HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-14-18 Planning and Economic Development Committee Meeting AgendaPEDC Meeting
Planning and Economic Development Committee
Ithaca Common Council
DATE: February 14, 2018
TIME: 6:00 pm
LOCATION: 3rd floor City Hall
Council Chambers
AGENDA ITEMS
Item Voting
Item?
Presenter (s)
Time
Start
1) Call to Order/Agenda Review
2) Special Order of Business
a) Public Hearing ‐ Amendment to FY17 HUD Action Plan, Amici
House, $90,960 loan to TCAction for unanticipated project
expenses
3) Public Comment
4) Announcements, Updates, and Reports
a) Chainworks Planned Unit Development
5) Discussion
a) 2017 Planning Division Accomplishments and 2018 Work Plan
b) Comprehensive Plan, Phase II – Next Steps
c) Planned Unit Development – Possible Boundary Adjustment
d) Proposed Revisions to the Landmarks Ordinance
6) Action Items (Voting to Send on to Council)
a) Historic Resource Survey Grant Application ‐ Authorization to
Apply
b) Amendment to FY17 HUD Action Plan, Amici House, $90,960
loan to TCAction for unanticipated project expenses
7) Action Items (Voting to Circulate)
a) Planning Board – Special Permits
8) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) October 2017
b) January 2018 – (sent under separate cover)
9) Adjournment
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Seph Murtagh, Chair
Lisa Nicholas, Dep. Planning Dir.
Lisa Nicholas, Dep. Planning Dir.
Megan Wilson, Senior Planner
JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director
Bryan McCracken, Historic
Preservation Planner
Bryan McCracken, Historic
Preservation Planner
Nels Bohn, IURA Director
JoAnn Cornish, Planning Director
6:00
6:05
6:10
6:20
6:30
6:55
7:20
7:45
8:25
8:35
8:45
8:50
8:55
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, February 13th, 2018.
2018 Planning Division Goals and Milestones
Plans, Studies & Projects Anticipated Completion
Waterfront Study Area Plan
Complete full draft of plan Q3
Public outreach Q3
Committee recommendation to Council Q3
Adoption by Council Q4
Draft Design Guidelines for waterfront study area Q4
Southside Neighborhood
Complete full draft of plan Q3
Public outreach Q3
Committee recommendation to Council Q3
Adoption by Council Q4
City Parks Master Plan (Phase 1)
Facilitate adoption of final plan Q1
City Parks Master Plan (Phase 2) Q3/ Pending Funding Approval
Strategic Plan for City Facilities
Work with consultants to Complete Plan Q2
Council – Presentation & next steps Q3
Collegetown Streetscape Plan
Complete conceptual Design Q3
Cayuga Street Improvements
Work with the Engineering Department and Streets and Facilities Q3/Discussion - In house vs Grant
to plan and facilitate installation of new pedestrian scaled Funded
lighting and pavement on 200-300 blocks of N Cayuga Street
Capital Projects
Coordinate Capital Budget Process Q3
Sustainability
Complete Green Building Policy report & recommendations Q1
Adopt Green Building Policy Q3
Adopt PACE 2.0 local law (clean energy financing program) Q1
Complete first energy benchmarking report for City facilities Q3
Pursue Solar Array Project at Ithaca Airport Q1-Q4
Work with Tomp. Co.to complete Electric Vehicle Accelerator project Q4
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
2018 Planning Division Goals and Milestones
2
Sustainability (Cont)
Support Public Works in leading LED streetlight Ongoing Q1-Q4
Support the Sustainability Center transition to the Tompkins Center Q1-Q4
for History and Culture
Support local initiatives through board participation, such as Ongoing Q1-Q4
Tompkins County Energy Task Force and Ithaca 2030 District
Inlet Dredging Q1-Q4
Work with Superintendent of Public Works, the DEC, and a consultant team to complete construction of the
Sediment Management Facility in the southwest area.
Cascadilla Creek Dredging
Complete grant administration for funding approval Q1
Complete Environmental Review Q2
Submit all required permits Q3
Housing
Work with Tompkins County and the Town of Ithaca to identify and close gaps in our understanding of the
local housing market and barriers to affordable housing (Housing sub-studies)
Create more market interest in the construction of affordable and middle market housing by revising zoning
and building codes, for example allowing alternate housing types such as Tiny Houses, Shipping Container
Homes, converted buses, etc.
Continue to pursue incentive or inclusionary zoning and other strategies to encourage affordable housing in
large housing projects.
Support appointed City representatives maximize impact of the Community Development Housing Fund to
construct affordable housing – Q4 milestone: award funds to at least one housing project in the City
Downtown Conference Center
Work with the Downtown Ithaca Alliance and Tompkins County Tourism Program on developing a Phase Two
feasibility study for a Downtown Conference Center. Pursue strategies as appropriate. Q1-Q4
Downtown Transportation Demand Management Program – Support roll out and implementation Q3
Tompkins Center for History and Culture
Support Tompkins County, The History Center, and partners in establishing this new attraction on Bank Alley,
through involvement on the Leadership Team for the project. Q1-Q4
Legislation Anticipated Completion
Adoption of PUD Expansion Q1
Zoning for Southside Neighborhood Q4
Special Permits Q1
2018 Planning Division Goals and Milestones
3
Economic Development Activities and Major Development Projects
Projects in Implementation Projects in Development
Tompkins Trust Headquarters- Completion Q2 Waterfront Projects
Harold Square- – Completion 2019 Q2 City Harbor (Guthrie etc)
City Centre –Completion 2019 Q2 Greenstar Relocation
Hilton Canopy –Completion 2019 Q2 Carpenter Business Park/Community Gardens
CFCU/Chemung Bank Building-– Completion Q3 Green Garage Redevelopment
The Dewitt House – Construction Pending Q2 Select Preferred Developer Q2
Execute Preferred Developer Agreement Q2
Projects In Process – Council vote project and property sale Q4
Chainworks District Relocation of DOT Facilities- Ongoing
Complete EIS and Adopt PUD Q3 Immaculate Conception Property- Ongoing
Development Approvals for Phase 1 Q4 Bus Station Property – Ongoing
Cornell North Campus Dorm Approvals Q3 or Q4
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) Anticipated Completion
Manage the City’s annual HUD Entitlement grant to increase the supply of affordable housing, make
homeowner repairs, assist employers who create jobs, fund job training programs resulting in job placement,
and prevent homelessness
Highlighted projects:
Completion of Spencer Rd. sidewalks Q2
Completion of wading pool at Alex Haley swimming pool Q3
Substantial completion of 98-unit INHS rental housing rehabilitation Q4
Issuance of 75 security deposit assistance grants Q4
Substantial Completion of TC Action child care center Q4
Quasi-Judicial Boards and Committees
Planning & Development Board
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC)
Planning and Economic Development Committee
Newly Formed Commissions
Support Commissions as assigned
Division Organization/Projects
Hire two new planners
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
1
Top Ten Accomplishments of 2017
*Highlighting depicts those items not part of the 2017 work plan but were added during the year.
Coordinated Site Plan approval for 29 projects equaling $130 Million in investment: 568 Housing Units
of which 107 are affordable and 28,500 SF of Commercial Space
Disbursed $1.5 million in grants for affordable housing, job training and placement, and prevention of
homelessness, including $478,000 to assist the 210 Hancock affordable housing project that included
59 apartments and 7 for-sale townhouses (IURA)
Chain Works Redevelopment- EIS – 85% Complete, Initiated Approval Process for the Planned Unit
Development and Design Guidelines
Prepared and coordinated adoption by Common Council of Downtown Design Guidelines (December 2017)
and Collegetown Design Guidelines (January 2018)
Completed a final draft and Initiated approval process for the City Parks Master Plan (Phase 1)
Green Building Policy - Hired consultants, Formed advisory committee, Hosted peer learning
exchange, drafted project deliverables
Amended zoning to create new waterfront zoning districts
Amended zoning to create a South Hill Overlay District to restrict the number of primary structures
that can be constructed on a property
Amended zoning to allow for Brew Pubs, and breweries in specific zones in the City
Coordinated the design and approval of an official City Parks’ logo
Plans, Studies & Projects
Design Standards for Downtown and Collegetown
Coordinated adoption by Common Council (Downtown adopted December 2017, Collegetown to be
adopted in January 2018)
Managed consultant and completed final drafts of the design guidelines
Circulated the guidelines for comment and initiated the approval process
Waterfront Study Area Plan
Coordinated approval of new waterfront zoning (adopted in Sept 2017)
Completed Land Use and Transportation Chapters
Drafted new waterfront zoning
Progressed Energy Water and Sustainability chapter to 80%
Conveyed committee recommendations on amending the waterfront zoning, and expanding the
CIITAP and the PUD.
Coordinated 20 meetings of the waterfront committee
City Parks Master Plan (Phase 1)
Initiated approval process for plan
Managed consultant and completed a final draft of the plan
Worked with Tompkins County and the Town of Ithaca to identify an alternative governance model for
waterfront parks
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
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
2
Southside Neighborhood Plan
Re-established the Southside Planning Committee and began meeting regularly
Began preparation of the plan
Completed Land Use Chapter
Progressed Natural and Cultural Resources chapter to 75%
Strategic Plan for City Facilities
Worked with Midland Appraisals Associates. Inc. to complete Restricted Appraisals of 13 city-owned
properties
Worked with consultant to complete physical assessments of existing city facilities
Worked with a consultant to complete interviews and spatial needs assessments for 12 City
Departments
Worked with consultant to substantially complete 2 studies; Study 1 - Center of Government Campus
and Study 2 - Consolidated Streets and Facilities and Water and Sewer Campus. (Draft reports
expected to be submitted in January 2018).
Collegetown Streetscape Plan
Prepared visual materials and held a public input session to get feedback on two design scenarios
Cayuga Street Improvements
Worked with the Engineering Department and Streets and Facilities to plan and execute installation of
new pedestrian scaled lighting and pavement on the 100 & 200 North and 100 South blocks of Cayuga
Street
Ithaca Green Building Policy
Hired consultants, formed advisory committee, hosted peer learning exchange, drafted project
deliverables. Project scheduled to be completed Q1 2018.
Sustainability
Continued planning effort for installation of solar array. Signed updated power purchase agreement
with Tesla.
Installed four electrical car charging stations in city garages.
Through a grant received by the City, people from 3 different cities came to Ithaca to discuss green
building practices with representatives from Burlington, Vermont, Fort Collins, Colorado, and Evanston,
Illinois.
Coordinated the Capital Budget process: 60 requests for $21 Million in funds, 18 projects approved
for $9.5 million and $4.5 million in reimbursable grant funds.
Inlet Dredging
Worked with Superintendent of Public Works, the DEC, and a consultant team to advance the 100%
design documents for the Sediment Management Facility in the southwest area.
Cascadilla Creek Dredging
Worked with consultant to develop draft plan & budget
Initiated sediment sampling and testing
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
3
Legislation
Amended zoning to create a South Hill Overlay District to restrict the number of primary structures that
can be constructed on a property.
Amended zoning to create the Street Level Active Use Overlay Zone, which requires active uses on the
street level of buildings located on the primary and secondary commons.
Amended zoning to allow for Brew Pubs, and breweries in specific zones in the City
Amended City Code to allow dogs in Stewart Park
Drafted Amendments to the CIITAP Ordinance
Drafted proposed amendments to the PUD Ordinance
Worked with the City Forester and the Shade Tree Advisory Board to amend the Site Plan Review
Ordinance in regards to plants and plant maintenance
Development Projects –Support, Coordination and Economic Development Activities
Chainworks Redevelopment
Worked with project team to develop final draft of the PUD and Design Guidelines
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - Completed all responses to comments on the Draft EIS
Community Investment Incentive Tax Abatement Program (CIITAP)
Coordinated the City approval process for the City Centre Project - Tax Abatement Approved
Coordinated the City approval process for 323 Taughannock Boulevard - IDA Approval Pending
Planned Unit Developments (PUD)
Coordinated the process for approval of a TMPUD and subsequent PUD for 323 Taughannock
Boulevard
Ithaca Commons
Worked with the Attorney’s Office to complete and execute a new MOU between the DIA and
the City that incorporates and plans for the newly completed Commons
Coordinated upgrades to the playground to improve accessibility
Coordinated repairs to the playground surfacing
Coordinated construction of the water feature
Worked with DIA, City DPW, and City Planning for ongoing management, repairs, and upgrades
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
4
Economic Development Activities and Major Projects
Relocation of DOT Facilities
Carpenter Business Park
Cayuga Medical Center
Community Gardens
Guthrie Medical
Maguire Automotive
Harold Square
Assisted with the relocation of the Green Garage Dumpsters in order to create a consolidated
waste and recycling facility owned and operated by a private entity
Assisted with the negotiations in the preparation and execution of a MOU agreement between
Harold Square, the City, and the adjacent property owners to all of the signatories.
