Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-05-20 Common Council Meeting AgendaOFFICIAL NOTICE OF MEETING A Regular meeting of the Common Council will be held on Wednesday, February 5, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York. Your attendance is requested. AGENDA 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: 2. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA: 3. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS: 4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: 5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 5.1 Reports of Municipal Officials 5.2 Special Presentation to Council Regarding the Conference Center 6. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL: 7. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR: 7.1 Announcement of the Availability of the 2020 Annual Disclosure Forms for The Mayor and Common Council 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: City Administration Committee: 8.1 Youth Bureau – New York State (NYS) Grant for Enclosure of Cass Park Rink Project - Resolution 8.2 Police Department – Request to Amend 2020 Budget for Grant – Resolution 8.3 Request to Fly Pan African Flag - Resolution 9. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 2020 Annual Common Council Concurrence that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board be Lead Agency in Environmental Review for Site Plan Review Projects for which the Common Council is an Involved Agency Resolution Common Council Meeting Agenda February 5, 2020 Page 2 9. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE (Con’t.): 9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens; and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Garde ns A. Designation of Lead Agency – Resolution B. Declaration of Environmental Significance – Resolution C. Adoption of Ordinance 9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” In Order to Establish Regulations for the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units A. Designation of Lead Agency – Resolution B. Determination of Environmental Significance – Resolution C. Adoption of Ordinance 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 City Apprenticeship Incentive Program for Public Works Contracts – Resolution 10.2 City Controller’s Report 11. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES: 12. NEW BUSINESS: 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 13.1 Alderperson Brock - A Resolution Authorizing Implementation and Funding in the First Instance 100% of the Federal Aid-Eligible Costs and Program-Aid Eligible Costs, of a Transportation Federal-Aid Project, and Appropriating Funds Therefore 13.2 Mayor Myrick - Community Conference Center Project - Commitment To Pursue A City Of Ithaca Hotel Occupancy Tax And Commitment To Provide A Shared Financial Guarantee With Tompkins County - Resolution 13.3 Alderperson Smith - Resolution to Approve Artwork for the Tompkins Giant No. 1 Proposal in Cass Park 13.4 Alderperson Murtagh - Common Council Resolution Opposing Relocation of Downtown Post Office 14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS: 14.1 Appointments to Public Safety and Information Commission – Resolution 15. REPORTS OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS: 16. REPORT OF CITY CLERK: Common Council Meeting Agenda February 5, 2020 Page 3 17. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY: 17.1 Proposed Executive Session to Discuss Pending Litigation 18. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS: 18.1 Approval of the January 8, 2020 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution 18.2 Approval of the January 15, 2020 Special Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution 19. ADJOURNMENT: If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 at least 48 hours before the meeting. Out of consideration for the health of other individuals, please refrain from using perfume/cologne and other scented personal care products at City of Ithaca meetings. Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. “This meeting can viewed via livestream on https://ithacany.viebit.com/” ______________________________ Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC City Clerk Date: January 31, 2020 8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS: City Administration Committee: 8.1 Youth Bureau – New York State (NYS) Grant for Enclosure of Cass Park Rink Project - Resolution RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca applied for financial assistance from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (“OPRHP”) under the Environmental Protection Fund Grant Program for the purpose of funding the Enclosure of Cass Park Rink project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to accept these grant funds in an amount not to exceed $523,269 for the project described in the grant application; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to agree to the terms and conditions of the Master Contract with OPRHP for such Enclosure of the Cass Park Rink project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to agree to the terms and conditions of any required deed of easement granted to OPRHP that affects title to real property owned by the municipality and improved by the grant funds, which may be a duly recorded public access covenant, conservation easement, and/or preservation covenant; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the governing body of the municipality delegates signing authority to execute the Master Contract and any required deed of easement to the individual(s) who hold(s) the following elected or appointed municipal office(s) or employment position title(s): Mayor and/or City Controller. Ithaca Youth Bureau 1 James L. Gibbs Drive Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone: (607) 273-8364 Fax: (607) 273-2817 “Building a foundation for a lifetime.” To: City Administration Committee From: Liz Klohmann, Director Re: Authorizing Resolution and Certification for EPF Grant Funding Date: 1/15/20 The Youth Bureau was awarded a matching grant in the amount of $523,269 from the Environmental Protection Fund Grant Program for Parks, Recreation, Preservation a nd Heritage (EPF) for the Enclosure of Cass Park Rink. To receive the award from a grant program administered by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (“OPRHP”), we must submit a duly adopted Resolution and Certification approving the City’s acceptance of grant funds and delegating signing authority to execute the New York State Master Contract for Grants and any deed of easement that may be required. 8.2 Police Department – Request to Amend 2020 Budget for Grant - Resolution WHEREAS, the Ithaca Police Department recently received a $10,000 grant from the Jason Sokoloff fund of the Jewish Commercial Fund; and WHEREAS, the grant is to be used for a ground control and arrest training room, which will improve the hands-on skill for the officers during arrest situations; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends the 2020 Authorized Police Department budget for said grant as follows: Increase Revenue Account: A3120-2705 Police Gifts and Donations $10,000 Increase Appropriation Account: A 3120-5435 Police Contracts $10,000 8.3 Request to Fly Pan-African Flag - Resolution WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission was tasked with developing a policy regarding the flying of advocacy and commemorative flags on City facilities; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission has reviewed an application to fly the Pan-African flag on City Hall during the month of February 2020 and has forwarded its recommendation of approval to Common Council for its consideration; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby approves the request to fly the Pan-African flag on City Hall during the month of February 2020. qt-siffir A Application for Flying of Advocacy Flag ({,t^ Advocate Name/Organization : (, Address r, ( I (-i (,'1tWebsite Contact Name (, Phone 0'\ Contact Email ti I ,L&,on u"t Phone: Flag requested to be flown What are the dates you would like the City to fly this From )4 1r h /)to Is there a specific location in the City where you would like to see this flag flying? -Yfies,C.koose from this list: _1pity Hall (flag dimensions 3' x 5') / Cass Park (flag dimensions 3' x 5') Stewart Park (flag dimensions A' x B') _ NO: The City may choose where it is most appropriate to fly this flag Would the like the flag returned after it is flown? YE,S: The advocate should make arrangements to collect the flag in a timely mamer. NO: The City can take possession of the flag so it can be flown again. NOTE: The advocate is responsible for determining whether the city already possesses the advocacy flag being requested. If the city does not possess it, the advocate is responsible one to the City Clerk. Date:IApplicant Signature: Please submit this form with an image (City Clerk's email). of the flag to Xxxxx@Cityoflthaca.org 9. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: 9.1 2020 Annual Common Council Concurrence that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board be Lead Agency in Environmental Review for Site Plan Review Projects for which the Common Council is an Involved Agency Resolution 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, State Law also specifies that when an agency proposes to directly undertake, fund or approve a Type I or Unlisted Action undergoing coordinated review with other involved agencies, it must notify them that a lead agency must be agreed upon within 30 calendar days of the date that the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) or draft EIS was transmitted to them; and WHEREAS, Projects submitted to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review and Approval, at times involve approvals or funding from Common Council, making Council an involved agency in environmental review; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the State Environmental Quality Review Law and the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, involved agencies are provided with project information and environmental forms for their review, as well as all environmental determinations; and WHEREAS, Common Council did consent to the Planning & Development Board acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for site plan review projects for which Common Council has been identified as an Involved Agency since 2015; and WHEREAS, in order to avoid delays in establishing a Lead Agency and to make the environmental review process more efficient, it is desirous to continue the agreement in which the Planning Board will assume Lead Agency status for such projects; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That Common Council does hereby consent to the Planning & Development Board acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for site plan review projects for which Common Council has been identified as an Involved Agency through December 31, 2020; and, be it further RESOLVED, That for any future project Common Council may withhold or withdraw its consent should it so desire. 