HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2019-07-23Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
1
Planning and Development Board
Minutes
July 23, 2019
Board Members
Attending:
Robert Aaron Lewis, Chair; McKenzie Lauren Jones, Vice Chair;
Garrick Blalock, BPW Liaison; Jack Elliott; Mitch Glass; Matthew
Johnston; Emily Petrina
Board Members Absent:
None
Board Vacancies: None
Staff Attending: Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning, Division of Planning
and Economic Development
Anya Harris, Administrative Assistant, Division of Planning and
Economic Development
Applicants Attending: Signage – 106-112 N Tioga Street
Jennifer Tavares, President & CEO, Tompkins County COC
Subdivision and Construction of a Single-Family Home –
243 Cliff Street
Laurie Hart, property owner
David Nutter, property owner
Apartments – 203-211 Elm Street
Lynn Truame, Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services Inc.
Chain Works District Redevelopment
Jamie Gensel, Fagan Engineers
Arthaus (Affordable Housing) – 130 Cherry Street
Kate Chesebrough, Whitham Planning & Design
Molly Chiang, Vecino Group
Student Housing – 815 S. Aurora Street
Noah Demarest, Stream Collaborative
Charlie O’Connor, Modern Living Rentals
Todd Fox, Visum Development
Adam Fishel, Marathon Engineering
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
2
Visions Federal Credit Union – 410 Elmira Road
Mitch Leech, PW Campbell Contracting
Joe Liguori, Visions Federal Credit Union
Gary Winterkorn, Costich Engineering
Immaculate Conception Redevelopment (Mixed-Use Housing) –
320 W. Buffalo Street
Noah Demarest, Stream Collaborative
Lynn Truame, INHS
Carpenter Circle Project
Yamila Fournier, Whitham Planning and Design
Andrew Boewes, Park Grove Realty
Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
1. Agenda Review
Deputy Director Nicholas noted the addition to the agenda of consideration of Site Plan
Approval extension for apartments at 203-211 Elm Street.
2. Privilege of the Floor
Chair Lewis opened Privilege of the Floor.
Roger Dennis of 4 Hudson Place, spoke in opposition to the student apartment project at 815 S.
Aurora Street. He expressed concerns about the proposed landscaping being inadequate to
separate the property from the neighbors. He was also concerned about the way the backyard was
calculated to come to the zoning determination. He said the parking seems insufficient, and that
emergency access will be a problem, especially for Building C. He asked about how the owners
would limit access to the parking to residents only and expressed concerns about managing snow
removal on site. He also expressed concerns about the safety of the cell tower, and said that the
vibrations from excavation could also cause problems.
Cathy Crane of 108 Grandview Avenue said that the proposed project at 815 S. Aurora Street
is out of character with the neighborhood and incongruous with the stated goals of the
comprehensive plan. She characterized the proximity of the parking lot to the cell phone tower as
“illegal.” She expressed concerns about adverse environmental impacts from the project,
including stormwater runoff. She also said that the parking study seems insufficient. She also
submitted written comments, which are included as an addendum to these minutes
Jon Greene of 213 Mitchell Street, spoke in opposition to the BZA Appeal #3131. He said that
he and his wife first received notice of the project on Sunday of the previous week and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
3
questioned whether that constitutes sufficient notice, and he referenced written comments he had
submitted to the Planning Board in advance of the meeting, which are included as an addendum
to these minutes.
Drew Engelhart of 215 Mitchell Street, spoke about his proposal to relocate the driveway
which would require a variance from the BZA (Appeal #3131). He said they want to move the
driveway to the other side of the house, take down the garage in back, and create a fenced-in
back yard for their dogs. He said that the current driveway is steep and has poor visibility, and it
is hard to turn in and out of it. He also submitted comments in writing, which are included as an
addendum to these minutes.
Joel Harlan of 318 S Albany Street, asked a question about what constitutes “out of character”
with a neighborhood in Ithaca. He said both colleges seem “out of character” with the
neighborhoods surrounding them. He said that we should have what they have in Collegetown,
downtown because it looks more like a downtown. He also said we shouldn’t worry about traffic
impacts from the Morse Chainworks redevelopment because they used to have 5,000 employees
there.
Jill Greene of 313 Mitchell Street, spoke in opposition to the BZA appeal #3131. She said they
have put a lot of work into the interior and exterior of their home and are concerned about
damages to their plantings and to the historic retaining wall, as well as safety. She said they also
don’t want to see their views changed. She said the current driveway is a normal sized driveway
for the Belle Sherman neighborhood, but this proposal would mean half the front yard would be
paved. She also expressed concerns that it would not be two cars parking there, as they currently
see up to five cars in the driveway at any time.
Brian Grout of 809 S. Aurora Street, asked if any of the Board members have visited his
property to look at the view. He expressed concerns about the project at 815 S. Aurora Street
resulting in a loss of sunlight to his property. He also expressed environmental and safety
concerns. He also submitted comments in writing, which are included as an addendum to these
minutes.
John Maceli of 104 Crescent Place said he’s surprised at how few comments he’s heard
regarding traffic impacts from the proposed apartments at 815 S. Aurora Street. He said that as a
former Gadabout driver he was always on red alert when coming down 96B into the City. He
said the Coddington Road intersection where the road narrows from four lanes to two is
problematic, as is the Chain Works intersection. He said parking also presents problems for the
site.
Nick Lambrou of 405 Eddy Street spoke about the 232-238 Dryden Road project. He said that
he owns 320 Summit Avenue nearby and that there’s currently a lawsuit regarding the proposed
project site. He urged the Planning Board not to make any decisions until the lawsuit is resolved.
John Snyder spoke on behalf of the Dennis family in opposition to the 815 S. Aurora Street
project. He expressed concerns about the environmental impacts of removing 3,000 square yards
of stone from the project site. He said the hoe rams they will use can be incredibly loud and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
4
cause vibrations. He urge the Board to require seismic monitoring to ensure that neighboring
buildings are not impacted, and he asked where the material will be removed to. He also
submitted comments in writing, which are included as an addendum to these minutes.
James McCollum of 804 S. Aurora Street expressed concerns about the project proposed for
815 S. Aurora Street. He said there will be noise impacts for the neighbors. He also said that the
City drains will need to be adjusted to accommodate the water runoff. He also expressed
concerns about the poor visibility of traffic coming down the hill.
Susan Fritts of 106 Grandview Place said the 815 S. Aurora Street project has her concerned
about effects on the stability of her house. She also said that 67 parking spaces for 158 beds
seems inadequate and that the project seems out of character with the neighborhood.
Kim Engelhart of 215 Mitchell Street said that they have addressed their neighbors’ concerns
numerous times. She said that the alternatives proposed by one neighbor will not work. She also
spoke to the comment about the number of cars in the driveway, saying that they have adult
children and their partners living with them at present, but that is temporary while they are
saving for a down payment on a house.
Danny Eastman of 805 S. Aurora Street spoke in opposition to the 815 S. Aurora Street
project. He said that traffic is a concern, as most IC students drive. He also said that without
proper control over pedestrian walkways, residents there will cut through neighbors’ properties
and likely cause damage. He said that the buildings will be too close to the Grouts’ property to
be adequately screened by the proposed vegetation, and he expressed concerns about how they
will accomplish snow removal.
Garth Dennis of 202 Park Lane spoke about the 815 S. Aurora Street project. He said he
thought there was a 25% planting requirement for the parking lot, and he doesn’t see any
plantings in the lot.
There being no more members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed Privilege of
the Floor.
3. Approval of Minutes
On a motion by Johnston, seconded by Petrina, the June 25, 2019 minutes were approved
unanimously with no modifications.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
5
4. Design Review
A. Signage - Tompkins County History Center, 106-112 N Tioga Street (Bank Alley) by
Jennifer Tavares for the Tompkins Center for History & Culture. Design Review
for Proposed Signage.
Jennifer Tavares appeared in front of the Board to present the proposed sign package. She said that
14 organizations are co-located on-site at the new Tompkins Center for History and Culture, which
justifies in large part their need for some additional signage.
Deputy Director Nicholas reminded the Board that Design Review is a non-binding process
whereby the Board can make recommendations to make sign packages better conform to the City’s
design guidelines.