Worked with City Staff and the development team to:
Obtain a project schedule
Negotiate optimum times for the crane installation to be the least disruptive to
merchants, businesses, and residents.
Coordinated a time/place for a weekly Harold Square project update meeting.
210 Hancock Street Development – Construction completed
City Centre – Under construction
Hilton Canopy – Under construction
The Dewitt House – In design development
CFCU move to the former Chemung Bank Building on the Commons. Bringing up to 50 employees – under
construction. July 2018 move in anticipated.
Green Garage Redevelopment
PEAK/Rimland Development Team presented their project proposal, which would include complete
reconstruction of the Green Garage, 450 parking spaces for public use, 300 rental units, and a
conference center.
An RFP was prepared, advertised, and widely distributed to developers at the request of Common Council.
Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA)
Disbursed $1.5 million in grants for affordable housing, job training and placement, and
prevention of homelessness, including $478,000 to assist the 210 Hancock affordable housing
project that included 59 apartments and 7 for-sale townhouses.
Orchestrated For-Sale Housing Construction for Habitat for Humanity at 402 South Cayuga
Street
Prepared and advertised RFP for the redevelopment of the Green Garage
Completed environmental remediation of the City-owned Ithaca Falls Overlook site
Completed the City of Ithaca Assessment of Fair Housing
Hired a Community Development Planner
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
5
Grant Awards & Applications
Awarded - $50,000 Community Wins grant for the "pay it forward" program to provide an alternative
approach to assist panhandlers (IURA)
Awarded- $500,000 RestoreNY4 grant for the "Seneca/Corn Buildings Rehabilitation project" 413-15 W.
Seneca and 109 N. Corn (Ed Cope, PPM Homes) for housing (IURA)
Awarded - $40,000 in other grants
Coordinated completion of four "high-impact actions" to enable NYSERDA CEC grant award of $100,000
to City
Submitted - $15 Million TIGER Grant for improvements to TCAT, College Avenue and Stewart Avenue
Submitted - $1 Million Restore NY Grant to rehabilitate 4 downtown buildings including expansion of
Press Bay Alley and renovation of and historic home at 310 W State
Quasi-Judicial Boards and Committees
Planning & Development Board
Staffed 12 meetings
Coordinated the approval of 19 projects equaling $113 Million in investment: 559 Housing Units of
which 107 are affordable and 26,000 SF of Commercial Space
Completed staff level approval for 10 projects totaling 17 Million for 9 housing units and 2,600 SF of
new commercial space
Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA)
Staffed 12 meetings
Coordinated the approval of 32 Actions
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
Staffed 12 meetings
Coordinated Commission approval of 31 projects including 3 new buildings
Completed 68 staff level approvals for in-kind repairs and minor improvements
Coordinated the designation process for 2 historic resources in Collegetown (403 and 411-415
College Ave.) on behalf of the ILPC, one of which designation was approved by Common Council (403
College Ave.)
Planning and Economic Development Committee
Staffed 12 meetings
Brought forward recommendations from the Waterfront Working Group to allow for Planned Unit
Development Citywide
Brought forward recommendations to expand the boundaries of the Community Investment
Incentive Tax Abatement Program (CIITAP), decision pending.
Advisory Boards
Parks Commission (12 meetings)
Staffed eight meetings
Coordinated the design and approval of an official Parks logo
Attended coordination meetings for Friends of Stewart Park
2017 Planning Division Accomplishments
6
Public Art Commission (12 meetings)
Staffed 11 meetings
Coordinated the approval and completion of 6 electrical box murals and one new mural
Coordinated the approval of a new rotating mural and an additional electrical box
Prepared and submitted a grant application for a collaborative project with Cornell in Collegetown
Shepherded the Ithaca Community Bike Rack Design Project for approval
Department Organization/Projects
Conducted interviews and hired an office assistant
Conducted interviews and hired a Deputy Director of Economic Development
Promoted Senior Planner to Deputy Director of Planning and Development
Conducted interviews and hired 2 new Housing Inspectors
TO: Planning & Development Board, Common Council
From: Lisa Nicholas, AICP, Deputy Director of Planning
RE: 2017 Planning Board Annual Report – Site Plan Applications and Approved Projects
Date: February 10, 2018
Site Plan Applications Submitted
2017: New Site Plan Applications Filed* – Type, Name, Construction Cost, Fees Collected and Status
Project Type Project Name/Location
Estimated
Construction
Cost
Fees
Collected
in 2017
Status as of 2/05/18
Commercial Retail Expansion $376,000 $564 Approved
Market Rate Housing 107 N Albany $946,600 $1,419 Under Construction
Institutional Schwartz Plaza Improvements $350,000 $525 Complete
Student Housing 118 College Ave $1,415,250 $2,123 Construction 2019
Supportive Housing & Retail FingerLakes Reuse Center $6,000,000 $9,000 Pending Funding
Senior Apartments DeWitt House $17,000,000 $25,000 Construction 2018
Apartments 323 Taughannock Blvd $2,500,000 $3,750 Construction 2018
Commercial Rebuild McDonalds $1,375,000 $2,063 Complete
Short Term Housing 238 Linden Ave $2,000,000 $3,000 Construction 2018
Student Housing Apartments 210 Linden $12,037,500 $18,056 Construction 2018
Affordable Housing Rebuild INHS Elm St Project $2,760,000 $4,140 Pending Funding
Senior Assisted Living Bridges at Cornell Height $1,500,000 $2,250 Construction 2018
Supportive & Affordable Housing Lakeview –Court St $13,000,000 $19,500 Pending Funding
Market Rate Housing Duplex -217 Columbia St $213,000 $320 Construction 2018
Student Housing 111-115 The Knoll $349,900 $525 Construction 2018
Public Stewart Park Playground $1,500,000 $0 Construction 2018
Student Housing 311 College Ave $5,000,000 $7,500 In Approval Process
Student Housing Two Duplexes- 209 Hudson St $600,000 $900 In Approval Process
Total $129,453,106 $124,771
* Excludes withdrawn projects
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
Site Plan Projects Approved in 2017 (Includes Staff Level Approvals)
2017: Approved Housing Projects - Number, Type and Number of New Units
All New Housing Units For Sale For Rent
561 LMI Market
Rate LMI Student* Market
Rate**
3 5 107 92 354
*Applicant’s stated target market * * Excludes student housing
2017 Approved Commercial Projects – Type, and New Square Feet
Site Plan Approvals– Five Year Activity
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Number of Board Approvals 14 12 13 11 19
Number of Staff Approvals 12 7 6 8 10
Fees Received – Full Site Plan Review $83,831 $167,614 $154,709 $94,476 $124,771
Fees Received - Staff Review $700 $600 $300 $400 $550
Est. Construction Cost – Board Approved Projects* $69,904,800 $53,241,650 $110,751,000 $26,547,166 $129,453,106
Est. Construction Cost –Staff Approved Projects $11,283,195 $3,050,000 $3,080,000 $1,125,875 $17,066,000
SF of Commercial Development Approved in 2017 102,057 25,800 123,563 4,000 28,573
Attachments:
Housing Units Approved, Built, and Under Construction 2006-2017, and Pending Construction in 2018
(showing numbers and percentages by type and completion status)
Affordable Units Approved, Constructed and Pending Construction 2006-2017
List of Housing Units- Name, Location, Number, Type and Completion Status 2006-2017 (showing type,
number and completion status)
Major Development Projects 2009-December 31, 2017 (showing developments of all types)
All New Commercial Industrial General Commercial Office
28,573 0 26,000 0
Planning Board Annual Report- 2017Housing Units Approved, Built and Under Construction 2006-2017 and Pending Construction in 2018# all Units# LMI Units % LMI UnitsTotal for Sale% for Sale# LMI % LMI# Not LMI% Not LMITotal For Rent% for Rent# Student % Student # LMI % LMI# Not LMI% not LMI561 110 20% 8 1.4% 3 38% 5 63% 553 99% 89 16% 107 19% 446 81%# all Units# LMI Units % LMI UnitsTotal for Sale% for Sale# LMI % LMI# Not LMI% Not LMITotal For Rent% for Rent# Student % Student # LMI % LMI# Not LMI% not LMI1846 378 20% 58 3% 28 48% 30 52% 1788 97% 693 39% 350 19% 1438 80%# all Units# LMI Units % LMI UnitsTotal for Sale% for Sale# LMI % LMI# Not LMI% Not LMITotal For Rent% for Rent# Student % Student # LMI % LMI# Not LMI% not LMI1181 271 23% 46 4% 28 61% 18 39% 1135 96% 613 54% 243 21% 892 79%# all Units# LMI Units % LMI UnitsTotal for Sale% for Sale# LMI % LMI# Not LMI% Not LMITotal For Rent% for Rent# Student % Student # LMI % LMI# Not LMI% not LMI407 23 6% 12 3% 0 0% 12 0% 395 97% 60 15% 23 6% 372 94%# all Units# LMI Units % LMI UnitsTotal for Sale% for Sale# LMI % LMI# Not LMI% Not LMITotal For Rent% for Rent# Student % Student # LMI % LMI# Not LMI% not LMI167 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 167 100% 9 5% 0 0.0% 167 100%* Does not include projects that have been canceled or for which Site Plan Approval has expiredHousing Units Built 2006-2017Housing Units Pending Construction in 2018FOR RENTFOR SALEFOR SALEHousing Units Under Construction as of Jan 2018FOR RENTLMI= units that are or will be financed through public funding, such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits, that dictate the maximum rent that can be charged based upon the Area Median Income as defined by HUDFOR RENTFOR SALEFOR RENTHousing Units Approved in 2017*Housing Units Approved 2006-2017*FOR SALEFOR SALEFOR RENT
Affordable Units Approved, Constructed and Pending Construction 2006-2017Units# BR2006Lakeview SRO310 Third St38 382007 Cedar Creek ApartmentsFloral Ave39 882010130-32 The Commons 130-32 The Commons 2 22010Magnolia HouseN Meadow St14 142011Breckenridge 100 Seneca 50 602012/14 Stone Quarry Apts400 Spencer Street35 822015 Multi Family & Townhomes 210 Hancock 7 59 892017 Amici House 671 Spencer Rd 23 232017 Reuse Center & Apartments 214 Elmira Road 24 242017 Small Projects*Subtotal of all 21 6 182017LakeView Supportive Apts709 W Court St 6060TOTALS 28 350 4982006Lakeview SRO310 Third St38 382007Cedar Creek ApartmentsFloral Ave39 882010Magnolia HouseN Meadow St14 142010130-32 The Commons 130-32 The Commons 2 22011Breckenridge100 Seneca 50 602012 Stone Quarry Apt400 Spencer Street35 822015 Multi Family & Townhomes 210 Hancock 7 59 8909-'17Small Developments*Subtotal of all 21618TOTALS: 28 243 391Under Construction 20182017 Amici House 671 Spencer Rd 0 23 23*Single Family Homes and Duplexes - One Building on One Lot Only Affordability is defined as units that are or will be finaced through public funding, such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits, that dictate the maximum rent that can be charged based upon the Area Median Income as defined by HUDApproved 2006-2017Completed 2006-2017For Sale For Rent Year ApprovedProject Name Project Address
Planning Board 2017 Annual Report: Housing
List of Housing Units- Name, Location, Number, Type and Completion Status 2006-2017