1 | Page To: Common Council From: Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning Date: January 16, 2020 Re: 2020 Annual Council Concurrence that the Planning Board be Lead Agency in Environmental Review for Site Plan Review Projects for which the Common Council is an Involved Agency Annually, Common Council passes a resolution concurring that the Planning Board will be Lead Agency in environmental review for site plan review projects for which the Common Council is an involved agency. Examples of such projects include the Chainworks District Project, 210 Hancock Street, Carpenter Circle and 320 W Buffalo (the Immaculate Conception Site). As per the previously adopted resolutions, this arrangement ends on December 31 of each year and must be renewed annually. Please find enclosed a proposed resolution which extends this arrangement to December 31, 2020. The purpose of this arrangement is to make the environmental review process more efficient while, at the same time, keeping Council informed of its potential role in the environmental review of site plan projects. Environmental forms and project information would continue to be forwarded directly to Council members without the need to coordinate with a monthly meeting schedule. This prevents the difficulty of the 30-day deadline to establish Lead Agency but preserves Council ability to not concur should that be the preferred course of action for any future project. As an involved agency, Council could, if desired, provide input to the Lead Agency. All comments from involved agencies are addressed during the environmental review. The Planning Board also has this arrangement with the Board of Zoning Appeals. If you have any questions, please contact me at 274-6557 CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT JoAnn Cornish, Director Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org 9.2 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens A. Designation of Lead Agency – Resolution WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law; and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, which requires environmental review; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the proposal to amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens B. Declaration of Environmental Significance – Resolution WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering a proposal to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is an “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Parts 1 and 2, dated December 9, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the SEAF prepared by Planning Staff; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short Environmental Assessment Form, dated December 9, 2019; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. C. An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code, Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” to Clarify the Definition of Community Gardens, to Add a Definition for Neighborhood Gardens, and to Establish Guidelines for Special Permit Requirements for Neighborhood Gardens ORDINANCE NO. 2020-_ BE IT NOW ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca is hereby amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325, Section 325-3, Definitions, be amended to add a new definition of Neighborhood Garden and to amend the existing definition of Community Gardens, to read as follows: § 325-3. Definitions and word usage. [COMMUNITY OR ] NEIGHBORHOOD GARDEN. An area used by several individuals or families, operating in association with each other and under sponsorship by a nonprofit or voluntary organization , primarily for seasonal production of vegetables and other garden produce for home consumption by the individuals or families directly engaged in such production or for food donations. [Added 7-10- 1985 by Ord. No. 85-6] COMMUNITY GARDEN. A lot that is specifically intended to be gardened by a group of people, with membership open to the public, operating in association with each other and unde r sponsorship by a nonprofit or voluntary organization utilizing either individual or shared plots on private or public land. The land may produce fruit, vegetables, and other garden produce; culinary, medicinal, or beneficial plants; and/or ornamentals. It may also contain structures intended to support year round gardening, community events or education of the gardening process. Section 2. Chapter 325, Section 325-9, Special Permits, be amended to remove Community Gardens from this section, to read as follows: § 325-9 Special Permits B. Applicability. (1.) The uses listed under the district regulations in §325-8, District Regulations, which require a special permit from the Planning and Development Board are as follows: (m)Community or neighborhood [Community or neighborhood] Neighborhood gardens in all districts. F. Expiration and Renewals. (1.) Special permits do not expire, with the following exceptions: (d) A community or neighborhood garden special permit shall expire automatically if the site is not used as a community or neighborhood garden, as defined in §325-3, for one complete garden season. (1) If a community or neighborhood garden special permit should expire, a new application must be submitted pursuant to §325-9C of this chapter. Section 3. Chapter 325, Section 325-10, Additional Conditions for Special Permits, be amended to remove Community Gardens from this section, to read as follows: §325-10 Additional Conditions for Special Permits B. Applicability. All uses allowed by special permit shall be subject to the criteria set forth in §325-9, Special Permits. In addition, accessory apartments, bed-and-breakfast homes, bed-and-breakfast inns, [community or] [n[Neighborhood gardens, and schools and related uses shall be subject to additional conditions as set forth in §325-10C. C. Additional Conditions. (3) Community or nNeighborhood gardens. The following specific conditions shall be applicable to all special permits for community or nneighborhood gardens: (n) Approved special permits for community and neighborhood gardens shall be reviewed by the Director of Planning and Development or designee at least annually for compliance with the above noted conditions and other conditions specific to each permit’s approval. If, following such review or investigation of any complaint, the Director of Planning and Development or designee determines that a substantial violation exists, notice of such violation shall be mailed to the designated contact person, requiring that such violation be corrected within 15 days. If satisfactory correction is not made, the special permit may be revoked by the Director of Planning and Development or designee. (o) In consideration of the fact that such gardens may be of an interim nature, may occupy only a portion of a parcel and may be located on property unsuited for other uses permitted under this chapter, the district regulations specified for permitted uses under §325-8 of this chapter shall be superseded, where applicable, by the following regulations for community or neighborhood gardens: Section 4. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 5. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. To: Planning and Economic Development Committee From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner Date: January 17, 2020 RE: Proposal to Amend the Zoning Code Regarding Community Gardens The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding a proposal to make minor amendments to the zoning code regarding community gardens. At last month’s meeting the Committee discussed a proposal to amend the City Code in order to clarify the definition of community gardens, to add a new definition for neighborhood gardens, and to amend the guidelines for special permit requirements for neighborhood gardens. The Committee directed staff to circulate the proposal for comments. The proposed amendments were circulated and also submitted to the Tompkins County Department of Planning and Sustainability for review pursuant to §239-l-m of New York State General Municipal Law. The County’s response is enclosed. No other comments have been submitted to date. Also enclosed for your consideration is the completed Short Environmental Assessment Form, and draft resolutions for declaration of lead agency and determination of environmental significance. If you have questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact me at jenniferk@cityofithaca.org. CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT JoAnn Cornish, Director Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Page 1 of 3 Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 - Project Information Instructions for Completing Part 1 – Project Information. The applicant or project sponsor is responsible for the completion of Part 1. Responses become part of the application for approval or funding, are subject to public review, and may be subject to further verification. Complete Part 1 based on information currently available. If additional research or investigation would be needed to fully respond to any item, please answer as thoroughly as possible based on current information. Complete all items in Part 1. You may also provide any additional information which you believe will be needed by or useful to the lead agency; attach additional pages as necessary to supplement any item. Part 1 – Project and Sponsor Information Name of Action or Project: Project Location (describe, and attach a location map): Brief Description of Proposed Action: Name of Applicant or Sponsor: Telephone: E-Mail: Address: City/PO: State: Zip Code: 1.Does the proposed action only involve the legislative adoption of a plan, local law, ordinance, administrative rule, or regulation? If Yes, attach a narrative description of the intent of the proposed action and the environmental resources that may be affected in the municipality and proceed to Part 2. If no, continue to question 2. NO YES 2.Does the proposed action require a permit, approval or funding from any other government Agency? If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit or approval:NO YES 3.a. Total acreage of the site of the proposed action? __________ acres b. Total acreage to be physically disturbed? __________ acres c. Total acreage (project site and any contiguous properties) owned or controlled by the applicant or project sponsor? __________ acres 4.Check all land uses that occur on, are adjoining or near the proposed action: 5. Urban Rural (non-agriculture) Industrial Commercial Residential (suburban) Aquatic Other(Specify):□ Forest Agriculture □ Parkland SEAF 2019 Page 2 of 3 5.Is the proposed action, a.A permitted use under the zoning regulations? b.Consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan? NO YES N/A 6.Is the proposed action consistent with the predominant character of the existing built or natural landscape?NO YES 7.Is the site of the proposed action located in, or does it adjoin, a state listed Critical Environmental Area? If Yes, identify: ________________________________________________________________________________ NO YES 8.a. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels? b.Are public transportation services available at or near the site of the proposed action? c.Are any pedestrian accommodations or bicycle routes available on or near the site of the proposed action? NO YES 9.Does the proposed action meet or exceed the state energy code requirements? If the proposed action will exceed requirements, describe design features and technologies: _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ NO YES 10.Will the proposed action connect to an existing public/private water supply? If No, describe method for providing potable water: _________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ NO YES 11.Will the proposed action connect to existing wastewater utilities? If No, describe method for providing wastewater treatment: ______________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ NO YES archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory? NO YES 13. a. Does any portion of the site of the proposed action, or lands adjoining the proposed action, contain wetlands or other waterbodies regulated by a federal, state or local agency? b.Would the proposed action physically alter, or encroach into, any existing wetland or waterbody? If Yes, identify the wetland or waterbody and extent of alterations in square feet or acres: _____________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________ NO YES 12.a. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district which is listed on the National or State Register of Historic Places, or that has been determined by the Commissioner of the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places? b.Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for Page 1 of 2 Part 2 Answer all of the following questions in Part 2 using the information contained in Part 1 and other materials submitted by the project sponsor or otherwise available to the reviewer. When answering the questions the reviewer should be guided by the concept “Have my responses been reasonable considering the scale and context of the proposed action?” No, or small impact may occur Moderate to large impact may occur 1. Will the proposed action create a material conflict with an adopted land use plan or zoning regulations? 2. Will the proposed action result in a change in the use or intensity of use of land? 3. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of the existing community? 4. Will the proposed action have an impact on the environmental characteristics that caused the establishment of a Critical Environmental Area (CEA)? 5. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change in the existing level of traffic or affect existing infrastructure for mass transit, biking or walkway? 6. Will the proposed action cause an increase in the use of energy and it fails to incorporate reasonably available energy conservation or renewable energy opportunities? 7. Will the proposed action impact existing: a. public / private water supplies? b. public / private wastewater treatment utilities? 8. Will the proposed action impair the character or quality of important historic, archaeological, architectural or aesthetic resources? 9. Will the proposed action result in an adverse change to natural resources (e.g., wetlands, waterbodies, groundwater, air quality, flora and fauna)? 10. Will the proposed action result in an increase in the potential for erosion, flooding or drainage problems? 