Overall, the Board expressed support for the proposed signage.
Johnston observed that this signage is similar in square footage to the CFCU signage across the
street, which did not receive strong support from the Board.
Glass asked the applicant if any of the signs would be lit.
Tavares said no.
Jones expressed support for the applicant using the universal symbol for information (which she
said sets this proposal apart from the previous one).
The Board did not recommend any changes to the proposed sign package.
5. Subdivision
A. Minor Subdivision and Construction of a Single Family Home, 243 Cliff Street,
Laurel Hart & Dave Nutter. Adoption of Preliminary and Final Subdivision
Approval. The applicant proposes to subdivide the .36 acre site into two parcels and build
one single-family home. The subdivision will result in Parcel A measuring .152 acres
(6,638 SF) with 66 feet of frontage on Cliff Street and containing an existing single family
home and garage, and Parcel B measuring .218 acres (9,484 SF) with 97 feet of frontage
on Park Road. The property is in the R-3a Zoning District, which has the following
minimum requirements: 5,000 SF lot size and 40 feet of street frontage for single-family
homes, 10-foot front yard, and 10- and five foot side yards and a rear yard of 20% or 50
feet, but not less than 20 feet. Access to the proposed home on Parcel B will be via a new
access drive connecting to Park Road. This has been determined to be a Type 1 Action
under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(2), and the
State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11).
Applicants Laurie Hart and David Nutter appeared in front of the Board to present updates to
their proposal. They explained that due to an existing deficiency (side yard setback) they were
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
6
informed by the Zoning Administrator that in order to complete their request for a subdivision,
they could A.) demolish a portion of their existing home to make the lot comply with zoning, B.)
make an appeal to the BZA to grant a variance for the existing deficiency, or C.) attempt to
purchase a strip of land from their neighbors to make the existing lot compliant with the side
yard requirements.
They opted to attempt to purchase a strip of land, and are in the process of executing a purchase
agreement with Incodema, their next door neighbor.
Deputy Director Nicholas then explained that the Board could grant approvals conditioned on the
applicants completing the purchase and submitting a revised subdivision plat showing the lot line
adjustment resulting in a lot that complies with the zoning setback requirements.
Adopted Resolution for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
On a motion by Glass, seconded by Johnston:
WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board for a subdivision, the construction of one single family home and associated site
improvements to be located at 243 Cliff Street, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to subdivide the .36 acre site into two parcels and build one single
family home. The originally proposed subdivision was to create Parcel A measuring .152 acres (6,638 SF)
with 66 feet of frontage on Cliff Street and containing an existing single family home and garage, and Parcel
B measuring .218 acres ( 9,484 SF) with 97 feet of frontage on Park Road. Access to the proposed home
on Parcel B will be via a new access drive connecting to Park Road, and
WHEREAS: the property is in the R-3a Zoning District, which has the following minimum requirements:
5,000 SF lot size and 40 ft of street frontage for single family homes, 10 foot front yard, and 10 and five
foot side yards and a rear yard of 20% or 50 feet, but not less than 20 feet, and
WHEREAS: due to a side yard deficiency caused by the placement of the existing home relative to the
north property line, the applicant has arranged purchase of a portion of the property to the north, and
WHEREAS: the new proposal is to consolidate a newly created Parcel C measuring .0333 acres with the
previously proposed Parcel A and the newly created Parcel D measuring .031 acres with the previously
proposed Parcel B. The resulting two parcels would be a combined Parcel A & C measuring .185 acres
(8,059 SF) with 80 feet of frontage on Cliff Street and containing an existing single family home and garage,
and the combined Parcel B & D measuring .249 acres (10,846 SF) with 97 feet of frontage on Park Road.
Access to the proposed home on Parcel B will be via a new access drive connecting to Park, and
WHEREAS: the creation and conveyance of Parcels C & D are considered a lot line adjustment in
accordance with the City Code Article 1, §290-1, Definitions - Any conveyance of real property between
adjacent landowners which does not result in additional buildable lots(s) nor create a zoning deficiency in
either lot. A lot line adjustment is not considered a subdivision for purposes of this chapter. A lot Line
adjustment is a ministerial action, and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 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 one additional
buildable lot, and
WHEREAS: due to the site’s adjacency to parkland, this has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(2), and the State Environmental
Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11) s, and
WHEREAS: that the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, did, on June 25, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency in
Environmental Review for the proposed project, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and
176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: a Public Hearing for the proposed action was held on June 25, 2019, and
WHEREAS: this Board, has, on July 23, 2019 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 drawings titled “Boundary and Topographic Map No. 237-239 & 243 Cliff Street, City of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York” dated 1/10/19 and “Subdivision Map No. 243 Cliff Street, City of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York” dated 4/18/19 and prepared by TG Miller PC, and other application
materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, Tompkins County
Department of Planning & Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to
comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered,
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did determine, as more clearly elaborated in
the FEAF, that the Applicant has mitigated any potentially significant impacts to the environment, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did, on June 25, 2019 determine the
proposed project would will result in no significant impact on the environment and did make a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance, and
WHEREAS: this Board, has, on July 23, 2019 reviewed and accepted as adequate: a revised survey titled
“Subdivision Map No. 243 Cliff Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York” with a revision date
of 7/16/19, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board has determined that the revised subdivision is consistent with the June 25,
2019 Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance and that no further environmental review is
required, and
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board recognizes that information received and reviewed for
this Subdivision indicates that, provided the aforementioned portion of the adjacent property is purchased
and consolidated with the proposed Parcels A & B, the resultant parcels will conform to area requirements
in the R-3a Zoning District, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning and Development Board does herby grant preliminary & final subdivision
approval to the project subject to the following conditions:
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
8
i. Submission of three (3) paper copies of the final approved plat showing new boundary line resulting
from purchased land, all having a raised seal and signature of a registered licensed surveyor, and
ii. Documentation of consolidation of purchased land.
Moved by: Glass
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. Construction of a Single Family Home, 243 Cliff Street, Laurel Hart & Dave Nutter.
Adoption of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval. The applicant proposes to
construct a single family home on a newly subdivide parcels (see above). Access to the
proposed home on Parcel B will be via a new access drive connecting to Park Road. This
has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act
(“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11 for which the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, made a
negative determination of Environmental Significance on June 25, 2019
Adopted Resolution for Final Site Plan Approval
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 subdivision, the construction of one single family home and associated site
improvements to be located at 243 Cliff Street, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to subdivide the .36 acre site into two parcels and build one single
family home and install associated site improvements. Access to the proposed home on Parcel B will be
via a new access drive connecting to Park Road. The property is in the R-3a Zoning District, and
WHEREAS: due to the site’s adjacency to parkland, this has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(2), and the State Environmental
Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11) s, and
WHEREAS: that the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for
approving and funding or carrying out the action, did, on June 25, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency in
Environmental Review for the proposed project, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and
176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: a Public Hearing for the proposed action was held on June 25, 2019, and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
9
WHEREAS: this Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, did, on June 25, 2019 review
and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant,
and Parts 2 and 3 prepared by Planning staff and drawings titled “Boundary and Topographic Map No. 237-
239 & 243 Cliff Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York” dated 1/10/19 and “Subdivision Map
No. 243 Cliff Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York” dated 7/16/19 and prepared by TG
Miller PC, and “Foundation Plan C1” dated 3/22/19, an annotated C-1 drawing showing stormwater
management practices and dated 6/12/19, and all prepared by SPEC Consulting, and three drawings
showing building elevations labeled EV1, EV2, EV3 & EV4 dated 5/24/19 and prepared by ICON Legacy
and other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did determine, as more clearly elaborated in
the FEAF, that the Applicant has mitigated any potentially significant impacts to the environment, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did, on June 25, 2019 determine the
proposed project would will result in no significant impact on the environment and did make a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning and Development Board does herby grant preliminary & final subdivision
approval to the project subject to the following conditions:
i. Submission of building materials, and
ii. Any future changes should be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval, and
iii. 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
Moved by: Petrina
Seconded by: Johnston
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
B. Elm St Apartments, 203-211 Elm Street, by Lynn Truame for Ithaca Neighborhood
Housing Services Inc. (INHS). Extension of Site Plan Approval. The proposed project
consists of the demolition of one single family home and two apartment buildings and the
construction of a single 12,585 SF apartment building with 13 dwelling units, parking for
six vehicles, and other associated site improvements. The Planning Board Approved this
project on October 24, 2017. The applicant is now requesting an extension.
