # E7 b
4
posting the property at least 5 days prior to the public information
session, with the date, time and location of the meeting.
4. City Approval– A City CIIP Review Committee, consisting of the
[Mayor and the Common Council] or [ the Mayor, the Director of
Planning and Development, and the City Controller] or [the Mayor] or
[the Mayor and the committee chairs], will consider project approval,
based on the stated criteria density, size, and location. If criteria are
satisfied, the CIIP review committee will forward the completed
application, along with a letter of approval to the IDA.
5. IDA Application –A developer will submit a standard IDA application
to the IDA for consideration in addition to the CIIP application and
Mayor’s approval letter. The IDA will make an independent
determination of the project.
6. Public Hearing – Following an initial review, the IDA will, if favorably
disposed toward a project, schedule a public hearing on the proposed
incentive package. Standard IDA policies apply with regards to public
hearing notification and other requirements.
7. IDA Determination – Following a public hearing, the IDA will make a
conditioned determination on the project. No final decision may be
reached by the IDA until SEQR requirements have been met by the
developer.
8. Notification and Reporting – The IDA will notify the City of Ithaca and
appropriate taxing jurisdictions once a project is approved. The IDA
may diminish or rescind incentives should the project materially change.
IDA agreements generally have claw back requirements.
9. Applications under this policy may not be accepted after December 31,
2017 unless the IDA and City of Ithaca vote to extend the policy beyond
that date.
Refer to the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency Mission, Policies and
Procedures for additional information.
V. Application Fees
The applicant is responsible for payment of the following fees associated with the CIIP
process.
1. Administrative Fees - The applicant is responsible for paying the IDA
Administrative Fee at the time of closing. This fee will be equal to 1% of the
total value of expenses that are positively impacted by IDA incentives. This
includes the value of construction of improvements to property that is
impacted by property and sales tax abatement and the value of furniture,
fixtures and equipment that are impacted by sales tax abatement. It will not
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light
Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (White)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light
Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Yellow)
Deleted: Endorsement
Deleted: endorsement
Deleted: endorsement
Deleted: endorsement
Deleted: 2022
Item # E7 b
5
include any purchases, such as manufacturing equipment, where the IDA does
not deliver an incentive. Soft Costs (legal, consulting, financial, architectural
and engineering fees) will be included in the amount considered as total value
of expenses. In an attempt to make its incentive program cost effective for
smaller projects, the IDA will reimburse the applicant for 100% of the
Administrative Fee, IDA Counsel Fee, and IDA Bond Counsel Fee associated
with the IDA involvement in the project if the total project cost is less than $1
Million. For total project cost greater than $1 Million but less than $2 Million,
the reimbursement of fees will be reimbursed on a sliding scale that declines
from 100% to 0% gradually based on project size. There will be no
reimbursement of fees for projects with costs over $2 Million. The
reimbursement will take the form of additional property tax abatement
credited to the business in the initial years of the Payment In Lieu of Tax
agreement (PILOT). The IDA retains the right to determine the credit the
applicant will receive. For projects where there is no property tax abatement,
there will not be any form of fee reimbursement.
2. IDA Counsel Fees – The applicant is also responsible for paying the IDA for
all legal costs it incurs including IDA Counsel and Bond Counsel fees.
3. Applicant Attorney Fees – The applicant is responsible for its own attorney
fees associated with closing IDA incentives.
