HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2019-01-22Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
1
Planning and Development Board
Minutes
January 22, 2019
Board Members
Attending:
Robert Aaron Lewis, Chair; Garrick Blalock; Jack Elliott; Mitch
Glass, Matthew Johnston; McKenzie Lauren Jones, Vice Chair;
Emily Petrina
Board Members Absent:
None
Board Vacancies: None
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Division of Planning and Economic
Development
Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning, Division of Planning
and Economic Development
Megan Wilson, Planner, Division of Planning and Economic
Development
Anne Redmond, Planner, Division of Planning and Economic
Development
Anya Harris, Administrative Assistant, Division of Planning and
Economic Development
Applicants Attending: 109-111 Homestead Road Minor Subdivision
Katrina Morse
Chain Works District Redevelopment Plan (draft FGEIS)
James Gensel for David Lubin, Unchained Properties
500 S Meadow Street – Extension of Site Plan Approval
Kim Goergen for Wegmans
Amici House & Childcare Center – Siding Changes and Sign
Package Presentation
Lee Dillon, TC Action
Larry Foor, Foor & Associates
NCRE Cornell University – Presentation
Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge, Wolf, Michaels, Landscape Architects
Alan Chimacoff, iKon5 Architects
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
2
Falls Park Apartments (74 Units) 121-125 Lake Street by IFR
Development LLC – Review of FEAF Part 3 – No action
Ryan Kovak, Trowbridge, Wolf, Michaels, Landscape Architects
Frost Travis, IFR Development
Chris Hyde, IFR Development
Deborah Wright, O’Brien & Gere
Nels Bohn, IURA
815-817 N. Aurora Street – Two New Two-Family Dwellings –
Declaration of Lead Agency
Daniel Hirtler, Daniel Hirtler Architecture
Stavros Stavropoulos, Property Owner
504 S. Meadow Street Maguire Lincoln – Declaration of Lead
Agency
John Snyder, John Snyder Architects
815 S. Aurora – Sketch Plan
Noah Demarest, Stream Collaborative
Charlie O’Connor, Modern Living Rentals
Housing – W Seneca/W State & Corn Streets – Sketch Plan
Noah Demarest, Stream Collaborative
Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
1. Agenda Review
Deputy Director Nicholas said there were no changes.
2. Special Order of Business – Presentation of the Greater Southside Plan
Senior Planner Megan Wilson appeared in front of the Board to make a brief presentation on the
Greater Southside Plan. She said since the last Planning Board meeting in December the Greater
Southside Plan Committee made its final revisions to the draft plan and voted unanimously to
recommend the draft dated December 19, 2018 to the Planning Board for their consideration.
Glass asked who was on the Committee.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
3
Wilson said it was a committee of about 15 members, of whom 8-12 were in attendance at any
given meeting. She said it was made up of a mix of renters and homeowners from within the
neighborhood.
Cornish said that Seph Murtagh and Ducson Nguyen were on the Committee representing
Common Council.
Wilson agreed and said that Susan Holland also participated, representing Historic Ithaca. She
said they did public outreach as well.
Petrina asked about accessory apartments.
Wilson said that accessory apartments refers to having an additional unit on an owner-occupied
property. She gave the examples of having a basement apartment or unit in a carriage house,
above a garage, or in a portion of a large home (but smaller in size than the main dwelling unit).
She said it’s a way to have a little extra income, but it’s different than building multiple units on
one property.
There being no further comments or questions, the Board considered the resolution.
Adopted Resolution to Recommend the Greater Southside Neighborhood Plan to Common
Council
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Petrina:
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan outlines a vision for the city’s future and serves as a guide for
future decision-making, policies, and funding, and
WHEREAS, the City decided to pursue a two-phased approach to its new Comprehensive Plan, where
Phase I entailed the preparation of an “umbrella” plan, Plan Ithaca, that sets forth broad goals and
principles to guide future policies throughout the city and where Phase II includes the preparation of
specific neighborhood and thematic plans, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council adopted Plan Ithaca in September 2015, and the planning process
then began to focus on the Phase II plans, and
WHEREAS, the Phase II plans provide an opportunity to take a proactive look at specific areas
throughout the city, particularly those with significant potential for change, and to implement
policies and capital improvements to help implement a shared vision, and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the City of Ithaca Municipal Code and New York State General City
Law, the Planning and Development Board is responsible for preparing and recommending a new
Comprehensive Plan to the Common Council for adoption, and
WHEREAS, formed in September 2016, the Southside Neighborhood Plan Committee was composed
of 15 area residents, including a member of the Planning and Development Board, and worked with
City Planning staff to conduct public outreach and prepare the draft plan, and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
4
WHEREAS, the complete draft Greater Southside Neighborhood Plan was made available for public
review in September 2018, and the Committee hosted community events, neighborhood meetings,
and an online survey to gather public comments on the draft plan, and
WHEREAS, following its review of the comments, the Committee revised the draft plan to
incorporate public input, and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on December 19, 2018, the Southside Neighborhood Plan Committee voted
to recommend the draft Greater Southside Neighborhood Plan, dated December 19, 2018, for review
and consideration by the Planning and Development Board as part of Phase II of the Comprehensive
Plan; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board recommends the draft Greater
Southside Neighborhood Plan, dated December 19, 2018, for review and adoption by the Common
Council as part of Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan:
Moved by: Jones
Seconded by: Petrina
In Favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
There being no further questions from the Board, they moved on to Privilege of the Floor.
