Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-13-17 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting Agenda1PEDC Meeting  Planning and Economic Development Committee  Ithaca Common Council        DATE: September 13, 2017  TIME: 6:00 p.m.  LOCATION: 3rd floor City Hall  Council Chambers         AGENDA ITEMS  Item Voting  Item?  Presenter(s) Time  Start  1) Call to Order/Agenda Review    2) Special Order of Business  a) Report and Public Hearing – Development  of the Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH)    3) Public Comment and Response from  Committee Members    4) Updates, Announcements, Reports    5) Action Items (Sending to Council)  a) Green Street Garage Re‐development  (with brief presentation from Ithaca  Properties LLC and Peak Campus)  b) Designation of the Larkin Building at 403  College Ave. as a Historic Local Landmark  c) Resolution Requesting Environmental  Review of Proposed Cargill Mine Shaft    6) Action Items (Approval to Circulate)   a) Proposal to Restrict South Hill In‐fill  Development    7) Review and Approval of Minutes  a) August 2017    8) Adjournment  No      Yes      No      No      Yes      Yes    Yes        Yes        Yes    Yes        Seph Murtagh, Chair      Nels Bohn, IURA Director                  Nels Bohn, IURA Director      Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation  Planner  Cynthia Brock, Committee Member        JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director  6:00      6:05      6:15      6:25      6:30      7:25    7:40        7:55        8:25    8:30                  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 12, 2017.   108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 274-6565   To:  Planning & Economic Development Committee   From:  Anisa Mendizabal, Community Development Planner  RE: Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) Public Hearing  Date: September 7, 2017      Overview:  The Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH), which replaces the Analysis of Impediments to Fair  Housing (AI), is a process mandated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to  be undertaken by communities receiving federal housing and community development dollars.   Communities must complete the AFH 270 days prior to the submission of their Consolidated Plans.  The City  of Ithaca receives federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnership  Program (HOME) funding on an annual basis and thus is subject to this mandate.  Due to the submission  cycle for its Consolidated Plan, Ithaca will be one of the first 125 communities nationwide to submit an AFH.       The IURA has initiated the AFH, which has a submission deadline to HUD of November 4, 2017. The AFH  must be approved by Common Council.  HUD has a 60‐day period to review and accept or comment on the  submitted AFH.    Background:  Federal fair housing law prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin,  sex, disability or familial status.  HUD recognized that fair housing barriers persist nationally and sought to  more fully incorporate fair housing analysis into the planning process by establishing the AFH.  The intent is  to help communities determine whether policies, practices, programs, and activities restrict fair housing  choice and access to opportunity. Under the AFH framework, once fair housing barriers are identified, the  next steps are to identify factors that contribute to the barriers, and then develop a plan with locally‐ determined priorities and goals for addressing these restrictions with meaningful actions.  Input acquired  through the AFH will be incorporated into the community’s Consolidated Plan and subsequent Action Plans.    Among the improvements and refinements of the AFH over the AI is that communities are provided with  data and maps to assess the following fair housing issues:  1. Patterns of integration and segregation  2. Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty  3. Disparities in access to opportunity  4. Disproportionate housing need.    The interactive maps and data tables are posted on the IURA website: Ithacaura.org.       The purpose of the public hearing is to obtain views of the general public on fair housing barriers and  opportunities in the community and region and identify projects for CDBG and HOME funding that increase  housing choices.   j:\community development\fair housing\afh 2017\memo to ped 9‐7‐17 afh vf.doc  Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 (607)-274-6565 Contact Person: Anisa Mendizabal at amendizabal@cityofithaca.org August 31, 2017 Legal Advertising Department The Ithaca Journal (e-mail:cnylegals@gannett.com) LEGAL NOTICE Please publish the following legal notice for three (3) consecutive days as soon as possible in the Ithaca Journal. Please publish the notices as soon as possible. Public Hearing City of Ithaca Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) The Planning and Economic Development Committee of the City of Ithaca Common Council will hold a public hearing at 6:00 p.m., Wednesday, September 13, 2017, in Council Chambers of City Hall, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY, on the Assessment of Fair Housing, a process undertaken to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing, as required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Public comment is encouraged. Written comments may be sent to Common Council, c/o City Clerk, City of Ithaca, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY 14850. For more information contact Anisa Mendizabal at Amendizabal@cityofithaca.org at (607) 274-6553. Please verify receipt of this order upon receipt to amendizabal@cityofithaca.org. Please do not send an affidavit of publication. Send the bill to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency. 1 Proposed Resolution Planning & Economic Development Committee September 13, 2017 Transfer of Property at 120 E. Green Street to the IURA to Structure a Proposed Urban Renewal Project Subject to Common Council Approval – Lead Agency Whereas, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to transfer ownership of property located at 120 E. Green Street to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to structure a proposed property sale and development agreement with a preferred developer to undertake an urban renewal project to redevelop the Green Street parking garage, and Whereas, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for the purpose of conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law, and Whereas, State Law specifies that for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, and Whereas, the proposed transfer of less than 2.5 acres of land is an “Unlisted” action pursuant to the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQR”), which requires environmental review under CEQR; and Whereas, the property to be transferred at 120 E. Green Street is 1.45 acres in size; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the transfer of property located at 120 E. Green Street (tax parcel #70.-4-5.2) to the IURA for the purpose of structuring a proposed property sale and development agreement with a preferred developer to undertake an urban renewal project subject to approval by Common Council. j:\community development\dispositions\green garage\reso pedc green garage transfer to iura - lead agency 9-13-17.doc 1 Proposed Resolution Planning & Economic Development Committee September 13, 2017 Transfer of Property at 120 E. Green Street to the IURA to Structure a Proposed Urban Renewal Project Subject to Common Council Approval – Environmental Review WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to transfer ownership of property located at 120 E. Green Street to the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to structure a proposed property sale and development agreement with a preferred developer to undertake an urban renewal project subject to approval by Common Council, and WHEREAS, the proposed urban renewal project will undergo separate environmental review as part of the site plan review process, and WHEREAS, the proposed urban renewal project is not fully defined or designed at this time, nor possible without acquisition of City-owned land, therefore an analysis of potentially significant adverse impacts of a yet-to-be defined urban renewal project at the site of the Green Street parking garage is not feasible at this time, and WHEREAS, as part of the site plan review process, the Planning Board regularly conducts rigorous and thorough environmental review of all aspects of the proposed development project that comes before it, and WHEREAS, pursuant to §176-6(F)(1)(b) of the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, the reestablishment of a Lead Agency may occur “upon failure of the Lead Agency’s basis of jurisdiction,” so that the Planning Board may subsequently assume the role of Lead Agency for the environmental review for the site plan review of the proposed hotel project, and WHEREAS, the proposed action for transfer of city-owned property of less than 2.5 acres is an “Unlisted Action” under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, and WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as Lead Agency, has reviewed the SEAF prepared by staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that circumstances warrant a segmented review of this property transfer from other stages of the proposed urban renewal project and that subsequent environmental review of the proposed project during the required site plan review process will be no less protective of the environment, and be it further 2 RESOLVED, that the Common Council, as Lead Agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own, the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form, and be it further RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as Lead Agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary, and be it further RESOLVED, that this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. j:\community development\dispositions\green garage\reso pedc green garage transfer to iura - environmental review 9-13-17.doc 1 Proposed Resolution Planning and Economic Development Committee September 13, 2017 Transfer of Property at 120 E. Green Street to the IURA to Structure a Proposed Urban Renewal Project Subject to Common Council Approval – Action WHEREAS, a developer has approached the City to acquire and redevelop the Green Street Parking Garage property (Garage) for a proposed mixed-use project including the following elements:  An approximately 25,000 square foot conference center;  Approximately 350 housing units;  Street level active uses along Green Street;  Retention of the Cinemapolis movie theater;  Approximately 450 parking spaces open to the public, and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca owns tax parcel #70.-4-5.2 located at 120 E. Green Street, a 1.45 acre parcel of which approximately 1.25 acres contains the Garage that is located within a CBD-140 zoning district, and WHEREAS, the Green Street parking garage parcel provides approximately 415 parking spaces currently, and WHEREAS, the western and central sections of the Garage are located on the City-owned tax parcel #70.-4-5.2 and the eastern section is located on air rights over property owned by Ithaca Properties LLC, and WHEREAS, the prospective developer team who approached the City to redevelop the Garage includes Jeffrey Rimland, the managing member of Ithaca Properties LLC who owns the land under the eastern section of the Green Garage, and WHEREAS, the Garage was constructed in 1974 and a recent structural evaluation of the western and eastern sections of the garage found significant structural problems that are estimated to require a substantial investment to extend the useful life of the garage, and WHEREAS, §507 of General Municipal Law authorizes the IURA to negotiate sale of public land with a Qualified and Eligible Sponsor (“Preferred Developer”) to undertake an urban renewal project, which proposed sale and development agreement is subject to public hearing and approval by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, the primary objective of the Urban Renewal Plan is to improve the economic, social and physical characteristics of the project neighborhood, and WHEREAS, City policy requires the Board of Public Works to declare City-owned property surplus for public works purposes prior to any transfer of City-owned property, and 2 WHEREAS, Plan Ithaca, the City of Ithaca comprehensive plan, supports compact, mixed- use development located near transit hubs and an increased supply of housing at different levels of affordability, and WHEREAS, environmental review has been completed on this proposed action; now, therefore, be it 1. RESOLVED, that the Common Council hereby authorizes transfer of the Green Street Parking Garage property located at 120 E. Green Street (tax parcel #70.