Item # E7 b
6
III. Tax Abatement Application
CCIIIIPP AApppplliiccaattiioonn ffoorr TTaaxx AAbbaatteemmeenntt
The City of Ithaca Community Investment Incentive Program provides incentives for
investment in the City. The incentives include property tax reductions and/or
abatements for a period of up to 7 years. Applicants and projects must meet the
minimum eligibility requirements (see application Part 5) in order to apply for the
program
Part 1. –Applicant Information
Application Date:____/____/_____
Company/Applicant Name:________________________________________________
Primary Contact:________________________________________________________
Address:_________________________City:__________State:______Zip:__________
Phone:___________________________Email:_________________________________
Applicant Attorney:______________________________________________________
Attorney Address:_________________City:__________State:______Zip:__________
Attorney Phone:___________________Email:_________________________________
Applicant Accountant:____________________________________________________
Accountant Address:________________City:__________State:_____Zip:_________
Accountant Phone:_________________Email:________________________________
Applicant Engineer/Architect:______________________________________________
Address:_________________________City:__________State:______Zip:__________
Phone:___________________________Email:_________________________________
Item # E7 b
7
Will a separate company hold title to/own property in question that is separate from
the operating company? If yes, please provide the name and contact information
for that entity.
Company Name:________________________________________________
Primary Contact:________________________________________________________
Address:_________________________City:__________State:______Zip:__________
Phone:___________________________Email:_________________________________
Describe the terms and conditions of the lease between the applicant and the owner
of the property:__________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Part 2. –Business History
Year Company was Founded:______
Type of Ownership (Corporation, LLC, Sole Proprietor):_____________________
Product or Service:___________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Major Customers:_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Major Suppliers:______________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Major Local Competitors:_______________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
Item # E7 b
8
Part 3. –Project Description
Project Narrative:________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Project Location:________________________________________________________
Property Size (acres) - both existing & proposed:_____________________________
Building Size (square feet) - both existing & proposed:_________________________
Proposed Project Start & Completion Dates:_________________________________
Do you certify that this project will not result in the relocation of all or part of any
business or jobs from another county within New York State to Tompkins County?
______Yes ______No
List the names, nature of business of proposed tenants, and percentage of total
square footage to be used for each tenant (additional sheets may be attached, if
necessary):______________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Part 4. –Project Costs
Item # E7 b
9
Value of land to be acquired (if any):________________________________________
Value of buildings to be acquired (if any):____________________________________
Cost of New Construction:___________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Value of Improvements:_____________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Value of Equipment to be Acquired:___________% subject to local sales tax_______
Other:____________________________________% subject to local sales tax_______
Total:____________________
Part 5. – Criteria
Will the proposed project result in an increase to the tax roll value of new real property
by at least $500,000? ________
Does this project contain at least three occupiable stories? __________________
Proposed Height (in stories and feet):___________________
Does the project include a rehab of an existing structure? ____________
Is the project located in the City of Ithaca Density District? __________
Does the project contain the redevelopment of a Brownfield site? _________
IV. Certification___________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________deposes that he/she is the _______________
Item # E7 b
10
(Name of chief executive officer of company submitting application) (Title)
Of ___________________ , the corporation named in the attached application; That he/she has
(Company Name)
read the foregoing application and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his
knowledge. Deponent further says that the reason this verification is made by the
deponent and not by ____________________________ is because the said company is a corporation.
(Company Name)
The grounds of deponent’s belief relative to all matters in the said application which are
not stated upon his own personal knowledge, are investigations which deponent has
caused to be made concerning the subject matter of this application as well as information
acquired by deponent in the course of his duties as an officer of and from the books and
papers of said corporation.
As an officer of said corporation (hereinafter referred to as the “Applicant”), deponent
acknowledges and agrees that applicant shall be and is responsible for all costs incurred
by the nonprofit Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency (hereinafter referred
to as the “Agency”) acting in behalf of the attached application whether or not the
application, the project it describes, the attendant negotiations and ultimately the
necessary issue of bonds or transfer of title are ever carried to successful conclusion. If,
for any reason whatsoever, the Applicant fails to conclude or consummate necessary
negotiations or fails to act within a reasonable or specified period of time to take
reasonable, proper, or requested action, or withdraws, abandons, cancels, or neglects the
application or if the Agency or Applicant are unable to find buyers willing to purchase
the total bond issue required or financing for the project, then upon presentation of
invoice, the Applicant shall pay to the Agency, its agents, or assigns all actual costs
involved in conduct of the application, up to that date and time, including but not limited
to fees of bond counsel for the Agency and fees of general counsel for the Agency. Upon
successful conclusion and sale of the required bond issue or transfer of title the Applicant
shall pay to the Agency an administrative fee set by the Agency, not to exceed an amount
equal to 1% of the total project cost. The cost incurred by the Agency and paid by the
Applicant, including bond counsel, the Agency’s general counsel’s fees and the Agency’s
Item # E7 b
11
administrative fees, may be considered as a cost of the project and included as part of the
resultant bond issue.