3. Privilege of the Floor
Chair Lewis then opened Privilege of the Floor.
Matt Yarrow of 119 Cascadilla Street, introduced himself as the Service Development
Manager for TCAT. He said that TCAT understands that denser development in the City and
effective transit service are intimately linked. He said dense areas of transit riders allows for
frequent service. Without good transit in the downtown core extending to job centers, transit-
dependent communities and essential services throughout the County, the City would have a
harder time dealing with parking, congestion, and providing equitable access to jobs, health
services, retail, etc. He said there are several medium to large projects on the horizon that will
affect TCAT services, and representatives from some of these projects have already reached out
to TCAT to discuss these impacts. He said that he is here today to voice the idea that TCAT and
the Board can and probably should work together more closely to ensure that larger development
projects adequately consider transit. He said that TCAT recently completed a Strategic Plan,
available on their website and said he hopes the Board members will take the time to take a look
at it. He said that they are also working on a Transit Supportive Development Guide to
encourage developers to engage with them early in the process, and he said TCAT would be
interested in developing a more formal protocol with the City and other municipalities to ensure
that transit plans do not just mean parking single occupancy vehicles. He said that he will try to
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
5
attend the Planning Board meetings when larger development projects are being discussed, and
he urged the Board to reach out to him and his colleagues at TCAT with any questions they
might have about transit and its interaction with development.
Nicholas suggested that he might return sometime and provide some training to the Board.
Several Board members agreed that this was a good idea.
Walter Hang of 218 Wait Avenue, spoke about the Falls Park Apartment project. He said that
the site is extensively contaminated, not just in soil, but also groundwater. He said the
contamination moves off site to the south and west. He said that the full extent of the pollution
plume has not been determined, and the problem is that if the property is redeveloped, without all
the pollution being removed, the site will never be cleaned up. He said the State of New York
simply does not enforce the law, so depending on the NYS DEC to ensure the site is cleaned up
is not sensible. He asked them to require the site and the Overlook to be cleaned up, and he said
the Overlook has re-contaminated the Gorge Trail. He said he thinks the only way to clean up the
site is to include it on the national priority list for SuperFund Cleanup. He said he thinks cleanup
should be the first priority and development, second.
Daniel Hoffman of 415 Elm Street, said that he is a member of the PRNR committee and his
remarks tonight are consistent with the concerns that group has. First, with respect to the
Chainworks project, he said any development there should be forward looking and take a new
perspective on energy use, carbon footprint, and sustainability, among other things. He said one
example could be encouraging the creation of opportunities for home and neighborhood food
production, and he noted that making sure there is access to home or community gardens is a
goal stated in the Comp Plan. He asked the Board to consider ways of stipulating that land that
has good solar access and is not contaminated be set aside and that it should have sufficient room
to include greenhouses to extend the growing season.
Hoffman also spoke about backyard infill in residential neighborhoods, saying that it is a trend
and a financial opportunity for landlords and developers to get more out of neighborhood lots.
He said that he thinks it’s not consistent with existing neighborhood character, another principle
the Comp plan says it supports, and wherever it’s happening, there are unhappy neighbors
concerned about the impacts, which seem to include making home ownership and owner
occupancy less likely, removal of trees and vegetation and an increase in pavement, and making
neighboring properties less desirable.
There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed privilege of
the floor.
4. Approval of Minutes
On a motion by Johnston, seconded by Jones, the November 27, 2018 minutes were approved
unanimously with no modifications.