Lynn Truame of INHS appeared in front of the Board and explained that they had recently
secured funding for the project, but she was not certain she could obtain the building permit
before their Site Plan Approval lapsed, so she is applying for the extension.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
10
Deputy Director Nicholas explained that per the ordinance, applicants have two years from the
date of their Site Plan approvals to begin work on the project, but the ordinance allows the Board
to grant an extension.
Adopted Resolution for an Extension of Site Plan Approval
On a motion by Blalock, seconded by Jones:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board Granted Final Site Plan Approval for
construction of an apartment building at 203-209 Elm St. by Lynn Truame for Ithaca Neighborhood
Housing Services (INHS) on October 24, 2017, and
WHEREAS: the proposed project consists of the demolition of one single family homes and two apartment
buildings and the construction of a single 12,585 SF apartment building with 13 dwelling units, parking for
six vehicles, and other associated site improvements. Due to the slope of the site, the building will have 2
stories facing Elm Street and three stories in the rear. The project requires the consolidation of three tax
parcels. The project is in the R-3a Zoning district and has received two area variances for relief from rear
yard setback and parking requirements, and
WHEREAS: this is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
(“CEQRO”) §176-4 (1)(h)[3], and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4 (11)
for which the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did, September 26, 2017, issues a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance, and
WHEREAS: the applicant is requesting an extension of the site plan approval for 12 months, now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does herby grant the requested
extension until October 2020.
Moved by: Blalock
Seconded by: Jones
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
C. Chain Works District Redevelopment Plan, 620 S. Aurora Street by Jamie Gensel
for David Lubin of Unchained Properties. Design Review & Discussion of
Outstanding Items for Final Approval Agency. The proposed Chain Works District
is located on a 95-acre parcel traversing the City and Town of Ithaca’s municipal
boundary. It is a proposed mixed-use development consisting of residential, office,
commercial, retail, restaurant/café, warehousing/distribution, manufacturing, and open
space. Completion of the Project is estimated to be over a seven-to-ten year period and
will involve renovation of existing structures as well as new structures to complete a
full buildout of 1,706,150 SF. The applicant applied for a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) for development of a mixed-use district, and site plan review for Phase 1 of the
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
11
development in 2014. The project also involves a Planned Development Zone (PDZ)
in the Town and subdivision. This project is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca
Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, §174- 6 (B)(1)(i),(j),(k),(n), (2), (6),
(7),(8)(a)and (b) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act §617.4 (b)(2),(3),
(5)(iii), (6)(i), and (iv), for which the Lead Agency issued a Positive Declaration of
Environmental Significance on October 28, 2014. The Lead Agency held subsequently
Public Scoping on November 18, 2014. The Lead Agency deemed the Draft GEIS
adequate for public review on March 8, 2016, held the public hearing on March 29,
2016 and accepted comments until May 10, 2016. The Lead Agency filed a Notice of
Completion for the FGEIS on March 5, 2019. The FGEIS includes the original DGEIS,
all comments and responses on the DGEIS, revised information resulting from those
comments, and updated information since the publication of the DEIS. The Board
adopted findings on March 26, 2019. The applicant is now proposing Phase 1 of the
project which entails the rehabilitation of buildings 21 and 24.
Jamie Gensel appeared in front of the Board to present project updates.
The Board and applicant reviewed the proposed Chainworks design guidelines and the resolution
for final approval of Phase 1, likely to be considered at the August meeting.
D. Arthaus, 130 Cherry Street by Whitham Planning & Design. Consideration of
Amended Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance & Consideration
of Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval. The applicant proposes an as-of-right
five-story building approximately 63 feet of height with galler y, office and affordable
residential space at 130 Cherry Street, on the east side of the Cayuga Inlet. The site is
currently the location of AJ Foreign Auto. The program includes ground floor covered
parking for approximately 52 vehicles, plus 7,000 SF of potential retail/office and
amenity space geared towards artists’ needs. Building levels two through five will
house approximately 120 studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom residential units. The
total building square footage is 97,500 SF. All residential rental units will be restricted
to renters earning 50 to 80 percent of the Area Median Income. The north edge of the
property will include a publicly-accessible path leading to an inlet overlook. This has
been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance § 176-4B(1)(k), (h)[2], (n), and the State Environmental Quality
Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4(b)(11).
Applicants Kate Chesebrough of Whitham Planning and Design, and Molly Chiang of the
Vecino Group appeared in front of the Board to report that the air quality tests they had done
indicated no “reportable” levels of metals (Cr, Cu, Fe, or Pb) in or near the proposed project site.
The tests performed had limits of detection (LODs) several orders of magnitude below OSHA’s
workplace exposure levels. All samples were reported as being below the LOD.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
12
The Board then reviewed and adopted a Negative Declaration resolution, amended to include the
new information before considering Final Site Plan Approval.
Adopted Resolution for an Amended Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Petrina:
WHEREAS: on April 23, 2019, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determined that the
proposed Arthaus Project at 130 Cherry St would 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 provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes an as-of-right five-story building approximately 63 feet in height with
gallery, office and affordable residential space at 130 Cherry Street, on the east side of the Cayuga Inlet.
The program includes ground floor covered parking for approximately 36 vehicles, plus 7,600 SF of
potential retail/office and amenity space geared towards artists’ needs. Building levels two through five
will house approximately 120 studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom residential units. The total building
square footage is 97,500 SF. The north edge of the property will include a publicly accessible path to the
Inlet, and
WHEREAS: this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §
176-4B(1)(k), (h)[2], (n), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4(b)(11),
both of which require environmental review, and
WHEREAS: in accordance with §176-7 E. of CEQR and §617.7(e) of SEQRA, the City of Ithaca Planning
and Development Board acting as Lead Agency has determined that (1) new information has been
discovered, and the Lead Agency has determined that no significant adverse impact will occur, and
WHEREAS: the Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has on June 25, 2019 reviewed
and accepted as adequate the new information consisting of: a revised Full Environmental Assessment Form
(FEAF), Parts 2 and 3, prepared by Planning staff and a letter and from Peter Wissoker dated May 28, 2019,
and supporting material, a response letter from J Kevin Cassil, Principal Scientist for Environmental Works,
INC. dated June 10, 2019, and a report titled Metals in Air Testing Area IH Ambient Air Sampling Delta
Project No. 2019.316.001, and other supporting materials, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby amend the Negative
Declaration issued on April 23, 2019 to include the above-mentioned information in the environmental
record, and be it further
RESOLVED: that based on all supporting documentation related to air quality, the City of Ithaca Planning
and Development Board, acting as Lead Agency, does hereby determine that the proposed project 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 provisions of Part 617 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act.
Moved by: Jones
Seconded by: Petrina
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
13
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
Adopted Resolution for an Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Petrina:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan
Review for a mixed-use development located at 130 Cherry Street, by Whitham Planning & Design,
applicant for owner, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes an as-of-right five-story building approximately 63 feet in height with
gallery, office and affordable residential space at 130 Cherry Street, on the east side of the Cayuga Inlet.