-4-5.2) to the IURA, via an option agreement, for the purpose of structuring a proposed property sale and development agreement with a preferred developer to undertake an urban renewal project subject to approval by Common Council, and be it further 2. RESOLVED, that such option agreement shall contain the following seller contingencies to be satisfied prior to closing: A. Determination by the Board of Public Works that the land and air rights to be conveyed for the redevelopment project is surplus for public works purposes; B. Discharge of mortgage, or consent of property transfer, by M&T Bank who holds a leasehold mortgage on the Green Garage as security for bonds issued to construct the public portions of the Cayuga Green project; C. Determination of exact boundaries of the parcel to be conveyed; D. Common Council approval of the proposed sale and development agreement with the developer following publication of a legal notice disclosing the essential terms of the proposed sale and development project and a public hearing on the proposed project, and be it further 3. RESOLVED, the Common Council directs the IURA to seek out the following programmatic elements to be included in the project: A. An approximately 25,000 square foot conference center; B. Approximately 350 housing units not designed exclusively for students, including a substantial number of units to be affordable to low and/or middle income households; C. Street-level active uses along Green Street; D. Retention of the Cinemapolis movie theater & a public walkway between Green Street and the Commons; E. Approximately 450 parking spaces open to the public, of which at least 90 will be available for short-term parking; and be it further 4. RESOLVED, that the following issues are to be resolved through negotiation to the satisfaction of the IURA and City: A. Disposition of the parking agreement for Marriott hotel guests; B. Compliance with the Downtown Design Guidelines; C. Coordination and compatibility with adjacent properties/uses and the Downtown Ithaca Alliance’s 2020 Strategic Plan; D. Pricing and management of parking available to the public; E. Disposition of outstanding municipal bonds issued for the Green Street Parking Garage; F. Taxable status of the project; G. Customer access to Cinemapolis during all phases of the project; 3 H. Relocation of municipal garbage, recycling and storage functions currently operating at the project site; I. Establishment of boundaries of the parcel to be conveyed; J. Sales price; and be it further 5. RESOLVED, that net proceeds from sale of City-owned land to a Preferred Developer shall be paid to the City, and be it further 6. RESOLVED, that the Mayor, upon review by the City Attorney, is hereby authorized to implement this resolution, including execution of any and all instruments necessary to execute an option agreement with the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, and be if further 7. RESOLVED, that the IURA shall be reimbursed for costs incurred to develop the proposed urban renewal project from lease or loan payments the IURA collects on behalf of the City. j:\community development\dispositions\green garage\reso pedc gren garage transfer to iura - action 9-13-17 revision 2.doc TO: Members of the Planning & Economic Development Committee FROM: Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner RE: Local Historic Designation of the Larkin Building at 403 College Avenue DATE: September 9, 2017 At their regular monthly meeting on July 11, 2017, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) held a public hearing to consider the designation of the property located at 403 College Ave. as individual local landmark. At the conclusion of that public hearing, the ILPC voted to recommend that Common Council proceed with the designation of this historic resource. Included in this packet are copies of the resolution adopted by the ILPC and the nomination form documenting the historic and architectural significance of the Larkin Building. Based on the information provided in the nomination, the ILPC found that the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave is eligible for local designation based on criteria 1, 2, and 3 as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code. Per criterion 1, the Larkin Building “possesses special historical and aesthetic interest as a part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the City of Ithaca” through its close association with the development and growth of Cornell University, as an example of the early-twentieth century response to the changing housing needs and preferences of those seeking housing in close proximity to Cornell University, and for its role in the development of Collegetown as an urban neighborhood separate from downtown Ithaca and with its own distinct character. Per criterion 2, the Larkin Building “is identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s)” through its association with the Larkin family, the owners and proprietors of many successful grocery and variety stores in Collegetown during the first half of the twentieth century. Per criterion 3, the Larkin Building “embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style” as a good local example of the commercial form of the Renaissance-Revival Style. As set forth in the Municipal Code, the Planning and Development Board has been requested to file a report to Common Council with respect to the relation of the proposed designation to the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved. A copy of that report is also attached. No reply was received from the Conservation Advisory Council in response to our request (as required by CEQR §176- 3-J) for their comment on this proposal. The Common Council is now requested to act to designate, veto, or refer the designation back to the ILPC for modification. Draft resolutions are included in this packet for the Committee’s consideration. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 ILPC Meeting – 07/11/17 Resolution - RC RE: Local Landmark Designation of the Larkin Building, 403 College Avenue RESOLUTION: WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) may recommend to Common Council the designation of landmarks and districts of historic and cultural significance, and WHEREAS, a public hearing held on Tuesday, July 11, 2017, for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave as a City of Ithaca landmark has been concluded, and WHEREAS, the ILPC has reviewed the New York State Building & Structure Inventory Form dated August 1, 2012, including the Narrative Description of Property and the Narrative Description of Significance prepared by the Secretary of the Commission, L. Truame, based on materials submitted to the ILPC in 2012 by Sara Johnson and Kristen Olsen of Historic Ithaca, Inc., with Mary Raddant Tomlan, City Historian,, and WHEREAS, the proposal is a Type II action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, consideration of the Larkin Building as a historic resource was introduced in a report prepared by Mary Tomlan and John Schroeder on June 14, 2009 entitled Collegetown Historic Resources Worthy of Detailed Research: Icons of Collegetown, Individual Buildings, Architectural Ensembles and Landscape Features, and WHEREAS, the Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines, endorsed by Common Council in August, 2009, recommends that “historically significant resources within the entire Collegetown Planning Area which merit designation as local landmarks, but which currently have no such protection, should be identified by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and designated by Common Council, and WHEREAS, based on the information provided in the Collegetown Historic Resources Worthy of Detailed Research: Icons of Collegetown, Individual Buildings, Architectural Ensembles and Landscape Features document and the recommendation from the Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines, the ILPC conducted an intensive- level survey of twelve properties within the Collegetown Planning Area that appeared to meet the eligibility requirements for local designation as set forth in Section 228-3B of the Municipal Code in 2012 , and WHEREAS, the New York State Historic Resource Inventory Form, which is being used as the basis for considering the designation of 403 College Ave, was prepared as part of the aforementioned intensive-level survey, and WHEREAS, Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code defines the criteria for designation of an individual landmark as follows: Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held Tuesday, July 11, 2017 Larkin Building 2 1. Possesses special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or 2. Is identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or 3. Embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or 4. Is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or 5. Represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community by virtue of its unique location or singular physical characteristics. RESOLVED, that the Commission adopts as its own, the documentation and information more fully set forth in the expanded New York State Building Structure Inventory Form dated August 1, 2012, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission has made the following findings of fact concerning the proposed designation. As described in the Narrative Description of Significance portion of the New York State Historic Resource Inventory Form prepared by L. Truame and dated August 1, 2012, the Larkin Building and the adjacent areas that are identified as tax parcel #64.