SFH Dplx LMI Units # BR Units # BR Units # BR Units # BR
2006 Coalyard Apartments Phase I 143 Maple Avenue 10 14 10 14
2006 Cayuga Green Apartments Green Street 68 88 68 88
2006 Top of the Hill 320 Dryden Rd 15 40 15 40
2006 719-23 Hudson Street 719-23 Hudson Street 1
2006 Lakeview SRO 310 Third St 38 38 38 38
2007 Cedar Creek Apartments Floral Ave 39 88 39 88
2007 616 W. Buffalo St 616 W. Buffalo St 17 24 17 24
2008 Cayuga Green II Cayuga Street 39 50 39 50
2009 Coalyard Apartments Phase II 143 Maple Av 24 39 24 39
2009 Aurora St Dwelling Circle Aurora St 3
2010 130-32 The Commons 130-32 The Commons 8 8 2 2 6 6
2010 309 Eddy Street – Apts 309 Eddy St 24 45 24 45
2010 601- W. Seneca Street Apts 601 Seneca 24 47 24 47
2010 Magnolia House N Meadow St 14 14 14 14
2011 Collegetown Terrace E State St 354 532 354 532
2011 140 College Ave 140 College Ave 3 12 3 12
2011 Breckenridge 100 Seneca 50 60 50 60
2011 Seneca Way Apts 120 Seneca Way 39 44 39 44
2012/14 Stone Quarry Apts 400 Spencer Street 35 82 35 82
2012 Housing (4 Units)107 Cook St 4 12 4 12
2012 Cayuga Residences 217 S Cayuga St 45 45 45 45
2012 201 Grandview 201 Grandview 1 2 1 2
2013 Apartments Thurston Avenue 20 59 20 59
2013 Harold's Square The Commons 108 137 108 137
2014 Dryden South Mixed-Use 205 Dryden Rd. 10 40 10 40
2014 Duplex 605 S Aurora St 2 6 2 6
2014 Collegetown Crossing 307 College Ave 46 96 46 96
2014 Residential Mixed-Use 327 Eddy St.22 56 22 56
2014 Apartment Building 114 Catherine St.3 17 3 17
2014 Apartments (Carey Building) 324 E State/ MLK Blvd. 16 20 16 20
2014 Apartments 205 Taughannock 7 10 7 10
2015 Apartments 707 E Seneca 6 18 6 18
2015 Duplexes 804 & 810 E State St 6 18 6 18
2015 Multi Family & Townhomes 210 Hancock 7 7 59 89 59 89
2015 Ithaka Terraces 212-215 Spencer St 12
2016 Student Apartments 201 College Avenue 44 76 44 76
2016 Two Duplexes 312-314 Spencer St 4 12 4 12
2016 Two Duplexes 1001 N Aurora St 4 12 4 12
2016 Four duplexes 607 S. Aurora St 8 24 8 24
2017 Amici House 671 Spencer Rd 23 23 23 23
2017 Apartments /College Townhouses 119-123 College Ave 67 67 67 67
2017 Student Apts - 5 units 126 College Ave 5 28 5 28
2017 Student Apts - 9 units 210 Linden Ave 9 36 9 36
2017 City Centre Mixed Use 301 E State St 193 250 193 250
2017 11 one-BR Apts 107 S Albany St 11 11 11 11
2017 Student Apts - 5 Units 118 College Ave 5 28 5 28
2017 Reuse Center & Apartments 214 Elmira Road 24 24 24 24
2017 DeWitt House 119 Court Street 58 58 58 58
2017 Apartments/ Condos 323 Taughannock Blvd 8 8 8 8
2017 Effeiciency Apartments 238 Linden Ave 24 24 24 24
2017 Student Apartments 232-236 Dryden Rd. .60 191 60 191
2017 Bridges Cornell Heights Residence 109 Dearborn Place 1 12 1 12
2017 Lakeview Suportive Apt 709 Court St 60 60 60 60
09-'17 Small Developments** Subtotal of all 19 16 21 24 66 6 18 12 36 6 12
TOTALS 30 28 28 1788 2860 350 498 693 1425 745 937
2006 Coalyard Apartments Phase I 143 Maple Avenue 10 14 10 14
2006 Cayuga Green Apartments Green Street 68 88 68 88
2006 Top of the Hill 320 Dryden Rd 15 40 15 40
2006 719-23 Hudson Street 719-23 Hudson Street 1
2006 Lakeview SRO 310 Third St 38 38 38 38
2007 Cedar Creek Apartments Floral Ave 39 88 39 88
2007 616 W. Buffalo St 616 W. Buffalo St 17 24 17 24
2010 130-32 The Commons 130-32 The Commons 8 8 2 2 6 6
2009 Coalyard Apartments Phase II 143 Maple Avenue 24 39 24 39
2010 309 Eddy Street – Apts 309 Eddy St 24 45 24 45
2011 140 College Ave 140 College Ave 3 12 3 12
2011 Collegetown Terrace - Phase 1 E State/MLK Blvd 140 210 140 210
2012 Housing (4 Units)107 Cook St 4 12 4 12
2012 Cayuga Residences 217 S Cayuga St 45 45
2010 Apartments 601- W. Seneca St.24 47 24 47
2010 Magnolia House N Meadow St 14 14 14 14
2011 Breckenridge 100 Seneca 50 60 50 60
2011 Seneca Way Apts 120 Seneca Way 37 44 37 44
2009 Aurora St Dwelling Circle N Aurora St 3
2011 Collegetown Terrace Phase 2 E State/MLK Blvd 71 106 71 106
2012 Apartment 201 Grandview 1 2 1 1
2013 Thurston Avenue Apts Thurston Avenue 20 59 20 59
2008 Cayuga Green II Cayuga St.45 50 45 66
2012 Stone Quarry Apt 400 Spencer Street 35 82 35 82
2014 Duplex 605 S Aurora St 2 6 2 6
2014 Apartment Building 114 Catherine St.3 17 3 17
2014 Apartments (Carey Building) 324 E State/ MLK St. 16 20 16 20
2014 Apartments 205 Taughannock 7 10 7 10
2014 Dryden South Mixed-Use 205 Dryden Rd. 10 40 10 40
2014 Collegetown Crossing 307 College Ave 46 96 46 96
2014 Residential Mixed-Use 327 Eddy St.22 56 22 56
2015 707 Sececa Street 707 Seneca Street 6 18 6 18
2015 4 Duplexes 804 & 810 E State St 6 18 6 18
2011 Collegetown Terrace Building 7 E State/MLK St.142 213 142 213
2015 Multi Family & Townhomes 210 Hancock 7 7 59 89 59 89
2016 Apartments 201 College Avenue 44 76 44 76
2016 Two Duplexes 312-314 Spencer St 4 12 4 12
2016 Two Duplexes 1001 N Aurora St 4 12 4 12
2016 Four Duplexes 607 S. Aurora St 8 24 8 24
09-'17 Small Developments** Subtotal of all 19 16 21 24 66 6 18 12 36 6 12
TOTALS: 30 16 28 1135 1855 243 391 613 1138 279 341
2013 Harold's Square The Commons 108 137 108 137
2015 Ithaks Condos 212-215 Spencer St 12
2017 Student Apartments 232-236 Dryden Rd. .60 191 60 191
2017 Amici House 671 Spencer Rd 23 23 23 23
2017 City Centre Mixed Use 301 E State St 193 250 193 250
2017 11 one-BR Apts 107 S Albany St 11 11 11 11
TOTALS 0 12 0 395 612 23 23 60 191 312 398
2017 Effeiciency Apartments 238 Linden Ave 24 24 24 24
2017 Student Apts - 9 units 210 Linden Ave 9 36 9 36
2017 College Town House Apts 119-125 College Ave 67 90 67 90
2017 Bridges Cornell Heights Residence 109 Dearborn Place 1 12 1 12
2017 DeWitt House 119 Court Street 58 58 58 58
2017 Apartments/ Condos 323 Taughannock Blvd 8 8 8 8
TOTALS 0 0 0 167 228 0 0 9 36 158 192
* Excludes Projects that were withdrawn or did not proceed to construction
**Single Family Homes and Duplexes on One Lot Only 2018 Projected Construction Units For Rent w/ Target Market
Market Rate Student LMI All TypesUnits for Sale COMPLETED PROJECTS 2006- 2017Under Costruction January 2018Units: Number & Type
Year
Approved
APPROVED PROJECTS 2006-2017*Project Name Project Address
Major Development Projects 2009-2017Total Estimated Investment: $558,488,450Complete, Under Construction or Planned for 2018 Site Plan Review Fees Collected: $768,739Projects listed here (does not include cancelled or smaller projects) Total New SF of Commercial Space 678,006Complete, Under Construction or Planned for 2018Total New Dwellings: 1,735Complete, Under Construction or Planned for 2018Low/ Moderate Income (LMI) Dwellings: 215Complete, Under Construction or Planned for 2018Chainworks District Mixed Use Up to 915 Housing Units over 10-15 years Waterfront ProjectsHousing & CommericalGreen Garage RedevelopmentHousing & CommericalSummary of Major Development Projects 2009- January 2018 Completed , Under Construction or Planned 2018 Construction Projects in Development in 2018Page 1
Major Development Projects 2009-2017Housing and Mixed Use Projects 2009- December 31, 2017 Complete Breckenridge$10,700,000 $16,05050 50 0Complete Magnolia House$2,236,000 $3,35414 14 0Complete 309 Eddy Street – Apts$2,400,000 $3,60024 0 24Complete 601- W. Seneca Street Apts $1,000,000 $1,50024 0 24Complete 107 Cook Street $865,000 $1,2974 0 4Complete Seneca Way Apts.$7,081,500 $10,622 9,31139 0 0Complete Coal Yard Apt Phase 2$2,534,000 $3,80124 0 24Complete Aurora St Dwelling Circle$550,000 $82530 0 0Complete Thurston Avenue Apartments$3,000,000 $4,81520 0 20Complete Stone Quarry Apartments$7,000,000 $9,46035 35 0Complete Collegetown Terrace Apts Buildings 1-6$60,000,000 $25,000354 0 354Complete 707 E. Seneca Street House $585,000 $8786 0 6Complete 114 Catherine St. Apartment Building$500,000 $7503 0 3Complete Cayuga Place Residences $6,000,000$045 0 0Complete 140 College Ave. Addition$865,000 $1,2973 0 3Complete 205 Taughannock$350,000 $507 0 0Complete 804 & 810 E. State Street $822,000 $6206 0 6Complete 327 Eddy St. Mixed-Use Apartment Building$5,000,000 $7,500 4,10022 0 22Complete Dryden South Mixed-Use Project$5,000,000 $7,500 2,1008 0 8Complete Collegetown Crossing $5,500,000 $8,250 5,00050 0 50Complete Collegetown Terrace Apts - Building 7 $10,000,000 N/A235 0 235Complete Carey Building $1,600,000 $2,400 3,60017 0 0Complete 210 Hancock Street $13,771,000 $20,656 10,0007 59 59 0Complete 201 College Avenue$6,000,000 $9,00044 0 44Complete 312-314 Spencer Rd. Two Duplexes $513,000 $7694 0 0Complete 1001 N Aurora St Two 2-Family Dwellings$465,000 $6984 0 0Complete Small Projects (One building on one lot) 12 21 25 6 12Complete Four Duplexes (607 S Aurora St) $1,500,000 $2,250.008 0 8Under Construction Amici House (671 Spencer Road) $4,732,000 $7,09923 23 0Under Construction 215-212 Spencer St.$2,000,000 $3,0001212 0 0Under Construction City Centre$32,005,000 $48,000.00 10,000193 0 0Under Construction Harold Square $27,000,000 $20,166 52,200108 0 0Under Construction 11 Units- 107 S Albnay St $946,000 $1,42011 0 0Under Construction Student Aparments - 232-36 Dryden Rd $12,037,000 $18,05660 0 60Subtotals $234,557,500 $240,682 96,311 27 28 1,541 187 907College Townhouse Project $10,000,000 $15,00067 0 0Student Apts - 9 units (210 Linden Ave)$1,972,000 $2,9589 0 9Efficiency Apartments- 238 Linden Ave $2,000,000 $3,00024 0 0Apartments/Condos (323 Taughannock) $2,500,000 $3,7508 0 0Dewitt House (Old Library) $1,700,000 $25,50058 0 0Bridges Residence (105 Dearborn) $1,500,000 $2,250100Subtotals $19,672,000 $52,4580167 0 9Lakeview Supportive Apartments$13,000,000 $19,50060 60 0Finger Lakes Reuse Supportive Apartments$6,000,000 $9,000 26,00024 240Student Apartmetns (118 College Ave) $1,415,250 $2,1235 05Student Apartmetns (126 College Ave) $2,880,000 $4,3205 0 5Subtotals $23,295,250 $34,943 26,00094 84 10Approved - Construction Expected in 2018 Status Project Name Est. Construction CostFor Sale LMI187 91627 28 1708Fees Collected SQ. FT Commercial Approved Projects - Unknown Construction Date Total: Complete, Under Construction and Antcipated 2018 ConstructionApts For Rent SQ. FT Commercial Fees Collected Est. Construction CostLow/ Mod IncomeStudent Student Market Rate For Sale LMIFor Rent Apts LMIMarket Rate $254,229,500 $328,083 96,311Page 2
Major Development Projects 2009-2017Commercial Projects (Office, Retail, Hotel & Medical ) 2009- December 31, 2017Complete Maines Source$1,500,000 $2,250 25,300Complete Airplane Factory Renovations$274,050 $4350Complete Maguire Vehicle Sales Lot$43,600 $1000Complete Honda of Ithaca$350,000 $550 5,636Complete Tim Hortons$500,000 $750 2,500Complete Enterprise Rent-A-Car$350,000 $4500Complete Maguire Automotive$150,000 $225595Complete 111 Tioga St. (façade)$80,000 $200 1,100Complete Ports of NY Expansion$2,000 $50255Complete Ports of NY Green House$6,000 $50500Complete Delta Chi Improvements $227,000 $3410Complete 359 Elmira Road – Fairfield Inn$6,500,000 $9,750 59,500CompleteWal-Mart Outparcel $784,800 $1,12228,663Complete Pressbay Alley Marketplace$150,000 $500Complete Planned Parenthood $4,100,000 $6,150 6,500Complete Crossfit Pallas Gym & Black Irish Boxing$700,000 $1,050 10,384Complete Colitvare $5,400,000$00Complete Purity Ice Cream Mixed-Use $3,664,000 $5,746 2,866Complete Dibellas $600,000 $900 3,400Complete Maguire Fiat $425,000 $638 8,910CompleteHoliday Inn Express$3,000,000 $4,50011,555Complete Downtown Marriot$15,000,000 $25,000 100,649Complete Texas Roadhouse $1,350,000 $2,0257,163CompleteIsland Health & Fitness Parking Lot Renovation$50,000 $1500Complete Rick's Rental World Expansion$100,000 $200 2,430CompleteThe Cherry Artspace$202,500 $304 1,200CompleteElmira Savings Bank Project$1,000,000 $1,500 4,000Complete Hotel Ithaca Renovation $11,000,000 $16,50013,845Complete209-215 Dryden Road (Johnson School)$12,000,000 $18,000 60,000Under Construction Tompkins Financial Headquarters $26,500,000 $39,750110,000Under Construction Downtown Canopy Hotel $11,500,000 $12,250100,000Subtotal$107,508,950$150,985566,951Approved - Construction Expected in 2018 Former Kmart /Petsmart Addition $424,000 $659 14,744$107,932,950 $151,644 581,695Est. Construction CostFees Collected SQ. FT Commercial Total: Complete, Under Construction and Antcipated 2018 ConstructionEst. Construction CostEst. Construction CostFees Collected SQ. FT Commercial Status Project Name Page 3