11. Will the proposed action create a hazard to environmental resources or human health? SEAF 2019 Proposal to Amend the Zoning Code R 12/19/2019 PRINT FORM Svante Myrick Mayor 9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” In Order to Establish Regulations for the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units A. Declaration of Lead Agency – Resolution WHEREAS, State Law and Section 176-6 of the City Code require that a lead agency be established for conducting environmental review of projects in accordance with local and state environmental law; and WHEREAS, State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the lead agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action; and WHEREAS, the proposed zoning amendment is a “Unlisted” Action pursuant to the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) Ordinance, which requires environmental review; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the establishment of regulations regarding accessory dwelling units. B. Determination of Environmental Significance – Resolution WHEREAS, demand for additional housing development has resulted in an increase in residential infill development within neighborhoods in the City; and WHEREAS, the City would like to allow for appropriate levels of residential development of accessory dwelling units, while also protecting neighborhoods from development that is out of scale and character with the surrounding neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, in August 2019, staff held a community conversation on accessory dwelling units and solicited comments from the public; and WHEREAS, staff evaluated all of the public feedback and spent several months evaluating options to regulate accessory dwelling units, while taking into consideration public concerns; and WHEREAS, staff has drafted an ordinance that will establish guidelines for developing accessory dwelling units in the R-1 and R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 zoning districts; and WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted, including the preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), dated November 22, 2019; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is a “Unlisted” Action under the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca, acting as lead agency, has reviewed the FEAF prepared by planning staff; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby adopts as its own the findings and conclusions more fully set forth on the Full Environmental Assessment Form, dated November 22, 2019; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Common Council, as lead agency in this matter, hereby determines that the proposed action at issue will not have a significant effect on the environment, and that further environmental review is unnecessary; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution constitutes notice of this negative declaration and that the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with any attachments, in the City Clerk’s Office, and forward the same to any other parties as required by law. 9.3 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 325 Entitled “Zoning” In Order to Establish Regulations for the Development of Accessory Dwelling Units WHEREAS, in 2017, the City established the South Hill Overlay District (SHOD) in response to concerns that were raised by the South Hill neighborhood rapid in-fill development of multiple primary structures (in the neighborhood and the impacts on both the aesthetic qualities and the character of the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the SHOD was intended to be a temporary measure to prevent further development until the City could establish regulations for this type of infill (ADUs); and WHEREAS, in the interim, similar concerns about development pressure were raised throughout the City; and WHEREAS, City staff were directed to research how infill (ADUs) development is regulated in other municipalities; and WHEREAS, Planning Staff spent several months researching other communities and developing proposals to encourage the development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that would protect neighborhoods while allowing for housing options that could provide property owners with additional income; and WHEREAS, on August 29, 2019, a community meeting was held, with approximately 70 people in attendance, who offered opinions on options to allow the development of appropriate ADUs; and WHEREAS, staff has considered feedback from the public, the Common Council, and other communities and has developed a set of regulations allowing property owners to develop ADUs, where appropriate, and the means to protect neighborhoods from the negative impacts of over development; now, therefore ORDINANCE NO. 2020-___ BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca that Chapter 325 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled, “Zoning”, be amended as follows: Section 1. Chapter 325-3B of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, entitled “Definitions and Word Usage”, is hereby amended to add the following new definitions: Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)— A second dwelling unit located in the rear or side yard on a lot with any one-family dwelling in R-1 and CR-1 zoning districts, or in any one-family dwelling or two-family dwelling in R-2 and CR-2 zoning districts (see Section 2F (3)(d). The second unit is created secondary to, and is always smaller than the primary one-family dwelling. The unit includes its own independent habitable space including provision for sleeping, cooking, and sanitation, and is designed to be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant, independent of the primary dwelling unit. 1. Attached Accessory Dwelling Unit (AADU) – A room or set of rooms, basement, or any other space that is located within a primary structure, but is established as a separate dwelling unit. AADUs may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. 2. Detached Accessory Dwelling Unit (DADU) – A separate dwelling unit that is constructed on a single family lot that is not connected to the primary structure. DADUs may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. 3. Out Building Conversion - A separate dwelling unit that is converted from an existing garage, carriage house, or other accessory structure. Out Building Conversion’s may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. Contiguous Green Space - Green Space on a lot that is uninterrupted by structures or paved surfaces. Contiguous green space must be at least 15’ in width. Section 2. Chapter 325-8 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code entitled “District Regulations”, is hereby amended to add a new section F, entitled “Additional Restrictions in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts”, to read as follows: F. Additional Restrictions in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts. (1) Intent. This section authorizes the installation of accessory dwelling units in the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 districts. The purpose and intent of permitting accessory dwelling units is: (a) To provide homeowners, especially those of low and moderate income, with a means of obtaining through rental income, companionship, security and services and thereby to enable them to stay more comfortably in homes and neighborhoods they might be forced to leave. (b) To add inexpensive rental units to the housing stock to meet the needs of smaller households, both young and old. (c) To make housing units available to low and moderate income households who might otherwise have difficulty finding homes within the City. (d) To develop housing units in family neighborhoods that are appropriate for households at a variety of stages in the lifecycle, thereby lessening fluctuations in neighborhood demand for services. (e) To preserve and allow more efficient use of the City’s existing stock of dwellings while ensuring healthy and safe living environments. (f) To allow for the creation of additional housing, while minimizing impacts to surrounding properties. (2) General Restrictions. (a) In the R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 Zoning Districts, only one primary structure is permitted as of right. (3) Additional Requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (a) All Accessory Dwelling Units that have any exterior changes to existing structures or any new ADUs that are new construction are subject to site plan review. (b) Number of Accessory Dwelling Units. Only one accessory dwelling unit, attached or detached, is permitted on a lot. (c) Parking. No additional parking is required for accessory dwelling units. (d) Location. Accessory Dwelling Units may be located on any lot in the CR-1 or R-1 zoning district that contains a one-family dwelling and on any lot in the CR-2 and R-2 zoning district that contains a one- or two-family dwelling. ADUs are permitted in any side or rear yard but not in the required front yard. Corner Lots shall be considered to have two front yards. (e) Additional Requirements for Detached ADUs. [1] Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, Setbacks for ADUs are consistent with existing zoning setbacks for primary structures [2] A DADU may not be placed less than 5 feet from the primary structure. [3] ADUs are not subject to the maximum lot coverage requirement, however, properties with ADUs are required to maintain 35% contiguous green space. . (f) Number of Residents. Accessory Dwelling Units may be occupied by an individual or a family, plus not more than one unrelated occupant. (g) Appearance of Accessory Dwelling Units. Accessory Dwelling Units should not disrupt the overall architectural character of the neighborhood. A similar architectural style and roof pitch should connect the primary structure to the accessory dwelling unit. [1] Location of Entrances. New or additional front entrances are discouraged, but in any event must be compatible with the architectural style of the existing structure. Detached accessory dwelling units (DADU) are exempt from this standard. (h) Size Allowances. [1] Detached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of a DADU may be no more than 75% of the habitable area of the primary structure or 800 square feet, whichever is less. [2] Attached Accessory Dwelling Units- The maximum size of an AADU that is added onto the existing structure may be no more than 33.3% of the habitable area of the primary structure. AADUs which do not change the exterior appearance of the primary structure have no maximum size limit. [3] Out Building Conversion- Outbuilding conversions are exempt from all area requirements, including maximum lot coverage requirements, minimum green space requirements, and any setback requirements. Section 3. Chapter 325-10 of the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca, entitled “Accessory Apartments”, is hereby deleted in its entirety. Section 4. The City Planning and Development Board, the City Clerk and the Planning Department shall amend the district regulations chart in accordance with the amendments made herewith. Section 5. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of this local law. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this local law is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion. Section 6. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as provided in the Ithaca City Charter. To: Common Council From: Jennifer Kusznir, Senior Planner Alexander Phillips, Planner Date: January 30, 2020 Re: Establishment of Regulations for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) The purpose of this memo is to provide information on a proposal to establish regulations for developing ADUs in the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts. Concerns were raised regarding infill housing development in the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts that is not in character with the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Department has worked over the past year evaluating the issues and researching different options, has held public discussions and has been at the Planning Committee repeatedly in order to develop the enclosed draft ordinance. In November of 2019, staff was directed to circulate a draft ordinance for comments. At the December Planning Committee meeting staff presented a summary of comments received, many of which had been received the day of the meeting, including a letter from Tompkins County Planning Commissioner that stated that the ordinance as written would require a super majority vote unless amended. Staff also presented an updated ordinance that contained recommended changes based on the comments that had been received. At the meeting the proposal was discussed, but ultimately tabled because of the late arrival of the comments and the need to clarify what was being requested by the County. After the meeting staff corresponded with the County to provide additional information and the updated draft ordinance that contained the recommended staff changes. This version of the ordinance that was considered and voted on by the Planning Committee meeting at their January meeting was reviewed by the County, however, it contained some changes that were not re-circulated. These changes were made in response to the comments that were received. Generally, our practice is to recirculate draft ordinances if there are significant changes made. The changes in this draft ordinance include the following:  Language was added to provide the minimum width for contiguous greenspace of 15’ and new diagrams were added. Staff feels that these changes are not significant changes, since they were only meant clarify the language that was already circulated.  