-2-29, is a structure deemed worth of preservation, by reason of its value to the city as enumerated below: Per criterion 1, the Larkin Building possesses special historical and aesthetic interest as a part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the City of Ithaca through its close association with the development and growth of Cornell University, as an example of the early-twentieth century response to the changing housing needs and preferences of those seeking housing in close proximity to Cornell University, and for its role in the development of Collegetown as an urban neighborhood separate from downtown Ithaca and with its own distinct character. As described in the Narrative Description of Significance, Cornell University offered few lodging opportunities for its students, faculty and staff when it open in 1868. As a result, boarding and rooming houses as well as many student-oriented service industries were established in close proximity to the university starting in the 1870s and 1880s. By the first two decades of the 20th century, preference in the rental housing market in Ithaca, particularly among the faculty and staff living in the area that would become known as Collegetown, had shifted away from single-room rentals like those found in the boarding and rooming houses to flat-style apartments—an urban-housing mode that contained kitchen, bathroom and living areas in one private unit. Built in 1913, the Larkin was of the first mixed-use mercantile-residential Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held Tuesday, July 11, 2017 Larkin Building 3 buildings to be constructed near the University to meet this demand. Its ground-floor commercial spaces housed businesses that catered to the ever growing student population, including the Larking Bros. grocery store, while the upper-story flats provided independent housing opportunities for professionals living in Collegetown. The Narrative Description of Significance further notes that the construction of the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave contributed to the transformation of the area that would become Collegetown from an extension of the downtown to a vibrant neighborhood with a distinct identity. Along with the Chacona Block and Sheldon Court, the Larkin Building was one of the first mixed-use commercial-style buildings constructed on College Avenue. Its completion marked the beginning of the gradual urbanization of the 400 block of that street, a process that allowed the street to become the commercial and housing center of a neighborhood centered almost exclusively on the needs of the university population. Per criterion 2, the Larkin Building is identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s) through its association with the Larkin family. As noted in the Narrative Description of Significance, the Larkin family owned multiple grocery and variety stores in the Collegetown from 1889 to 1940. Edward Larkin, an Irish immigrant and laborer, established the family’s first grocery store on Eddy Street in 1890 or 1901. After the completion of their namesake building in 1913, Walter F. and John J. Larkin opened the second grocery business on College Ave, indicating the growing need for grocery suppliers in the neighborhood to service the boarding houses and fraternities as well as the residents living in self-contained apartment units. Per criterion 3, the Larkin Building embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style. The Larkin Building is a good local example of the commercial form of the Renaissance-Revival Style. Although the first floor has been significantly altered, the upper stories of the Larkin Building still possess important characteristics indicative of this architectural style, including the segmental- arch-capped three-story pilasters with simple limestone bases and Ionic capitals, the barrel- and segmental-arched window openings in the fourth and fifth stories, and the alternating single and double, full-story brackets of the fifth story, forming the building’s cornice. RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission, determines that based on the findings set forth above, the Larkin Building meets criterion 1, 2, and 3 defining a Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission Meeting Held Tuesday, July 11, 2017 Larkin Building 4 Local Landmark as set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Commission hereby recommend the designation the Larkin Building at 403 College Avenue as a City of Ithaca landmark. RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: D. Kramer Seconded by: M.M. McDonald In favor: M.M. McDonald, D. Kramer, E. Finegan, K. Olson Against: S. Gibian Abstain: 0 Absent: S. Stein, J. Minner Vacancies: 0 OFFICE USE ONLY USN:HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY FORM IDENTIFICATION Property name(if any) Address or Street Location County Town/City Village/Hamlet: Owner Address Original use Current use Architect/Builder,if known Date of construction,if known DESCRIPTION Materials please check those materials that are visible Exterior Walls:wood clapboard wood shingle vertical boards plywood stone brick poured concrete concrete block vinyl siding aluminum siding cement asbestos other: Roof:asphalt,shingle asphalt,roll wood shingle metal slate Foundation:stone brick poured concrete concrete block Other materials and their location: Alterations,if known:Date: Condition:excellent good fair deteriorated Explain: ATTACHMENTS Photos Provide several clear,original photographs of the property proposed for nomination.Submitted views should represent the property as a whole.For buildings or structures,this includes exterior and interior views,general setting,outbuildings and landscape features. Please staple one photograph providing a complete view of the structure or property to the front of this sheet. Additional views should be submitted in a separate envelope or stapled to a continuation sheet. Maps Attach a printed or drawn map indicating the location of the property in relation to streets,intersections or other widely recognized features so that the property can be accurately positions.Show a north arrow.Include a scale or estimate distances where possible. Prepared by:Address Telephone:Email Date (Continued on reverse) Field Services Bureau • Division for Historic Preservation • New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Peebles Island, P. O. Box 189, Waterford, NY 12188 • www.nysparks.com/shpo • 518-237-8643 Larkin Building 403 College Ave. Tompkins Ithaca 403 Huestis Street LLC 400 College Ave., #100, Ithaca, NY 14850 mixed-use mixed-use x x see continuation sheet x stucco x 1913 L. Truame 108 E. Green St., Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 274-6555 ltruame@cityofithaca.org 8/1/12 STATE AND NATIONAL REGISTERS PROGRAM HISTORIC RESOURCE INVENTORY FORM 2 Revised 9/09 Field Services Bureau • Division for Historic Preservation • New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation • www.nysparks.com/shpo PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION Narrative Description of Property:Briefly describe the property and its setting.Include a verbal description of the location (e.g.,north side of NY 17,west of Jones Road);a general description of the building,structure or feature including such items as architectural style (if known),number of stories,type and shape of roof (flat,gabled, mansard,shed or other),materials and landscape features.Identify and describe any associated buildings, structures or features on the property,such as garages,silos,privies,pools,gravesites.Identify any known exterior and interior alterations such as additions,replacement windows,aluminum or vinyl siding or changes in plan.Include dates of construction and alteration,if known.Attach additional sheets as needed. Narrative Description of Significance:Briefly describe those characteristics by which this property may be considered historically significant.Significance may include,but is not limited to,a structure being an intact representative of an architectural or engineering type or style (e.g.,Gothic Revival style cottage,Pratt through truss bridge);association with historic events or broad patterns of local,state or national history (e.g.,a cotton mill from a period of growth in local industry,a seaside cottage representing a locale's history as a resort community,a structure associated with activities of the "underground railroad.");or by association with persons or organizations significant at a local,state or national level.Simply put,why is this property important to you and the community. Attach additional sheets as needed. See continuation sheet See continuation sheet Narrative Description of Property: Larkin Building, 403 College Avenue, Ithaca The Larkin Building is a five-story, commercial-style, brick-clad building constructed in 1912- 13 in the Renaissance Revival style. Above the ground floor storefronts, the building’s principal façade is clad in gray-white brick. Decorative elements include stone Ionic capitals on brick pilasters, corbelled brick arches, simple stone window sills and lintels, and a series of barrel arch windows on the fifth story. Large decorative brackets extend almost the full height of the fifth story. The building is located on the northernmost block of College Avenue near the south entrance to Cornell University. It is among the earlier commercial-style buildings constructed on College Avenue to provide both rental apartments and commercial space. ------------------------------- The Larkin Building, also known as the Larkin Block, is located at 403 College Avenue, on the east side of College Avenue near the intersection with Dryden Road. This five-story representative of the commercial, Renaissance-Revival Style is a mixed-use building with commercial space in the two ground floor storefronts and apartments in the upper stories. The Larkin Building and the Chacona Block, located in the same commercial row, were constructed in the early twentieth century and set the tone for the late-twentieth century buildings that complete the block today. Neighboring wood-frame buildings were replaced by these newer commercial buildings, appropriately-scaled and complimentary to the historic Chacona and Larkin buildings as well as their neighbor across the street, Sheldon Court. Directly across College Avenue to the west are late-twentieth century mixed-use commercial buildings. Sheldon Court and Cornell’s Schwartz Center for the Performing Arts are located at the north end of the west side of College Avenue. Late-twentieth century commercial buildings are on the southeast corner of College Avenue and Dryden Road and directly behind the building on the east side of Dryden Road. Further south, the 100 and 200 blocks of College Avenue are former single-family homes converted to student apartments, except for the Grand View House at 209 College Avenue, the last surviving of Collegetown’s great boardinghouses. The Larkin Building is constructed of hollow clay tile and brick with a concrete foundation. The building’s principal, west, façade consists of six bays. The first-story is clad in red brick that is consistent with the contiguous buildings, but not original to the building. The two recessed center bays contain doors leading to the upper-story apartments and the restaurant occupying the south storefront. The two bays on each side of the center bay contain full-height aluminum- framed windows. The first-story windows and doors are all non-historic; the date of these alterations in not known but appears to be after the Triangle Book Shop moved from the building in 1990. During its occupation by the Triangle Book Shop, the entrance to the store was through the northernmost bay, but it is not known where the primary storefront entrance was at the time of construction in 1913. The current storefront signage consists of a first-story awning extending almost the full width of the building, shared by a coffee shop, restaurant, and basement lounge, all under the same ownership. Earlier businesses mounted signs on the second story that projected over the sidewalk. The Triangle Book Shop sign was mounted between the first and second northernmost windows, above the entrance. The previous occupant, Egan’s IGA, mounted its sign between the two center windows.1 The six-bay upper stories are clad in light gray-white brick. Pilasters separate the second and third bays and the fourth and fifth bays. The simple gray sandstone bases of the pilasters rest on the top of the first story and the pilaster’s sandstone Ionic capitals line up with the soldier brick lintels above the fourth story window. Corbelled segmental arches formed by rows of soldier bricks span the spaces between pilasters and also between the pilasters and the slightly projecting exterior corners of the building. The second, third, and fourth story window openings contain 1/1 non-historic windows with gray sandstone sills. The second and third story windows have simple sandstone lintels. The sills and lintels create the appearance of stringcourses across the façade. Though the windows are 1 New York State Building-Structure Inventory Form photograph for 403 College Avenue, 1975; Tompkins County Department of Assessment, Tompkins County Tax Assessment photograph, 1954, Historic Ithaca, Inc., Ithaca, NY; Map of 403 College Ave., Ithaca, NY, April 9, 1955, included in deed book 377, page 212, Office of the Tompkins County Clerk, Ithaca, NY. replacements, a ca. 1954 photograph shows what appear to be similar 1/1 sash, possibly the building’s original windows. A narrow band of sandstone caps the fourth story and a row of six cornice-line, barrel arch window openings defines the slightly recessed fifth story. The windows are framed in the same gray-white brick as the rest of the façade, with soldier bricks creating the barrel arches. The existing non-historic window sash replaced original fanlight-topped windows. Alternating paired and single