5. Subdivision
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
6
A. 109-111 Homestead Road Minor Subdivision by owner Katrina Morse.
Declaration of Lead Agency, Public Hearing, Determination of Environmental
Significance, and Recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals. The applicant
proposes to subdivide a 0.58 acre property into two parcels: Parcel A measuring 0.33
acre (14,148 square feet) with 73.28 feet of frontage on Homestead Road and
containing an existing residential structure, driveway, and other site features; and
Parcel B measuring 0.26 acre (11,113 square feet) with 75.5 feet of frontage on
Homestead Road with an existing fenced-in vegetable garden. The property is in the R-
1a Zoning District, which has the following minimum requirements: 10,000 SF lot size,
75 feet of street frontage, 25-foot front yard, and 10-foot side yards. The project
requires an area variance for the existing deficient front yard on the proposed Parcel A,
measuring 24.5 feet instead of the required 25 feet. This is an Unlisted Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), both of which require environmental
review.
Owner Katrina Morse appeared in front of the Board. She said the property was originally two
lots, so she wants to divide it into two lots again and sell the vacant lot.
Adopted Resolution for Declaration of Lead Agency:
On a motion by Johnson, seconded by Elliott:
WHEREAS: 6 NYCRR, Part 617, of the State Environmental Quality Review Law and Chapter 176.6 of
the City Code, Environmental Quality Review, 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: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board for a Minor Subdivision of City of Ithaca Tax Parcel #86.-3-4, by owner Katrina
Morse, and
WHEREAS: The applicant proposes to subdivide a 0.58 acre property into two parcels: Parcel A measuring
0.33 acre (14,148 square feet) with 73.28 feet of frontage on Homestead Road and containing an existing
residential structure, driveway, and other site features; and Parcel B measuring 0.26 acre (11,113 square
feet) with 75.5 feet of frontage on Homestead Road with an existing fenced-in vegetable garden. The
property is in the R-1a Zoning District, which has the following minimum requirements: 10,000 SF lot size,
75 feet of street frontage, 25-foot front yard, and 10-foot side yards. The project requires an area variance
for the existing deficient front yard on the proposed Parcel A, measuring 24.5 feet instead of the required
25 feet, and
WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
(“CEQRO”) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”), both of which require
environmental review, and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
7
WHEREAS: this is considered a Minor Subdivision in accordance with the City of Ithaca Code, Chapter
290, Article 1, §290-1, Minor Subdivision – Any subdivision of land resulting in creation of a maximum
of one additional buildable lot, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board is the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and
funding or carrying out the action, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby declare itself Lead
Agency for the environmental review for the action of Subdivision approval for City of Ithaca Tax Parcel
#86.-3-4, by owner Katrina Morse.
Moved by: Johnston
Seconded by: Elliott
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
Public Hearing
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Johnston, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing.
There being no members of the public appearing to speak, on a motion by Jones, seconded by
Petrina, Chair Lewis closed the public hearing.
Jones asked the applicant if she has any plans for the subdivided parcel.
Applicant said her intent is to sell. She has no plans.
Elliott asked if this is all about 6 inches.
Morse said yes, she has to go to the BZA for a variance because her existing front yard is
deficient by about 6 inches.
Adopted Resolution for a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance:
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Johnston:
WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board for a minor subdivision of City of Ithaca Tax Parcel #86.-3-4, by owner/applicant Katrina
Morse, and
WHEREAS: The applicant proposes to subdivide a 0.58 acre property into two parcels: Parcel A measuring
0.33 acre (14,148 square feet) with 73.28 feet of frontage on Homestead Road and containing an existing
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
8
residential structure, driveway, and other site features; and Parcel B measuring 0.26 acre (11,113 square
feet) with 75.5 feet of frontage on Homestead Road with an existing fenced-in vegetable garden, and
WHEREAS: The property is in the R-1a Zoning District, which has the following minimum requirements:
10,000 SF lot size, 75 feet of street frontage, 25-foot front yard, and 10-foot side yards. The project requires
an area variance for the existing deficient front yard on the proposed Parcel A, measuring 24.5 feet instead
of the required 25 feet, and
WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
and an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, both of which require
environmental review, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, the Tompkins
County Department of Planning and Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the
opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any comments received to date on the aforementioned
have been considered, and
WHEREAS: this Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has reviewed and accepted as
adequate a City of Ithaca Short Environmental Assessment Form prepared by owner/applicant Katrina
Morse, and a Part 2 prepared by Planning Staff, a “Subdivision Map of No. 111 Homestead Road”, dated
4/26/2017, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C., now therefore be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board hereby determines that the proposed
subdivision for the above referenced action will result in no significant impact on the environment, and that
a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in
accordance with the requirements contained in Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
Moved by: Petrina
Seconded by: Johnston
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
6. Site Plan Review
A. Chain Works District Redevelopment Plan (FGEIS), 620 S. Aurora St. by Jamie
Gensel for David Lubin of Unchained Properties. Board Comments on the
Proposed Chainworks District PUD & Design Guidelines. The proposed Chain
Works District seeks to redevelop and rehabilitate the +/-800,000 sf former Morse
Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility, located on a 95-acre parcel traversing the
City and Town of Ithaca’s municipal boundary. The applicant has applied for a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) for development of a mixed-use district, which includes
residential, commercial, office, and manufacturing. The site’s redevelopment would
bridge South Hill and Downtown Ithaca, the Town and the City of Ithaca, by providing
multiple intermodal access routes including a highly-desired trail connection. The
project will be completed in multiple phases over a period of several years with the
initial phases involving the redevelopment of the existing structures. Current
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
9
redevelopment of this property will focus on retrofitting existing buildings and
infrastructure for new uses. Using the existing structures, residential, commercial,
studio workspaces, and office development are proposed to be predominantly within
the City of Ithaca, while manufacturing will be within both the Town and City of Ithaca.