___________________________________________________
(Signature of chief officer of company submitting application)
NOTARY
Sworn to before me this
_______ day of ______________, 20______
____________________________________
V. Completion Status (To be Completed by Staff)
Eligibility Criteria:
Size ________________
Density ________________
Location ________________
Additional Documentation Submitted: _____________
Staff Review Date______________
Mayor’s Endorsement date_____________
Item # E7 c
Draft Resolution
September 6, 2012
Endorsement of Revisions to the City of Ithaca Community Investment Incentive
Program
1. WHEREAS, On July 5, 2000, the Common Council unanimously requested that the Tompkins
County Industrial Development Agency (“IDA”) undertake a program to provide financial
incentives for development of multi-story buildings within a density target area encompassing
the downtown Central Business District, the West State Street corridor, the West End, and
Inlet Island, and
2. WHEREAS, that program was accepted by the IDA in 2001 and remained in operation for five
years, and
3. WHEREAS, in 2006, the City endorsed the continuation of an IDA program of local tax
abatements, as a tool for encouraging appropriate real estate and business investment in the
urban core of the city; and it requested the IDA establish the Community Investment
Incentive Program (“CIIP”) through which projects would be reviewed by the community
and evaluated by Common Council, and (if endorsed by Common Council) proposed for
recommendation by the Mayor to the IDA as eligible for tax abatements, and
4. WHERAS, in the six years that the CIIP has been in operation, only one developer was able
to successfully obtain tax abatements, and
5. WHEREAS, it has been determined that including an extensive list of potential benefit criteria
into a tax abatement application, while successful in identifying goals important to the City,
has not been successful in real-world use as an attainable incentive for potentially eligible
projects within the density target area, and
6. WHEREAS, revisions to the criteria and to the application have been drafted that would allow
projects to be recommended for tax abatements if they met certain simpler requirements
including:
• minimum size (over $500,000 in anticipated increase in taxable value),
• location (within the density target area), and
• built project density (represented by building height of at least three stories),
and
7. WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes that several types of benefits addressed in the
former CIIP program may not be best achieved via a tax abatement program like the CIIP,
although they remain important goals for development within the City and should continue to
be addressed through other current and yet to be developed programs, and
8. WHEREAS, the Common Council also recognizes that the criteria in this revised application
will encourage fuller build-out of areas in the density target area in the core of the City,
thereby supporting denser patterns of development appropriate to these areas and which
benefit residents of the city by providing
• walkable access to the jobs, housing and services that are located in these new
buildings,
• a built environment that supports walkability and additional similar development
in the density target area,
• support for the health of the City’s tax base and economy, support for
1
Item # E7 c
achievement of greenhouse gas emission goals, support for the vibrancy and
health of surrounding neighborhoods, and support for the financial health of its
residents via the first two benefits; now, therefore, be it
1. RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council finds that the IDA density incentive
program is a useful tool to (1) strengthen and enhance the downtown with new housing and
other mixed-use developments, and (2) locate new compact development in nodal centers
identified in the County Comprehensive Plan, such as the City of Ithaca’s downtown areas,
thereby combating sprawl development, and be it further
2. RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca does hereby request the continuation of the IDA’s
density incentive program as a tool for encouraging appropriate real estate and business
investment in the core areas in Tompkins County, but that it be revised in accordance with
the Community Incentive Investment Program with the 2012 revisions, and be it further
3. RESOLVED, that the geographic area within the City of Ithaca to be targeted under this
Program should be the current density target area, encompassing the downtown business
improvement district area, the West MLK/State Street corridor, the West End, and the Inlet
Island waterfront area.