brackets extending the full height of the fifth story and separate each bay. The paired brackets are located on the projecting exterior edges and above the pilasters, continuing the vertical emphasis created by those elements.2 The building’s south and east façades are generally not visible from the street due to the position of neighboring commercial buildings. The stucco-clad north façade of the Larkin Building is exposed in an alley between the Larkin Building and the building to the north. The entrance to the alley is framed by a band of red brick topped with gray stone extending from the top of the neighboring building’s first story to the top of the Larkin Building’s red brick first story and the simple sandstone base of the second story. Narrative Description of Significance: Larkin Building, 403 College Avenue, Ithaca The Larkin Building is significant for its close association with the growth and development of Cornell University, as an example of the early-twentieth century response to the changing housing needs and preferences of those seeking to reside in proximity to the campus, and for its role in the development of Collegetown as an urban neighborhood separate from downtown Ithaca and with its own distinct character. Built in 1912-13 as a mixed-use, fire- resistant, commercial-style building replacing an earlier wood boardinghouse, the construction of the Larkin Building on the block of College Avenue adjacent to the entrance to Cornell University was part of a larger movement toward establishing College Avenue as the center of Collegetown. It has architectural significance as an example of the early-twentieth century commercial Renaissance Revival Style. The Larkin Building has additional local significance for its association with John J. and Walter F. Larkin, whose family owned multiple grocery and variety stores in Collegetown from 1889 to 1940, and for its association with the Triangle Book Shop, a bookstore located on College Avenue from 1903 to the late 1990s, and in the Larkin Building from 1965 to 1990. 2 Tompkins County Department of Assessment, Tompkins County Tax Assessment photograph, 1954, Historic Ithaca, Inc., Ithaca, NY --------------------- The area now called Collegetown was settled relatively early due to the abundant waterpower provided by Cascadilla Creek. In 1827 Otis Eddy, for whom Eddy Street is named, established his cotton mill on the current site of Cascadilla Hall. Eddy had already constructed a dam in Cascadilla Gorge to direct water to his millpond. Called Willow Pond, it endured until the 1890s, crossed by Huestis Street immediately north of the Larkin Building. Along with the rest of Collegetown and much of the present-day city of Ithaca, the Larkin Building property was part of the extensive holdings amassed by Simeon DeWitt following the allotment of lands within the Military Tract. Much of the land on East Hill was farmed or grazed during the early 19th century, and in 1857 the DeWitt farm north of Cascadilla Creek was purchased by Ezra Cornell, who would go on to donate 200 acres for the campus of his namesake university. To the south of the creek, much of present-day Collegetown was part of the 21-acre John and Samuel Giles estate. Possibly anticipating commercial and residential development after the opening of Cornell University in 1868, the Giles heirs divided the estate into urban-size parcels and sold them in the 1870s. The Larkin building is on lot #2 of the Giles estate.3 The shortage of student housing that continues to affect Cornell today began as soon as the University opened in 1868, when the only lodging offered by the school was in Morrill Hall, the first campus building, or in Cascadilla Hall, a repurposed building designed (though never used) as a water-cure sanitarium located at the north end of Eddy Street on the south side of the Cascadilla Creek gorge. Students and professors who did not lodge on campus rented rooms in homes downtown and endured multiple daily treks up East Hill before omnibus service to Cascadilla Hall began in 1876. When Walter F. and John. J. Larkin purchased 403 College Avenue from Sylvester Eckler on July 27, 19114, the property included a two-and-a-half story wood frame house previously operated by Eckler as a rooming house. The fourteen-room house, which evidence suggests was constructed between 1898 and 1904, was advertised by Eckler for rent, partially furnished, in June 1911.5 Rather than demolish this building, the Larkins chose to move the existing house to a lot on Linden Avenue, possibly 230 or 232 Linden Avenue. On October 3, 1912, the Ithaca Daily Journal reported that the city approved the move of the house with the following conditions: the Larkins were to move the house in three days, the work would be supervised by 3 Map of a Part of the Giles Estate, January 1876. Office of the Tompkins County Clerk, Ithaca, NY. 4 Deed of July 27, 1911 conveying 403 College Avenue to Walter F. and John J. Larkin from Sylvester Eckler, book 177, page 98, Office of the Tompkins County Clerk, Ithaca, NY. 5 Sanborn fire insurance maps of Ithaca, 1898 and 1904; Ithaca Daily News June 5, 1911. the building commissioner, the Larkins were responsible for any damage to other properties, and they were required to remove and replace overhead wires along the moving route.6 Prior to opening their College Avenue business, the Larkin family operated grocery stores on Eddy Street. Edward Larkin, an Irish immigrant and laborer, established the first of these businesses in 1890 or 1891.7 A 1907 fire damaged several Eddy Street buildings, including the locations of the John A. Chacona Candy Company store, the Student Agencies laundry, and a men’s clothing shop. It is not known whether this fire damaged the Larkin’s Eddy Street business, but both the Larkins and the Chacona family built new commercial buildings along College Avenue between 1911 and 1913. The modern rooming houses and mixed-use apartment buildings constructed in the early 1900s – Sheldon Court, the Chacona Block, the Larkin Building and others – were constructed of fire-resistant materials, heated with steam, and illuminated with electric lights to reduce the danger of fire.8 In November 1912, it was reported that the Larkins were planning to build a four-story building on the College Avenue site, to be constructed of brick and hollow terra cotta block, and projected to cost $40,000. The ground floor would be divided into two store spaces and the three upper floors would be designed for apartments. At the time of the report, no architect was named for the building, and the Larkins had not hired a contractor, but by January 1913, excavations had begun on the site.9 The Larkin Building was one of many construction projects in Ithaca in 1912-1913, and in September 1912, the Ithaca Daily Journal reported a local labor shortage. The Driscoll Bros. contracting firm had four large construction projects underway in at the time – Ithaca High School, the City Hospital, Cornell’s Prudence Risley Hall, and the Realty Company Building. Cornell’s Cascadilla Hall was also being rehabilitated for use as an official men’s dormitory; it had previously been university-owned housing with boarding facilities operated by private contractors.10 The Larkin Block was completed by September 1913, when Larkin Bros. advertised in the Cornell Daily Sun: “Larkin Bros. have moved to their new store in the Larkin Bldg. Catering to fraternities, boarding houses and students in general is our specialty.” Another September 6 Ithaca Daily Journal, October 3,1912; Ithaca Daily News November 14, 1912. Conflicting newspaper reports state both 230 and 232 as the possible new address of the moved building. 7 Norton’s Ithaca City Directory for 1890-91 (Ithaca, NY: E.D. Norton), 156. 8 Carol U. Sisler, Margaret Hobbie, and Jane Marsh Dieckmann, eds., Ithaca’s Neighborhoods (Ithaca, NY: DeWitt Historical Society of Tompkins County, 1988), 169. 9 Ithaca Daily News November 14, 1912; Ithaca Daily Journal, January 3, 1913. 10 Ithaca Daily Journal,September 9, 1912. Cornell Daily Sun advertisement offered the new apartments at “reasonable” rents, and directed potential tenants to inquire at the Larkin store. 11 An Ithaca Daily News advertisement described the apartments as “strictly modern with private halls.” There was at least one apartment still unoccupied in December 1913, when the Larkins ran another Ithaca Daily News ad offering a “Modern Apartment” in the “New Larkin Block”. This directed inquiries to either J.J. Larkin at 403 College Avenue or W.F. Larkin at 410 Stewart Avenue.12 The Larkin Building apartments were representative of flat-style apartment units, an urban housing mode that contained kitchen, bathroom, and living areas in one private unit. This type of apartment became popular in Ithaca during the first two decades of the twentieth century, particularly in Collegetown. The apartments above the retail spaces were rented to a variety of tenants, many associated with Cornell University. Both students and professors lived in the Larkin apartments, as well as employees of Collegetown businesses and their families. John V. Larkin, one of John J. Larkin’s sons, and his wife occupied one of the apartments in 1929-1930. The Ithaca city directory listings indicate six separate apartment units in the building, although it is not known how the apartments were laid out on each floor or the size of each space.13 While the nineteenth century saw student-oriented businesses both downtown and at the edge of campus with a concentration along Eddy Street, in the early twentieth century, the construction of large, commercial-style mixed-use buildings firmly established the 400 block of College Avenue as the heart of Collegetown. When the Larkin brothers opened their College Avenue store, there was only one other grocery business on College Avenue. As they noted in their September 1913 advertisement, the Larkin store aimed to serve the boarding houses and fraternities, which would have required large grocery orders, but there were also a growing number of Collegetown residents living in apartments with self-contained kitchens; by 1919, only one boarding house remained on the 400 block of College Avenue.14 As the number of new Collegetown apartment units grew, more grocery stores and services opened on College Avenue to meet the needs of apartment dwellers. In 1929, the Ithaca city directory listed six grocery stores on College Avenue, including Larkin Bros.15 11 Cornell Daily Sun September 26, 1913. 12 Ithaca Daily News,September 27, 1913;Ithaca Daily News, December 19, 1913. 13 Ithaca city directories, 1913-1965; Manning’s Ithaca (New York) Directory for the Year Beginning January, 1930 (Schenectady, NY: H.A.Manning Co., 1930), 218. 14 Sanborn fire insurance map for Ithaca, September 1919, sheet 32. 