Jamie Gensel of Fagan Engineers appeared on behalf of applicant David Lubin (Unchained
Properties) to present updates and answer Board questions. He said one change to the District
PUD and Design Guidelines is the addition of another sub-zone to CW-3 to address comments
about the development close to Hillview. The change reduces the number of stories in that area
an eliminates sub stories
He said there are a number of small changes to the Design Guidelines and asked for comments
from the Board.
Nicholas said the Board had seen this document a year ago and all their previous comments have
been incorporated.
A brief question and answer period followed.
Director Cornish said that to address a comment raised during Privilege of the Floor, they would
review possibilities for community gardens during Site Plan Review.
Applicant agreed, and said they had looked at options for greenhouses.
Blalock asked about the size restriction on bakeries.
Board agreed to recommend striking that line.
Applicant agreed to look into the comments to see what the rationale was.
Board agreed recommending bike parking guidelines conform to City standards and community
gardens/greenhouse(/s) be looked at during SPR
B. 15,700 SF Retail Building at 500 S Meadow Street by Kim Goergen for Wegmans.
Extension of Site Plan Approval. The Planning Board approved the 15,700-SF retail
building with associated site improvements on December 16, 2014 and subsequently
extended the approval for 24 months. The applicant is seeking an additional 24-month
extension of the site plan approval.
Kim Goergen, project manager for Wegmans’ site development group, said they had received
Site Plan approval for a retail building that fronts S. Meadow Street in late 2014, and came back
for an extension of Site Plan Approval in 2016, and are now returning to ask for one more
extension. She said they want to keep the site plans as previously approved.
Petrina asked why they want to have another extension.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
10
Applicant said that they have a lease negotiation underway elsewhere in the City, and if for
whatever reason, negotiations fall through, they would like to reserve the right to build on the
site.
Blalock said that in general, he doesn’t like the idea of approving something five years ago and
then not revisiting it when the situation on the ground around it is changing. He referenced the
Ford dealership project proposed next door to the site.
Jones said she thinks a building would be preferable to a parking lot and asked if the project was
always going to be a maybe.
Applicant said that they had thought they would build initially but then were able to lease
elsewhere.
The Board next asked had a brief discussion of procedural options and decided that they would
require applicant to return to review and approve landscape plans before any building is built.
Adopted Resolution for an Extension of Site Plan Approval:
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Johnston:
WHEREAS: on December 16, 2014, the Planning Board granted final Site Plan Approval to the proposed
retail building to be located at 500 S. Meadow St., and
WHEREAS: the approved project is a 15,700-SF retail building. The project site is a 17.7-acre parcel that
contains an existing 115,000-SF retail building (Wegmans), associated parking, and an access road from
Meadow Street. The new building will be located on an existing 201-space parking area. Project
development will include parking for 77 cars, internal sidewalks, plus a sidewalk along the access road,
crosswalk striping, lighting, and landscaping. The project is in the SW-2 Zoning District, and
WHEREAS: §276-10 of the City Code states that if construction of a project has not commenced within
two years of the date of Site Plan Approval, such approval shall expire, unless an extension has been granted
by the Board, following a written request by the applicant, and
WHEREAS: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did grant a two -year extension of
Site Plan Approval until November 22, 2018, subject to all the conditions stated, and all drawings cited, in
the final Site Plan Review Approval resolution, dated December 16, 2014, and
WHEREAS: in a letter dated January 15, 2019 to Lisa Nicholas from Kim Goergen, Project Manager for
Wegmans Food Markets, Inc., an additional extension of the Site Plan Approval was requested, and
WHEREAS: the applicant has verified that no changes are proposed to site plan approved on December
16, 2014, and
WHEREAS: the Site Plan Review Ordinance was amended in 2017 to include, among other things, more
detailed requirements for tree planting and an increased greenspace requirement of 25% for parking lots
now, therefore, be it
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
11
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby grant an additional
two-year extension of Site Plan Approval until November 22, 2020, subject to all the conditions stated, and
all drawings cited, in the final Site Plan Review Approval resolution, dated December 16, 2014, and subject
to the following condition related to the above referenced 2017 changes to the Site Plan Review Ordinance:
i. Submission of a revised landscaping plan showing 1) the project in context with the recently
approved site plan for the adjacent property, and 2) additional greenspace and planting
specifications in conformance with the current Site Plan Review Ordinance.