Major Development Projects 2009-2017Institutional Projects (Cornell & IC) 2009- December 31, 2017Complete Big Red Marching Band $1,800,000 $2,700 5,200Complete Cornell Law School Addition $13,084,000 $19,626 16,500Complete University Ave Reconstruction$1,400,000 $2,1000Complete Cornell Rowing Center $4,930,000 $7,395 9,600Complete IC Boathouse$1,600,000$2,4006,000Complete Kite Hill Electrical Substation Upgrade$983,000 $1,4750Complete Cornell Univ. Means Restriction$4,899,000 $7,3480Complete Cornell Univ. CIS Building $31,000,000 $46,725103,000CompleteKimball Hall Renovations $9,000,000 $500CompleteStatler Hall East Avenue Entry $2,400,000 $3,6001,500Complete Cascadilla Trail Rehab $300,000 $4500Complete Klarman Hall (Goldwin Smith Hall)$28,000,000 $42,000 67,511CompleteUpson Hall Renovation $40,000,000$60,0000CompleteGarden Ave/Tower Rd. Intersection$530,000$500CompleteCornell- Hughes Hall $10,000,000 $15,300.000CompleteCornell Ag. Quad Renovations$3,000,000 $4,500.000CompleteGannett Health Center $25,500,000$38,250 73,600Under Construction Rand Hall Fine Arts Library $14,000,000 $500Under Consruction Noyes Welcome Center Improvements $3,900,000 $500Total $196,326,000$254,069282,911Project Name Status Project Name Est. Construction CostFees Collected SF Page 4
From: Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
To: Members of the Planning and Economic Development Committee
Date: February 8, 2018
Subject: Proposed Revisions to the Landmarks Ordinance
Following Common Council actions on two recent proposed local landmark designations, the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) evaluated the clarity and effectiveness of the
Landmarks Ordinance, particularly the criteria used by the ILPC, Planning and Development Board,
and Common Council to review nominations for local designation. The intent of this memo is to
outline the ILPC’s recommended revisions to the designation criteria defined in the Landmarks
Ordinance.
ILPC Evaluation Criteria
In their review of its own criteria used to evaluate a local landmark nomination, the ILPC found
some to be too broadly defined and felt additional criteria were needed to represent the diverse
historic resources within the City. The criteria currently enumerated in the Landmarks Ordinance
are as follows:
(1) possesses special character or historic or aesthetic interest or value as part of the cultural,
political, economic or social history of a locality, region, state, or nation;
(2) is identified with historic person(s) or event(s);
(3) embodies the distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style;
(4) is the work of a designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; and
(5) represents an established and familiar visual feature of the neighborhood by virtue of its
unique location or singular physical characteristics.
The ILPC recommends revising criterion 3 as follows: embodies distinctive characteristics of a
type, period, method of construction or architectural style, or possessing unique architectural and
artistic qualities, or representing a significant and distinguishing entity whose component may lack
individual distinction. This revision accounts for the diverse ways an historic resource gains
architectural significance beyond its architectural style. The Commission also recommends adding
the following new criteria: (1) illustrative of the historic growth and development of the city, region,
state; (2) embodies elements that make it structurally or architecturally innovative; and (3) is
eligible for or already listed on the State and National Registers of Historic Places.
Additionally, the ILPC recommends the following additional standard that must be met by all
properties nominated for local landmark designation: “any structure, property or area that meets one
or more of the above criteria shall also have sufficient integrity of location, design, materials, and
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
workmanship to make it worthy of preservation or restoration.” This additional criterion establishes
high standard for recommended designations and ensures there is sufficient integrity, or extant
historic features and materials, to preserve once a property is designated.1 It would also limit the
number of properties within the City that are eligible for designation.
Common Council Evaluation Criteria
The ILPC also reviewed the designation review process and noted that the Landmarks Ordinance
clearly outlines review criteria for the ILPC and the Planning and Development Board but provides
no such guidance for Common Council. As set forth in Section 228 of the Municipal Code, the
ILPC is charged with identifying and recommending the designation of significant historical,
architectural, and cultural landmarks within the City and it uses the above noted criteria to execute
this charge. Its review focuses solely on the merits of the historic resource. The Planning and
Development Board’s role and its review criteria are also clearly defined. The Board is required to
evaluate the broader planning issues associated with the designation of a historic resource,
specifically how the designation relates the Comprehensive Plan and other planning documents,
zoning laws, projected public improvement, and any plans for the renewal of the site or area
involved. The criteria specified for the ILPC and Planning Board create a framework for clear and
consistent review of proposed landmark designations. Their recommendations and reports are based
on evidence pulled from the nomination materials and publically vetted documents.
The Landmarks Ordinance charges Council with approving, disapproving, or referring the proposed
designation back to the Commission for modification, but provides no specific guidance to Council
on how or with what information to make their decision. Adopting evaluation criteria for Common
Council’s review of a proposed designation would provide guidance to council members, clarify the
justifications for a designation, and ensure an objective and consistent review of all landmark
designations.
To facilitate a conversation about this revision, staff examined the review criteria used by other
Common Councils in New York State. In communities where they exist, staff found the review
criteria typically mirrored those used by the municipalities’ Landmarks Commission and Planning
Board. For example, the City of Schenectady includes the following language in their ordinance:
“in making their recommendations and decisions with respect to designation proposals, the
Commission, Planning Commission, and City Council shall be guided by the application review
criteria or [the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings].” In the City of Elmira, Public Hearings to consider designations
are held by Common Council and focus solely on the “historic, architectural, or cultural importance
of the proposed landmark or historic district,” narrowing their review criteria to these points.
Staff also consulted with the State Historic Preservation Office (SPHO) on this issue. The SHPO
advised against establishing different criteria for Common Council’s review and suggested
including the following language in the Ordinance instead: the Council’s review shall be based on
the same record that was before the commission and using the same criteria in the local law. This
approach defines Council’s review criteria, creates a framework for clear, objective, and consistent
decisions, establishes consistency throughout the review process, and continues to allow for Council
discretion.
1 The recommended revisions are based on a survey of designation criteria used in the Cities of Troy, Schenectady,
Binghamton, Rochester, Syracuse, Buffalo, Elmira, and Saratoga Springs.
From: Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
To: Members of the Planning and Economic Development Committee
Date: February 8, 2018
Subject: Historic Resource Survey Grant Application – Authorization to Apply
As a participating municipality in the Certified Local Government (CLG) program, the City of
Ithaca is required to regularly update its inventory of historic resources. This is primary done
through historic resource surveys. In a recent review of the City’s CLG activities from 2013-
2016, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) noted that the City had not applied for CLG
funding to conduct a historic resource survey during the evaluation period and “strongly
encourage[d] the City to seek a CLG grant this coming grant cycle for an historic resource
survey.” Based on this suggestions, the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning and
Development plans to submit on behalf of the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission an
application for CLG funding to engage a consultant to complete a historic resource survey of
nineteen properties located on N. Aurora, Linn, and E. Court Streets adjacent to the East Hill
Historic District. The research may result in the inclusion of the survey area in the National
Register East Hill Historic District and the consideration of local designation by the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission. The estimated total project budget is between $8,000 and
$10,000. Based on the CLG grant guidelines, the department plans to submit a grant request for
60% of the project cost and will fulfill the 40% municipal contribution through in-kind personnel
professional services and donated volunteer research work.
The proposed survey area includes nineteen contributing properties roughly bounded on the
north by the south bank of Cascadilla Creek; on the east and south by the existing boundary of
the East Hill Historic District; and on the west by the east side of N. Aurora St. from 309 N.
Aurora St. to the Cascadilla Creek bridge. (See attached map.) As the map indicates, the
existing western boundary of the East Hill Historic District is irregular and does not appear to be
based on geographic conditions or historical or contextual development patterns. The proposed
survey area was selected for its potential to regularize and provide a strong geographic
justification for this boundary.