15 Norton & Goohue’s Ithaca City Directory for 1911-12 (Ithaca, NY: Norton printing Company, 1911), 410-411; Manning’s Ithaca (New York) Directory For the Year Beginning January, 1929 (Schenectady, NY: H.A. Manning Co.), 554. According to Ithaca city directories, John J. Larkin was the manager and proprietor of the Larkin Brothers College Avenue store, and though Walter Larkin co-owned the property, he maintained a wholesale grocery business on Stewart Avenue. Available records do not indicate that brother Thomas J. Larkin was involved with the College Avenue grocery, but his obituary stated that he was in business with his brothers until the partnership dissolved in 1916. Thomas J. Larkin continued to operate an Eddy Street store until his retirement in 1940.16 The Larkin Bros. grocery store shared the first story of 403 College Avenue with the Student Supply Store from 1915 through 1937. It is likely that the Student Supply Store occupied the north storefront because advertisements list the store’s address as 405 College Avenue, while Ithaca city directories list the business at 403 College Avenue, the Larkin Building’s official street address. Like Larkin Brothers, the Student Supply Store was located on Eddy Street prior to its move to College Avenue, and may have maintained the Eddy Street branch for two years after the opening of the College Avenue store. The Student Supply Store was a stationery and variety store, selling books, stationery, pens, account books, alarm clocks, Kodak products, banners and general school supplies. A 1924 advertisement claimed that it was “The Busiest Store in Collegetown.” The Student Supply Store closed in 1937 or 1938, and its proprietor, John B. Burling, is listed in the 1937 Ithaca city directory as the owner of Imperial Stationery, a store located at 403 College Avenue for approximately one year.17 After John J. Larkin’s death in 1938, Francis W. Egan purchased Larkin Bros. grocery store. At the time of the sale, Egan also owned a grocery store at 113 South Cayuga Street. The Larkin family retained ownership of the Larkin Building until May 6, 1955, when they sold the property to Francis and Rita Egan. The Egan family may have continued to operate the Cayuga Street store in 1938 and 1939, but closed it by 1940. The family also chose to live in Collegetown after purchasing the Larkin business, moving to nearby 212 Delaware Avenue in 1940 or 1941.18 Francis and Rita Egan operated their grocery business at 403 College Avenue from 1938 to 1965, apparently utilizing the entire first story. During these years, the Ithaca city directories and advertisements listed the store under various names: Egan’s Food Shop, Egan’s Food Store, Egan’s Super Market, and Egan’s I.G.A. A 1954 photograph of the building shows only the top of 16 Obituary of Thomas J. Larkin, Ithaca Journal, January 3, 1944. 17 Manning’s Ithaca (New York) Directory For the Year Beginning January, 1937 (Schenectady, NY: H.A. Manning Co.); Cornell Daily Sun September 24, 1924. 18 Obituary of John J. Larkin, Ithaca Journal, March 8, 1938, p. 3. Notice of Egan’s purchase of Larkin store is in Cornell Alumni News, June 2, 1938. Deed of May 6, 1955 conveying 403 College Avenue from Larkin family to Francis Egan, Deed Book 377, Page 212. Office of the Tompkins County Clerk. Ithaca City Directories, 1937-1941. the store’s sign projecting from the second story; the visible portion of the sign is the word “SUPER”.19 Collegetown continued to develop as a distinct neighborhood, and a September 1956 Ithaca Journal advertisement sponsored by the East Hill Merchants Association called the College Avenue, Dryden Road and Eddy Street commercial area the “East Hill Shopping Center”. This may have been in response to the competition posed by the Ithaca Shopping Plaza, which opened on Elmira Road a few years earlier and advertised plenty of free parking. The Merchants Association’s map represented over fifty varied businesses, offering goods, services, and recreational opportunities to neighborhood residents. Egan’s I.G.A. was featured, with an advertisement listing groceries, meats, fruits, vegetables, frozen foods, beer and soft drinks among their merchandise.20 Egan’s grocery moved to 301 College Avenue in October 1964, and the Triangle Book Shop moved into the Larkin Building’s first floor space the following summer. Francis and Rita Egan retained ownership of the Larkin Building until May 1, 1972, when they sold the property to Robert G. and Mabel F. Johnson. Robert G. Johnson was the owner of Collegetown’s Triangle Book Shop.21 The Triangle Book Shop had a Collegetown presence for over ninety years. It was established in 1903 in a first-story retail space in Sheldon Court, where it remained until 1965, when Cornell University, then the owner of Sheldon Court, declined to renew the store’s lease. The developers of Sheldon Court, who initially operated the store, sold the buisness in 1906 to the owners of downtown Ithaca’s Corner Book Store. The store expanded in 1939, opening an annex across College Avenue in the former College Book Shop space. 22 Triangle’s move to the Larkin Building in 1965 was the result of Cornell University’s decision to expand the merchandise and non-academic departments of its campus store into Sheldon Court due to lack of space in its Barnes Hall location. The university planned to double the amount of textbook space in Barnes Hall and the Sheldon Court move was viewed as a temporary solution to the space shortage. While the Cornell store gained space, Triangle’s new Larkin Building space was about 500 square feet smaller than its Sheldon Court store, but the manager and owner, Robert Johnson, planned to develop some of the building’s basement area 19 Ithaca city directories, 1938-1965; Tompkins County Department of Assessment, Tompkins County Tax Assessment photograph, 1954, Historic Ithaca, Inc., Ithaca, NY. 20 Ithaca Journal, September 26, 1956. 21 Deed of May 1, 1972 conveying 403 College Avenue to Robert G. and Mabel F. Jonson from Francis W. and Rita F. Egan, book 499, page 880. Office of the Tompkins County Clerk, Ithaca, NY. 22 Cornell Daily Sun, November 12, 1943; September 27, 1938. to gain more space. He estimated that the move and remodeling would cost $30,000 to $40,000. Robert Johnson sold the bookstore to the Nebraska Book Company in 1986.23 The Triangle Book Shop continued to operate in the Larkin Building until 1990 when it moved to 301 College Avenue, the former Egan grocery store, operating at that location until 1999 or 2000.24 When Robert and Mabel Johnson sold the Larkin Building to Po Ching and Liang Chun Po on June 4, 1990, the deed included a restriction against the operation of a retail bookstore in the building as long as the Nebraska Book Company or its successors owned a bookstore in Collegetown, or until January 31, 2010.25 The current ground floor occupants of the Larkin Building, Stella’s Restauant and Coffee Shop, have occupied the building since 1993, and are representative of the type of commercial activity common in Collegetown today, which has a large number of restaurants but no full service grocery store and few retail businesses.26 23 Cornell Daily Sun, September 24, 1964; Sisler, Ithaca’s Neighborhoods, 171. 24 Dickman Directory, Ithaca & Tompkins County,2000, 25. 25 Deed of June 4, 1990 conveying 403 College Avenue to Po Ching and Liang Chun Po from Robert G. and Mabel F. Johnson, book 654, page 493, Office of the Tompkins County Clerk, Ithaca, NY. 26 Dickman Directory, Ithaca & Tompkins County, 1993-2000. Proposed Local Designation, 403 College Ave- The Larkin Building Board of Planning & Development, Meeting Held August 22, 2017 Moved by Schroeder, seconded by Jones Rounds and unanimously approved At the regular monthly meeting on July 11, 2017 the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission by unanimous vote recommended designation of the Larking Building at 403 College Avenue as a local landmark. A map showing the location of the house and a summary of its historic and architectural significance are attached to this report. As set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, “The Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved.” The following report has been prepared to address these considerations. 1. Relation to the Comprehensive Plan The 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan and Conceptual Design Guidelines (Collegetown Plan) contains the following recommendations pertaining to historic resources: 5.M. Historically significant resources within the entire Collegetown Planning Area which merit designation as local historic landmarks, but which currently have no such protection, should be identified by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and designated by Common Council. Ideally, this process would take place concurrently with consideration and adoption of the proposed form-based Collegetown zoning amendments. 5.N. Collegetown’s cultural, architectural and natural history should be highlighted and interpreted for both residents and visitors through such elements as markers, signs or decorative sidewalk panels, in accordance with a thematically and aesthetically coordinated program. 6.A. As a resource to be used when applying the new design standards, exemplary existing Collegetown buildings, both new and historic, should be identified which can serve as sources of inspiration for designers. Suitable newer buildings might include 401, 407 and 409 College Avenue, and suitable older buildings might include not only those structures selected for historic designation (see item 5.M. above), but other non- designated older structures displaying attractive proportions or physical design elements that could spark ideas suitable for inclusion in projects under design. The Collegetown Plan states the following with respect to the east side of the 400 block of College Avenue, which includes the Larking Block: The exemplary row of buildings currently defining the east side of College Avenue between Oak Avenue and Dryden Road is praised in the Collegetown Vision Statement as being “a striking example of excellence in architectural design within an existing urban context,” and this opinion is broadly shared by the Ithaca community. The aesthetic harmony of this facade row is even more striking because two component structures are roughly a century old while the other three were built more recently. Each of these buildings has a well-designed facade in its own right, but here—unlike other areas of Collegetown—the interplay of old and new creates a unified streetscape whose aesthetic power is much greater than the sum of its (already attractive) parts. Numerous design elements visually relate the individual buildings in this row to each other and to the streetscape as a whole: (1) All five buildings present roughly the same height when viewed from College Avenue; (2) the four northern most buildings are linked by a ground-floor horizontal “base” of consistent height and red-brick color, which is then carried up vertically by the red-brick Ciaschi Building at the Dryden Road corner; (3) the upper-story portion of each of the four northernmost buildings has a harmonious light earthtone color, and is separated from the other three (above the linked ground-floor “base”) by narrow slots which provide a visual rhythm to the series of facades; (4) the newer buildings, while contemporary in expression, display deliberate design references to the older buildings, so that horizontal elements (though varying in detail) are carried across all five buildings at the same height, basic rhythms of facade organization are found on all five buildings, and even decorative features of the older buildings are echoed by design elements of the newer buildings. The east side of the 400 block of College Avenue is a major urban planning success, notable not only within its Collegetown context, but within the context of the City as a whole, and no incentive (such as substantially increasing the maximum permitted building height) should be enacted that would provide an economic incentive to demolish any of the buildings, old or new, that together create this exceptional urban ensemble. After the adoption of the Collegetown Plan, a Collegetown Survey was completed, titled “Collegetown Historic Resources Worthy or Detailed Research; Icons of Collegetown, Individual Buildings, Architectural Ensembles and Landscape Features”, by Mary Tom lan and John Schroeder, dated June 14, 2009. This study identified structures worthy of further research. The Larkin Building and the Chacona Block were identified as key elements of an architectural ensemble on the east side of the 400 block of Colleg e Avenue. Local designation is consistent with the Collegetown Plan and the 2009 Collegetown historic resources survey. 2. Relation to Zoning Laws The property is located in the Mixed Use-2 (M-U2) zoning district the purpose and intent of which are as follows: The Mixed Use districts accommodate retail, office, service, hotel, and residential uses, and in most cases, multiple uses will be combined within the same building. The purpose is to create a dynamic urban environment in which uses reinforce each other and promote an attractive, walkable neighborhood. Located in central Collegetown, the Mixed Use districts allow the highest density within the Collegetown Area Form Districts. Redevelopment is anticipated and encouraged (with the exception of designated local landmarks), and the intent is to concentrate the majority of additional development within these districts. Local designation will not affect building uses permitte d under the Zoning Ordinance. Building height in the district is limited to a maximum of 6 stories and 80’ and a minimum of 4 stories and 45’. The existing building is five stories. Local designation may restrict the future addition of a sixth story. Any proposed exterior alterations or additions would be subject to the area requirements in the MU-2 Zoning district and would require ILPC review to assess the visual and historic compatibility. 