The program includes ground floor covered parking for approximately 36 vehicles, plus 7,600 SF of
potential retail/office and amenity space geared towards artists’ needs. Building levels two through five
will house approximately 120 studio, one-bedroom and two-bedroom residential units. The total building
square footage is 97,500 SF. The north edge of the property will include a publicly accessible path to the
Inlet, and
WHEREAS: this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §
176-4B(1)(k), (h)[2], (n), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) § 617.4(b)(11),
both of which require environmental review, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving
and funding or carrying out the Action, did, on February 26, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency for
environmental review of the Project, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and
176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: a Public Hearing for the proposed action was held on April 23, 2019, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, has on April 23, 2019
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form (“FEAF”), Part 1, submitted by
the applicant, and Parts 2 & 3, prepared by Planning staff and amended by the Planning Board, the following
drawings, “Existing Conditions (C2)”, “Demolition Plan (C3)”, “Site Plan (C4)”, “Grading Plan (C5)”,
“Utility Plan (C6)”, “Civil Details (C7 & C8)”, “E&S Plan (C9)” and “E&S Details (C10)”, dated 3/20/19
and prepared by Fagan Engineers; “1st Floor Plan (P1)” dated 04-02-19, and “2nd Floor Plan (P2)”, 3rd
Floor Plan (P3)”, 4th Floor Plan (P4)” and 5th Floor Plan (P5)” dated 01-17-19 and “1st Floor Accessibility”,
“Exterior Elevations (2 sheets)”, “Southeast Approach Perspective”, “Northeast Human Scale Perspective
(P6, P8 P9 & P11) ” and “Southeast Human Scale Perspective (P7)” all dated 4/15/19 and “Exterior
Elevations (P10)” dated 4/02/19 and all prepared by BW Architects and Engineers; “Site Plan (L-1.0)”
dated 3-11-19, and “Landscape Site Plan” – showing Construction Phases Timeline dated 3-06-19, and
other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, Tompkins County
Department of Planning & Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to
comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered,
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
14
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did determine, as more clearly elaborated in
the FEAF, that the Applicant has mitigated any potentially significant impacts to the environment, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did, on April 23, 2019 determine the
proposed project would will result in no significant impact on the environment and did make a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance, and
WHEREAS: in accordance with §176-7 E. of CEQR and §617.7(e) of SEQRA, the City of Ithaca Planning
and Development Board acting as Lead Agency determined that (1) new information had been discovered,
and the Lead Agency determined that no significant adverse impact will occur, and
WHEREAS: the Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, did on June 25, 2019 review and
accept as adequate the new information consisting of: a revised Full Environmental Assessment Form
(FEAF), Part 3, prepared by Planning staff and a letter and from Peter Wissoker dated May 28, 2019 and
supporting material and a response letter from J Kevin Cassil, Principal Scientist for Environmental Works,
INC. dated June 10, 2019 and a report titled Metals in Air Testing Area IH Ambient Air Sampling Delta
Project No. 2019.316.001, and other supporting materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did, on June 25, 2019 amend the Negative
Declaration issued on April 23, 2019 to include the above -mentioned information in the environmental
record, and
WHEREAS: this Board, did on July 23, 2019 review and accept as adequate the following new and revised
drawings: “1st Floor Plan (PR1)”, “Tower Floor Plan (PR2)”, Exterior Elevations (PR3 & PR4)’,
Perspectives (PR5-9) and “Proposed Signage (PR 10)” all dated 5/16/19 an prepared by BW Architects and
Engineers and other application materials, now, therefore be it
RESOLVED: that the Planning and Development Board does herby grant preliminary & final approval to
the project subject to the following conditions:
i. Submission to the Planning Board of project details, including but not limited to lighting, signage,
exterior furnishings, bike racks, etc., and
ii. Confirmation from the City Transportation Engineer that the driveway preserves lines -of-site and
that the sidewalk connects to City ROW on adjacent properties, and
iii. Submission to the Planning Board of a revised site plan showing any changes since 3/6/19, and
iv. Submission of building materials, and
v. Submission of a revised first floor plan showing a stripped accessible pathway through the parking
garage to the activity room, and
vi. Any future changes should be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval, and
vii. Bike racks must be installed before a certificate of occupancy is granted, and
viii. Execution of a easement agreement between the City and the property owner for portions of the
sidewalk on private property, and
ix. 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
Moved by: Jones
Seconded by: Johnston
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
15
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
E. Student Housing, 815 S. Aurora Street, by Stream Collaborative, Noah Demarest
for Project Sponsors Todd Fox & Charlie O’Connor. Determination of
Environmental Significance & Potential Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan
Approval. The project applicant proposes a new 66 unit student housing complex
comprised of three buildings constructed on hillside on the east side of Route 96B,
overlooking the proposed Chain Works District. The proposed buildings will contain
(2) one-bedroom units, (41) two-bedroom units, and (23) three-bedroom units.
Amenities will include a gym and media room, with access to an outdoor amenity space
on the first floor of building B, and a roof terrace and lounge on the fourth floor of
building B. The project shares the 2.85 acre site with an existing cell tower facility,
garages, an office and a one-bedroom apartment. Site improvements will include
walkways and curb cuts to be tied into a public sidewalk proposed by the Town of
Ithaca. Fire truck access is proposed at existing site entry at the south end of the
property, with a new fire lane to be constructed in front of the buildings A & B at the
northern end of the site. The project will include 67 parking spaces, as required by
zoning. The property is located in the R-3b Zoning District. This has been determined
to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(k), (n), (B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review
Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11).
Applicants Noah Demarest of Stream Collaborative, Adam Fishel of Marathon Engineering, and
project sponsor Charlie O’Connell appeared in front of the Board to present project updates.
Applicants submitted revised drawings showing changes to the “garage door” for accessing the
cisterns under building 1. They also provided cut sheets for the proposed materials.
Jones asked what percentage of the lot is greenspace.
Demarest did the calculations and said approximately 40 percent.
Jones asked if the parking lot is considered a congregation space.
Deputy Director Nicholas said no, not according to the zoning.
Board and staff then reviewed Part III of the FEAF.
Blalock asked about rock removal and if any noise or vibrations were anticipated.
Nicholas asked if they would be doing any monitoring.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
16
Fishel said that he thinks they will be able to manually break up and remove the shale and would
not be doing any blasting, so monitoring should not be necessary.
Adopted Resolution for Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Jones:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan
Review for a new 66-unit student housing complex comprised of three buildings, located at 815 South
Aurora Street by Stream Collaborative on behalf of the owner, and
WHEREAS: the project applicant proposes to construct a new 66 unit student housing complex comprised
of three buildings constructed on hillside on the east side of Route 96B, overlooking the proposed Chain
Works District. The proposed buildings will contain (2) one-bedroom units, (41) two-bedroom units, and
(23) three-bedroom units. Amenities will include a gym and media room, with access to an outdoor amenity
space on the first floor of building B, and a roof terrace and lounge on the fourth floor of building B. Th e
project shares the 2.85 acre site with an existing cell tower facility, garages, an office and a one-bedroom
apartment. Site improvements will include walkways and curb cuts to be tied into a public sidewalk
proposed by the Town of Ithaca. Fire truck access is proposed at existing site entry at the south end of the
property, with a new fire lane to be constructed in front of the buildings A & B at the northern end of the
site. The project will include 67 parking spaces, as required by zoning. The property is located in the R-3b
Zoning District, and
WHEREAS: this is Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
§176-4(B)(1)(k), (n), (B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11),
and
WHEREAS: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Tompkins County
Department of Health, and the New York State Department of Transportation, all potentially involved
agencies in this action have all consented to the Planning Board acting as Lead Agency for this project,
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving
and funding or carrying out the Action, did, on March 26, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency for
environmental review of the project, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, has on July 23, 2019
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form (“FEAF”), Part 1, submitted by
the applicant, and Parts 2 & 3, prepared by Planning staff and amended by the Planning Board, the following
drawings: “Topographic Map, No. 815 South Aurora Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York”
dated 9-26-16 and prepared by T.G. Miller P.C; “Demolition Plan (C1.0)”, “Site Plan (C2.0)”, “Site Plan
Future Access (C2.1) (showing bike parking)”, “Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan (C3.0 & 3.1)”,
“Lighting Plan (C5.0)”, “Rock Plan (C6.0)”, “Detail Sheet (C9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 & 9.5)”and “Driveway
Plan (C10.0, 10.1, 10.2 & 10.3) with a latest revision date of 5-21-19; “Truck Plan (C8.0 & 8.1)’ with a
latest revision date of 5-23-19 and “Utility Plan (C4.0)” with a latest revision date of 6-14-19 all prepared
by Marathon Engineering, and “Building A Unit Area Plans (A.00)”, “Building B Unit Area Plans (A.01)”,
“Building A Exterior Elevations (A2.00)”, “Building B Exterior Elevations (A2.01)”, “Building A Sections
(A3.01)” and “Building B Sections (A3.03)” dated 6-03-19 “Building C Unit Area Plans (A.00)”, “Building
C Exterior Elevations (A2.00)”, “Building B Exterior Elevations (A2.01)” and “Building C Sections
(A3.00)” dated 6-07-19, all prepared by Stream Collaborative et al; and “ Planting Plan (L103)’ dated 6 -
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
17
21-19; “site Sections (L301)’ dated 5-22-19, “Solar Study (A9.1, 9.2 & 9.3)”, Context Images (A9.4 & 9.5)
dated 5-09-19; “ 815 Aurora Updated Drawings from the Public Way Submitted June 19, 2019”, and
unattributed renderings showing the rooftop mechanicals layout and screening, hand dated 6-25-19, and
other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, Tompkins County
Department of Planning & Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to
comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered,
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, has determined, as more clearly elaborated
in the FEAF, that the applicant has mitigated any potentially significant impacts to the environment, now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determines the proposed project
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 provisions of Part 617 of
the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
Moved by: Petrina
Seconded by: Jones
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: Johnston
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
Jones requested approval from the City stormwater engineer as a condition of approval.