In keeping with the architectural character and significance of the East Hill Historic District, the
properties within the survey area are primarily residential and display a range of architectural
styles and modes dating from the 1830s through the 1920s, including Greek Revival, Italianate,
Queen Anne, Colonial Revival, and bungalow. In terms of historic context, the properties were
constructed during the same period and in response to the same social, political and economic
conditions as those already included in the East Hill Historic District.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
Proposed Resolution
Planning and Economic Development Committee
February 14, 2018
Historic Resources Survey Grant Application – Authorization to Apply
WHEREAS, as a participating municipality in the Certified Local Government (CLG)
program, the City of Ithaca is required to regularly update its inventory of historic
resources, an activity typically conducted through historic resource surveys, and
WHEREAS, in a recent review of the City’s CLG activities from 2013- 2016, the State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) noted that the City had not applied for CLG funding
to conduct a historic resource survey during the evaluation period and “strongly
encourage[d] the City to seek a CLG grant this coming grant cycle for an historic
resource survey.”
WHEREAS, the City’s comprehensive plan, Plan Ithaca, also recommends seeking grant
funding to conduct intensive-level surveys of historic resources, and
WHEREAS, the Department of Planning, Building, Zoning & Development proposes to apply
to the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation
Certified Local Government Subgrant program for funds to engage a consultant to
survey and document nineteen (19) selected historic resources adjacent to the
western boundary of the East Hill Historic District, and
WHEREAS, such subgrants are available exclusively to New York State government entities
that have received certification from the New York State Office of Parks,
Recreation, and Historic Preservation, such as the City of Ithaca, and
WHEREAS, the estimated project budget is between $8,000 and $10,000 for which the CLG
Subgrant program guidelines recommend a local match of 40%, which can be a
combination of in-kind, services and/or cash contributions, and
WHEREAS, the Department plans to satisfy the 40% local match through in-kind contributions
of City personnel professional services, and donated volunteer research work;
now therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the Planning and Economic Development Committee recommends to
Common Council authorization of the application for a Certified Local
Government Subgrant to survey and document nineteen (19) selected historic
resources adjacent to the western boundary of the East Hill Historic District along
N. Aurora, E. Court, and Linn Streets.
NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 Datum
Map Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-2012
Data Source: City of Ithaca GIS
Map Prepared by: City of Ithaca Planning Division
February 8, 2018
313
309
407
309
405 310
101
316
315-17
319313
403401
108
321
106
319
308
315-17N TIOGA STE BUFFALO ST N AURORA STE COURT ST LINN STCA
S
C
A
D
I
L
L
A
A
V
E
TERRACE PLFOUNTAIN PLCASCADILLA P
A
R
K
R
D
PARKER ST0 200 400100 Feet
1:2,130±
Proposed Historic Resource Survey Area
Legend
Building
Parcels
Proposed Survey Area
Dewitt Park Historic District
East Hill Historic District
Proposed Resolution
Planning & Economic Development Committee
February 14, 2018
Amendment to 2017 HUD Action Plan
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) recommends approval of an amendment to
the 2017 HUD Action Plan to provide $90,960 in supplemental loan assistance to Tompkins
Community Action, Inc. (TCAction) for relocation assistance associated with the new Harriet
Giannelis Child Care Center under construction at 661‐701 Spencer Road, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca (City) receives funds annually to address community development
needs through the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) Entitlement program,
and
WHERAS, the City has contracted with the IURA to administer, implement and monitor the City’s
HUD Entitlement program in compliance with all applicable regulations, and
WHEREAS, the City adopts an Action Plan annually that identifies a specific list of budgeted
community development activities funded from the HUD Entitlement program, and
WHEREAS, a change in activity funding of more than $25,000 requires Common Council approval,
and
WHEREAS, the need to relocate TCAction offices during construction of the Child Care Center was
unforeseen in the original project budgeting, and
WHEREAS, TCAction requested IURA loan assistance to fund unforeseen relocation expenses, and
WHEREAS, the IURA approved a $90,960 loan at 2.5% interest for 10 years to TCAction, and
WHEREAS, relocation assistance of administrative offices is a Type II action under the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, so no further environmental review of this action is
required; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council for the City of Ithaca hereby approves the following IURA‐
recommended amendment to the 2017 HUD Action Plan:
Project: Harriet Giannelis Child Care Center, 661‐701 Spencer Road, Ithaca, NY
Sponsor: Tompkins Community Action, Inc.
Amount: $90,960
Description: Supplemental loan assistance for relocation assistance of administrative
offices, and be it further
RESOLVED, that funding shall be derived by transferring $90,960 from the IURA Community
Development Revolving Loan Fund to the 2017 HUD Action Plan.
1
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development
Date: February 6, 2018
Re: Follow-up Memo Authorizing the Planning and Development Board to approve the
granting of Special Permits. (Currently the Board of Zoning Appeals has this
authority.)
At the January 10, 2018 Planning Committee meeting, I brought forward a proposal to authorize
the Planning Board to review and act on Special Permit applications, a power and duty currently
held by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
The following questions were raised by PDEC members:
Q. What is the process for applying for a special permit? Currently, special permits follow the
same process as a variance. Notification of neighbors within 200 feet, publication of a legal
ad, and a required public hearing.
Q. Is it the same as a variance with neighbor notification and a public hearing? Yes
Q. Do you place a legal in the paper as with other variances? Yes
Q. Would the process for a special permit be quicker if the Planning Board reviewed it rather
than the BZA? Currently, the variance process takes about 45-55 days from the
application deadline to the hearing date. This depends on what day the first Tuesday of the
month falls on (BZA meets on the first Tuesday of the month). The applicant can expect to
work through the process in about 60 days, depending on preliminary meetings and the
information required. Approximately the same time period would be applicable if the
Planning Board issued special permits.
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
2
Q. How many special permits do we review, on average, in a year? The BZA issued 3 special
permits last year; one community garden and two accessory apartments.
As a reminder, The Planning Board, when reviewing site plans, uses much the same criteria as is
used by the BZA to evaluate special permits. During site plan review, the PB looks at impacts a
project will have on the immediate neighbors, the neighborhood, and the greater community. In
accordance with the City Code Chapter 276, Site Plan Review, §276-7 Project review criteria.
A. General criteria: the Planning Board is charged with weighing the impacts of a project by;
(1) Avoidance or mitigation of any negative impacts. The following shall be emphasized in
particular:
(a) Erosion, sedimentation and siltation control in accordance with Chapter 282 of the City
Code.
(b) Protection of significant natural features and areas, including but not limited to trees, views,
watercourses or bodies of water and land forms, on or near the site. The protection of existing
mature vegetation, especially trees over eight inches DBH (diameter-breast-height) may be
required unless a justification for their removal can be made by the applicant.
(c) Protection of, and compatibility with, other nearby features and areas of importance to the
community, including but not limited to parks, landmarks, neighborhoods, commercial areas,
and historic districts.
After numerous discussions with Gino Leonardi, the Zoning Administrator for the City, it was
thought that the Planning Board was the more appropriate body to review applications for special
permits since the review criteria was so similar to the site plan and environmental review criteria.
If PDEC members are comfortable with the responses to their questions, we would like to move
this idea forward by circulating it for comment. We will bring any concerns, comments, or
suggestions back to the Planning Committee in March for further discussion and a decision on
whether or not to move this onto Council for a vote.
I have again attached the entire section of the Code, so that you can review the section on special
permits as well as the proposed changes.
If you have any concerns or questions regarding any of this information, feel free to contact me
at 274-6566.
Page 1 of 16
Date: February 6, 2018
Re: Proposal to Authorize the Planning and Development Board to approve the
granting of Special Permits. (Currently the Board of Zoning Appeals has
this authority.)
§ 325-9 Standards for special conditions and special permits.
A.
Intent. The intent of this section is to set forth additional regulations and conditions
which shall apply to certain land uses and activities which are incongruous or sufficiently
unique in terms of their nature, location and effect on the surrounding environment and
the quality of the community to warrant special evaluation of each individual case.
B.
Special conditions. The Director of Planning and Development or designee shall
approve the following uses only when the special conditions specified in this subsection
have been met:
[Amended 1-14-1993 by Ord. No. 93-2; 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[1]]
(1)
[2]Development in R-3 Districts which abut R-1 Districts. The development of
any permitted use in the R-3a or R-3b Zoning Districts, except a one-family dwelling or
a two-family dwelling, shall be subject to the following special conditions if the land on
which the development occurs directly abuts land in either the R-1a or R-1b Zoning
District.
(a)
Minimum lot size (area in square feet): The required area in square feet needed to
satisfy the minimum lot size requirement shall be 150% of the requirement shown on
the District Regulations Chart[3] for the R-3a or R-3b District.
(b)
Maximum building height: The maximum building height requirement shall be the same
as the requirement on the abutting R-1a of R-1b District.
(c)
Maximum percent of lot coverage by buildings: The maximum percent of lot coverage
by buildings shall be 75% of the requirement shown on the District Regulations Chart for
the R-3a or R-3b District.
Formatted: Font: (Default) Arial, 12 pt
Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Auto
Deleted: ¶
Page 2 of 16
(d)
Yard dimensions, side or rear yards: The minimum required side or rear yard
requirement shall be 150% of the requirement shown on the District Regulations Chart
for the R-3a or R-3b District if the side or rear yard abuts land in the R-1a or R-1b
District.
C.
Special permits.
(1)
Applicability. The uses listed under the district regulations in §325-8 which require
a special permit from the Planning and Development Board are as follows:
(a)
Cemeteries in all districts.
(b)
Public utility facilities in all residential districts.
(c)
Private schools in all residential districts.
(d)
Nursery schools or child day-care centers in R-2 and R-U Districts.
(e)
Neighborhood retail or service commercial facilities in R-2 and R-3 Districts.
(f)
Hospitals or sanatoriums in R-3 Districts.
(g)
In P-1 Districts, within 200 feet of adjoining residential districts, any use other than
public recreation, classrooms or living accommodations. In such P-1 Districts, living
accommodations within 200 feet of adjoining residential districts shall conform to the
use and area regulations applying to the strictest of such adjoining residential districts.
(h)
Signs in all districts, as provided in the Sign Ordinance.[4]
[Amended 4-1-1981 by Ord. No. 81-2]
(i)
[5]Home occupations in all Residential Zoning Districts require a temporary special
permit unless the home occupation meets all the following criteria:
[Added 4-1-1981 by Ord. No. 81-2; amended 11-4-1992 by Ord. No. 92-16; 12-2-
1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
Deleted: Board of Appeals
Page 3 of 16
[1]
The occupation does not carry a stock of merchandise or store materials for resale or
use in the occupation, except a reasonable supply of office supplies customarily
incidental to a small office.
[2]
The occupation does not create traffic or need for parking beyond that which is
customarily incidental to the residential use of the property. Factors that are not to be
considered incidental to residential use are regularly scheduled events such as
deliveries, client or customer visits or similar events.
[3]
The occupation requires or performs no exterior alterations and maintains no exterior
display visible from outside the residence (including vehicles with signage parked
outside of the buildings) except a nameplate as permitted by Municipal Code
Chapter 272, Signs.
[4]
The occupation does not create any noise, vibration, smoke, dust or objectionable
effects not customarily incidental and accessory to the residential use of the property.
(j)
In any district, towers or structures for the transmission or receipt of radio or other
electronic communications signals, except towers or structures subject to Article V-A of
this chapter, entitled "Telecommunications Facilities and Services," unless:
[Added 4-1-1981 by Ord. No. 81-2; amended 11-4-1992 by Ord. No. 92-15; 12-3-
2003 by Ord. No. 2003-20]
[1]
The towers or structures are antennas or satellite dishes with a maximum dimension of
six feet or less;
[2]
Such antennas or satellite dishes are not in a front yard;
[3]
The maximum height (top to bottom) of such antenna or satellite dish, when combined
with attached mounting supports, is 10 feet or less; and
[4]
Such antennas or satellite dishes, if they are to be located where they would ordinarily
be visible from a public way adjoining the property, are subject to the following
conditions:
Page 4 of 16
[a]
If in a residential zone or on a lot abutting or across a street or waterway from a
residential zone, they shall be screened from such view.
[b]
In all other locations, they shall be screened from such view or be of a color and/or in a
location that will minimize their visual impact.
(k)
Towers or structures intended for use in the generation of electricity for the premises on
which such tower is located in any district.