3. Relation to Projected Public Improvements Streetscape improvements are planned for the length of Colleg e Avenue, including the 400 block within which this property is located. Improvements, which are currently in the planning process, will likely take place in 2020 and include realignment of the curb line and improvements to pedestrian and bike amenities. Historic designation would not affect this proposed work 4. Relation to Plans for Renewal of the Site or the Area There are no plans in the City’s Community Development Block Grant program or by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for renewal of this site or the nearby area. Local landmark designation requires that any private proposal for material change of the exterior of the building or site undergo review and approval by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission before work commences. Proposed Resolution Planning & Economic Development Committee September 13, 2017 RE: LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THE LARKIN BUILDING AT 403 COLLEGE AVENUE. WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) is responsible for recommending to Common Council the designation of identified structures or resources as individual landmarks and historic districts within the city, and WHEREAS, on July 11, 2017, the ILPC conducted a public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to designate the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave., as a local landmark, and WHEREAS, the designation of a local landmark is a Type II action under the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act and the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and as such requires no further environmental review, and WHEREAS, the ILPC found that the proposal meets criteria 1, 2, and 3, defining a “Local Landmark,” under Section 228-3B of the Municipal Code and on July 11, 2017, voted to recommend the designation of the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave., and WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the comprehensive plan, the zoning law, projected public improvements and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved, and WHEREAS, a copy of the Planning Board's report and recommendation for approval of the designation, adopted by resolution at the meeting held on August 22, 2017, has been reviewed by the Common Council, and WHEREAS, Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code states that the Council shall within ninety days of said recommendation of designation, approve, disapprove or refer back to the ILPC for modification of same; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Common Council finds that the designation [is/is not] compatible with and [will/will not] conflict with the comprehensive plan, existing zoning, projected public improvements or any plans for renewal of the site and area involved, and be it further RESOLVED, that the Larkin Building at 403 College Avenue, meets criteria for local designation, as set forth in the Municipal Code, as follows: 1. it possesses special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural, political, economic, or social history of the locality, region, state, or nation; or 2. it is identified with historically significant person(s) or event(s); or 3. it embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style; or Proposed Resolution Planning & Economic Development Committee September 13, 2017 RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council [approves/denies] the designation of the Larkin Building at 403 College Ave and the adjacent areas that are identified as tax parcel #64.-2-29 as a local landmark. RECORD OF VOTE: Moved by: 0 Seconded: 0 In favor: 0 Against: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Vacancies: 0 Proposed Local Designation, 403 College Ave- The Larkin Building Board of Planning & Development, Meeting Held August 22, 2017 Moved by Schroeder, seconded by Jones Rounds and unanimously approved At the regular monthly meeting on July 11, 2017 the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission by unanimous vote recommended designation of the Larking Building at 403 College Avenue as a local landmark. A map showing the location of the house and a summary of its historic and architectural significance are attached to this report. As set forth in Section 228-3 of the Municipal Code, Landmarks Preservation, “The Planning Board shall file a report with the Council with respect to the relation of such designation to the comprehensive plan, the zoning laws, projected public improvements, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area involved.” The following report has been prepared to address these considerations. 1. Relation to the Comprehensive Plan The 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan and Conceptual Design Guidelines (Collegetown Plan) contains the following recommendations pertaining to historic resources: 5.M. Historically significant resources within the entire Collegetown Planning Area which merit designation as local historic landmarks, but which currently have no such protection, should be identified by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and designated by Common Council. Ideally, this process would take place concurrently with consideration and adoption of the proposed form-based Collegetown zoning amendments. 5.N. Collegetown’s cultural, architectural and natural history should be highlighted and interpreted for both residents and visitors through such elements as markers, signs or decorative sidewalk panels, in accordance with a thematically and aesthetically coordinated program. 6.A. As a resource to be used when applying the new design standards, exemplary existing Collegetown buildings, both new and historic, should be identified which can serve as sources of inspiration for designers. Suitable newer buildings might include 401, 407 and 409 College Avenue, and suitable older buildings might include not only those structures selected for historic designation (see item 5.M. above), but other non- designated older structures displaying attractive proportions or physical design elements that could spark ideas suitable for inclusion in projects under design. The Collegetown Plan states the following with respect to the east side of the 400 block of College Avenue, which includes the Larking Block: The exemplary row of buildings currently defining the east side of College Avenue between Oak Avenue and Dryden Road is praised in the Collegetown Vision Statement as being “a striking example of excellence in architectural design within an existing urban context,” and this opinion is broadly shared by the Ithaca community. The aesthetic harmony of this facade row is even more striking because two component structures are roughly a century old while the other three were built more recently. Each of these buildings has a well-designed facade in its own right, but here—unlike other areas of Collegetown—the interplay of old and new creates a unified streetscape whose aesthetic power is much greater than the sum of its (already attractive) parts. Numerous design elements visually relate the individual buildings in this row to each other and to the streetscape as a whole: (1) All five buildings present roughly the same height when viewed from College Avenue; (2) the four northern most buildings are linked by a ground-floor horizontal “base” of consistent height and red-brick color, which is then carried up vertically by the red-brick Ciaschi Building at the Dryden Road corner; (3) the upper-story portion of each of the four northernmost buildings has a harmonious light earthtone color, and is separated from the other three (above the linked ground-floor “base”) by narrow slots which provide a visual rhythm to the series of facades; (4) the newer buildings, while contemporary in expression, display deliberate design references to the older buildings, so that horizontal elements (though varying in detail) are carried across all five buildings at the same height, basic rhythms of facade organization are found on all five buildings, and even decorative features of the older buildings are echoed by design elements of the newer buildings. The east side of the 400 block of College Avenue is a major urban planning success, notable not only within its Collegetown context, but within the context of the City as a whole, and no incentive (such as substantially increasing the maximum permitted building height) should be enacted that would provide an economic incentive to demolish any of the buildings, old or new, that together create this exceptional urban ensemble. After the adoption of the Collegetown Plan, a Collegetown Survey was completed, titled “Collegetown Historic Resources Worthy or Detailed Research; Icons of Collegetown, Individual Buildings, Architectural Ensembles and Landscape Features”, by Mary Tom lan and John Schroeder, dated June 14, 2009. This study identified structures worthy of further research. The Larkin Building and the Chacona Block were identified as key elements of an architectural ensemble on the east side of the 400 block of Colleg e Avenue. Local designation is consistent with the Collegetown Plan and the 2009 Collegetown historic resources survey. 2. Relation to Zoning Laws The property is located in the Mixed Use-2 (M-U2) zoning district the purpose and intent of which are as follows: The Mixed Use districts accommodate retail, office, service, hotel, and residential uses, and in most cases, multiple uses will be combined within the same building. The purpose is to create a dynamic urban environment in which uses reinforce each other and promote an attractive, walkable neighborhood. Located in central Collegetown, the Mixed Use districts allow the highest density within the Collegetown Area Form Districts. Redevelopment is anticipated and encouraged (with the exception of designated local landmarks), and the intent is to concentrate the majority of additional development within these districts. Local designation will not affect building uses permitte d under the Zoning Ordinance. Building height in the district is limited to a maximum of 6 stories and 80’ and a minimum of 4 stories and 45’. The existing building is five stories. Local designation may restrict the future addition of a sixth story. Any proposed exterior alterations or additions would be subject to the area requirements in the MU-2 Zoning district and would require ILPC review to assess the visual and historic compatibility. 3. Relation to Projected Public Improvements Streetscape improvements are planned for the length of Colleg e Avenue, including the 400 block within which this property is located. Improvements, which are currently in the planning process, will likely take place in 2020 and include realignment of the curb line and improvements to pedestrian and bike amenities. Historic designation would not affect this proposed work 4. Relation to Plans for Renewal of the Site or the Area There are no plans in the City’s Community Development Block Grant program or by the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency for renewal of this site or the nearby area. Local landmark designation requires that any private proposal for material change of the exterior of the building or site undergo review and approval by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission before work commences. 