Language was added that states that there is no maximum size for an attached accessory dwelling unit (AADU), if it doesn't change the exterior of the structure. This language was added in response to the Planning Board recommendations. This is a potentially significant change that can be removed or can be recirculated for comment.  The Planning Committee voted to change the ordinance to include language allowing multiple primary structure by special permit. This is a potentially significant change that was added in response to the County’s request. If the Council decides to remove this language the ordinance will require a super majority vote in order to be adopted. An environmental review of this action has been completed. Draft resolutions for Lead Agency, and environmental significance are enclosed. If you have any concerns or questions regarding any of this information, feel free to contact us at 274-6410. CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT JoAnn Cornish, Director Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org 10. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE: 10.1 City Apprenticeship Incentive Program for Public Works Contracts – Resolution WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca, from time to time, undertakes construction contracts which involve the construction, reconstruction, improvement, or rehabilitation of buildings, facilities, and structures in the City of Ithaca; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca is making considerable efforts to increase the number of jobs in the city, and is consistently advocating for quality employment opportunities for city residents, in particular young people in the city; and WHEREAS, maintaining a qualified and skilled labor force is essential to a healthy and dynamic local economy; and WHEREAS, per Common Council resolution of January 2005, the City previously required all contracts in excess of $500,000 to include apprenticeship programs, repealing that requirement in December 2010 due to the “substantial expense incurred by the City … without a showing that this extra expense resulted in the local job creation that was originally intended; internal administrative problems associated with the selection process for qualified bidders …”; and WHEREAS, the City has successfully implemented and/or funded other workforce development programs such as the Hospitality Employment Training Program, the Finger Lakes ReUse Job Skills Training program, and an internship program in the City’s Department of Public Works, each of which have successfully developed a talent pool of benefit to the City; and WHEREAS, the Common Council is committed to providing such additional funding to pending, already-funded 2020 projects as may be necessary to cover the expenses of this Program’s cost arising from those projects; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby establish the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program as follows: 1. Any contractor that is awarded a contract by the City of Ithaca, and any subcontractors to that contractor, shall thereafter be eligible to participate in the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program for purposes of fulfillment of the awarded contract, thereby receiving: a. An incentive of $5 per hour for each hour worked by an eligible apprentice on the awarded contract, subject to a minimum of 100- hours of apprentice work on the project per Program-participating contractor or subcontractor, b. up to an aggregate project-wide maximum of 2% of the total contract amount. 2. In order to qualify under the preceding paragraph, the contractor and/or subcontractors must: a. reasonably demonstrate as part of its application to the Program that the eligible apprentices to be employed on the project are either (or both) i residents of the City of Ithaca, or ii residents of Tompkins County who also either satisfy the definition of “minority group member” in New York State Executive Law Section 310(8) or are women (or both), and b. maintain or participate in a bona fide New York State Apprentice Program approved by, and with a graduation rate of at least thirty percent as determined by, the Division of Apprentice Training of the Department of Labor for each apprenticable trade or occupation represented in their workforce and must abide by the apprentice to journeyman ratio for each trade prescribed therein in the performance of the contract, ; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council directs that the City Apprenticeship Incentive Program be funded by the department responsible for funding of each associated contracts, except that where the City has agreed to bid out a contract for an outside entity (generally, a non-profit organization), which outside entity is in fact paying the cost of that contract in part or whole, the outside entity shall also be responsible for reimbursing the City for the out-of-pocket costs of the Program incurred by the City in connection with that contract; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the department responsible for accepting the certified payroll of the contractor pursuant to any given public works contract shall also be the department responsible for administering the Program with respect to that project, in accord with a Program Participation Agreement, including by tracking the per-project costs of this Program; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Engineering Office of the Department of Public Works together with the City Attorney’s Office and the Controller’s Office shall prepare a template Program Participation Agreement for use under this Program, containing recommended terms not inconsistent with this resolution; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this resolution shall take effect 90 days after passage. 13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS: 13.1 Alderperson Brock - A Resolution Authorizing Implementation and Funding in the First Instance 100% of the Federal Aid-Eligible Costs and Program-Aid Eligible Costs, of a Transportation Federal-Aid Project, and Appropriating Funds Therefore WHEREAS, a Project for the Hector Street Complete Street, P.I.N. 395063 (the “Project”) is eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S. Code, as amended, that calls for the apportionment of the costs of such program to be borne at the ratio of 80% Federal funds and 20% non-federal funds; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca desires to advance the Project by making a commitment of 100% of the non-federal share of the costs of all phases of the Project; and WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017, Common Council authorized Capital Project #846 for this Project in the amount of $331,800 for preliminary engineering/final design of the project, with the understanding that the City share would be $66,360 to be covered by Sidewalk Improvement District #5; and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works, acting as the lead agency, declared on May 15, 2018, that the project would not have a significant negative environmental impact in accordance with the City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act; and WHEREAS, on August 7, 2020, Common Council authorized an amendment to CP #846, Hector Street Complete Street, to bring the total authorized budget to $2,500,000, which included $1,400,000 in federal aid, and $1,100,000 in non-federal aid, which was comprised of City general fund borrowing, Sidewalk Improvement District (SID) 5 funding (both operating and financed), NYS Consolidated Highway Improvement Program (CHIPs), and Town of Ithaca funding; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2020, construction bids were opened and the qualified, low- bidder’s price was $2,264,689, which, in addition to Engineering and Construction Inspection costs, requires a total project budget of $2,740,000 in order to award the construction contract, a difference of $240,000 from the authorized budget; and WHEREAS, staff has identified the following additional funding sources that can be applied against this $240,000 difference, namely, an additional $50,000 from Town of Ithaca and approximately $70,000 in additional fund balance from SID 5, leaving a gap of $120,000 to be filled; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby approves the above-subject project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Common Council hereby authorizes the City of Ithaca to pay in the first instance 100% of the federal and non-federal share of the cost of all phases of work for the Project or portions thereof; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends Capital Project #846 in the amount of $240,000 for a total project authorization of $2,740,000, of which addition it is expected that $120,000 will be General Fund borrowing in addition to the $350,000 previously authorized in the 2019 Capital Budget; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the sum of $2,740,000 is hereby appropriated from the issuance of serial bonds and made available to cover the cost of participation in the above phase of the Project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this project be undertaken with the understanding that the final cost of the Project to the City of Ithaca General Fund will be roughly 17% of said portion, currently estimated at $470,000 of the $2,740,000 authorized for this portion of the project, in monies and in-kind services as managed by the Superintendent of Public Works and monitored by the City Controller, with the balance of other funds currently estimated as follows:  $1,400,000 in federal-aid  $360,000 approved via 2019 SID #5 capital project cost  $205,000 approved via SID #5 (Fund Balance for Hector St)  $209,000 from CHIPS reimbursement  $70,000 Town of Ithaca for share of work in Town  $26,000 from 2020 SID #5 Work Plan ; and, be it further RESOLVED, That in the event the full federal and non-federal share costs of the project exceeds the amount appropriated above, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca shall convene as soon as possible to appropriate said excess amount immediately upon the notification by the NYSDOT thereof; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the Mayor of the City of Ithaca be and is hereby authorized to execute all necessary Agreements and the Superintendent of Public Works is hereby authorized to execute all necessary certifications or reimbursement requests for Federal Aid on behalf of the City of Ithaca with the New York State Department of Transportation in connection with the advancement or approval of the Project and providing for the administration of the Project and the municipality’s first instance funding of Project costs and permanent funding of the local share of federal-aid and state-aid eligible Project costs and all Project costs within appropriations therefore that are not so eligible; and, be it further RESOLVED, That a certified copy of this resolution be filed with the New York State Commissioner of Transportation by attaching it to any necessary Agreement in connection with the Project; and, be it further RESOLVED, That this Resolution shall take effect immediately. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-5690 Office of City Engineer Telephone: 607 / 274-6530 Fax: 607 / 274-6415 To: Common Council From: John Licitra, Sidewalk Program Manager Tim Logue, Director of Engineering Date: 29 January 2020 Re: Hector Street Complete Street Project Please find enclosed a resolution authorizing the additional funding for the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) federal-aid project known as Hector Street Complete Street. This project was authorized by Common Council on Aug 7th, 2019 at a not to exceed amount of $2.5 million for engineering and construction project costs. Of this amount, 80% is federal aid eligible, but capped at $1.4M maximum reimbursement. On January 16, 2020, construction bids were opened and the low bid was Bothar Construction at $2,264,689. While this bid is about 9% over the engineer’s estimate, it is $456,000 lower than the next bidder. The Engineering division is recommending award of contract, contingent on a budget amendment. Unfortunately, we are asking for a member file petition in order to stay within the 45 day bidding terms to award the contract, and to ensure that selective tree cutting will occur before March 31st for the protection of the Northern Long- Eared Bat, a federally protected species. While the total project authorization needs to be increased by $240,000, staff has worked with the Town of Ithaca towards an agreement that the Town will contribute $50,000 toward this amount, and staff has worked with the Controller’s office to identify approximately $70,000 from Sidewalk Improvement District 5’s fund balance. The proposed project total cost is $2.74M. With $1.4M available in federal aid, the local share will be $1.34M as a local share, paid via the following sources:  $470,000 total proposed for 2019 General Fund Capital Project program  $360,000 previously approved in 2019 SID#5 capital project costs  $205,000 approved via SID#5 (Fund Balance for Hector St)  $209,000 from NYS Consolidated Highway Improvement Program (CHIPs) reimbursement  $70,000 Town of Ithaca contribution toward local share  $26,000 from 2020 SID#5 Work Plan There are two reasons why we are comfortable recommending an increase to the project budget to be funded by general fund borrowing. First is that we need it to authorize the contract, but we might not need much of it in practice. Already included in the contract is a field change order worth about $100,000. This item is like a built in change order. If we need it, we use it and it's already built-in to the contract. If we don't, we get it back in a negative change order at the end of the project. In our experience, more than half the time, we don't use more than a quarter of the field change item. So that might reduce our need by $75,000. We are also looking at a few cost savings by reducing the scope of work (e.g., reusing some catch basins instead of using new, and possibly eliminating some work at the bottom of the hill). These items could save us $30,000 and $100,000 respectively. We are still exploring them with our engineer, but we think there is a good chance we can do one or maybe both. The second reason is that we feel that the low bid is a good one. The other two were over $450,000 higher. We know Bothar and they are a qualified bidder. It seems these days, all our bid prices are higher than our engineer's estimate, due to our construction climate with high demand for labor and increasing material costs. We also think there is a compelling argument why the general fund should pick up this balance - primarily that the scope of work has increased to accommodate some DPW needs that are only tangentially related to sidewalk - $100,000 for new culvert headwalls, over $240,000 in storm sewer work, about $130,000 in new curbing, and an improved road realignment at Vinegar Hill. Also, we shifted the road to the south in the upper curve in order to minimize the grading impacts on neighbors to the north. And, lastly, we've committed quite a bit of SID 5 funding (about $200,000 in fund balance and about $360,000 in financed work), and think it would be too much to bond further against the district. If you have any specific questions about the project, please let us know. You can reach John directly at 274-6534 or JLicitra@cityofithaca.org. You can reach Tim at 274-6535 or TLogue@cityofithaca.org. 13.2 Mayor Myrick - Community Conference Center Project - Commitment To Pursue A City Of Ithaca Hotel Occupancy Tax And Commitment To Provide A Shared Financial Guarantee With Tompkins County - Resolution WHEREAS, a Conference Center Organizing Committee comprised of multiple stakeholder groups including Tompkins County, the City of Ithaca, the Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce, the Ithaca Tompkins County Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB), the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA), the Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency (IURA), the Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Planning Board (STPB), Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD), and the local hotel industry has been meeting regularly for over a year to create a financially feasible and operationally sound strategy for developing and funding a conference center project; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes the importance of the tourism and hospitality economy to Tompkins County as a major economic sector, which in 2018 generated $227 million in economic activity, over $16.7 million in local taxes, supported $746 per household in property tax savings, and supported over 2,600 in direct local jobs; and WHEREAS, two market demand and feasibility study projects were performed in the last year and funded through County Tourism Program funds, and both of these studies demonstrated the market demand for a new conference center in Ithaca and projected the appropriate size and capacity of the center; and WHEREAS, Tompkins provided funds for a consulting engagement between the CVB and Civitas to assist in the creation of a viable and reliable lodging industry stream of income for a conference center project; and WHEREAS, a successful Community Conference Center project will be an asset for the City of Ithaca resulting in significant increased room tax and sales tax revenues, the addition of new direct and indirect jobs; significant economic impact beyond center operations through the purchase of supplies and services; an estimated 22,000 new room nights as well as annual visitation of over 63,000 after center operations are stabilized in year five; and WHEREAS, recognizing the economic development value to the City, County and Southern Tier Region, the State of New York has awarded the Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce Foundation a $5.0 million grant through Southern Tier Regional Economic Development Council to establish base equity in support of the Community Conference Center project; and WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of the Downtown Ithaca Alliance (DIA) has voted to support and endorse possible ownership of the project and, if required, will provide a baseline guarantee of fiscal support up to $25,000 per year to ensure that lease payment obligations are met; and WHEREAS, it is anticipated that Vecino Group would own the Green Street Garage property and enter into a 30-year lease with the DIA for the conference center portion of the project and that the DIA would hire a professional operator to run the center; and WHEREAS, a municipal financial guarantee has also been requested from the City of Ithaca and Tompkins County for the approximate annual $1.5M lease payment for the duration of the debt project financing period to secure project financing for the Community Conference Center; and WHEREAS, a City hotel room occupancy tax - which requires the adoption of a state enabling law specific to the City of Ithaca as well as the adoption of a new local law - is the preferred means of securing a new source of annual funding from the lodging industry to support the financing, operations and reserves for the Center; and WHEREAS, a City tourism improvement district (TID), has been identified as a secondary option in lieu of hotel room occupancy tax for generating the required revenues from the lodging industry for the conference center, which does not require action by the State Legislature; and WHEREAS, the project plan includes the development and long term management of several reserve funds that would serve to protect all involved parties, including:  Operating Reserve Fund - to provide assurance to operator during years when the annual operating loss exceeds revenues for direct conference center operations  FF&E/Capital Replacement Fund - to ensure replacement, repair, and replenishment as needed of all furnishing, fixtures, and equipment of the conference center  Rental Reserve Fund - to ensure additional protection for DIA to mitigate any cash flow concerns and ensure two months of lease payments are available to DIA at all times  Developer Operating Reserve Fund - to be established and held by Vecino as required by their lender, and maintained to equal two months’ rent throughout lease term; and WHEREAS the Tompkins County Legislature has expressed its willingness to enter into an agreement with the City of Ithaca to support the City’s financial guarantee for the annual project lease payments throughout the life of the lease; and WHEREAS the Tompkins County Legislature has agreed that should the new City of Ithaca hotel room occupancy tax or TID revenues not cover annual lease payments, and all reserve funds are depleted, and the DIA financial support is exhausted, the Tompkins County Legislature will commit revenues from County hotel room occupancy tax for the purposes of generating additional funds to support a portion of the City financial guarantee for annual lease payments; and WHEREAS, the aforementioned reserve funds except for the Developer Operating Reserve Fund will be managed by the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, or its subsidiary, as project owner; and DIA or its subsidiary shall report the balances of each fund to the City of Ithaca on at least a quarterly basis; and WHEREAS, there is a deadline of February 6, 2020 for the IURA, in consultation with Vecino Group, to decide whether the Community Conference Center project has a financially feasible and implementable plan for moving forward as part of the overall Green Street Garage project; now, therefore be it: 1. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council supports the development of the community conference center project; and, be it further 2. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby express its commitment to provide a financial guarantee for the project financing to be shared with Tompkins County throughout the life of the lease, and behind a limited financial guarantee of the Ithaca Downtown Alliance, subject to establishment of a City hotel room occupancy tax or tourism improvement district revenue source in an amount sufficient to pay rent and projected operating deficits; and, be it further 3. RESOLVED That the City of Ithaca Common Council commits to pursuing New York State authorization for the establishment of a new City hotel room occupancy tax and subsequent adoption of a new local law to provide the necessary revenues from the lodging industry to support the conference center project; and, be it further 4. RESOLVED, That in the event that the New York State does not support the establishment of a new City hotel room occupancy tax as anticipated, the City of Ithaca Common Council expresses its interest and support for instead pursuing a City tourism improvement district which can be established through local action; and, be it further 5. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca will explore additional methods for mitigating risk to the City, including, but not limited to establishing a reserve fund at the City to be capitalized with initial City hotel room occupancy tax funds to be used for risk mitigation and future funds dedicated to the long term fiscal support of the project; and, be it further 6. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Commons Council authorizes the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney, to execute a memorandum of agreement with Tompkins County outlining roles and responsibilities on the shared financial guarantee for the Conference Center lease; and, be it further 7. RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council authorizes the Mayor, subject to review by the City Attorney and satisfaction with the terms of the City- County MOU on the roles and responsibilities for the shared financial guarantee, to execute a memorandum of agreement with Vecino Group to commit to enter into a legally binding lease guarantee for the Conference Center, and further requests staff to continue its work with the conference center organizing committee to ensure the best possible project be planned, developed, and operated on behalf of the residents of the City of Ithaca. DowntownIthacaCommunityConferenceCenterReport,1/31/201|Page  THEDOWNTOWNCOMMUNITYCONFERENCECENTER AREPORTTOTHECITYOFITHACACOMMONCOUNCIL January31,2020  This summary report is intended to accompany the formal presentation of the Community Conference Center organizing Committee on the proposed Downtown Community Conference Center project. The report is divided into six sections: (1) Financial and community benefit of the conference center (2) Market feasibility and demand (3) Project physical description (4) The deal structure and roles of each participant (City, County, DIA, hotels) (5) How room tax/TID revenue sources work, and why guarantors can be comfortable that at least $1.9M will be received annually (6) Explanation of the guarantee, including the maximum financial liability, length of the guarantee and why it should not need to be called on. This memorandum has been prepared by Gary Ferguson on behalf of the Downtown Community Conference Center Organizing Committee. Other attachments: Conference Center summary handout, risk memo, Construction Sources and uses statement, Draft Ten-year operating pro-forma, Vecino project sketches  PartOne FinancialandCommunityBenefit  Whyisthisprojectimportanttothecommunity?  