[Added 4-1-1981 by Ord. No. 81-2]
(l)
Community or neighborhood gardens in all districts.
[Added 7-10-1985 by Ord. No. 85-6]
(m)
(Reserved)[6]
(n)
Group adult day-care facilities in R-2 Districts.
[Added 5-6-1987 by Ord. No. 87-13]
(o)
Any use not permitted as of right in the I-1 Zoning District.
[Added 11-14-1989 by Ord. No. 89-16]
(p)
Redemption centers in B-2 Districts.
[Added 10-6-1993 by Ord. No. 93-19]
(q)
Bed-and-breakfast homes and bed-and-breakfast inns.
[Added 9-6-1995 by Ord. No. 95-10]
(r)
Neighborhood parking in any district where such parking is permitted.
[Added 6-6-2012 by Ord. No. 2012-03]
Page 5 of 16
(2)
Required plan.
(a)
A plan for the proposed development of a site shall be submitted with an application for
a special permit. The plan shall generally conform to the requirements for presentation
of plans set forth in Ch. 290, Subdivision of Land. It shall show parking areas, traffic
areas, landscaping, building arrangement, the height and number of stories of the
buildings, topography and other pertinent information that may be required by the Board
of Appeals.
(b)
In addition to the plan requirements set forth in Subsection C(2)(a) above, an applicant
for a special permit for a school or related use must provide the following information:
[Added 11-6-1985 by Ord. No. 85-14]
[1]
Information on the nature of the proposed uses to be conducted or facilities to be
located on the premises, including but not limited to the courses of study and subjects to
be offered, the size and composition of the student body to be accommodated, the size
of the faculty and staff required, the daily hours of operation and annual periods of
operation and the type and location of support facilities required.
[2]
Information concerning the type and number of living accommodations which may be
required to serve any increase in the institution's enrollment resulting from the proposed
action, including the location and availability of those accommodations.
[3]
Documentation of the evaluation of suitable alternative sites for the proposed activity,
together with reasoning supporting its preference for the site for which a special
permit is sought.
[4]
Detailed information on the occupant load, night operation and the use of chemical,
biological or radioactive agents expected in connection with the proposed activity.
(3)
Standards applicable to all uses requiring special permits. No special permit shall be
granted by the Planning and Development Board unless the proposed use or activity
meets the following requirements:
Deleted: recommended
Deleted: Board or granted by the Board of Appeals
Page 6 of 16
(a)
The location and size of the use, the size of the site in relation to it and the location of
the site with respect to the existing or future streets giving access to it shall be such that
it will be in harmony with the existing or intended character of the neighborhood and will
not discourage the appropriate development of adjacent land and buildings or impair the
enjoyment or value thereof.
(b)
Operations in connection with any special use shall not be more objectionable to nearby
property by reason of noise, fumes, increased vehicular traffic or parking demand,
vibration or flashing lights than would be the operations of any use permitted without
a special permit.
(4)
Specific standards applicable to certain uses requiring special permits. Certain uses
listed in the district regulations in § 325-8 as requiring a special permit must conform to
the applicable conditions set forth in this subsection.
(a)
Neighborhood retail or service commercial facilities in R-2 and R-3 Districts:
[1]
The applicant must furnish information as to the specific goods or services offered and
the nature, size and hours of operation of the facility proposed in sufficient detail to
enable the Planning and Development Board to determine whether the use conforms to
the limitations specified in the definition of this category. (See § 325-3.)
[2]
The response of those notified by the applicant as required in the procedures set forth in
§ 325-40, as well as that expressed at the public hearing, should be a principal factor in
the Planning and Development Board's decision to grant the special permit.
[Amended 8-5-1992 by Ord. No. 92-9; 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
(b)
Towers or structures for the transmission or receipt of electronic communications
signals in connection with any commercial or business enterprise in any zone except
towers or structures subject to Article V-A of this chapter, entitled "Telecommunications
Facilities and Services:"
[Amended 12-3-2003 by Ord. No. 2003-20]
[1]
Deleted:
Deleted: of Appeals
Deleted: appellant
Page 7 of 16
Applicants must furnish information on the nature of the business requiring such means
of communication, including reasons why such tower or structure must be located on
the premises in question.
[2]
Applicants shall furnish the Planning and Development Board with scale drawings of the
proposal, including, as a minimum, a plot plan of the premises involved showing lot lines
and the accurate locations of all buildings or structures on the premises and on each
adjacent lot, as well as the locations of the proposed tower and all guy wires, poles or
anchors, and a sketch elevation of the premises accurately depicting the proposed
tower and its relationship to structures on the premises and to the nearest structures on
adjacent lots.
[3]
Applicants shall provide sufficient information, including manufacturer's specifications or
engineering data, to assure the Board that the proposed tower or structure will not
unnecessarily obstruct the view from neighboring properties, that the tower support
system meets manufacturer's specifications or engineering requirements and that the
tower and its supports will be adequately safeguarded against structural damage by
persons or vehicles and against unauthorized climbing.
[4]
The response of those notified by the applicant as required in the procedures set forth in
§ 325-40, as well as that expressed at the public hearing, should be a principal factor in
the Board's decision to grant the special permit.
[Amended 8-5-1992 by Ord. No. 92-9; 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
(c)
Towers or structures for use in the generation of electricity for use on the premises
where such tower or structure is located in any district:
[Added 4-1-1981 by Ord. No. 81-2]
[1]
Same as Subsection C(4)(b)[2] for radio towers above.
[2]
Same as Subsection C(4)(b)[3] for radio towers above.
[3]
Deleted: Board of Zoning Appeals
Deleted: appellant
Page 8 of 16
Applicants shall furnish the Planning and Development Board with sufficient information,
including manufacturer's specifications or engineering data, on the mechanical devices
and the materials in the generating structure to indicate that excessive or annoying
noise will not be produced during prolonged operation of the generating machinery and
that failure of moving parts during operations will not present a safety hazard to
adjoining properties due to flying debris.
[4]
Same as Subsection C(4)(b)[4] for radio towers.
(d)
Specific standards applicable to schools and related buildings in all residential districts
[R-1 (R-1a and R-1b), R-2 (R-2a, R-2b and R-2c), R-3 (R-3a and R-3b) and R-U].
Notwithstanding the criteria set forth in Subsection C(3) above, which criteria shall not
apply hereto, no special permit shall be granted by the Planning and Development
Board unless the proposed use or activity meets the following requirements:
[Added 11-6-1985 by Ord. No. 85-11; amended 1-8-1990 by Ord. No. 90-2]
[1]
If the proposed use is the expansion of an educational use, then the applicant must
show a need to expand into the residential area rather than into a less-restrictive area.
No special permit shall be granted by the Planning and Development Board unless the
applicant can demonstrate that there is no reasonable alternative to location or
expansion on the site proposed.
[2]
The location and size of the use, the size of the site in relation to it, the operations in
connection with the use and the parking and traffic related to the operations shall not be
such as to create a significant hazard to the safety or general welfare of the surrounding
area.
[3]
The proposed use or operation shall not produce or present substantial danger of
excessive noise, noxious odors, noxious or harmful discharge, fire or explosion,
radiation, chemical or toxic release or other conditions injurious to the health or general
welfare of occupants of nearby properties.
[4]
The size and use of the facility or the concentration with similar facilities in the
neighborhood shall not be so substantially out of proportion to the character of the
neighborhood as to jeopardize the continued use of the neighborhood for residential
purposes.
Deleted: Board of Appeals
Deleted: Board of Appeals
Page 9 of 16
(e)
Community or neighborhood gardens in all districts:
[Added 7-10-1985 by Ord. No. 85-6]
[1]
Applicants shall provide evidence of approval for such use from the owner of the
property on which the gardens are to be located.
[2]
Applications shall provide evidence that the area to be used will at all times be operated
in a responsible manner so as not to present a nuisance to or interfere with the use and
enjoyment of neighboring private or public property. Such evidence shall designate at
least one responsible adult, who shall be a participant in the gardening, a representative
of the sponsoring organization or the owner of the subject property, to administer or
coordinate the operation and to act as a contact person therefor.
[3]
Applications shall be submitted in writing to the Department of Planning and
Development and shall include:
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[7]]
[a]
The name, address and phone number(s) of the contact person.
[b]
A description of the refuse disposal procedure to be followed and of the intended use of
organic materials, chemical fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides.
[c]
A site plan showing the proposed locations of all features of the site, including access
point(s) and any of the required parking spaces that may be located on adjacent
property.
Applicants, or the administrator/coordinator of the garden area, shall ensure the
following:
[a]
That the gardening activity on individual plots is confined to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to
10:00 p.m., except that power machinery shall not be operated before 8:00 a.m. or after
8:00 p.m.
[b]
Deleted: ¶
Page 10 of 16
All organic refuse and trash from the gardening operations is promptly and properly
disposed of on at least a weekly basis and that, pending disposition, it is stored neatly in
such a way that it does not produce offensive odors or attract dogs, raccoons or vermin.
[c]
That power or motorized machinery used in preparing and maintaining individual plots is
no larger than that normally used in connection with home gardening, e.g., a typical
walk-behind rototiller.
[d]
That farm tractors or other heavy machinery is not employed on the site except for initial
site development and for annual spring preparation and fall cleanup, if necessary; and
in those instances it shall be operated only between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. weekdays.
[e]
That mulch, compost or organic fertilizer employed in the gardening is confined to the
site in a neat and orderly manner and that no fresh manure shall be used or composted.
[f]
That noxious fertilizers or noxious chemicals employed in the gardening are used only
with the knowledge and consent of all gardeners using the site, all adjoining property
owners and, in the event that adjoining properties are rental residential properties, with
the knowledge and consent of the head of each tenant household.
[g]
That no flammable liquids will be stored on the site.
[h]
That noise and odors produced in connection with the gardening activity will be no
greater than those normally associated with home gardening.
[i]
That City residents of the area nearest the site will be given an opportunity to obtain
plots in the allocation of plots on a first priority basis.
[j]
Other City residents will be given an opportunity to obtain plots in the allocation of plots
on a second priority basis.
[k]
Page 11 of 16
That unused portions of the site will be maintained in a neat and orderly manner at all
times.
[l]
That, at the end of each gardening season or within 30 days of revocation of a permit,
whichever occurs first, the entire site will be cleaned and left with a neat appearance.
[5]
In addition, the applicable portions of § 325-15A and C shall be observed.
[6]
In consideration of the fact that such gardens may be of an interim nature, may occupy
only a portion of a parcel and may be located on property unsuited for other
uses permitted under this chapter, the district regulations specified for permitted uses
under § 325-8 of this chapter shall be superseded, where applicable, by the following
regulations for community or neighborhood gardens:
[a]
Minimum lot size: none.
[b]
Width in feet at the street line: none required; however, sites lacking street frontage
shall be accessible to vehicles and pedestrians via a right-of-way of at least eight feet in
width.
[c]
Structures permitted: No structures for human habitation or occupancy shall
be permitted except for a weather shelter for gardeners, which may have a maximum
floor area of 64 square feet. A light accessory structure for storage of gardening
equipment and materials for plant propagation, with a maximum floor area of 64 square
feet, may be erected separately or attached to the weather shelter. If necessary, a well-
housing structure for the production of water for garden use may be erected with
permission of the owner of the site.
[d]
Parking and loading space: At least one off-street space on or immediately adjacent to
the site shall be provided for the use of the gardeners for each 15 individual garden
plots on the site or portion thereof.
[e]
Page 12 of 16
Yard setbacks shall not be required, except that the provisions of §§ 325-
17B and C and 325-25 of this chapter shall apply to any plantings, fences or accessory
structures on the site.
[7]
The response of those notified by the applicant as required in the procedures set forth in
§ 325-40, together with any other written comment received by the Planning and
Development Board before the hearing, as well as that comment expressed at the
public hearing, with primary consideration given the wishes of residents living within 200
feet of the property, should be a principal factor in the Planning and Development
Board's decision to grant or deny the special permit.