Moved by: Johnston
Seconded by: Jones
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
C. Amici House & Childcare Center at 661-701 Spencer Rd. Larry Foor of Foor
Associates on behalf of Tom Schickel for Tompkins Community Action (TC
Action). Approval of Signage and Recommendation to the BZA. The project was
approved by the Planning and Development Board on January 24, 2017. The applicant
is now seeking approval of the signage associated with the project which includes two
new buildings, to be used for supportive housing for young homeless people and their
children, as well as childcare. The project will require a recommendation to the BZA,
as the proposed signage requires variances.
Lee Dillon of TC Action and Larry Foor of Foor & Associates appeared to request retroactive
approval of siding color changes and to present the proposed sign package.
Chair Lewis was unhappy with the unapproved changes saying that the approved siding colors
had undergone a rigorous design review.
Jones said the color palette chosen was meant to be more residential, and this feels more
institutional.
Elliott said he actually finds this scheme more attractive, but he wishes they had not used the
simulated wood grain.
Chair Lewis asked staff what their options are here. He said it’s pretty disconcerting for a
finished building come back looking completely different than what was approved.
With no options forthcoming, the Board moved on to consider signage.
Jones asked if this is the first they have seen of the sign package and if any of it is up already.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
12
Foor said the sign over the door that says “Child Care Entrance” is up.
Dillon said they opened the Child Care on September 5, and wanted to be sure people knew
where to enter. She said that is the only signage that is up, aside from some window stickers to
guide the Fire Department, if needed.
Chair Lewis asked if these signs would require a variance.
Nicholas said yes.
After some discussion, Board agreed to recommend the sign variance because the size of the
signs are in keeping with the scale of the building.
D. North Campus Residential Expansion (NCRE) at Cornell University Campusby
Trowbridge Wolf Michaels for Cornell University. Presentation - Site
Architecture & Schedule Review – No Action. The applicant proposes to construct
two residential complexes (one for sophomores and the other for freshmen) on two sites
on North Campus. The sophomore site will have four residential buildings with 800
new beds and associated program space totaling 299,900 SF and a 59,700 SF, 1,200-
seat, dining facility. The sophomore site is mainly in the City of Ithaca with a small
portion in the Village of Cayuga Heights; however, all buildings are in t he City. The
freshman site will have three new residential buildings (each spanning the City and
Town line) with a total of 401,200 SF and 1,200 new beds and associated program
space – 223,400 of which is in the City, and 177,800 of which is in the Town. The
buildings will be between two and six stories using a modern aesthetic. The project is
in three zoning districts: the U-I zoning district in the City in which the proposed five
stories and 55 feet are allowed; the Low Density Residential District (LDR) in the
Town which allows for the proposed two-story residence halls (with a special permit);
and the Multiple Housing District within Cayuga Heights in which no buildings are
proposed. This has been determined to be a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) §176-4 B.(1)(b), (h) 4, (i) and
(n) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4 (b)(5)(iii),
for which the Lead Agency issued a Negative Declaration on December 18, 2018.
Kathryn Wolf of Trowbridge Wolf Michaels Landscape Architects and Alan Chimacoff of iKon5
Architects appeared in front of the Board to give a presentation on the historic reasons for the
layout of the site and the impact that the North Campus Residential Expansion project will have
on the site layout and circulation.
Chimacoff also presented initial designs for the proposed buildings and provided some information
about materials and colors selections.
Wolf said that the pathways have been designed to provide continuous ADA accessible paths and
fire access routes across North Campus. She also discussed improvements to transit services and
bike paths and cyclist infrastructure (racks, lockers, showers, etc.)
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
13
She also spoke a bit about the planting plans, sa ying that they would attempt to preserve existing
shade trees, plant new ones, plant native species, use low-mow or no-mow grasses, and create
seasonal interest. She said preliminary site plan review is anticipated to begin the following month.