8‐Sep‐17    Deleted: 6‐Sep‐17 Objecting to the DEC Permitting Cargill Mine Expansion Without Proper Environmental Review WHEREAS the first Cayuga Salt Mine shaft was drilled in 1915 and Cargill, Inc. (“Cargill”)’s permitted mining reserves extend into the Town of Lansing, Town of Ulysses, and south into the southern end of Cayuga Lake to within one mile of the City of Ithaca; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes the economic, social, recreational, and ecological importance of Cayuga Lake and its watershed to the State and to the local community; and WHEREAS New York has established the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) process to systematically consider environmental factors early in the planning stages of actions and projects that are directly undertaken, funded or approved by local, regional and state agencies;1 and WHEREAS environmental review early in the planning stages allows a project to be vetted, and modified as needed, to avoid adverse impacts on the environment;2 and WHEREAS Cargill’s proposed shaft construction, the mining of the one‐mile connecting tunnel, and expanded salt mining have potential adverse impacts that have not been properly reviewed and vetted under SEQR in contrast to the Hampton Corners Salt Mine in Livingston County which is carrying out its second Draft Environmental Impact Statement; and WHEREAS adverse impacts include impacts on local water resources, including groundwater and the waters of Cayuga Lake and various ways in which substantial quantities of salt would be incidentally brought into contact with such local water resources, not only during current mining operations but also during the post‐operational period after the mine is closed and abandoned; and WHEREAS “the abandonment of dry salt mines raises a difficult problem, as post‐abandonment mine flooding is, in most cases, highly probable, with possible severe consequences at ground level;”3 and WHEREAS “the majority of salt mines succumb to collapse and flooding”4 and “flooding, whether intentional or inadvertent, is …‘game over’ for successful containment or control of the salinity associated with the brine that will inevitably be squeezed out of the mine;”5 and WHEREAS since 1975, and despite several applications for mine expansion by Cargill, the NYSDEC has never requested a full environmental impact study of the mining risks; and                                                              1  6 NYCRR Part 617; SEQR Handbook, 3rd Edition, 2010, Introduction  2 Ibid.  3 P. Bérest, B. Brouard, and B. Feuga, Dry Mine Abandonment, Abstract, Solution Mining Research Institute (SMRI) Technical Conference Paper, Wichita, KS, Spring 2004. (http://www.brouard- consulting.com/sites/default/files/smri-wichita.pdf) 4 A. Michalski, 1/31/17 comment letter to DEC. 5 R. Vaughan, 12/9/16 comment letter to DEC.  8‐Sep‐17    Deleted: 6‐Sep‐17 WHEREAS the 1994 collapse and flooding of the Retsof salt mine in Livingston County and subsequent salinization of an adjacent fresh water aquifer provide an example of various adverse impacts and some of the factors implicated in salt‐mine collapse; and WHEREAS these and other potential adverse impacts on the environment should be subject to full and proper environmental review under SEQR; and WHEREAS the NYSDEC reviewed the Cargill Shaft 4 project and concluded that the action meets their standards, and on 16 August 2017 issued an applicable permit without full environmental review of the project in its entirety; now therefore, be it RESOLVED that the City of Ithaca joins with other Cayuga Lake stakeholders in a soon‐to‐be‐filed Article 78 proceeding to require environmental review under SEQR pertaining to Cargill’s Shaft 4 project and all proposed construction and expansion of the Cargill Mine; and be it further RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded by the City Clerk to Governor Andrew Cuomo, NYSDEC Commissioner Basil Seggos, State Senators Patricia Helming and Thomas O’Mara, Senate Leader John Flanagan, Senate Minority Leader Andrea Stewart‐Cousins, Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, Assembly Minority leader Brian Kolb, Chair of the Assembly’s Standing Committee on Environmental Conservation Steve Englebright, Village of Trumansburg Mayor Martin Petrovic, and Tompkins County Legislature Chair Michael Lane. To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner Date: September 5, 2017 Re: Proposal to Restrict South Hill In-Fill Development This memo is intended to address concerns that have been raised regarding in-fill development in the South Hill neighborhood. Many city residents attended the August 9, 2017, Planning Committee meeting to express concerns about the proliferation of in-fill student housing that is taking place on South Hill, addressing the degradation on both the aesthetic qualities and the character of the neighborhood. Residents requested that the City consider rezoning the area in order to restrict this type of development, specifically manufactured duplex housing. Planning Committee members directed staff to explore options for dealing with this issue. The predominant zoning in this area is R-1b and R-2a with some smaller R-3b districts. The R-1 and R-2 districts are intended to be lower density, restricted to 1 and 2 family houses and larger lot sizes. These zones are usually located in areas where there are established owner occupied neighborhoods. However, if all of the site requirements (in accordance with zoning) can be met for each building, a property owner may construct multiple primary structures on one lot, which is the trend we are currently seeing. Most, if not all new housing units recently constructed, are manufactured duplex housing units. We have seen as many as five new duplexes on a parcel that already contained two existing homes (that were converted to rentals), for a total of seven rental buildings containing +/- 36 bedrooms. These units are geared towards students, having the potential to significantly change the character of this neighborhood, in both demographics and behavior. As part of the phase two Comprehensive Plan for the City, staff has begun working on two area plans in the City. It is recommended that once these plans are completed, South Hill be CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 JoAnn Cornish, Director DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org considered for the next area of study. This will allow the neighborhood to weigh in on a vision for this area and for the City to develop a plan for sensible growth and development. In addition, staff recommends that the Council consider a change in the zoning to prevent further uncontrolled growth until a vision and plan for this area can be completed. In order to do this, staff recommends that one of following options be implemented in the area shown on the attached map. The first option would be to halt all development by instituting a temporary moratorium on any new construction in the South Hill area. This option would allow the City to take time to develop a vision and plan that would include recommendations for zoning changes. This option would require the City to begin this planning process immediately in order to have a plan completed before the moratorium expires. This may be difficult, in that the City is already in the process of completing several other plans including two neighborhood plans. A second option would be to rezone the area to R-1a. The R-1a zoning district requires larger lot sizes and restricts the number of occupants living in a dwelling unit. This would make in-fill development more difficult. However, it may also put some of the existing properties out of conformance with zoning. The third option is to create an overlay zoning district for this area that would restrict properties to only having one primary structure. An overlay district would allow the City to establish the study area and restrict further in-fill development. Once the City goes through the planning process for this area, it can determine whether there are locations where in-fill development makes sense and whether guidelines are needed to ensure the development is in line with the neighborhood character. Once the Committee has determined which course of action is most favorable, staff will draft and circulate an ordinance and environmental review and will return to the Committee with comments for further discussion before a recommendation is made to Common Council. If you have any concerns or questions regarding any of this information, feel free to contact me at 274-6410. M ITC H E L L S T C OD D ING TON R D EDDY STE BUF FA L O ST GIL E S ST STATEROUTE366 E STATE ST W B U F FA L O S T HUDSON STE S ENE C A S T VALENT I N E PLS CAYUGA STDRYDEN RD W SE N E C A S T W S TAT E S T B R A ND O N PLSENECAWAYW G R E E N S T COLLEGE AVEW C L I N TO N S T C R E S C E N T P LE SPENCER STE G R E E N S T FOUNTAINST GRANDVIEWAVE C O LUM B I A S T E C L I N TON ST S TITUSAVEN TITUSA VEGRANDVIEWPLSTEWART AVESPRINGLNDEWITTPLOR C H A R D PL CO OK S TGLEN PLWILLETSPLEDDY STH IL LV I E W P LTERRACE PLNAURORASTSAGE PLELSTONPLN TIOGA STPEARSALL PL SE N E C A W AY B OO L STN QUARRY STN CAYUGA STN GENEVA STFROSH ALY HUDSONSTEXTSCHUYLER PLPARKER STS GENEVA STHAWTHORNE PL HUDSO N HTSW O O DCOCK ST SOUTH HILL TERJAMES STSQUARRYSTCHAR L E S S T RENZETTIPL P R O S P E C T ST PL EAS A N T S T CAT H ERINE S T LINDEN AVEWSPENCERSTBLAIR STOSMUNPLTURNER PLCOTTAGEPLGRAN D V IE W C TS GENEVA STFERRI SPLSIXMILECREEKW ALKH U D SO N PL NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 DatumMap Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-2017Data Source: City of Ithaca Department of Public Works, 2017Map Prepared by: GIS Program, City of Ithaca, NY, August, 2017±0 160 320 Feet South Hill Zoning ZONE B-1a I-1 P-1 R-1a R-1b R-2a R-3aa R-3b South Hill Planning Area Municipal Border Waterway Total Parcels: 485Owner-Occupied Residences: 189 or 39%Owner-Occupied Residences with Rental Unit(s): 24 or 5%Bed & Breakfast: 2 or <1%Rental Properties: 223 or 46%Vacant: 23 or 5%Parks: 2 or <1%Non-Residential Uses: 22 or 5% GI L ES ST E STATE ST HUDSON STS AURORA STS ALBANY STS CAYUGA STS PLAIN STS TITU S AVEN TITU S AVEW S TAT E S T C O L U M B I A S T W G R E E N S T S GENEVA STW OO D S T V A LLE Y R D H I L LV I E W P L W C L I N T O N S T E G R E E N S T TURNER PLELMIRA RDITHACA RDFAYETTE STBLAIR STP L E A S A N T S T EDDY STCO DDING TO N RDSPENCER RDC R E S C E N T P LW SPENCER STC E N T E R S T P R O S P E C T S T WATER STH U D SO N PL LINDEN AVEPEARSALL PL C O O K S T COLLEGE AVEBRYANT AVE SOUTH HILL TERGRANDVIEW AVE PA R K ST MORRIS HTSDELAWARE AVEH Y E R S S T R ID G E D A L E R DIRVING P L E SPENCER STFERRIS PLHUDSO N HTSM ITC H E LL S T BRIDGE STE CL INTON ST JAMES STBRAND O N PLS QUARRY STELSTON PLCOTTAGE PLS GENEVA STS PLAIN STProposed South Hill Planning Area Legend City Boundary Parks Waterway South Hill Planning Area Southside Planning Area ¯ 0 0.1 0.2 Miles August 9, 2017 City of Ithaca Planning & Economic Development Committee Wednesday, August 9, 2017 – 6:00 p.m. Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street Minutes Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Josephine Martell, Cynthia Brock, and Stephen Smith Committee Members Absent: Alderperson Rob Gearhart Other Elected Officials Attending: Mayor Svante Myrick and Alderperson George McGonigal Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Planning and Development Department; Nels Bohn, Director of Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency; Dan Cogan, Chief of Staff; Tom Parsons, Fire Chief; Deborah Grunder, Executive Assistant Others Attending: None Chair Seph Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 1) Call to Order/Agenda Review There were no changes made to the agenda. 2) Special Order of Business a) Public Hearing – Amendment #1 to the 2017 City of Ithaca Action Plan (HUD) Alderperson Martell moved to open the public hearing; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Carried unanimously. No one from the public was present to speak. Alderperson Brock moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Carried unanimously. 