[Amended 8-5-1992 by Ord. No. 92-9; 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
[8]
In granting a special permit for community or neighborhood gardens, the Planning and
Development Board may prescribe any conditions that it deems necessary or desirable,
including but not limited to additional off-street parking spaces, so that the spirit of this
chapter shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured and substantial justice
done.
[9]
Special permits for neighborhood and community gardens shall be reviewed by the
Director of Planning and Development or designee at least annually for compliance with
this section and with any conditions established by the Planning and Development
Board. If, following such review or investigation of any complaint, the Director of
Planning and Development or designee determines that a substantial violation exists,
notice of such violation shall be mailed to the contact person designated in accordance
with Subsection C(4)(e)[2] above, requiring that such violation be corrected within 15
days. If satisfactory correction is not made, the permit may be revoked by the Director of
Planning and Development or designee. Appeals to such revocation shall be made to
the Planning and Development Board as provided in § 325-41 of this chapter.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[8]]
[10]
Special permits for neighborhood and community gardens shall be revoked
automatically if the site is not used as a community or neighborhood garden, as that
term is defined in § 325-3, for one complete garden season.
(f)
Group adult day-care facilities in R-2 Districts: Applicants shall furnish information
sufficient to describe the scope of the proposed activity, including the size of the
Deleted: appellant
Formatted: Underline, Font color: Dark Red
Formatted: Font color: Dark Red
Page 13 of 16
building, the number of clientele, the operating hours, off-street parking availability, the
number of employees and the proximity to other group adult day-care facilities in the
neighborhood. Prior to granting any special permit for such use, the Planning and
Development Board must find that the activity is compatible with the character and
quality of the neighborhood in which it is to be located.
[Added 5-6-1987 by Ord. No. 87-13]
(g)
Bed-and-breakfast homes and bed-and-breakfast inns:
[Added 9-6-1995 by Ord. No. 95-10]
[1]
The Planning and Development Board shall only grant a special permit for a bed-and-
breakfast home or a bed-and-breakfast inn (in those districts allowing such uses) if the
following special conditions are met and adhered to during the period the bed-and-
breakfast use is in operation:
[a]
Each such use before it commences must obtain a certificate of occupancy from the
Director of Planning and Development or designee.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[9]]
[b]
A bed-and-breakfast home must be owner-occupied and owner-managed. A bed-and-
breakfast inn must be owner-managed.
[i]
An owner-occupant is an individual who owns at least a 1/2 interest in the real estate on
which the bed-and-breakfast home is located and also owns at least a 1/2 interest in the
business of running the bed-and-breakfast home and who primarily resides in and lives
in the bed-and-breakfast home for at least 80% of the days (in each calendar year)
when the bed-and-breakfast home is open for business as a bed-and-breakfast home.
[ii]
An owner-manager is an individual who owns at least a 1/2 ownership interest in the
real estate on which the bed-and-breakfast home or bed-and-breakfast inn is located
and also owns at least a 1/2 interest in the business of the bed-and-breakfast home or
bed-and-breakfast inn and who is primarily responsible for the management of the bed-
and-breakfast home or bed-and-breakfast inn and is physically present in the bed-and-
breakfast home or bed-and breakfast inn at least once per day for 80% of the days (in
each calendar year) when the bed-and-breakfast home or bed-and-breakfast inn is
open for business.
Deleted: Board of Zoning Appeals
Deleted: Board of Zoning Appeals
Page 14 of 16
[c]
Bed-and-breakfast homes or inns in residential zones must be compatible with the
surrounding residential neighborhood. No alterations to the exterior of the house for the
purpose of establishing or expanding bed-and-breakfast operations shall be
permitted except for routine maintenance, alterations not requiring a building permit,
restoration or requirements related to safety or handicapped accessibility. There shall
be no exterior indication of a business, except the one permitted sign as indicated below
and required parking. Drawings illustrating any proposed exterior modifications must be
submitted with the special permit application.
[d]
Drawings illustrating any major proposed interior modifications (excluding plumbing,
wiring or other utility work) directly related to establishing or continuing the bed-and-
breakfast use must be submitted with the special permit application. Examples of major
interior modifications are the removal, replacement or installation of staircases or
partitioning walls.
[e]
No cooking facilities are permitted in the individual guest rooms.
[f]
Food service shall only be provided to guests taking lodging in the bed-and-breakfast
home or inn.
[g]
In R-2 Zones, no bed-and-breakfast home may be located on a lot closer than 500 feet
to any other lot containing a bed-and-breakfast home, with only one such
establishment permitted per block face.
[h]
There shall be no more than one sign. Such sign shall not be self-illuminated and shall
not exceed five square feet in area. Additional requirements described in Chapter 272,
entitled "Signs," of this Code shall be met.
[2]
The response of those notified by the appellant as required in the procedures set forth
in § 325-40, as well as that expressed at the public hearing, should be a principal factor
in the Planning and Development Board's decision to grant or deny the special permit.
[Amended 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
[3]
Page 15 of 16
A special permit granted for a bed-and-breakfast home located in an R-2 Zone shall
expire after a period of five years. All the requirements pertaining to the application for
and granting of a first-time special permit for a bed-and-breakfast home shall also apply
to the application for and granting of a renewed special permit for a bed-and-breakfast
home located in an R-2 Zone, including the notification procedures set forth in § 325-
40 and the expiration of such renewed special permit after five years.
[Amended 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
(h)
Temporary special permits for home occupations.
[Added 12-2-1998 by Ord. No. 98-30]
[1]
Spaces in which home occupations are conducted must comply with the New York
State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.
[2]
A home occupation temporary special permit shall be issued for a three-year period.
[3]
The response of those notified by the appellant as required in the procedures set forth
in § 325-40, as well as that expressed at the public hearing, should be a principal factor
in the Planning and Development Board's decision to grant the temporary home
occupation special permit.
[4]
Renewals. The renewal of temporary home occupation special permits for additional
three-year periods shall be granted by the Director of Planning and Development or
designee following inspection of the premises by the Department of Planning, Building
and Development, submission of a renewal application form issued by the Department
of Planning and Development and an affidavit stating that the conditions as originally set
forth to the Planning and Development Board have not changed in any way. It is the
responsibility of permit holders to renew their temporary special permits. The Director of
Planning and Development or designee shall determine that the premises still meet the
standards of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and that
the original qualifying conditions still exist. The Director of Planning and Development or
designee is authorized to charge a fee of $30 for each renewal inspection conducted.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[10]]
[5]
Revocation. The Director of Planning and Development or designee shall revoke
any special permit issued hereunder, should the applicant or the applicant's tenant
Deleted: Board of Zoning Appeals
Deleted: Building Commissioner
Page 16 of 16
violate any provision of this chapter or any condition imposed upon the issuance of
the special permit.
[6]
Periodic review. The Department of Planning and Development shall review the effects
of this section at least every five years to determine the long-term effect on the
residential character of the neighborhoods.
[Amended 6-5-2013 by Ord. No. 2013-15[11]]
[11]
Editor's Note: This ordinance provided for an effective date of 1-1-2014.
(5)
In the I-1 Zone, uses other than those permitted under § 325-8 may be permitted
by special permit upon a finding by the Planning and Development Board and
concurrence by the Common Council that such use shall have no negative impact by
reason of noise, fumes, odors, vibration, noxious or toxic releases or other conditions
injurious to the health or general welfare.
[Added 11-14-1989 by Ord. No. 89-16]
D.
The Board shall deny a special permit in all instances where it finds that a proposed use
would have a significant negative impact on traffic, congestion, property values,
municipal services, character of the surrounding neighborhood, or the general plan for
the development of the community. The granting of a special permit may be conditioned
on the effect the use would have on traffic, congestion, property values, municipal
services or the general plan for the development of the community. The applicant may
be required by the Planning and Development Board to submit plans for the site and for
parking facilities and to disclose other features of the applicant's proposed use so as to
afford the Planning and Development Board an opportunity to weigh the proposed use
in relation to neighboring land uses and to cushion any adverse effects by imposing
conditions designed to mitigate them. If the Planning and Development Board finds that
the adverse effects cannot be sufficiently mitigated, then the Planning and Development
Board shall deny the special permit.
[Added 7-8-1987 by Ord. No. 87-16; amended 7-1-1998 by Ord. No. 98-11]
Deleted: (i) ¶
Parking in the Waterfront Zone. Parking areas will
be permitted as a primary use in the Waterfront Zone
WF-1 and WF-2 districts by special permit and only if
they are open to the public or if they are intended to
serve the needs of multiple businesses.¶
[Added 10-5-2011 by Ord. No. 2011-13]¶
Deleted: Board of Zoning Appeals
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, October 11, 2017 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
Minutes
Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Cynthia Brock,
Rob Gearhart, Michael Decatur, and Stephen
Smith
Committee Members Absent: None
Other Elected Officials Attending: Mayor Svante Myrick (8:45)
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Planning and
Development Department; Jennifer Kusznir,
Senior Planner; Megan Wilson, Senior Planner;
Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation
Planner; Nels Bohn, Director of Ithaca Urban
Renewal Agency; Anisa Mendizabal, IURA
Community Planner; 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
The Collegetown and Downtown Design Guidelines presentation and the vote to
circulate were moved to the front of the meeting agenda.
Alderperson Brock asked before this goes to a vote, she would like to see the
zoning changes.
2) Special Order of Business
a) Design Guidelines for Collegetown and Downtown
Megan Wilson presented the guidelines to the group. The presentation can be
found at the following links:
Collegetown:
http://www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/6923
Downtown:
http://www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View/6924
b) Public Hearing – South Hill Overlay District
Alderperson Brock moved to open the public hearing; seconded by Alderperson
Smith. Carried Unanimously.
Steve Rogers, 152 Coddington Road, spoke in favor of the implementation of
the overlay district.
Jes Seaver. 218 Coddington Road Columbia Street. She lives across from the
controversial site at 217 Coddington Road Columbia Street that began this
overlay district. She is happy that the developer has changed his plan to focus
on single family homes rather than rental property. She would like to see
Council focus more on the student behavior.
Kenny Broadwell, 218 Coddington Road Columbia Street. He mirrors the
comments of his spouse Jes Seaver. They are currently in the building permit
and site plan review of their current project. He asks for some time before this
goes into effect.
Patrick Braga, 118 Prospect Street, supports the overlay district proposal as a
temporary measure. In fills should attract families to keep the neighborhood a
more family friendly neighborhood.
Kurt Martin, 311 Turner Place, he and his partner value the student population
to help enrich the neighborhood. He defined the term in-fill. He stated that this
does not follow the Comprehensive Plan.
Ken Young, 228 Columbia Street, is in favor the proposed overlay district.
John Efroymson (sp?), 407 Columbia Street, is in favor of the overlay district
proposal. He’s been a member of the neighborhood for years. We are on the
brink of our neighborhoods going away from families.
John Graves, 319 Pleasant Street. The majority of these properties are in the
R1 and R2 zones. Permanent residents living with undergraduates is
challenging but is worth working on. An interim overlay district is a must until
the City can review this neighborhood using the guidelines of the
Comprehensive Plan.
Jessie Hill, changing the zoning in this area will not solve the current issues.
When will the City accept that Ithaca is a Collegetown? Those who want to
build then decide to rent to a student will run into problems because the City
won’t let it happen.
Alderperson Smith moved to close the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson Brock. Carried Unanimously.
Formatted: Strikethrough
Formatted: Strikethrough
Formatted: Strikethrough
c) Public Hearing – Assessment of Fair Housing
Alderperson Brock moved to open the public hearing; seconded by Alderperson
Smith. Carried unanimously.
Denise Katzman, 309 Center Street, spoke in favor of the fair housing
assessment. We need to take care of the current and future tenants. Housing
crisis occur in many cities. The United States spends $1.2 M a year in
homelessness. We should focus on fair housing first.
Alderperson Brock moved to close the public hearing; seconded by
Alderperson Smith. Carried Unanimously.
3) Public Comment and Response from Committee Members
Patrick Braga, 118 Prospect Street, spoke regarding the Collegetown and
Downtown Guidelines. We need to review what the samples we are looking at to
help determine these guidelines. They need to be consistent with our local
landscape.