A brief discussion period followed.
Nicholas suggested keying the Site Plan layout/s to elevations.
E. Falls Park Apartments (74 Units), 121-125 Lake Street by IFR Development LLC.
Review of FEAF Part 3 – No action. The applicant proposes to build a 133,000 GSF,
four-story apartment building and associated site improvements on the former Gun Hill
Factory site. The 74-unit, age-restricted apartment building will be a mix of one- and
two-bedroom units and will include 7,440 SF of amenity space and 85 parking spaces
(20 surface spaces and 65 covered spaces under the building). Site improvements
include an eight-foot wide public walkway located within the dedicated open space on
adjacent City Property (as required per agreements established between the City and
the property owner in 2007) and is to be constructed by the project sponsor. The project
site is currently in the New York State Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP). Before
site development can occur, the applicant is required to remediate the site based on soil
cleanup objectives for restricted residential use. A remedial investigation (RI) was
recently completed at the site and was submitted to NYSDEC in August 2018. The
project is in the R-3a Zoning District and requires multiple variances. This is a Type I
Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”)
§176-4 B(1) (h)[2], (k) and (n) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act
(“SEQRA”) §617-4 (b) (11).
Ryan Kovak from Trowbridge, Wolf, Michaels Landscape Architects; Frost Travis, IFR
Development; Chris Hyde, IFR Development; Deborah Wright, O’Brien & Gere; and Nels Bohn,
IURA appeared to review the history of the remediation efforts on the site.
Bohn reviewed cleanup efforts. He said there are a number of separate areas to consider when
looking at the remediation. He said passed out a jurisdictional map. He said that it is one site, but
has been divided into several jurisdictions for cleanup purposes. The project site is one area. The
City’s property (Overlook site) spans from Lake Avenue, crosses the Raceway and includes the
Island. The third area is the Gorge Floor, and the fourth area extends to cover the Fall Creek
neighborhood. He said each is covered by a different program. The City site is covered by the
municipally owned Brownfields program and its remediation has been determined recently to be
complete by DEC (up to restricted residential use). He said the offsite Fall Creek neighborhood
is still under investigation, and that the DEC has installed six systems and are tracking about 50
sites. He said the Gorge floor is under the EPA’s jurisdiction; he said they have done removals
and cleanups several times in that area, and that more sampling was done this fall, but due to the
partial federal government shutdown, they are still awaiting the results. He said the project site is
going through the Brownfields cleanup program right now, and (he believes) DEC’s approval is
pending.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
14
He said they have heard criticisms that the City site cleanup was not robust enough because they
did not do full source removal. He said removal was done in the raceway, and on the Island
down to bedrock, and they replicated the EPA’s remediation efforts on the walkway, removing
about 3 feet of surface material and replacing it with soil and a vegetative cap. He said the City
has an obligation to have a licensed environmental consultant walk the site yearly and after any
major storm event and report their findings to the DEC. He said they will do their first mandated
walk through in June of this year. He said they have also installed fences to prevent damage to
the vegetative cap from trespassers. He said that in the areas where they have removed to
bedrock, the rock is fracture prone, so in some places they have found they have had to go back
to do more cleanup via hand removal, and following removal, the site was meeting the restricted
residential standard of less than 400 ppm of lead.
Petrina asked about the parking lot to the west of the site, saying that if that’s contaminated, it
seems like it could be leeching down to the Fall Creek neighborhood.
Bohn said that that’s fill material and it’s not municipally owned. He said part of the
investigation included groundwater monitoring wells, as well as wells down gradient of that lot.
He said there was one hit on a well where the groundwater lead level was modestly higher than
allowable which triggered the need to look at the neighborhood below, but there were wells
below that showed non-detect for lead and also for the VOCs. He said that’s why they are
monitoring.
He said that though there is some suspicion that the fill for the lot came from Ithaca Gun, there is
essentially a cap on it (from the pavement on the lot). He said the lead doesn’t seem to be
migrating. Monitoring wells have been in place at least 10 years.
Chair Lewis asked what happens if something shows up in Fall Creek monitoring areas once the
project is underway.
Bohn said that under the Brownfields Cleanup Program and the ERP program, the State is
responsible for off-site contamination. NYS has already determined that it is eligible for
SuperFund designation, and the monitoring is being done through the state SuperFund program.
As long as the City is maintaining their responsibilities through the site management plan, they
would not be responsible, and likewise for the developer through Brownfields.
Chair Lewis asked how the Gorge floor came under the jurisdiction of the EPA.
Bohn said that in 2002 they did an emergency removal after doing some site assessments. They
created a status where it was an emergency action.