Adopted Resolution for Preliminary Site Plan Approval
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Petrina:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan
Review for a new 66-unit student housing complex comprised of three buildings, located at 815 South
Aurora Street by Stream Collaborative on behalf of the owner, and
WHEREAS: The project applicant proposes a new 66 unit student housing complex comprised of three
buildings constructed on hillside on the east side of Route 96B, overlooking the proposed Chain Works
District. The proposed buildings will contain (2) one-bedroom units, (41) two-bedroom units, and (23)
three-bedroom units. Amenities will include a gym and media room, with access to an outdoor amenity
space on the first floor of building B, and a roof terrace and lounge on the fourth floor of building B. The
project shares the 2.85 acre site with an existing cell tower facility, garages, an office and a one-bedroom
apartment. Site improvements will include walkways and curb cuts to be tied into a public sidewalk
proposed by the Town of Ithaca. Fire truck access is proposed at existing site entry at the south end of the
property, with a new fire lane to be constructed in front of the buildings A & B at the northern end of the
site. The project will include 67 parking spaces, as required by zoning. The property is located in the R-3b
Zoning District, and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
18
WHEREAS: this is Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
§176-4(B)(1)(k), (n), (B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11),
and
WHEREAS: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the Tompkins County
Department of Health, and the New York State Department of Transportation, all potentially involved
agencies in this action, all consented to the Planning Board acting as Lead Agency for this project, and,
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving
and funding or carrying out the Action, did, on March 26, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency for
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 a required Public Hearing on April 23, 2019, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, has on July 23, 2019
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form (“FEAF”), Part 1, submitted by
the applicant, and Parts 2 & 3, prepared by Planning staff and amended by the Planning Board, the following
drawings: “Topographic Map, No. 815 South Aurora Street, City of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York”
dated 9-26-16 and prepared by T.G. Miller P.C; “Demolition Plan (C1.0)”, “Site Plan (C2.0)”, “Site Plan
Future Access (C2.1) (showing bike parking)”, “Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan (C3.0 & 3.1)”,
“Lighting Plan (C5.0)”, “Rock Plan (C6.0)”, “Detail Sheet (C9.0, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4 & 9.5)”and “Driveway
Plan (C10.0, 10.1, 10.2 & 10.3) with a latest revision date of 5-21-19; “Truck Plan (C8.0 & 8.1)’ with a
latest revision date of 5-23-19 and “Utility Plan (C4.0)” with a latest revision date of 6-14-19 all prepared
by Marathon Engineering, and “Building A Unit Area Plans (A.00)”, “Building B Unit Area Plans (A.01)”,
“Building A Exterior Elevations (A2.00)”, “Building B Exterior Elevations (A2.01)”, “Building A Sections
(A3.01)” and “Building B Sections (A3.03)” dated 6-03-19 “Building C Unit Area Plans (A.00)”, “Building
C Exterior Elevations (A2.00)”, “Building B Exterior Elevations (A2.01)” and “Building C Sections
(A3.00)” dated 6-07-19, all prepared by Stream Collaborative et al; and “ Planting Plan (L103)’ dated 6 -
21-19; “site Sections (L301)’ dated 5-22-19, “Solar Study (A9.1, 9.2 & 9.3)”, Context Images (A9.4 & 9.5)
dated 5-09-19; “ 815 Aurora Updated Drawings from the Public Way Submitted June 19, 2019”, and
unattributed renderings showing the rooftop mechanicals layout and screening, hand dated 6-25-19, and
other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, Tompkins County
Department of Planning & Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to
comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered,
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, has determined, as more clearly elaborated
in the FEAF, that the proposed Project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment and
did issue a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance, and
RESOLVED: the Planning Board does herby grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval to the project. Such
approval applies to the major elements of the site layout including building placement and footprints,
location and design of major routes of site circulation pertaining to emergency access, personal, commercial
and service vehicles, and pedestrians and bikes, grading and demolition, and placement of major hardscape
features such as walls, patios, stairways, etc. Preliminary approval does not apply to the placement and
arrangement of building façade features, building and hardscape materials and colors, planting plans,
lighting, signage, site furnishings and other site details, and be it further
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
19
RESOLVED: Preliminary Approval for this project is subject to the following conditions:
Before Final Site Plan Approval:
i. Submission to the Planning Board of colored and keyed building elevations for all facades, and
ii. Submission to the Planning Board of documentation of the hours of operation of the exterior
amenity spaces, and
iii. Submission to the Planning Board of all site details including building materials and colors,
signage, lighting, exterior furnishings, paving, wall and railing materials and details, and
iv. Applicant to consider additional exterior bike racks, and
v. Submission to the Board of the layout of covered bike parking, and
vi. Acceptance of the SWPPP by the City Stormwater Management Officer, and
Before issuance of a Building Permit
i. Confirmation from the City Transportation Engineer that all concerns have been addressed, and
ii. Documentation of a binding commitment for winter sidewalk snow removal, and
iii. Documentation from Ithaca Fire Department and DOT that all transportation and emergency access
issues have been satisfied, and
Before Certificate of Occupancy
iv. Any future changes should be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval, and
v. Bike racks must be installed before a certificate of occupancy is granted, and
vi. Execution of a easement agreement between the City and the property owner for portions of the
sidewalk on private property, and
vii. 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
Moved by: Jones
Seconded by: Petrina
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
Jones requested staff draft a memo to Common Council informing them that the cell tower
regulations they have enacted are allowing for parking lots to be in use within the fall zone of the
tower.
F. Commercial Building – 3,450 SF, 410 Elmira Road by PW Campbell for Visions
Credit Union. Public Hearing & Determination of Environmental Significance.
The applicant proposes to construct a 3,450 SF commercial building with a drive-
through, parking area for 20 cars, a 940 SF amphitheater, and associated site
improvements on the 1.56 acre project site. The site is currently vacant. The project
site is in the SW-3 Zoning district and will likely require an area variance. The project
is subject to the Southwest Area Design Guidelines. This has been determined to be a
Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
20
§176-4(B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”)
§617.4(b)(11).
Mitch Leech of PW Campbell, Joe Ligouri of Visions Credit Union, and Garth Winterkorn of
Costich Engineering appeared in front of the Board to present project updates.
Public Hearing
On a motion by Johnston, seconded by Blalock, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing.
There being no members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed the Public Hearing
on a motion by Johnston, seconded by Petrina.
Adopted Resolution for a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
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 the construction of a 3,450 SF commercial building and associated site
improvements located at 410 Elmira Road by PW Campbell for Visions Credit Union, and
WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to construct a 3,450 SF commercial building with a drive-through,
parking area for 20 cars, a 940 SF amphitheater, and associated site improvements on the 1.56 acre project
site. The site is currently vacant. The project site is in the SW-3 Zoning district and requires area variances.