2
Item # F1 a
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
To: Planning and Development Committee
From: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development
Date: July 5, 2012
Re: Proposed Modifications to the I-1 Zoning District
I have been asked to prepare a concept memo proposing a change to the City’s Industrial Zoning
District (I-1) to allow for residential uses. Historically residential uses were not allowed in the I-
1 Zoning District for health and safety reasons including negative impacts and prolonged
exposure to noise, fumes, odors, vibration, noxious or toxic chemical releases, traffic and other
conditions that could injure or impact the health of residents. Ithaca, like many cities in the
northeastern United States, allowed industry to locate along its waterways, railroads, and major
roadways, which helped to facilitate early economic growth. These patterns continued as land
use and zoning were codified in the City. However, in recent history, concerns over cleaner
water and environments along with changing industrial patterns and regulations marked a move
toward increased interest for other types of development in these areas.
Currently, the there are five areas in the City zoned I-1; Cherry Street, Carpenter
Business Park, the former Emerson site, the former Ithaca Gun site , and a triangular piece of
land wedged between the north side of Willow Avenue and the west side of Route 13 North. We
know from recent inquires that there is demand in the city for industrially zoned land upon which
a building with a large footprint could be built for manufacturing and related industry. We also
know that most industry today is much cleaner and more tightly regulated than it has been
historically, diminishing the threat of injury to human health.
In almost all cases, these industrially zoned sites would make for great multi-family housing
developments but given the demand, should not preclude the allowance of clean industry and/or
mixed use.
I have attached applicable parts of the City Code so that you might also consider how allowing
housing in the I-1 zone would impact other parts of the code and what adjustments may have to
be made. (We commonly refer to these as unintended consequences.)
Page 1 of 4
Item # F1 a
§ 325-8. District regulations. [Amended 9-7-1988 by Ord. No. 88-7]
A. The District Regulations Chart is hereby made a part of this chapter.EN Column heads on
the District Regulations Chart are defined as follows:
B. General notes pertaining to regulations.
(1) For minimum lot size requirements stated in Column 6, Area in Square Feet, for all residential
use districts, each square-footage requirement applies separately to the initial permitted primary use and
to each additional permitted primary use located in a separate building on the property in question (e.g., in
R-2b Districts, an area of 3,000 square feet is required for a one family house or a two-family house, and
an additional area of 3,000 square feet is required for each additional one-family house or two-family
house on the property).
(2) Landfilling and bulkheading plans and procedures shall be subject to approval of the Board of
Public Works.
(3) Regulations, standards and permitted uses are generally cumulative, except for the P-1 and MH-1
Districts and except where otherwise indicated by specific prohibition or omission. [Amended 12-6-2000
by Ord. No. 2000-12]
(4) Where a variance or special permit is required or where special conditions apply to allow in one
district a use which is permitted by right in another district, the regulations applying to such use shall be
those of whichever district has the stricter regulations, unless otherwise determined by the Board of
Zoning Appeals.
(5) All uses permitted or allowed in any district shall conform to the general performance standards
as set forth in § 325-23.
(6) ENIn R-1 and R-2 Districts, minor dependent children in the care of a parent or relative shall be
excluded in determining the number of unrelated occupants in a dwelling unit.
(7) In all districts where multiple dwellings are permitted, each multiple dwelling shall be required to
have a rear yard of at least 20 feet in depth. (This requirement has been imposed so that these structures
comply with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.)
(8) In all districts, the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code may impose
additional requirements pertaining to the location of a structure on a parcel of property, including, for
example, additional building setback requirements.