Theconferencecenterprojectdeliversanumberofimportantbenefitstoourcommunity:  Ͳ Itisalongtermcommunityinfrastructureasset.TheCenterwillserveourcommunityfor decades.ThisisaninvestmentinthefutureofIthacaandTompkinsCounty. Ͳ Itcreatesanindoorlargeformatpublicmeeting&eventspace.Wedonothavesuchaspace forcommunityuseintheregion.Ourcitizensandourorganizationsneedsuchaspace. Ͳ Itisasignificantvisitortrafficgenerator.Aconferencecenterrepresentsthelargestandmost significantprojectwecanundertaketobolsterourhospitalitybusinessesatthistime. Ͳ Itprovidesroomtaxstabilizationandgrowth.Thetourismindustryneedsmoredemandtofill theroomswehaveandtomaintainandgrowtheroomtaxthatsupportssomanyofour communityinstitutionsthroughouttheCityandCounty. Ͳ Itprovidesnewsalestaxgrowth.Withnewroomtaxcomesadditionalnewsalestax.Half emptyhotelsrepresentlosttaxrevenueopportunityfortheCityandCounty. Ͳ Itprovidesamajorfoottrafficboosttothedowntowneconomy.DowntownIthaca’ssmall retailandrestaurantbusinessesrelyonvisitorandtourismtrafficforatleasthalfoftheirannual sales.Aconferencecenterwillboostdowntownfoottrafficandmateriallyhelpthese businesses. Back-Up Item 13.2 It is a job creator. The center itself will result in up to 60 new jobs, many available to people ea rning low- and moderate-incomes. It preserves and retains hospitality sector jobs. The conference center will help to strengthen the hospitality industry and its 2,600 countywide jobs. By filling in currently high vacancy dates, the project will help preserve and grow job stability in the industry. Why is this project important to the City of lthaca? The conference center project delivers real and tangible benefits that will directly benefit our City as well as all County residents: - lt builds and strengthens our local hospitality and tourism industry. - lt retains and builds wealth here in lthaca and Tompkins County. - lt grows the lodging tax that supports arts, culture, and nonprofit organizations in the City and countywide. - lt helps create and sustain low/moderate income jobs in our hospitality sector, and offers more full employment opportunities for those who are marginally or seasonally employed. - lt strengthens our local community businesses. - lt builds a lasting and enduring community asset at an optimal City location. How will the conference center benefit City residents and businesses? Located in the heart of Downtown lthaca, this project will deliver important benefits to the city and its residents and businesses: - This pro.ject will generate considerable new foot traffic and overnight stays in the City. This foot traffic, in turn, results in new spending at our retails shops, restaurants, entertainment venues, and of course, hotels. - Hotels and other lodging properties throughout the City will see increased occupancy and rates. This increase will be immediately felt in the major downtown hotels. As these downtown hotels fill, overflow is channeled citywide. A number of conference attendees will choose lower price point hotels located outside of downtown in other parts of the city and beyond. - Room tax revenues will increase - room tax investments benefit the City and the entire community, including arts & culture, events & festivals, outdoor recreation, theatres, museums, parks, and trails throughout the City and beyond. - City sales tax revenues will increase. 2lPageDowntown lthaca Community Conference Center Repotl, 1'l3Ll2O Who wants this center? This project represents the aspirations and interests of a broad cross section of people and groups: - Cityand regionaltourism/hospitalitystakeholders - The city and county lodging industry - Hundreds of City lodging workers - The business community/our small local businesses who depend on tourism for their survival. - Nonprofit organizations and other recipients of lodging room tax. - City and county groups and organizations who can and will use the new facility. - City and county residents who are affiliated with organizations and associations. Part Two Market Feasibility and Demand Will there be an actual demand to support this center? Considerable research and study was commissioned to determine demand feasibility for this project. - lt is important to note that the demand for this project is the result of over a decade of growth and development. A 2003 Pinnacle study sugBested that Tompkins County was not yet ready at that time for a conference center. - 2016 and 2018/1.9 demand studies were performed by the nationalconsulting firm Hunden Strategic Partners. - The demand is made possible by the clustering of 585 downtown hotel rooms. - A dynamic downtown/Commons center and is attractive to conference-goers and meeting planners who make decisions on booking business. - The 2018/19 Hunden study projected 180 events per year. - The study projected nearly 63,000 attendees per year. - The study estimated 22,000 new room nights per year. - Demand will be driven by local higher education (Cornell and lC) and state associations, as well as local demand for large space - The project will substitute for the loss of The Space and the Women's Community Building. Why Downtown and why link it to the Vecino project? The Hunden study was clear. The project needs to be located in downtown lthaca. Reasons include: - The center needs to be adjacent to a major cluster of hotels. - The center needs to be in a walkable attraction and draw that will entice people to visit. - The Vecino site is adjacent or near to 1,000 garage parking spaces. - The Vecino site is located in the center of downtown, within steps of the Commons. - The Vecino site is equidistant from all major downtown hotels. - Piggybacking the Center with the Vecino pro.iect helps reduce costs. - The project will use a City owned site provided at no cost. The Economic Benefits The Hunden study provided summary statistics on estimated 20-year economic impacts to the community. These include: Net New Spending - Direct - lndirect - lnduced Total (in millions) S186 S53 sz3 5322 3lPageDowntown lthaca Community Conference Center Reporl, 1'l3ll2o Net New Wage Earnings (in millions) - From Direct S58 - From lndirect S20 - From lnduced $PTotal 5101 Part Three Project Physical Description The center is A 49,000 SF major indoor public meeting and event space A 531 million two story facility with high ceilings for large rooms Located on Green Street in the Vecino Asteri project Adjacent or near to over 1,000 garage parking spaces It will be the largest conference facility in the Southern Tier region It will feature a +/- 72,O0O SF ballroom It will have 7-8 breakout meeting rooms It will have pre-function and exhibitor/booth space It will contain kitchen and catering services There will be seating for +/- 900 and total capacity +/-1,100 Who has been organizing this effort? A conference center or8anizing committee, initially created by the Tompkins County Strategic Tourism Planning Board (STPB), has been working for several years on the development of this project. Key members are: - Peggy Coleman, lthaca Tompkins County Convention and Visitors Bureau - Gary Ferguson, Downtown lthaca Alliance - Nick Helmholdt, Tompkins County - Tom Knipe, City of lthaca - Nels Bohn, lthaca Urban Renewal Agency - Jennifer Tavares, Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce - Also helped by Katie Borgella, Jason Molino, Heather McDaniel, STPB, Hotel reps - Technical assistance and coordination with Vecino Group (developer), Hunden Associates (feasibility study), Civitas (lodging revenues) How much does this project cost? What are the costs? ln simple terms... - SZt+1- Million total project cost - 526 M construction - 55 M soft costs (financing costs, professionalfees, reserves) See attached sources and uses statement 4lPageDowntown lthaca Community Conference Center Reporl, 7/3712O What is the conference center? How are conference centers typically funded around the country? According to Hunden Strategic Partners and confirmed by our own research and investigation... - Public conference center projects are typically funded through generalobligation (GO) bond financing from either a City or County. - We determined this was not a route to pursue here. These sources were selected because they are predictable and certain. They can be affirmed by the IURA on February 6. There could be other possible sources, given more time. One example may be funds from a city or countywide Tourism lmprovement District. Does this project cash flow or breakeven? The organizing committee has pledged that it would only submit a plan that would cash flow and break even. See the attached summary and ten-year pro forma. The project does indeed break even, with revenue coming from two primary sources- center operations and the City room tax/TlD. Who is being asked to do what? This project requires a number of entitles to work together to undertake and provide specific elements that all must be assembled to make this a success: - City - provision of land, PPP through IURA (avoided land acquisition cost of S7.0 M) - Clty - shared lease guarantee with County - City - authorize the creation of a citywide room tax or TID - County- funds for feasibility and market demand studies, and for TID organization assistance - County - shared lease guarantee with City - DIA - lease ownership - DIA - 'first-in' limited annual financial guarantee of 525,000 SlPaBe Part Four The Deal Structure and Role of Participants What are the project capital sources? Our sources and uses statement shows the following sources of capitalfunding: - S24 M private financing - S5.0 M state grants - S2.5 M accrued lodging industry revenues (City room tax) - S0.2M-other - New York State (through Empire State Development) has granted our community 55.0 million in two grants to incentivize this project. who owns the center and why? Ownership is driven by the financing and funding tools used for the project. Under the preferred private financing path, Vecino would build and own the property and then enter into a long term lease with the Downtown lthaca Alliance (DlA), who would be tapped to own the facility lease. This arrangement keeps the project from affecting either City or County debt caps. The DIA is located downtown and is a 501(c)3 community organization that has the capacity and motivation to oversee this enterprise. The DIA intends to create a new, special purpose nonprofit to oversee conference center operations in order to protect and preserve existing DIA operations and resources. Downtow, lthaca Community Conference Center Report, 7l3ll2o CVB - support sales and marketing efforts of conference center; help identify qualified operators; bring industry expertise and collaboration from statewide partners City Hotels - collect and remit room tax/flD revenues City Hotel guests - pay additional assessment +/-14.5o/.1to support conference center) New York State - Grants to subsidize and incentivize the project New York State - Enabling legislation for City room tax Vecino- secure financinB, construct turnkey project, and lease to community (DlA) How will a lodging stream of revenue be created? The primary and recommended route is for the City of lthaca Common Council to authorize the creation of a citywide room tax. This tax is commonly allowed under state law and will be applied to all lodginB properties within the City. The tax is paid by hotel patrons and then remitted to the City/County on a periodic basis. To raise the needed S1.9 million annualtax needed for the project pro forma, a citywide room occupancy tax of approximately 4.65% will be required. It is important to note that the creation of a citywide room tax will require enabling legislation specific to the City of lthaca to be passed by the New York State Legislature. Given that the State has already expressed strong support for the project through its award of a S5.0 million grant and that the use of these room tax funds (for the construction and operation of a conference center) will be narrowly defined in a way that supports the industry, this approval seems very likely. A City room tax^lD is being proposed to assist the project in two essential ways. - lt provides some up front capital to help write down the cost of the project. We are estimating 52.5 million, the equivalent of 1.3 years of TID revenues collected prior to project completion. - The room tax also provides an earmarked lodging stream of income necessary to help cash flow the project. The annual room tax stream of income provides the primary source of revenues to pay conference center rent, which Vecino relies on to repay debt to construct the conference center. The City Common Council will be asked to create this tool and the organizing hotels are cognizant of how it would be used to support the conference center project. One point to note: history shows that room tax revenue will grow over time, as evldenced by the County's 2o+-year history of room tax collection, including during two major recessions. We have conservatively not considered any ofthis growth in our pro.jections. Downtown lthaca Community conference center Reporl,7l37l2o 6 | P a g e Part Five Lodging lndustry Revenue and the Project Working with the City Attorney and City staff and elected