Kovak said that on the project site, they will remove to the depth of the foundations and the
nature of the project is to effectively cap the site. He said the VOCs reside deep in the bedrock,
and the lead will be largely removed. The contamination predates the developer’s involvement,
and they will remediate it to the extent required by the DEC.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
15
The Board next did a preliminary review of Part III.
Jones asked about documentation of outcomes is available from the DEC.
Applicants said they would provide those materials.
Nicholas asked applicants to provide a clear synopsis of what’s been completed to-date.
Cornish said they need to provide a list of reference materials supporting the synopsis as well.
Glass asked if the smokestack would be preserved, said the possibility of selling to the City had
been examined.
Travis said contamination under the smokestack is a concern, and that the structure itself is a
public safety concern because it’s tempting for people to climb it.
Staff said more information would be needed.
Travis said that they investigated modifications to the design to make it more bird-friendly as well.
F. New Two-Family Dwellings, 815-817 N Aurora by Daniel Hirtler for Stavros
Stavropoulos. Continued Site Plan Review – No Action. The applicant proposes to
demolish an existing two-family residential structure and construct two new 1,290 SF
two-family dwellings on a 9,590 SF lot. The existing residential building is a legally
non-conforming building with a side setback deficiency (2.9 feet instead of the required
5 feet). The proposed redevelopment will include four parking spaces for four three-
bedroom apartments. The applicant is requesting the Board’s approval to use the
landscaping compliance method for parking arrangement. The project site is located in
the R-2b Zoning District and meets all applicable zoning lot and setback requirements.
This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance (“CEQRO”) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”).
Daniel Hirtler appeared in front of the Board to present three project schemes.
After some discussion, the Board expressed support for the design with a porch facing Aurora
Street and adding a garage in the rear.
G. Maguire Ford Lincoln Additions and Improvements, 370 Elmira Road by John
Snyder Architects PLLC. Preliminary & Final Approval with Conditions. The
applicant proposes to demolish a portion of the existing building and construct two
additions with updated exterior materials. The existing building is 18,500 GSF, with
2,265 GSF proposed for demolition. The new building will be 24,110 GSF. Site
improvements include incorporation of a new pedestrian walking path, and site
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
16
connections to Wegmans. Approximately 311 parking spaces are proposed to
accommodate customer, service parking, employee, and display parking. The project
site is located in the SW-2 Zone, is subject to the 2000 Southwest Design Guidelines,
and will require a zoning variance for a front yard that exceeds the maximum
permissible in the SW-2 district (34 feet maximum permitted, 69-feet 3-inch setback
proposed). This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance (“CEQRO”) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act
(“SEQRA”); however, it was treated as a Type I Action for the purpose of
environmental review, for which the Lead Agency issued a Negative Declaration on
December 18, 2018.
Architect John Snyder appeared to present revisions to the site plan proposed for the project.
The Board decided to grant a Preliminary and Final Approval of the project, on the condition the
BZA grant the required area variance for the front yard depth.
Adopted Resolution for Conditional Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval:
On a motion by Johnston, seconded by Petrina:
WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board for two new additions and site improvements for the car dealership at 504 S Meadow
Street by John Snyder Architects on behalf of the owner, Maguire Family Limited Partnership, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to demolish a portion of the existing building and construct two
additions with updated exterior materials. The existing building is 18,500 GSF, with 2,265 GSF proposed
for demolition. The new building will be 24,110 GSF. Site improvements include incorporation of a new
pedestrian walking path, and site connections to Wegmans. Approximately 311 parking spaces are proposed
to accommodate customer, service parking, employee, and display parking. The project site is located in
the SW-2 Zone, is subject to the 2000 Southwest Design Guidelines, and will require a zoning variance for
a front yard that exceeds the maximum permissible in the SW-2 district (34 feet maximum permitted, 69-
feet, 3-inch setback proposed), and
WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
(“CEQRO”) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”); however, it was treated as a
Type I Action for the purpose of environmental review, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility
for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on November 27, 2018 declare itself the Lead
Agency for the environmental review of the project, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted, and adjacent property owners notified in
accordance with Chapter 290-9 C. (1), (2), & (3) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on December 18,
2018, and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
17
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, the Tompkins
County Department of Planning and Sustainability, and other interested parties has been given the
opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any comments received to date on the aforementioned
have been considered, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has on December 18,
2018 reviewed and accepted as adequate: A Full Environmental Assessment Form (“FEAF”), Part 1,
submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3, prepared by Planning staff and amended by the Planning
Board; the following drawings: “Context Map,” “Zoning Map and Analysis,” “Survey,” and Perspective
View 1, dated December 5, 2018 and “Existing Conditions Plan,” “Demolition and Erosion Control Plan,”
“Layout & Materials Plan,” “Grading & Drainage Plan,” “Greenspace Plan”, “Planting Plan,” “Site
Details,” “Rendered Site Plan,” “East & West Rendered Elevations,” “North & South Re ndered
Elevations,” and Perspective Views 2 and 4; all revised and dated December 18, 2018, and prepared by
John Snyder Architects et. al., and,
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board did on December 18, 2018 make a Negative Declaration
of Environmental Significance for the proposed subdivision, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board did on January 22, 2019 review and accept as adequate the following new
and updated drawings: “Site Plan (L100)”, “FEMA Map Overlay ( L101)”, “Site Demolition and Erosion
Control Plan (L200), ” “Layout & Materials Plan (L300),” Greenspace Plan (L301)”, “Illustrative Master
Plan (L302),” “Grading & Drainage Plan (L400),” “Planting Plan (L500),” and “Site Details (L600),”all
dated 01/17/2019 and prepared by John Snyder Architects et. al., and
WHEREAS: In accordance with § 276-7C(4) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, 25% of the interior
ground area in motor vehicle parking areas shall be planting areas, the Board has determined for the
following reasons the applicant is exempt of this requirement.