(9) All columns established by this section are subject to the supplementary regulations stated in
Article V of this chapter.
Page 2 of 4
Item # F1 a
§ 181-14. Storage of flammable liquids.
A. Aboveground tanks. The limits referred to in the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building
Code in which storage of flammable liquids in outside aboveground tanks is prohibited are hereby
established as follows: all portions of the City not described as the Industrial Zone in the Zoning
OrdinanceEN of the City.
B. New bulk plants. The limits referred to in the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code
in which new bulk plants for flammable liquids are prohibited are hereby established as follows: all that
portion of the City not described as the Industrial Zone in the Zoning OrdinanceEN of the City and lying
west of the east shore branch of the Lehigh Valley Railroad between Cascadilla Creek on the north and
West Clinton Street on the south.
§ 181-15. Storage of liquefied petroleum gases.
The limits referred to in the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code in which bulk storage of
liquefied petroleum gas is restricted are hereby established as follows: all that portion of the City not
described as the Industrial Zone in the Zoning OrdinanceEN of the City and lying west of the east shore
branch of the Lehigh Valley Railroad between Cascadilla Creek on the north and West Clinton Street on
the south.
ARTICLE III, Special Permits
§ 325-9. Standards.
A. Intent. The intent of this section is to set forth additional regulations and conditions which shall
apply to certain land uses and activities which are incongruous or sufficiently unique in terms of their
nature, location and effect on the surrounding environment and the quality of the community to warrant
special evaluation of each individual case…
C. Special permits.
(1) Applicability. The uses listed under the district regulations in § 325-8 which require a special
permit from the Board of Appeals are as follows:
(o) Any use not permitted as of right in the I-1 Zoning District. [Added 11-14-1989 by
Ord. No. 89-16]
(5) In the I-1 Zone, uses other than those permitted under § 325-8 may be permitted by special permit
upon a finding by the Board of Zoning Appeals and concurrence by the Common Council that
such use shall have no negative impact by reason of noise, fumes, odors, vibration, noxious or
toxic releases or other conditions injurious to the health or general welfare. [Added 11-14-1989
by Ord. No. 89-16]
Page 3 of 4
Item # F1 a
(6) § 325-29.1. Adult uses. [Added 10-4-2000 by Ord. No. 2000-10]
D. Location.
(1) Adult uses may not be located in any zone except the following portions of the I-1 use districts as
more fully detailed on the official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca. The permitted adult use areas are
conveniently described herein solely for purposes of this legislation.
(a) The I-1 site bordered on the east by the railroad property known as parcel number 2.-
2-3, which borders on New York State Routes 13 and 34, on the north and west by
parcel 16.-1-3, which is the site of the TCAT and Ithaca DPW facilities, and on the
south by parcels 16.-1-8, 16.-1-5.2 and 16.-1-5.1;
(2) Adult uses may not be located, when initially opened as, or converted to, an adult use:
(a) Within 350 feet of the boundary of any residential zoning district.
(b) Within 350 feet of any property, including the exterior lot, used as a licensed day-
care facility.
(c) Within 350 feet of any structure, including the exterior lot, which has tax exempt
status as a religious or educational use.
(d) Within 350 feet of any waterfront, park or farmers' market.
(e) Within 350 feet of any gymnastic center, library or museum.
(f) Within 200 feet of the boundary of any Marine Commercial Districts.
Page 4 of 4
Item # F1 b
DRAFT #1
For Review, July 6, 2011
An Ordinance to Amend Chapter 325 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code
entitled “Zoning” to allow Dwelling Units in the I-1 Industrial Zoning District
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca
as follows:
Section 1.
Chapter 325, Section 325-8 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca entitled
“District Regulations” is hereby amended to allow Dwelling Units in the I-1
Industrial Zoning District to read as follows (changes will appear on the District
Regulations Chart, which is a part of Chapter 325):
Column 1: Use District – I-1
Column 2: Permitted Primary Uses
1. Any use permitted in B-52. Industrial warehousing, wholesaling, storage
and handling of bulk goods (not including rubbish as defined in §196.1),
lumber yards, and agriculture except that no animals may be kept within 50 ft.
of any property line.