The project is subject to the Southwest Area Design Guidelines, and
WHEREAS: this has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(2), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”)
§617.4(b)(11),
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving
and funding or carrying out the Action, did, on June 25, 2019 declare itself Lead Agency for environmental
review of the project, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, has on July 23, 2019
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form (“FEAF”), Part 1, submitted by
the applicant, and Parts 2 & 3, prepared by Planning staff and the following drawings: “Existing Features
/Demolition Plan (CA100)”, “Site and Pavements Marking Plan (CA110)”, “Utility Plan (CA120)”,
“Grading and Erosion Control Plan (CA130)”, “Lighting Plan (EA100)” and all dated 7/10/19 and “Detail
Sheet (CA500 & 501)” dated 5/17/19 and “Landscape Plan (LA100)” dated 7/18/19 and “Exhibit A
(CE100)” dated 7/17/19 and all prepared by Costich Engineering, and “Proposed Building Elevations
(A201 202 & 203), and “Proposed Site Plan (A101)” dated 7/12/19 and “Proposed Amphitheater Floor Plan
(A102)” and “Proposed Amphitheater Elevations (A204)” dated 5/17/19 and all prepared by PW Campbell,
and other application materials, and
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
21
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, Tompkins County
Department of Planning & Sustainability, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to
comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered,
WHEREAS: the City Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, has determined, as more clearly elaborated
in the FEAF, that the applicant has mitigated any potentially significant impacts to the environment, now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determines the proposed project
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 provisions of Part 617 of
the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
Moved by: Johnston
Seconded by: Petrina
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
G. Immaculate Conception Redevelopment Project (Mixed Use Housing), 320 W
Buffalo Street by Lynn Truame for Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services.
Project Presentation & Public Hearing. The project involves the
renovation/conversion of the existing two-story former school building into a mixed-
use building, a new four-story apartment building, (2) three unit townhome buildings,
(1) four-unit townhome building, the renovation/conversion of a single family home
into a two-family home, and the renovation of the “Catholic Charities” Building. The
overall project will contain 79 dwelling units with 130 bedrooms. Total increase in
square footage on the site will be 49,389 SF, from 62,358 to 111,747. 9,274 sf of new
and existing space in the former school will be commercial use. Site development will
require demolition of one wing of the existing school building and one single-family
home. The project also includes greenspace areas, 48 surface parking spaces and other
site amenities. The property is located in the R-2b zoning district, however the
applicant has applied to Common Council for a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
This has been determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental
Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(k), (n), (B)(6), and the State Environmental
Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11).
Lynn Truame of INHS and Noah Demarest of Stream Collaborative appeared in front of the
Board to present project updates.
Public Hearing
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Elliott, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing.
There being no members of the public appearing to speak, Chair Lewis closed the Public Hearing
on a motion by Jones, seconded by Elliott.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
22
H. Carpenter Circle Project, Carpenter Park Road by Andrew Bodewes for Park
Grove Realty LLC. Project Presentation & Declaration of Lead Agency. The
project seeks to develop the existing 8.7-acre vacant parcel located adjacent to Route
13 and off of Third Street. The proposal includes a 64,000 SF medical office; two
mixed-use buildings, which will include ground-level retail/restaurant/commercial uses
of 23,810 SF, interior parking, 166 market-rate apartment units, and 4,652 SF of
amenity space; and a residential building offering +/-42 residential units for residents
earning 50-60% AMI. Site amenities will include public spaces for residents and
visitors, bike parking, transit access for TCAT, open green space, a playground, and
access to the Ithaca Community Gardens. The project includes 400 surface parking
spaces and an internal road network with sidewalks and street trees. The project sponsor
is seeking a Break in Access from NYS DOT to install an access road off of Rte 13.
The property is located in the Market District; however, the applicant has applied to
Common Council for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The project will require
subdivision to separate each program element. This has been determined to be a Type
1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176 -
4(B)(1)(d), (i), (k), and (B)(6) and (8)(a) and the State Environmental Quality Review
Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4(b)(11).
Yamila Fournier of Whitham Planning and Design and Andrew Bodewes of Park Grove Realty
appeared with other members of the project team to present to the Board. After the presentation,
the Board reviewed Part II of the FEAF.
I. Student Apartments, 232 Dryden Road by Todd Fox for Visum Development.
Project Presentation & Declaration of Lead Agency. The applicant is proposing to
construct a four-story building with eight apartments and associated site improvements.
The .884-acre project site contains two recently completed apartment buildings. Site
development requires the removal of existing landscaped areas and the removal,
relocation, or upgrading of water and sewer lines within Summit Avenue. Site
improvements will include retaining walls, landscaping, walkways, and exterior bike
racks. Parking for bikes will be provided inside the buildings. The project site is in the
CR-4 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and requires Design Review. As no
parking is proposed for the project, the applicant will submit a Transportation Demand
Management Plan (TDMP) for approval by the Planning Board in accordance with
district regulations. The project is likely to require area variances. This has been
determined to be an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality
Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) and
requires environmental review.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
23
Noah Demarest appeared in front of the Board. Due to the lateness of the hour, he suggested
foregoing any presentation that night, and the Board agreed.
Adopted Resolution for Declaration of Lead Agency
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Jones:
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: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan
Review for a new 8-unit apartment building located at 232 Dryden Road ( City of Ithaca Tax Parcel #64.-
2-18) by Todd Fox for Visum Development, and
WHEREAS: The applicant is proposing to construct a four-story building with eight apartments and
associated site improvements. The .884-acre project site contains two recently completed apartment
buildings. Site development requires the removal of existing landscaped areas and the removal, relocation,
or upgrading of water and sewer lines within Summit Avenue. Site improvements will include retaining
walls, landscaping, walkways, and exterior bike racks. Parking for bikes will be provided inside the
buildings. The project site is in the CR-4 Collegetown Area Form District (CAFD) and requires Design
Review. As no parking is proposed for the project, the applicant will submit a Transportation Demand
Management Plan (TDMP) for approval by the Planning Board in accordance with district regulations. The
project is likely to require area variances, and
WHEREAS: This has been determined to be an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental
Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) and requires
environmental review, now, therefore be it
RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, being that local agency which has
primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, does, by way of this resolution,
declare itself Lead Agency in Environmental Review for the proposed project.
Moved by: Petrina
Seconded by: Jones
In favor: Blalock, Elliott, Glass, Johnston, Jones, Lewis, Petrina
Against: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
Vacancies: None
7. Recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals
# 3129 – Area Variance, 825 Taber Street
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
24
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
The Board does not object to the side yard variance because the right of way remains large enough for a
future sidewalk and tree lawn. Although two trees will be removed, the appellant has agreed to replace
them. The Board also welcomes the expansion of existing businesses and investment in this area of the
City.
# 3130 – Area Variance, 205 Fairmount Avenue
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal. The
Board does not object to the side yard variance because the right of way remains large enough for a future
sidewalk and tree lawn. Although two trees will be removed, the appellant has agreed to replace them. The
Board also welcomes the expansion of existing businesses and investment in this area of the City.
# 3131 – Area Variance, 215 Mitchell Street
In general the Board does not support establishment or expansion of front yard parking in residential areas.
The Board also recognizes that sensitive design could make it acceptable in unique situations. This is a
relatively low density residential area that should maintain a residential character including adequate
greenspace, provisions for pedestrian and bike safety and design that reflects a human scale. The appellant
has provided drawings that show a very large parking area consuming about half of the front yard. The Board
sees neither a unique situation nor sensitive design in this plan and does not support it as proposed.
# 3132 – Area Variance, 315 Elmira Road
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
# 3133 – Sign Variance, 900 W. State Street
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal.
This is a unique site with three street facing sides and seems to require additional signage.
8. Old/New Business
PRC Meeting
After some discussion, the Board agreed to move the time of the PRC to 8:30 a.m. on Thursday
two weeks before Planning Board.
Inclusionary Zoning/Zoning to Promote Affordable Housing
The Board discussed options for holding a special meeting to discuss the issue. The fifth Tuesday
in October was identified as a possible time.
9. Reports
A. Planning Board Chair
Chair Lewis suggested that the Board draft a letter to the IURA supporting the larger of the two
“Plan B” options of the Green Street Garage replacement (the option with a larger number of
affordable housing units.)
The resulting letter is attached as an addendum to these minutes.
Approved by the Planning & Development Board on August 27, 2019
25
B. Board of Public Works Liaison
Blalock said that there is a great opportunity at this time (especially due to the proposed
Carpenter Park project) to address problems along Route 13 and identify improvements.
C. Director of Planning & Development
Deputy Director Nicholas had no report.
10. Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 10:32 p.m. by unanimous consent.
already struggling for momentum at that point. To that we will add downhill traffic
that will be reduced to one lane after the new turnoff to Coddington. All this in addition
to unclarified traffic flows in the lot and the inadequate number of space~efe.