Dan Hoffman, 915 Elm Street, has many years of Ithaca experience in many
different arenas – student, council member, city attorney – spoke in support of the
historic designation of the Chacona Block to be a blend of different styles and eras.
Caroline O’Malley, 212 Center Street and Historic Ithaca. She fully supports the
designation of the Chacona Block. It blends the old and the new of street scape
Alphonse Pieper, 139 Ithaca Road, supports the designation of the Chacona Block.
His written comments are included with these minutes.
Nancy Break, 5214 Jacksonville Road, supports the designation of the Chacona
Block. When we lose old buildings, we lose a bit of ourselves. Ithaca is a city who
claims to support the green practices. This is one way to do so.
Kyle Karnes, Student Agencies, 409 College Avenue, he fully respects and
understands the meaning of landmark designation. In terms of these buildings,
they need to be replaced. They were not build to remain standing. He asks the
City to reject the designation of the Chacona Block.
Wendy Wilcox, 220 Bryant Avenue. In the case of the Nines, 411 College Avenue,
the profits made will be used to further the commitment of students. There has
been a recent trend where parents buy homes in the Collegetown area for their
children to live. She encourages the City to not designate the Chacona Block.
Brad Edmundson, 106 Short Street, has worked at Cornell Sun for years. A lot of
their workers are students. Student Agencies do a large amount of good. He
urges Student Agencies be allowed to continue as they are without designation.
Frost Travis, 204 White Park Road, is in favor of Student Agencies. If this building
is designated, we add a huge of financial hardship to make any changes. He
encourages the City not to designate this building.
Nick Lambrou, 405 Eddy Street, stated that he has always had good experiences
with the ILPC. I believe the historic designation is valuable.
Zachary Shulman, 417 Hudson Street, supports the non-designation of the
Chacona Block. It houses Students Agencies which has provided a lot to the City.
Collegetown Bagels is housed in the Chacona Block. It’s the CTB business that
make the building what it is. If you landmark the building, you will burden Student
Agencies.
Ravi Meel, 5076 Cold Springs Road, does not support the designation of the
Chacona Block.
Ken Rother, 954 Coddington Road, does not support the designation of the
Chacona Block. It will seriously deflate any continuation of Students Agencies.
G. Lincoln Morse, 720 Willow Avenue, spoke against the designation of the
Chacona Block. He has many years of experience in remodeling, etc. He does
not know how to fix the façade of this building.
Steve Hugo, 111 Center Street, is not in favor of the designation. Not all old
buildings are good. Surely new development could favor this area as a gateway to
the City.
Yamila Fournier, Village of Lansing, works for Whitham Consulting. This is not a
great building. An engineering report from Tatum Engineering states that this
building is beyond its reasonable life.
Scott Whitham, City of Ithaca, he urges the City to not designate this property and
allow Student Agencies to update and renovate this building.
Costa Lambrou, 309 Eddy Street, is a huge supporter of Student Agencies and
why it’s important to keep this building as is and not designate.
Madeline Leiber, 409 College Avenue, she too is a huge supporter of Student
Agencies and how much they helped her.
Mary Tomlan, 200 Delaware Avenue, City historian and neighbor. She sees this
building as a great example of teaching those students helped by Student
Agencies. The façade of the very simple Chacona Block is very subtle. Very
composition of architecture that should not be easily dismissed.
John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue, he sees this building as a prime example of
a designated building. This building was built to allow the Chacona family to work
at their confectionary business. Historic designation is key.
Kenny Broadwell, is an electrician who has worked on this building. He does not
find this building is worth working on or renovating it.
Alderperson Smith stated that there was large packet of information supplied by
Student Agencies that did not make its way into the agenda packet, however,
Common Council was provided this information.
4) Updates, Announcements, Reports
No updates or announcements were given.
5) Action Items (Voting to send onto Council)
(a) Assessment of Fair Housing – HUD Entitlement Program
Moved by Alderperson Smith; seconded by Alderperson Gearhart. Passed
unanimously.
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca (City) receives an annual grant funding from the U.S.
Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) Entitlement program, which
requires the City to adopt and submit an Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH) by November
4, 2017 as a condition for continued funding, and
WHEREAS, the City has contracted with the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA) to
administer, implement and monitor the City’s HUD Entitlement program in compliance
with all applicable regulations, and
WHEREAS, the IURA has conducted community engagement activities, analyzed fair
housing issues and completed a draft Assessment of Fair Housing (AFH), and
WHEREAS, Federal fair housing law prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion,
national origin, sex, disability or familial status, and
WHEREAS, fair housing issues restrict housing choice and access to opportunity for
protected classes, and include:
Patterns of segregation
Racially or ethnically concentrated areas of poverty
Disparities in access to opportunity
Disproportionate housing need, and
WHEREAS, the AFH utilizes HUD‐provided data and local information to assess housing
issues; identifies contributing factors that create, contribute to, perpetuate or increase
the severity of one or more housing issues; and develops goals to address barriers to fair
housing, and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 13, 2017 during the development of
the AFH, and
WHEREAS, the draft AFH is available for a 30‐day comment period ending October 30,
2017, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council for the City of Ithaca hereby adopts the City of
Ithaca Assessment of Fair Housing, Ithaca, NY as amended to incorporate comments
received.
b) South Hill Overlay District
An Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” In Order to Create a South Hill Overlay
District – Declaration of Lead Agency
Moved by Alderperson Smith; seconded by Alderperson Gearhart.
Passed unanimously.
WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead
agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in
accordance with local and state environmental law, and
WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local
environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has
primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action,
and
WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendment is an “Type 1” Action pursuant
to the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires
environmental review under CEQR; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby
declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the proposal to
amending the Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled
“Zoning,” To Create a South Hill Overlay District.
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of
Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” In Order to
Create a South Hill Overlay District – Declaration of
Environmental Significance
Moved by Alderperson Smith; seconded by Alderperson
Brock. Passed unanimously.
1. WHEREAS, The Common Council is considering a proposal
to amend the Municipal Code of the City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” in order to create a
South Hill Overlay District, and
2. WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been
conducted, including the preparation of a Full
Environmental Assessment Form Parts 1, 2, and 3
(FEAF), dated September 15, 2007 and
3. WHEREAS, the proposed action is a “TYPE I” Action
under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance,
and
4. WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca,
acting as lead agency, has reviewed the FEAF prepared
by planning staff; now, therefore, be it
1. RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in
this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and
conclusions more fully set forth on the Full
Environmental Assessment Form, dated September 15,
2017 and be it further
2. RESOLVED, that this Common Council, as lead agency in
this matter, hereby determines that the proposed
action at issue will not have a significant effect on
the environment, and that further environmental review
is unnecessary, and be it further
3. RESOLVED, that this resolution constitutes notice of
this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is
hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together
with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and
forward the same to any other parties as required by
law.
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of
Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” in Order to
Establish a South Hill Overlay District
ORDINANCE NO. ____
Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson
Smith. Passed unanimously.
1. WHEREAS, residents of the South Hill neighborhood have
expressed concerns that rapid in-fill development is
taking place in the neighborhood and will have a
drastic impact on both the aesthetic qualities and the
character of the neighborhood, and
WHEREAS, currently, this area is predominantly zoned R-
1b, R-2a and R-3b, and
2. WHEREAS, the R-1 and R-2 districts are intended to be
lower density districts that are restricted to 1 and 2
family houses and larger lot sizes and these zones are
usually located in areas where there are established
owner occupied neighborhoods, and
3. WHEREAS, existing zoning regulations permit properties
to construct multiple primary structures on a single
tax parcel if they are able to meet the area
requirements for each additional structure, and
4. WHEREAS, recent development projects in the South Hill
neighborhood have been able to meet area requirements
allowing development of multiple primary structures on
one parcel, which has the potential to significantly
change the character of this neighborhood, and
5. WHEREAS, in September of 2015, the Common Council
adopted Plan Ithaca as Phase I of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan and in 2016, the City began working
on Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan, which is a
series of neighborhood and area plans, and
6. WHEREAS, in order to allow residents to participate in
creating a vision for this area and for the City to
develop a plan for sensible growth and development,
the City anticipates beginning work on an area plan
for the South Hill neighborhood within the next year,
and
7. WHEREAS, to ensure that any ongoing development while
the plan is being developed supports the goals of the
City’s Comprehensive Plan, the City is proposing the
creation of an overlay zoning district that would
restrict properties to constructing only one primary
structure per tax parcel, and
8. WHEREAS, this overlay district will be used to
establish the boundaries of the South Hill Study Area,
and
9. WHEREAS, once the City completes the planning process
for this area, it can determine whether there are
locations where in-fill development is more
appropriate and whether design guidelines are needed
to ensure new development is in line with the
neighborhood character, now therefore
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the
City of Ithaca that Chapter 325, Zoning, be amended as
follows:
Section 1. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-
3(“Definitions and Word Usage”) of the Municipal Code of
the City of Ithaca is hereby amended in order to add a
definition of the term Primary Structure, to read as
follows:
Primary Structure
A single structure (located on a parcel) containing a use
permitted in the zoning district in which it is located.
Section 2. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-4(“Zoning
Districts”) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is
hereby amended to add a South Hill Overlay District
(SHOD).
Section 3. Chapter 325, Section 325-5, Zoning Map of the
Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended to
create a South Hill Overlay District (SHOD) to include
properties located within the boundaries displayed on the
map entitled “Proposed Boundary for South Hill Overlay
District-September 2017”, a copy of which is attached and
shall be kept on file in the City Clerk’s office.
Section 4. Chapter 325 (“Zoning”), Section 325-8(“District
Regulations”) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca
is hereby amended to add a subsection 325-8E. Entitled
“Additional Restrictions in the South Hill Area” to read
as follows:
E. Additional Restrictions in the South Hill Area
(1) South Hill Overlay District Restrictions
a. After the date of this ordinance, any property
located within the South Hill Overlay District
with a zoning designation of R-1 or R-2 is
prohibited from constructing a primary structure
on any parcel already containing one or more
primary structures, and is prohibited from
constructing more than one primary structure on a
parcel containing no primary structures. The
preceding sentence shall not impact future
changes to primary structures existing prior to
the effective date of this paragraph.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection,
sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of
competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 6. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of
notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Mayor Myrick joined the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
c) Proposed Local Landmark Designation of the Chacona Block at 411-415
College Avenue
A structural engineer was asked for his opinion on the building. The building is
in good shape for its age. The façade has deteriorated and no longer keeps
water, etc. out of the building. In his opinion, he doesn’t think the façade can be
saved. It would need to be replaced.
Mayor Myrick stated he doesn’t think that this committee should designate this
building. It’s not the building that makes it great, it’s the use of it.
After a lengthy discussion, Chair Murtagh moved the resolution to approve the designation and send onto Council. No committee member seconded the motion. Deleted: After a lengthy discussion, Chair Murtagh moved to deny
this resolution and send onto Council¶
The resolution failed. It was then moved by Alderperson Murtagh; seconded by Alderperson Gearhart to deny and send onto Council for a full Council vote. Carried unanimously 3-2.
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 August 8, 2017, the ILPC concluded a public hearing for the purpose
of considering a proposal to designate the Chacona Block at 411-415 College Avenue
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, 3, 4, and 5 defining a
“Local Landmark” under Section 228-3B of the Municipal Code and on August 8, 2017,
voted to recommend the designation of the Chacona Block at 411-415 College Avenue, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-4 of the Municipal Code, the Planning Board shall
file a report with Common 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 September 26, 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 Chacona Block at 411-415 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 is the work of a
designer whose work has significantly influenced an age; or
4. represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community by virtue of its
unique location or singular physical characteristics.
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Common Council [approves/disapproves] the designation of
the Chacona Block at 411-415 College Avenue and the adjacent areas that are identified as
tax parcel #64.-2-1 as a local landmark.
6) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) September 2017 – The minutes were not available for a vote.
7) Adjournment
Moved by Alderperson Gearhart; seconded by Alderperson Brock. Passed
unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.