3. Any use not permitted in any other zoning district, subject to the issuance of a
special permit of the Board of Zoning Appeals in accordance with §325-9 and
concurrence by the Common Council.
4. All uses must conform to special performance standards governing
establishment of industrial uses (see 325-24).
5. Transfer station for recyclable materials.
Column 3: Permitted Accessory Uses
Any accessory use permitted in B-5.
Column 4: Off-Street Parking Requirements
1. Same as B-5.
2. Wholesale, industrial and similar uses: 1 space per 2 employees on maximum
work shift, plus 1 space per 500 SF or portion thereof devoted to office or
sales use.
Column 5: Off-Street Loading Requirements
1. Same as B-5.
2. Industrial use: 1 space for each use with 3,000 to 10,000 SF of floor space in
single occupancy, plus 1 space for each additional 15,000 SF or major
fraction thereof.
Deleted: , except that dwlg. units are
prohibited. ¶
Deleted: except residential and
home occupation.
Item # F1 b
Column 6: Minimum Lot Size – 5,000 SF.
Column 7: Minimum Lot Size, Width in Feet at Street Line – 50
Column 8: Maximum Height of Building, Number of Stories – 4.
Column 9: Maximum Height of Building, Height in Feet – 40.
Column 11: Yard Dimensions, Front, Required Minimum – 20.
Column 12: Yard Dimensions, Side, One Side at Least – 12.
Column 13: Yard Dimensions, Side, Other at Least – 6.
Columns 14 and 15: Yard Dimensions, Rear – 15% or 20 feet.
Column 16: Minimum Height of Building, Height in Feet – None.
Section 2.
The Official Zoning Map of the City of Ithaca, New York, as referenced in Chapter
325, Section 325-5 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, is hereby
amended to allow dwelling units in the I-1 Industrial District.
Section 3.
Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of the Ordinance is held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, it shall in no way
affect the validity of any 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.
Formatted: Font: Bold
C:\Documents and Settings\dgrunder\My Documents\Dropbox\PEDC
120912 for Deb\F1c Comments received - Res in I-1.doc
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 Item # F1 c
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
TO: Planning and Economic Development Committee
FROM: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development
DATE: September 5, 2012
RE: Comments Received for the Proposal to Allow Residential Uses in
Industrial Zones
At the July 11, 2012 meeting of the Planning Committee, members approved the circulation of a
concept memo and proposed zoning ordinance to allow residential uses in industrial zones.
Below are comments received to date on the proposed amendment for consideration at the
upcoming Planning Committee meeting.
1.) The patchwork effect of zoning in Ithaca is the result of a diversified city adapting to develop
and function as it needed along that road of growing up. However, it has often resulted in
competing or conflicting terms. I can cite many examples where differences in use and even
lifestyle collide. In this case, eventually the residential allowed in the industrial zones will
conflict with each other. It will be good to unravel some of that patchwork effect to clarify
"neighborhoods" and "use" in anticipation of the changes we already see happening in the
city. Here are a couple comments to consider:
Residential and Industrial zones cannot be overlapping, these are polar opposites on a
city map and do not cooperate by nature.
Residents are exposed to hazards, regardless of advancements in manufacturing, safety,
and health issues. The city may eventually need to limit the industrial sector because of
this stark difference, along with space limitations and a growing population.
Waterfront areas (lake, inlet, gorges, and creeks) are not for industrial use. Waterfront
property is not needed for industry. These parts of the city are an important natural and
community resource that are no longer essential to viable industry and economic growth.