For those of us who enjoyed the "natural" flow of water eeking through the shale
bedrock to our basements yesterday, this development also threatens to increase the
quantity of storm water runoff; another impact outlined in the Code's criteria for
determining significance. Though some might be impressed, even enamored with the
proposed drainage system pf retention ponds, berns, and Baracudas, the developers'
drainage plan offers NO adequate address to overland runoff on a site whose plan more
than doubles the parcel's impervious surface. It's just that the cause for this site's
14 11;e\t 11£_k~V
egregious impacts cannot be mitigated~problem is the hi~ which this site is
sited. A very steep hill which, in addition to these environmental impacts, magnifies the
project's density, its mass, its aggressive 40' wall proximity to its downhill neighbors.
You have all the reason in the world to reject this site Plan tonight. ~~u cannot
agree that these adverse impacts are significant, then we request that the Board make a
Negative Declaration tonight de:rp.anding that developers prepare and file a detailed
EIS. This process would bring the light of public scrutiny to the egregious d etails of this
development. We are not a small group of disgruntled neighbors, we represent at least
~:(1
500 South residents who have recorded their rejection of this development. I trust that
"' you will ultimately vote to deny approval to the site plan at 815 S Aurora Street.
Page 1 of 7
Jonathan & Jill Greene
213 Mitchell Street
Ithaca NY 14850
July 19, 2019
Gino Leonardi, Secretary
Board of Zoning Appeals
City of Ithaca
108 Green Street
Ithaca NY 14850
RE: Appeal #3131 for 215 Mitchell Street
Dear Mr. Leonardi,
Thank you again for your time last week to review the materials regarding the requested
variance for 215 Mitchell Street (Case #3131). We are the owners and residents of 213
Mitchell Street. As we discussed during our meeting, we DO NOT support the
proposed variance #3131 that applicants, Kim and Andrew Englehart are seeking.
While we were previously aware of the applicants’ general interest in pursuing a
driveway expansion, the letter received on Monday, July 15, 2019, was the first time
we and other neighbors were notified of the actual plan. And it wasn’t until Sunday, July
21, 2019, only days before the Planning Board hearing, when the applicants shared with
us a detailed plan that included engineering drawings. Thus, the applicants did not
adequately discuss the nature and potential impacts of the proposal prior to filing.
Common sense dictates the courtesy of a discussion and thorough review of the plans
with neighbors impacted by a project of this nature.
We understand the applicants may desire to have additional green space in their
backyard. While municipal code allows for consideration of variances for parking areas
greater than 25% of front lot area, applicants and the City are legally required to meet
specific evidentiary requirements before a variance may be granted [IMC Section 325-
40 C(4)(b)]. Among other factors, this determination must consider any “…detriment to
the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant.” As
shown below, it is clear that the applicants HAVE NOT, AND CANNOT, meet the
evidentiary burden for the City to grant the requested variance.
• An undesirable change will be produced in the character of the
neighborhood AND a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the
granting of the area variance.
o There is significant potential damage to mature landscaping and walkway on the
east side of our property during construction (Figure 1), which are directly
adjacent to the proposed location of the driveway. The applicant’s engineering
plan does not address these potential impacts, nor did our discussion with them
Page 2 of 7
leave us with any confidence that they would steward the construction in a
manner as to consider and mitigate potential damage to our property.
o Our discussion on Sunday July 21, 2019, indicated several inconsistencies
between the engineering plan and their interpretations of this plan. For example,
the engineering plan calls for removal of the existing retaining wall between our
properties. However, the applicant stated numerous times that this wall will
remain in-tact and a new wall will be constructed uphill.
o There is significant potential for post construction property damage from changes
in surface water drainage to our property which is downhill. Surprisingly, the
applicant was not aware that the engineering plan calls for the driveway’s main
drainage pipe to terminate in a location that could damage mature landscaping
on our property, as well as flood our basement (Figure 2).
o The proposed plan suggests an increase in overall green space on the
applicant’s lot. However, it does so at the expense of 5X reduction in front lot
green space, from 91% to 52%. This unnecessary increase in hardscape is
aesthetically negative for the neighborhood and runs contrary to the stated goals
of the City’s comprehensive plan (Plan Ithaca P.17 & Figure 3). Further, the
proposed site plan appears to be more of a parking area, as opposed to a
standard driveway. In fact, during our discussion on Sunday, July 21, 2019, the
applicant stated that the intent of the proposed design was to enable them to turn
their cars around to avoid backing out onto Mitchell Street. However, the
applicant’s current driveway enables them to do just that. Thus, the variance is
NOT required to improve safety conditions.
o By granting this type of request the City, may create an unwanted precedent that
results in similar requests by other residents living on busy streets.
o Proposed location of the applicant’s driveway actually reduces their sight lines to
Mitchell Street due to the presence of a Cherry Tree on our property and the cars
in our driveway (Figure 4).
• Applicant has NOT demonstrated that their stated objectives and benefits
cannot be met through feasible alternative means, other than an area variance.
o Applicant have NOT explored alternative site plans that include using part of their
backyard for a driveway and/or a minor expansion of their existing driveway in
the front in order to achieve their goals of increased green space.
o With a minor front yard expansion of the current driveway, the existing driveway
along the East side of the applicant’s house could be terminated at a reasonable
distance to the south to enable plenty of parking for the applicant AND the ability
to turn most of their backyard into greenspace. This feasible alternative could
include:
§ A Less costly resolution of the elevation difference between the
Englehart’s and Moore’s driveway and Mitchell Street.
§ Less obstructed sightlines between drivers on Mitchell Street and those
existing the driveway on 215 Mitchell Street
§ Maintain the character of Belle Sherman neighborhood with only a 16%
increase in parking area in the front of the applicant’s lot (Figure 3)
Page 3 of 7
o The owners of 217 Mitchell Street, Justin and Stephanie Moore, have expressed
a willingness to discuss a property conveyance that addresses the current
encroachment of the Englehart’s driveway onto their property. A walk of the site
indicates that there are in fact potential benefits to both property owners to
complete site work on the area that separates their properties.
§ The requested area variance is substantial and is NOT a “relatively minor”
deviation from the area requirements in question.
o A 5x increase in driveway area over the existing conditions and is nearly
double the percentage allowed by code is indeed substantial.
§ The proposed variance WOULD have an adverse effect or impact on the
physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district;
o A significant reduction in front lot green space is not consistent with the City
of Ithaca’s comprehensive plan (P.17) and will negatively impact the
character of the Belle Sherman neighborhood (Figure 3).
o Reduced sight lines from the proposed location of the parking area have the
potential for MORE vehicular accidents, as well as other negative interactions
with bicycles and pedestrians.
§ The alleged difficulty was self-created by the applicants
o Applicant purchased 215 Mitchell Street about 5 years ago with full
knowledge of the driveway and yard conditions.
o Applicant acknowledges that Mitchell Street is a busy street, but they have
provided no evidence how the proposed driveway plan will improve overall
pedestrian, bicycle, and automobile safety. In fact, the plan will have the
opposite impact as previously indicated.
o Dog ownership is not a reasonable basis for a variance. Moreover, applicant
has not provided any evidence that the proposed project is necessary to
adequately fence their backyard to contain their dogs safely.
The applicant has clearly not met the evidentiary requirements required under the law.
The negative impacts to the neighbors and the overall neighborhood of this proposed
project are clear. There are no net positive impacts to the character of neighborhood,
accessibility for handicap persons, historic preservation, and affordable housing. And
the applicant has not shown that there are no feasible alternate options that achieve the
desired result without seeking a variance. Because the applicant has clearly not met the
evidentiary requirements mandated by IMC Section 325-40 C(4)(d) and IMC Section
325-40 C(4)(d), the Board of Zoning Appeals cannot by law grant this variance request.
In closing, we want to state that since moving in to their house at 215 Mitchell Street,
the Englehart family have been kind and friendly neighbors and, therefore, a welcome
addition to the neighborhood. The Englehart’s overall goals can be achieved with a
minor expansion of the existing driveway that may not require a variance. This option
would meet their needs while balancing safety, maximizing green space, and
maintaining neighborhood aesthetics. If after a thorough engineering review of this or
Page 5 of 7
Figure 1: Mature Landscaping and Existing Retaining Wall Separating 213 & 215
Mitchell Street.