leadership, it was determined that there should be a primary and secondary recommended process for securing the needed lodging stream of reven ue. Should the primary citywide room tax route not prove to be feasible, a secondary route that will be pursued will the creation of a citywide Tourism lmprovement District (TlD), utilizing the City's authority under New York special benefit assessment district law. Part Six Financing & Financial Guarantees Why is a lease guarantee required? How will it work? Both the private financing and revenue bond funding options required revenue guarantees. Lenders are inherently risk averse and always seek multiple layers of protection. We have proposed and the bank will accept a municipal guarantee package that would involve the City and County, plus the DlA. While one entity (the City) would sign the lease document, there would be a formalguarantee participation plan put into place between the City and the County and DIA to split the risk of the guarantee for the duration of the lease. It is recommended that the City use a portion of the citywide room tax collected prior to the opening of the conference center to create its own reserve/contingency fund that could be called upon in the event of any call for guarantee support. lt is anticipated that this citywide room tax or TID would be created and approved by December 2020, and would have nearly 2.5 years of collection opportunity prior to the opening of the center. As previously mentioned, 1.3 years of this pre-opening collection will be earmarked for construction capital. A portion of the balance can also be earmarked toward a city reserve/contingency fund for guarantee mitigation. What protections are put into place to assure that the project can cover costs without turning to the County and City for activating the guarantee? why private financing? Two primary funding options were explored: private financing and revenue bond funding. While both options can work, the private financing route was selected as the preferred option for several reasons: - While it had higher interest rates, it involved fewer issuance and financing fees. - The private financing model had overall lower costs and was a simpler project structure. - Bond financing by the olA may impact the City's debt capacity/borrowing limits. ln the private financing model, Vecino retains ownership of the real estate and enters into a lon8 term lease with the DlA. This model protects both City and County debt caps. But, even though the project cash flows and has established reserves, the lender will still require public guarantees. It is possible that guarantee exposure can decrease over time. Please refer to the attached risk analysis plan that details the specific risks and the protections put into place to mitigate these risks. Among those mitigations described In this plan are: - The operating pro forma calls for cash flow/ break even. This project has been designed to work without subsidy over and above the operations revenues and room taxfilD collections. - The early ramp up years will have desiBnated extra dollars to cover costs. - Project reserve funds totaling over S1.5 million will be put into place. - The City can also create an additional dedicated reserve fund from early room tax collections and any room tax growth above projected values. - lncluded is a FFE/capital replacement reserve fund is also in place to assist with capital updating and repair costs. Downtown lthaca Community Conference Center Repoft,ll3ll2o 7 | P a g e The DIA Board has pledged a willingness to extend 525,000 toward a guarantee. This can be first-in money. It is also important to note that room tax or TID revenues will grow while lease payment will remain flat. Our annual pro forma projections do not account for this additional revenue. But, we can count on room tax revenues to improve dramatically over time, providing an additional layer of protection. To summarize, the City of lthaca has been previously asked to assist in the development of the project through including the conference center in the IURA preferred redevelopment plan. This is a significant decision - it allows the project to be built on a site that does not have any acquisition costs. Now, the City is being asked to participate in the project with Tompkins County, the DlA, the State of New York, and area hotels. The specific asks are: (1) To aBree to create a citywide room tax or TID (if necessary) for the express purpose of supporting a conference center project; and (2) To participate with the County and DIA in a revenue guarantee plan for the project financing. Summary: Role of the City of lthaca Summary: Why now? Why not wait until another time? The Conference Center organizing committee believes this is the best time to move forward with this project: - The Vecino site is available now, and the deadline to decide the fate for this project at this site is February 6th. - We now have the requisite hotel rooms needed to support this project. - We have documented the demand and the need. - We have access to no-cost land. - We have an ideal site location within a block of 585 hotel rooms. - We have S5.0 million in state grants awarded to the community for this project. - We have years of preparation and feasibility work. - We have the backing and support of the STPB and local, regional and state economic development partners. - We have a developer willing to build it. - We have a lender willing to loan funds for it. - We will protect and grow jobs for hundreds of people in the lodging industry. - We have a workable model that maximizes benefit and minimizes risk to City and County taxpayers. Downtown lthaca Community Conference Center Reporl, l/31/20 8lPage Downtown lthaca Conference Center 1 / 30/20 2 0 u p d d ted p rolo rm o Revised Droft Sources & Uses / Pto Fomo Sources of Funds Private loan to Developer or DIA Bond Empire State Development (S4.sM EsD; S5ooK MorketNr) TID/lodging source Accruat TCTP Capital Grant (requerBprins2o2o;paidovertwoyeart) Sponsorship/underwritinE from hotels Total Sources for Constructlon: Uses of Funds Demoliton Site lmprovement Construction, Bond, lnsurance, Const MEmt FurnishinSs, Fi)dures & Equipment (FFE) Professional Fees Environmental soft costs Contingency (8% oJ shell construction &soft costs) construction loan Fee Construction Loan lnterest Permanent Loan Origination Fee Vecino OperatinS Reserve (lender required) FFE/Capital Replacemenl Resetve - initiol copitolizotion OperatinS Reserve Fund - conltt oqtonont Rental ReseNe Fund - Fot Lessee (2 months rent) Subtotol Consttuction, ReseNes & Finoncing: 23,8t4,970 5,000,000 2,500,000 | 1 1/3 yeors accruol 150,000 s0,000 $ 31,s14,970 Total Development Budget 300,0@ 200,000 20,475,496 1,600,000 1,174,375 140,000 526,300 1,025,000 214,L50 1,440,900 238,1s0 300,000 500,000 5m,m0 3m,mo 29,594,370 lor non-ftxed lurnishings in Lechose scenorio 50% deloyed PRIVATE FINANCE 30. YR LEASE 5 s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s s 5 s 7% ol loon see calculotion ot Annuol Debt Setvice lext box 7% ol bon 50% ol onnuol clebt seNice s10hl p@ected totol opefiting delicits ovet 525OK (Huoden) Total Project Cosls: 5 $ 1,920,600 31,514,970 maintaan€d at 7.4% of total construction costs only {not reserves) ' . Fi6t ures otro {r€s€ruer accounts) Cost/Bond Ollering: Loon lnlercst Expente: lnterest Eorned cosh: Cost: grc nts/TlD occ, uo l, etc.. il't,'tt-,, vectno wth 5l)% s27,114,970 2 4.38% 52,401,ss1 60% 0% 1,44),9@ i0 4.38% 31,514,970 (6,90O,NO) 23,814,970 Revenue Event Revenue Space Rental Equipment Rental Net Food & Beverage Event Services lncome subtotol Other Revenue Advertisin&/Sponsorships Other Revenue Total operating Revenue Expensea Salaries & WaSes Employee Benefits PassthrouSh Labor Maintenance & Repairs CleaninS Utilities Marketing & Advertising/T.ade shows General & Administrative lnsurance Olher Operating Expenses Management Fee - Operator Misc other expenses TotalExpensei Net Operatint lncome 551 689 10 2l 10 17 11 25 11 30 Year 1 Proforma Operating Statement of Revenue & Expenses (5000's, inflated) Year2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Year5 YeatT Year8 Yearg Year 10 5104 16 403 28 s142 21 488 38 5175 26 s96 47 5212 755 57 5222 33 793 60 S228 34 813 52 S234 35 833 63 S2oo 30 708 54 5217 33 773 59 S239 36 854 55 844 992 1056 1082 1108 1137 1155 1194 l1 32 11 32 12 33 12 34 12 35 12 36 578 720 880 1033 1099 1125 1153 1183 L2l2 7242 490 123 26 39 32 71 60 47 28 38 58 10 to22 502 L26 34 52 35 16 55 48 29 40 72 12 t0E1 30 44 103 15 1203 554 139 50 91 45 90 53 53 47 172 20 1286 568 142 51 94 48 92 55 55 33 48 115 20 1321 597 150 54 98 54 96 60 57 34 50 121 20 1391 528 132 47 17 40 85 50 541 135 49 89 43 88 50 s2 31 45 110 18 1251 582 146 53 96 51 94 56 34 49 118 20 1356 57 612 153 55 101 51 98 60' Bic push n .d.d tk fllt hw y.o6 59 35 51 t24 20 1425 51 -444 -361 -762 -170 -152 151 158 -L73 -L79 183 -2253 ovetoge -225_3 Private,30 yea6, revised Vecino #'s 1/22/2020 updoted prcformo 515 L29 41 65 38 81 50 49 30 42 88 t4 1142 AnnualCash Flow Projection - OIA Year 1 Yeet2 Year3 Year4 Year5 Year6 YeatT Year8 Yearg Year lO Revenue Net Operating from obovel [od8in8 Revenue/room tax support Vecino Rent Abatement Retail Rentals (1st floor) DPW Rent Sponsorships/Hotel support TotalRevenue Erpenses Annual Rent to vecino (DlA) Accountin&/Audit Sales/Marketing Reserve for FF&E/upErades/Replacement Fee to DIA/owner organization Total Expenres Net calh llow from operatlons Beginning operating reserve Net operatint reserves + or ( - ) 1,714 ' at veao con:tuaion 6t ten io,plr t 2xDca 38 ' ^dd.d .@btot 2OO ' Arnuot k/.o.6 to .enplrh taht c@b b rcf.r. ptoJ.dbn 50 ' a!.ry 10 y.o6 uperu.l4 otu rcsotc.li N$.r Sl@k 95 -444 1900 229 20 23 50 -361 1900 229 20 23 52 -262 19@ 229 20 23 54 170 1900 229 20 23 56 -168 1900 20 23 62 -t73 1900 229 20 23 64 -179 1900 20 23 66 -183 1900 20 23 68 161 229 20 23 60 1,52 229 20 58 714 34 180 50 85 1,714 30 160 50 80 1,714 28 150 50 75 1,1,114 26 140 50 70 114 24 130 50 50 l,114 22 120 30 55 I, zo37 396 433 1900 1900 L77A 1853 1964 2058 2074 2071 2066 2063 2059 2057 1,114 20 100 25 50 1,114 32 170 50 80 714 36 190 50 90 1, 1,90!) -131 1,941 -78 2,080 -2t 1,978 -14 297 217 2,l}t7 -40 432 392 2,m0 2,017 2,034 2,045 2,063 58 61 0 453 432 453 453 433 453 335 396 277 33S 369 291 500 369 Asteri lthaca Sketch Plan Presentation 1.28.20 o T.G.MILLER,P.C. ENTITLEMENIS COOBDINAIION LANDSCAPE ARCH!TECT CIVIL ENGINEEB PROJECT ANCHITECT a I rrcflIcnJlt I lso{tn1r6, t( WrrlrttRtr,l l'! NNrN(; & l)rstcN. rLL(: i,l p il la'i Asteri lthaca o lMixed-use affordable housing building in current location of West garage. Expansion of public parking in existing Center garage "Housing for the Greater Good" Site Process - RFP. Affordable Housing 218 Affordable housing units with conference center, or 273 Affordable housing units with ground floor retail. Ground floor use TBD Conlerence center on levels 1 and 2, or. Ground floor retailo -353 Parking spaces in Center garage Existing: -243 spaces Addition of 4 levels of parking on Center garage. High-quality, publicly accessible open spaceo February 2020 - submit Site Plan Review Application. Constru clion 2021 - 2023 \\ IIIt- .\\t T.G. MrrtIR l'.c.Project Overview skerch pran p.esenrarionlJa nuary 28.2020 o ***"*" o g J ; =- F /. F OL!za7< r3 N Jo aJo(L =u,t2 o e E ti o - -E I E ! o ab u.trCCo<cEl<oIA ! o- 0, =o t!5oo(, troo tooo CLo o- uJ z l l lu)J 2 odl a)oo- t!z- G LllF(/) L t+.a-'t'f ttvH A.t-t3 rr L-l I t uJ o- o U'F Ll,J uJtrF @ N J o- JJ I to I t il L] a f a r_'--a wa .,.a , t) I - (!il .\ c I t tuo tr x. IJJF l!oot j * I L\ .. I r-\ t c T o1'ooo CL .Tt o-o 't d ln lnr N EL .Tt 6-o 9 E- a a96' _=_ Q o I , I o -t :JI = - i1 -o !f,q> ooI't Ez -o nrnsn9> z0 ?l oov ! Ez P l-T I ozm !ofa F 22 tib3B"3, a ir ill SETBACK FROM 1 .0- SETBACKFROMi.'l HI,4 I i.:!l I ASTERI ITHACA *lql?tl- E E I P E Ri qi 6 !t!; ?lii ;rll 9X95H;;!i I ! oov -o Ez rti '1it'l ! ! o 120 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA NEW YORK 14850 .I .l I ) -lT ,' 1.I Er I I I r=!!r:i ;n r- L: dg B!V 1l o oo .Il 6-o !q, o (.) ; =.Il 6-o o_ 6 =_ Q o{ t o a1 ,> :l n 1 7 n -o 5!e> uo ooI ! Fz :E -!? m5na> -1r oov !Iz |---l t+ri lI= tI ASTERI ITHACA <;t23iI i4 ^, qx 4a <a qd i+ an IEIIilf;r I;3,iE h ooa 1l Fz 1l o N) EE {g 120 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA NEW YORK 14850tr s9 nt E I dl IB ql €t nt si E3-t u9 nl ES il BW ^I q5 EA s3 ! o!,oooe .I o-o 1't o ct,1'o -o g o -l :iI = at fr il rr :U . --{ ll q> tz m m . --{ l! q> gz m m l-r tiqt q fn ir o a ! z a Ies-oIm5,a>AF -ta ooa ! Ez ;z ,> ,{ I n ASTERI ITHACA! o(, {g iE i !t $8 {t xt 120 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 nt!i JI g a a ci E9rl f;i r! *lr'i' ; t$!ire;3t l!: l: ! lili iEtlr iii:izE:l L ;l -t E a a ei sE nt nt €E I rtI qI f- EI-I qt I st| -rI rt| *t E i Ji eE E' nl E9 nt E3 nt EI-t q;sl e9 E34l I El lI qt lI c9 lI ql II xl II *l I ei I nl I rt| "r BW ! otooorL aoo*o so{o -@rc azeo mo:oz -1 @,i5 ?x _m Ioz f;o9,i dg EE i 8H ;E I ,!, ! a 6 =_ o t o i1 :r = -,.] I :rEiIeia lr,s !E moIoz 1l o(rl n TN --l TN m:zo vm a.omzI IIIIIIIIIIITII II I IT l {a +l-F I +trr+++t+++.'