i. The Southwest Area Design Guidelines previously identified a 12% of gross site as landscape
area distributed equally within parking and around buildings, which has been met by the
applicant, and
ii. The applicant has agreed to comply with the Board’s request to provide a pedestrian connection
from the project site to Wegmans, and
iii. The existing and proposed use of the site is for the display and sales of motor vehicles, which
requires more parking than other commercial uses, and
WHEREAS: the applicant has resolved all site plan issues, and the Board is therefore inclined, under this
special circumstance, to grant approval subject to the condition of the BZA granting the required variance
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: the Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval to the
project, subject to the following conditions:
iv. Granting of the required area variance by the BZA, and
v. Submission to the Planning Board of project details, including but not limited to lighting, signage,
exterior furnishings, bike racks, planting materials, etc., and
vi. Submission of a revised detail sheet and drawing showing internal plantings and soil vol umes in
accordance with § 276-7C(4) of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, and
vii. Bike racks must be installed before a certificate of occupancy is granted, and
viii. This site plan approval does not preclude any other permit that is required by City Code, such as
sign permits, tree permits, street permits, etc., and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
18
ix. Written approval from the City Fire Department the project meets all life safety access
requirements.
Moved by: Johnston
Seconded by: Petrina
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
H. Sketch Plan – 815-817 S. Aurora Street
Noah Demarest of Stream Collaborative and appeared to present a sketch plan for three
apartment buildings across the street from the Chainworks site.
I. Sketch Plan – W Seneca/W State & Corn Streets – Sketch Plan
Noah Demarest presented a plan for creating a large multi-use development on the site of
Wylie’s Dry Cleaning, a duplex across the street, and a second large, multi -use building
spanning the area between W. State and Seneca Streets in the vicinity of Franco’s Pizza and
Gimme Coffee.
7. Recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals
# 3113, Area Variance, 213 S. Fulton Street
The Planning Board does not identify any long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The minimum two story requirement was intended to improve/impact the street level experience.
This building is towards the rear of the property and not highly visible from the public way, and
therefore has no street presence.
# 3115, Area Variance, 109-111 Homestead Road
The Planning Board does not identify any long term planning impacts and supports this appeal as
it does is an existing deficiency of the existing structure. The Board supports the creation of
additional buildable lots within the City.
# 3116, Sign Variance, 661 Spencer Road
The Planning Board does not identify any long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The property is in two zoning districts with differing sign regulations and the sign variance is for
the childcare center in the residential zone. The size does not overpower the building and the signs
Approved by the Planning and Development Board February 26, 2019
19
are not illuminated – so there will be no nighttime impact. The Board feels that the size and
location of signage is needed for the use. The Board finds that the size and design of the signage
on the daycare building is appropriate on the edge of this residential zone.
8. Old/New Business
Board members discussed edits to the Draft Energy Memo being prepared to send to Common
Council.
9. Reports
A. Planning Board Chair
No report.
B. Board of Public Works Liaison
Blalock reported that the City is now actively trying to hire additional road and sewer crews
which should help with some of the maintenance issues.
He asked about the possibility of including a bus depot as a portion of the new Green Street
Garage redesign.
C. Director of Planning & Development
No report
10. Adjournment:
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Johnston, the meeting was adjourned at 11:10 p.m. .