Figure 2: Approximate Location of Drainage Pipe Termination for Proposed
Project Above Mature Landscaping and Existing Retaining Wall, East (Uphill) Side
of Property Between 213 & 215 Mitchell Street.
View of Proposed Parking
Area (right) from Walkway on
213 Mitchell, Facing North
View of Proposed Parking
Area of 215 Mitchell from
front Yard of 213 Mitchell,
Facing South
View of Street Entry of
Proposed Parking Area from
front Yard of 213 Mitchell,
Facing North
Page 6 of 7
Figure 3: Typical Driveways in Belle Sherman Neighborhood on Mitchell Street
and Brandon Place
Typical Driveways in Belle Sherman Neighborhood on Mitchell Street & Brandon Place
Page 7 of 7
Figure 4: Sight Lines of Oncoming Downhill Traffic on Mitchell Street from
Existing Driveway of 215 Mitchell Street (left) and Proposed Driveway of 215
Mitchell Street (right)
However, we did meet with our neighbors (the Greenes and Justin Moore) on Sunday night to discuss a
proposal that they came up with. Both neighbors would prefer the driveway remain where it is, allow
stacked parking next to the house and the driveway be expanded to allow the cars to back up into the
front yard. This proposal would not be feasible as both the water and gas lines are on that side of the
house. I also demonstrated to them that the car doors barely open making access to the vehicles
challenging. Jon Greene suggested that the hill closest to 217 could be cut back and a retaining wall
erected on Justin Moore's property. It is my opinion that this was not an acceptable solution to Justin.
Keeping the entrance on this side would also require us to purchase a slither of land from Justin Moore
and his wife as we would still be intruding on their property line.
We have been discussing moving the driveway to the other side of the house with the Greenes since we
purchased the property. The previous owner had already obtained a Street Permit but it had expired
prior to our purchase . The Greenes told us their initial concern was the retaining wall located on our
property so we made sure we discussed keeping it with every contractor. They also stated early on that
we would have an issue with the ice on our driveway during the winter. We stated that our goal was to
have a permeable surface. Their third concern was for our safety in exiting the driveway. We have
mentioned to them in the past that we would be creating an area large enough for a vehicle to turn
around. As recently as two months ago, we walked the boundary line with the Greenes showing them
where the new retaining wall would be located. During our discussions with the Greenes on Sunday
night, it became apparent that the main reason they are against our driveway is that our cars would be
visible out their side kitchen window. They also stated that the noise of opening/closing car doors
would disturb their children sleeping. The 200 block of Mitchell Street borders Collegetown with heavily
populated student housing resulting in social gatherings with loud music into the early morning hours.
This generates far more noise than the two vehicles we plan on having parked in the new driveway.
We have invested a significant amount of money to remove 3 trees as well as have an engineer draw up
the plans all of which the Greenes knew about. We addressed each concern that the Greenes had
brought to us over the years of planning this driveway and at no point was it ever mentioned that they
did not want our cars parked there until we pressed the issue on Sunday.
Without the variance, a 16 foot wide driveway could still be located on the west side, it would just
create a safety hazard to backout onto a busy street, around a corner with a tree/vehicles potentially
obstructing our view.
I respectfully ask you to recommend our variance in the interest of not only our safety but also the other
drivers coming up the hill.
I
z 0 < OJ
-· OJ
::J n ro
OJ
OJ n
A -·
z
ro -· OQ
::::J
o-
0
l
v)'
\J
l
0 -o
0
l/")
OJ
7/31/2019 815 South Aurora Street
https://mail.cityofithaca.org/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAARIsSZ0EVsS4n2MKDkun3eBwDjpccsYj4cR7Vd9alRbaQ2AABDbVgtAADjpccsY…1/2
815 South Aurora Street
John Snyder [john@js-architects.com]
Sent:Tuesday, July 23, 2019 6:40 PM
To:Anya Harris; Lisa Nicholas
Anya,
Please see a ached le er in regards to the 815 South Aurora Street project.
My name is John Snyder from John Snyder Architects. I am an architect who has been before this board many mes over the years. I
am here on behalf of the Dennis Family, property owners who own property immediately adjacent to the proposed development of
815 South Aurora. The Dennis family has been a client of my office for many years and we have been before this board for some of
our projects, most notably the townhouse units we designed on Hudson Place.
The projects we have completed for the Dennis family are projects responding to the family rental needs of the community. Not
dormitory style small units. Recently we completed a nice fence project in front of the apartment units on Coddington working with
Dan Segal at the Plantsman Nursery. It is the plan to extend this design to other areas of the site and undertake renova ons to the
facades on the exis ng buildings giving them a fresh more contemporary look replacing the aged cedar and other dated parts of the
buildings.
I have been asked to come before you to comment on the environmental aspects of this project and to call to your a en on the
incredible effort that will be needed to remove over 3000 yards of stone from this site. The engineering report (in my opinion) does
not adequately address how this material will be removed only to state that this will be removed using standard construc on
processes. There is nothing standard with removing this quan ty of material.
This will require large equipment such as a hoe ram(s) which will be extremely noisy and bothersome to the residents nearby. The
hour of construc on are noted in the report as 7:30-7:30 pm. I would love to have coffee with any of you on a jobsite close to a hoe-
ram at waking or end of the day hours. When the geo-technical work was performed by the applicant elderly neighbors raised
concerns about vibra ons.
Addi onally it is not clear where all this material will be removed to. A trucking route was called out or crushing material on site
however please understand this is a significant construc on effort that will require careful a en on and coordina on with the
community.
I would urge you all to pay par cular a en on to the documenta on prepared by the applicant rela ve to this par cular
environmental concern.
Sincerely,
John Snyder, AIA
John Snyder, AIA, NCIDQ, LEED AP
President + Design Principal
John Snyder Architects, PLLC
700 Cascadilla Street. Suite 203| Ithaca, NY 14850 | 607.273.3565
www. johnsnyderarchitects.com
Please consider our environment before prin ng e-mails or a achments.
7/31/2019 815 South Aurora Street
https://mail.cityofithaca.org/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAARIsSZ0EVsS4n2MKDkun3eBwDjpccsYj4cR7Vd9alRbaQ2AABDbVgtAADjpccsY…2/2
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The informa on contained in this transmission, as well as any accompanying documents, cons tutes copyrighted, confiden al and/or legally privileged informa on
which is the property of JSA: John Snyder Architect, PLLC. This informa on is covered by the Copyright Law of the United States of America in par cular "architectural
work" under sec on 102 of the Copyright Act (Title 17 of the United States Code). The informa on is intended solely for the individual en ty named on this transmi al
sheet. If you are not the designated recipient, you are hereby no fied that any disclosure, copying, distribu on or taking any ac on in reliance on this informa on is
strictly prohibited. Use of this copyrighted material for any purpose (social media, company websites, and etc.) without wri en authoriza on from John Snyder
Architect, PLLC is strictly prohibited and will be enforced. Opinions, conclusions and the informa on in this message that do not relate to the official business of John
Snyder Architects shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by JSA. If you received this email in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from
any computer.
City of Ithaca Planning Board
To: Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency
From: Ithaca Planning & Development Board
Date: July 24, 2019
RE: Maximizing Affordable Housing at the Green St Garage Mixed Use Redevelopment Project
The Planning and Development Board supports the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency's work on the
Green Street Garage project. Affordable housing and conference space are both valuable
additions to Ithaca's downtown, and this project promises to deliver both. However, conference
centers are famously difficult to develop, and there is an open question as to what the project
looks like in the absence of a conference center.
In the event that the conference center component of the project does not move forward, the
Planning and Development Board unanimously encourages the IURA to maximize the amount
of affordable housing developed. While there are trade-offs concerning height and construction
impacts, this project presents a unique opportunity to supply affordable housing within walking
distance to jobs and services. This opportunity should be maximized.
Maximizing the amount of affordable housing is not only good planning: It is in keeping with the
mission of the IURA, which is charged with "...expanding access to quality affordable housing,
strengthening neighborhoods and the local economy..." The Planning and Development Board
supports this mission and this project, and looks forward to seeing both progress.