+ :E;:BrBb *2 it ;i Bb sb dr rt tr tf-i"i=l-i -i -: -i -i -i ci ii it c= i ,'r * ,E l! = BWASTERI ITHACA Ifili!";:i l,ii! srtii iEI I9 ii!:; L --T-r[Tfrrfr ; _lI I I ffi 120 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 HABOLD'S SOUARE L- veCtlP irucr eROPER1lEg PROJ€ Proposed - Massing Views - Urban Context skerch pran presemarionl Janua.y 28 2o2o O *--"* O \\ tTH.\\l T.G. MlLttR. P.C.E t., g)'t'' tI I ttl,t I la I II I T I II I a f I I r a I hrw |I I III tl I i *iliaa,fft.' t* -+ D f I-,J,i --ar ! j i I I J I t) I[Tr ffi tzu I ,t itr =1./4 lr T I 13.3 Resolution to Approve Artwork for the Tompkins Giant No. 1 proposal in Cass Park WHEREAS, Plan Ithaca, the City’s comprehensive plan, identifies public art as an important cultural resource that contributes to quality of life and economic vitality and calls for the City’s continued support of public art (see Cultural Resources); and WHEREAS, Community Arts Partnership has submitted a proposal to install a freestanding sculpture in Cass Park; and WHEREAS, the creation of the sculpture has been privately funded by the project organizer; and WHEREAS, City staff including City Forester, Jeanne Grace, Recreation Supervisor, Jim Dalterio, and Planner, Alex Phillips, visited Cass Park on September 06, 2019 and identified a specific site in the park that would not impact any surrounding natural or recreational features; and WHEREAS, the City Code §8-13 Duties, tasks the Community Life Commission, to advise on issues related to art and public art in Ithaca, including public art displays, programs, and exhibitions, the Community Life Commission accepted staff’s request to circulate the Tompkins Giant No. 1 proposal at its meeting on September 16, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works heard the public art proposal at its meeting on September 17, 2019 and approved Cass Park as a potential site for sculpture at its meeting on October 15, 2019; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission extended the public comment period for the sculpture proposal at its meeting October 21, 2019 to consider the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission input given the proposal’s placement in a city park; and WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, considered the proposals and raised concerns to the Community Life Commission regarding safety (climbing), appropriateness of site, and maintenance; and WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission and staff addressed the concerns identified by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission along with the mixed responses from public comment at its meeting on November 18, 2019. The Community Life Commission determined the proposal worthy of consideration for the Planning and Economic Development Committee; and WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council addressed the concerns identified by the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council accept the proposal by Community Arts Partnership to create a sculpture for the city in Cass Park; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the selected artist may proceed with the installation of the sculpture upon the execution of an agreement with the City as reviewed by the City Attorney. CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 JoAnn Cornish, Director DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning & Economic Development Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565 E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org To: Planning & Economic Development Committee From: Alexander Phillips, Planner Date: December 04, 2019 Re: Approval for Public Art Sculpture Proposals The purpose of this memo is to provide information on two public art proposals sited in two of the city’s parks. Enclosed are detailed project proposals including renders of the proposed sculptures and representation of the sculpture’s location for your consideration as well as public comment and a memo from Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources. The proposals were independently submitted to city staff and privately funded by the respective project organizers; Community Arts Partnership for the Tompkins Giant No.1 proposal, and Monica Franciscus and Tom Hirschl for the Anthropocene proposal. The Anthropocene proposal requested Baker Park as a prospective location. City staff, Jeanne Grace and Alex Phillips visited the site on September 17, 2019 and identified the proposed location as a site that would not impact any existing natural or recreational features of the park. The Tompkins Giant No.1 proposal requested Cass Park as a prospective location. City Staff, Jeanne Grace, Jim Dalterio, and Alex Phillips discussed multiple locations in Cass Park and identified the proposed location as a site that would not impact any existing natural or recreational features in the park. The Board of Public Works heard the public art proposals at its meeting on September 17, 2019 and approved Baker Park and Cass Park as potential sites for sculpture at its meeting on October 15, 2019. Community Life Commission sought public comment on the proposal through city-wide notification and City staff. Community Life Commission extended the public comment period to consider additional input from residents and the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission, given the proposals location in city parks. The public comment period was held through the November 18th CLC meeting to gather input on the proposed design and location, and the comments received were mixed for both projects. The Community Life Commission and staff addressed the concerns identified by Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources Commission along with the mixed responses from public comment. The Community Life Commission determined the proposals worthy of consideration for the Planning and Economic Development Committee and City of Ithaca Common Council. The Planning and Economic Development of the Common Council will consider this proposal at their regularly scheduled meeting on December 11, 2019. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 274-6556. Public Art Project 2019 Tompkins Giant No.1 This project started in 2017 when Tom Knipe, then working as staff for the Tompkins County Tourism program and the Strategic Tourism Planning Board met with John Spence from the Community Arts Partnership, Jennifer Tavares from the Chamber of Commerce and others to talk about putting 2018 public art funding toward the purchase and installation of a piece of sculpture. Previous funding had gone to supporting the creation of murals. The work of Thomas Dambo, pictured above and to the right, was very much the inspiration for the initial conversations. Page 1 The group initially thought that a tie to the legend of the Taughannock Giant made sense from a local history and tourism point of view. We were unaware that the Tompkins County History Center was working on a presentation about the Taughannock Giant that included the production of a full scale model of the original “giant”. Very quickly there was confusion wedding the two distinct projects in people’s minds. We also learned that there were people for whom the Taughannock Giant represented a hoax and a scam and did not appreciate what might seem like a celebration of this dark piece of Tompkins County’s past. For those reasons the group started to refer to our project simply as the Tompkins Giant No. 1 There is the thought that perhaps several giants, each by a different artist, placed throughout the County would create an entertaining tour for residents and visitors alike. Page 2 Page 3 The request for proposals went out to artists nation wide and, of course local artists were encouraged to submit there designs. Artists were told that we were not necessarily looking for literal giants. The final piece need only suggest the concept of a giant. A large hat, a giant footprint in the ground, fingers reaching up from the ground would all meet our criteria. Specifically the artists were told, “The artwork sought should be the vision of the artist, using the term “giant” as a starting point to create a piece of public art that elicits joy and wonder and illustrates a phrase often used to describe Ithaca, New York as being “ten square miles surrounded by reality.” Page 4 The committee feels that almost any piece of sculpture will benefit from a plaque placed in close proximity that puts the piece into context for the viewer. The wording on the artwork above is only a suggestion and may be improved upon . Public Art Project Committee  Nick Helmholdt - T.C Planning Department  John Spence - Community Arts Partnership  Jennifer Tavares - TC Chamber & Visitors Center  Peggy Coleman - Vice President of Tourism and Community Relations  Susan Holland - Executive Direct Historic Ithaca  Kelsey Gardner - Community member  Linda Jaffe - Community member Funding provided by the Tompkins County Tourism Program (2018 & 2019) and by a private foundation. Questions can be directed to: John Spence Community Arts Partnership director@artspartner.org 607-276-5072 Ext 19 Or Nick Helmholdt Tompkins County Planning Department NHelmholdt@tompkins-co.org 607-274-5575 Page 5 16 feet14 feet 20 feet Tompkins Giant Project Tompkins Giant Project Views to Project: 1. Farmers Market 2. Taughnnock Blvd Views to Project: 1. Farmers Market 2. Taughnnock Blvd 1 2 13.4 Common Council Resolution Opposing Relocation of Downtown Post Office WHEREAS the Downtown Ithaca Post Office represents a key civic institution that is of vital importance to City of Ithaca residents and employees; and WHEREAS the Downtown Ithaca Post Office is an extremely busy destination that serves businesses and residents in the City of Ithaca, including residents of limited means who would find a bus or car trip to a more remote post office to be burdensome and costly; and WHEREAS, over the past 15 years Downtown Ithaca has been one of the region’s and upstate New York’s fastest growing districts, with over 1,000 new residents and over a half billion dollars in new downtown investment; and WHEREAS, this growth is expected to continue in the foreseeable future with the pending redevelopment of the Green Garage superblock, which will add at least another 400 units of housing; and WHEREAS, Downtown Ithaca has emerged as a center of technology and commerce, supporting some 100 retail businesses, 65 food and beverage businesses, and over 400 professional and office businesses employing approximately 3,500 people, many of whom rely on quick, walkable access to the post office and who utilize Post Office services for their on-line packaging fulfillment needs; and WHEREAS, within walking distance of Downtown Ithaca reside over 10,000 people, representing some six different neighborhoods who utilize the different services of the Post Office, including post office boxes, money orders, and mailing/packaging services; and WHEREAS, Downtown Ithaca serves as a transit hub connecting over 21,000 Cornell students, 6,700 Ithaca College students, and thousands of other City of Ithaca residents who do not have cars; and WHEREAS, this area is known for its walkability, for both residents and employees; and WHEREAS, the Ithaca Common Council is concerned that the relocation or moving of the Post Office out of Downtown Ithaca would materially affect the operations of businesses and the lives of the many residents, including many international students living in and around the downtown core, who currently depend on this Post Office to be centrally located and within walking distance and adjacent to our community’s transit hub; and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca has reported that the Post Office has re-signed a lease for only a two-year period and may want to seek alternative locations outside of Downtown; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council does hereby express its concern about any possible plans to relocate the U.S. Post Office out of Downtown Ithaca; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council respectfully requests the U.S. Postal Service to retain a downtown location in the years to come in recognition of Downtown’s status as the commercial and social center of the Ithaca community; and, be it further RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca will work with local stakeholders and local and federal officials to ensure that the Ithaca Post Office remains in Downtown Ithaca. 14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS: 14.1 Appointments to Public Safety and Information Commission – Resolution RESOLVED, That Peter Thorman be appointed to the Public Safety and Information Commission to replace Mark Spadolini with a term to expire December 31, 2021; and, be it further RESOLVED, That Mike Brindisi be appointed to the Public Safety and Information Commission to replace Kenneth McLaurin with a term to expire December 31, 2020.