2.) Increasingly, we are seeing people's tolerance levels decrease especially when it comes to
noise. We've had a lot of dissatisfaction in the 2nd Ward with the City during the past couple
of years regarding industrial sized air conditioning units; continual complaints from residents
in Nate's Floral Estates regarding train idling; complaints from the residents of Seneca Street
due to the Westies Bar outdoor tables and programming; and continual concerns from
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
Item # F1 c
residents and new developments (Argos Inn) about truck traffic on East State Street. All of
these situations are very difficult to navigate and in the end, I don't think anyone is satisfied
because there really isn't anything we can do as everyone is operating within their legal
rights. I would hate to see us intentionally set up situations that are going to create
unsolvable problems.
I'm a huge fan of developing our waterfront - what an untapped resource! It would make
more sense to re-zone industrial zones as residential or business zones instead of allowing
residential uses in industrial zones. I understand that this could take decades to accomplish
due to existing businesses but I just think it would be a cleaner approach especially when it
comes to enforcement issues.
3.) Regarding housing in the industrial zone, another approach would be to designate housing as
a "secondary" but not a "primary" use (or something similar), which could actually feed two
birds with one scone by allowing housing in these areas as well as increasing the potential for
industrial projects to be viable (given higher land and construction costs in the City) through
pairing them with housing projects for a cross-subsidy arrangement.
4.) There may be value in dividing our I zones into two sub-zones. I-1 would keep existing
zoning mostly intact and would be applied to Cherry Street and perhaps parts of the SW
where we could continue to support light industrial uses in the traditional sense. I-2 could
encompass Emerson, Gun Hill, and Carpenter Business Park where we believe that ultimate
development may be of more mixed use. In those zones, we would still allow certain light
industrial uses as zoned, but we might also require multiple stories for other uses (e.g.,
retail/commercial), include housing as an option, and provide for no parking minimums and
perhaps parking maximums.
This approach I think would be consistent with many of our goals for these I-zones that are
potentially emerging development sites in the City for denser, mixed use development which
could include housing and/or are in proximity to other high value sites such as the Waterfront
Zones in the case of CBP and IC/CU in the case of the others; not to mention existing
neighborhoods.
5.) I tend to agree that Residential and Industrial uses are not terribly compatible. Mixed retail
and residential would be o.k., but mixed residential and industrial uses could result in
unintended exposures to chemical releases (spills) diesel fumes from truck/train traffic, and
noise and light pollution that are generally not tolerated in the residential environment. Even
"light" industry, such as the high tech firms out by the airport, can use significant amounts of
highly toxic materials that can cause public health emergencies in the event of an unintended
release of these materials. And there is always the prospect that residential uses in industrial
areas could be "ghettoized" over time which would not be a good outcome, either. I also
agree that most waterfront property is better used for pubic recreational and light retail
2
Item # F1 c
purposes (public access trails/Boatyard Grill and boat rental firms, for example). However,
sections of the lake front are still part of the Erie Canal and could foreseeably be used for
loading and unloading industrial materials from barges. As the price of liquid fuels
continues to escalate it may once again be more economical to move bulk industrial materials
by barge than by train or truck. Ithaca is situated at the South end of the Lake such that it
could once again be important to barge traffic as it once was, and the City would need to
accommodate industrial uses of the water front as it once did.
6.) Please let me chime in to say that I am NOT in favor of the proposal to allow residential uses
in the industrial (I-1) zone.
Generally speaking, industrial and residential uses just don't seem to mix. First, industrial
uses may allow for hazardous materials and/or conditions that create an unhealthy housing
environment. Secondly, there will be hundreds, if not thousands, of housing units added to
the city's stock given the number of housing developments already or soon to be underway in
current residential zones. Thirdly, it is not clear to me that affected property owners have
been given proper notice of the proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance and the
possible negative consequences to their ability to conduct business.
This seems like an initiative that should be folded into the ongoing Comp Plan discussions,
as it could change the city's landscape by potentially adding new neighborhood housing to
areas that have traditionally been set aside for business and industry.
3