3) Public Comment and Response from Committee Members Fay Gougakis, the Commons, spoke regarding the bike rack design project. She has been biking in the City for years and feels she is not respected. The City does not protect cyclists. The bike rack design project is a waste of money and effort. The City needs to focus on safety first. Karen Gellman, 207 Columbia Street, has lived there for 20+ years. She spoke on the Columbia Street development. There are too many people, cars, lack of trees, etc. One of the issues in the neighborhood is poor drainage, the more development, the more problems; there are too many students who don’t know how to behave. She asked the City to take another look at the R1 and R2 zones. John and Rita Graves and Verlaine Boyd, 319 and 315 Pleasant Street. The City needs a moratorium in the South Hill area. South Hill is being transferred from a quiet, pleasant neighborhood to a student “ghetto”. Is this what the Planning Department wants for the City? The parties are numerous, so large the police are afraid to break them up, etc. If development continues as is currently, we will be in big trouble. Verlaine Boyd, 315 Pleasant Street, spoke against the South Hill development. What is the law for owner occupancy? Is the City in control or are the student landlords in charge? Ian Golden, 517 Hudson Street, is a graduate of Ithaca College and agrees that the students do bring vibrancy to the neighborhoods; but too much, is too much. He supports stopping the process and institute a moratorium for a bit. Jed Sheckler, 142 Hawthorne Place, has been in the area for about 20 years. He is raising three young children and supports the others’ comments. We need to step back as a community and see what we are doing. We need a plan. The developers do whatever they want and are allowed to do so. Heather Lambert and Casey Porter, 304 Hudson Street, we have always had a great neighborhood, but what’s happening is young students are moving in and getting trashed, passing out in our yard, throwing up in our lawn, students urinate, and throw garbage, etc. A beautiful neighborhood is being destroyed. She’s concerned about that as well as the safety of the students. Mayor Svante Myrick joined the meeting at 6:25 p.m. Henry Granison, 107 Oxford Place, spoke regarding the South Hill development issues. He agrees with the ‘student ghetto’ terminology. It’s happening. Ken Young, 228 Columbia Street, commented on the new project at 217 Columbia Street. It is yet another student housing project. He renovates and sells home in this area to families, not rented to students. The Cosentini project on Aurora Street has been named as a similar ‘guide’ to the Columbia Street project. These areas are far different. One of the grander houses on Hudson Street has been bought up and cut up for student housing. He quoted many of the City Code statements that contradict the City’s actions to date. He urges a moratorium. The Town of Ithaca is working on a solution in their municipality. The City should follow suite. Sally Lockwood, 641 Hudson Street, near Therm. She worked with INHS to buy this house. Prior to her buying, there were developers who wanted to bring in student housing but were not able to due to the zoning restrictions. She agrees that a moratorium should be in place and make zoning restricted to student housing. Penny VanSchoick, 221 Columbia Street, lives right next to the proposed new development at 217 Columbia Street. She is the last owner occupied on the block. She is afraid that down the road she won’t be able to sell her house to anybody but Charlie O’Conner. Janet Fortess, 225 Columbia Street, is now the senior person on the street. She too enjoys the energy of the students, but enough is enough. She would like a moratorium put in place. When she first bought her home it was a two-family dwelling. She has since converted it to a one-family dwelling. Pam Mackesey, 323 Pleasant Street, with all the development happening, there are no back yards, no parking, etc. We don’t have to make it an ugly and inhabitable place to live. The City needs to step up and do something. The landlords who rent to the students don’t care about the neighborhood or the families that live there. They are all about the money they make. Chris McNamara, 122 Pearsall Place, attended Ithaca College as a student and now is a faculty member there. She has paid off her home and is now looking at an empty lot that she could add another dwelling to. That’s not what her family would like to do. We worked hard to pay off our home. We don’t want to live next to the students. David Beer, 311 Hudson Street, a local landlord with his parents. His parents’ home will gradually decrease due to the surrounding student housing. The notion that the zoning (R1 and R2) was written to allow this dense housing to happen needs to be looked at again. It will benefit the South Hill area a great deal. Charlie O’Connor, owner of 217 Columbia Street. He had a total different vision for 217 Columbia Street. He’s exploring different ideas. As a developer, he looked at what zoning allowed and went from there. He further stated that there will be a meeting to talk in depth about this project scheduled for next week in City Hall on Thursday, August 17th, at 5:30 p.m. 4) Updates, Announcements, Reports a) Community Bike Rack Design Project – JoAnn Cornish JoAnn Cornish informed the committee that this project will be covered by a grant received by the City. The Board of Public Works still needs to give their go ahead before anything further can be done. 5) Action Items (Voting to send onto Council) a) Amendment #1 to the 2017 City of Ithaca Action Plan (HUD) 2017 Action Plan - Program Amendment #1, Reallocate HOME Funds Declined by Lakeview Health Services, Inc.    Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson Smith. Carried unanimously. Whereas, the City adopted 2017 Action Plan allocated $50,000 in HOME funds to assist the Lakeview  Ithaca project, a 50‐unit affordable rental housing building sponsored by Lakeview Health  Services,  Inc., (Lakeview), and     Whereas, on June 22, 2017, Lakeview declined the HOME funding award for the project due to  regulatory requirements triggered by receipt of HOME federal funds, which are projected to create  both a financial and administrative burden far in excess of the $50,000 funding award, and     Whereas, on June 26, 2017, the City received formal notice that its FY17 HOME award declined by  16% from the prior year’s award, thereby requiring a pro‐rata funding reduction in all HOME‐ assisted projects, and    Whereas, the Lakeview award declined to $43,708.16 from $50,000, and     Whereas, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) is designated by the City of Ithaca as the  Lead Agency to develop, administer and implement the HUD Entitlement grant program,  including funds received through the Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) program, and     Whereas, the City’s HUD Citizen Participation Plan requires a public hearing and Common Council  approval for a substantial amendment to the Action Plan, such as reallocation of more than $25,000,  and    Whereas, at their July 27, 2017 meeting, the IURA recommended reallocating funds awarded to  Lakeview to restore funding cuts to other HOME‐assisted projects; now, therefore, be it    RESOLVED, that the Common Council for the City of Ithaca hereby adopts the IURA‐recommended  program amendment #1 to the FY17 HUD Action Plan to reallocate HOME funding as follows:      Project Name  Sponsor Funding Change Final Funding Lakeview Ithaca Lakeview Health  Services  Decrease:        $43,708.16    $0.00  402 S. Cayuga Street Habitat of Tompkins  &Cortland Counties  Increase:        $10,066.95    $80,000.00  Housing Scholarship  Program  The Learning Web Increase:        $8,253.89    $65,592.00  Security Deposit  Assistance 2017‐18  Catholic Charities of  Tompkins/Tioga  Increase:         $5,379.52    $42,750.00  Unallocated HOME  Funds   Increase:        $20,007.80    $20,007.80    j:\community development\entitlement grants\cdbg 2017\action plan\reso pedc fy17 action plan program amendment #1 8‐9‐17.docx  6) Discussion a) Development Patterns on South Hill Chair Murtagh thanked all who spoke on this issue during the public comment period. Mayor Myrick stated that we can’t fix the problem without building new student housing. He would agree and propose a moratorium while we complete the neighborhood plan. He would support a moratorium on all housing. To propose it only student housing is discriminating and illegal. When you use the term ‘student ghetto’ it undermines your message. Alderperson Brock stated that the first person who raised issue on this was George McGonigal. He raised the red flag. He sent messages to the list serve, etc. Despite his efforts, it didn’t work. She also thanked Ken Young with all his research and work. She absolutely is in favor of a moratorium, but not on all housing. The existing R1, R2, and R3 zones are fine to offer one dwelling per parcel. This moratorium should be put in place city wide. She also thanked Charlie O’Connor for speaking tonight and for agreeing on a public meeting to discuss this project. We have three new university presidents coming on board this year. At State College, when the administration noticed three students having the same address, they flagged the City. This might be something to put in place here. Alderperson McGonigal thanked all who spoke tonight including Charlie O’Connor and the Mayor. He also praised Alderperson Brock for her forethought on how to correct the problem. He stated that students should live on campus. Homeowners are selling their homes to leave all the student housing around them. He stated that he thinks South Hill is already a dense area. He sees a problem with allowing a second dwelling on one parcel. No family would be able to afford to buy such parcels. He agrees that a moratorium is in order. JoAnn Cornish thanked Alderperson Brock for pointing out that the zoning has been in place for a very long time. It is only recently that we’ve seen an influx of this type of density. She further pointed out the inspection cycle for each type of housing. Single family homes have a five-year inspection cycle. A lot can happen in five years – bedrooms are changed into different rooms, etc. She agrees that a moratorium is a good idea. The City is already working on the Southside Plan, Waterfront Plan, and the Parks Master Plan. Our staff is stretched very thin. Alderperson Brock stated that it was a complete shock that is was even possible to add multiple dwellings on one parcel. Chair Murtagh stated that in-fill density is needed. Neighborhoods are all different. This isn’t shutting down housing for students. The next step is to how to move forward. Mayor Myrick stated that if the comprehensive plan were in place, there may be more housing on campus with the bars remaining downtown and bus transportation from downtown to campus and back. Alderperson Brock stated that the increase of student parties, etc. is due to the new tools available to the students i.e., social media, etc. Chair Murtagh stated that staff will take all this input into consideration and discuss it at the next meeting. b) Future of College Avenue Fire Station The question surrounding the future of the College Avenue Fire Station is, should we sell and build a new state-of-the art building (s). Chief of Staff Dan Cogan walked the group what has been done to date. The City has been awarded a grant in the amount of $1M to relocate the fire station. If this is not done soon, the grant will be taken away. The Facilities Master Plan brought this to light. The existing fire station sits right next to the Nines. There is a proposal for the Nines – do we want to keep it or relocate it? A number of different scenarios were discussed: 1. Refurbish the current station 2. Move and build a new station at Maple Avenue 3. Build at a perfect site (undetermined where that might be) The option of consolidating the central and Collegetown stations were also discussed. Converting the current College Avenue station as a mixed-use property was also discussed. Mayor Myrick left the meeting at 8:50 p.m. 7) Review and Approval of Minutes a) July 2017 Moved by Alderperson Martell; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed unanimously. 8) Adjournment Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson Martell. Passed unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.