HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-11-19 Planning and ED Committee Meeting AgendaPEDCMeeting
PlanningandEconomicDevelopmentCommittee
IthacaCommonCouncil
**AMENDEDSeptember10,2019**
DATE:September11,2019
TIME:6:00pm
LOCATION:3rdfloorCityHall
CouncilChambers
AGENDAITEMS
ItemVoting
Item?
Presenter(s)
Time
Start
1) CalltoOrder/AgendaReview
2) PublicComment
3) SpecialOrderofBusiness
a) PublicHearing:WestState/MLKZoningChange
4) Announcements,Updates,Reports
a) PlanningBoardReportfortheCarpenterCirclePlannedUnit
Development
b) UpdateonRegulatingShortͲTermRentals
5) ActionItems(VotingtoSendontoCouncil)
a) WestMLK/StateZoningChanges
6) ActionItems(ApprovaltoCirculate)
a) WaterfrontPlan
7) Discussion
a) StewartAvenuePaving
b) AccessoryDwellingUnit/BackyardInfillRules
c) HousingStrategy–NextSteps
8) ReviewandApprovalofMinutes
a) July2019
9) Adjournment
No
No
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
SephMurtagh,Chair
LisaNicholas,Planning
TomKnipe,EconomicDev.
JenniferKusznir,Planning
JenniferKusznir,Planning
BryanMcCracken,Planning
AlexanderPhillips/Jennifer
Kusznir,Planning
JoAnnCornish,PlanningDirector
6:00
6:05
6:15
6:30
6:35
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:00
8:30
9:00
9:05
Ifyouhaveadisabilityandrequireaccommodationsinordertofullyparticipate,pleasecontacttheCity
Clerkat274Ͳ6570by12:00noononTuesday,September10,2019.
**Outofconsiderationforthehealthofotherindividuals,pleasetrytorefrainfromusingperfume/cologne
andotherscentedpersonalcareproductsatCityofIthacameetings.Thankyouforyourcooperationand
understanding.**
LEGAL NOTICE
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Planning and Economic Development Committee
of Common Council of the City of Ithaca, New York, will hold a public
hearing to consider the proposal to amend the Municipal Code of The City
of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” To Establish a minimum story
height requirement in all of the CBD zoning districts. Also, for all
properties located within the portion of the CBD-50 district that fronts
on the 300, 400, and 500 blocks of West State Street, (71.-1-10, 71.-1-
11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15, 71.-1-16, 71.-1-17, 71.-1-
18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-1-3, 71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-
1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14, 71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-
19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12,
71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18, 71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22,
71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-4, 71.-5-5, 71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-
6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-
17, 71.-6-18, 71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-
24, 71.-6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9,
72.-3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17, 72.-3-18.1,
72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-24, 72.-3-
26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-10, 72.-4-13,
72.-4-14, 72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9), the following
additional requirements are proposed:
x Create a requirement that the front façade of any newly-
constructed structure that is over 4 stories in height must contain
a stepback of 15’ after the first 32’ in height, before the
structure can build up to the maximum allowable height for all new
construction located in the portion of the CBD-50 District directly
fronting on the 300, 400, and 500 blocks of West State/MLK Street,
x That the maximum height in the CBD-50 Zoning District be limited
to 52 feet,
x All new construction in the CBD Zoning Districts is required to
have a minimum height of 12 feet floor to floor on the first story
and a minimum 10 feet floor to floor for each subsequent story,
x Create a requirement that all new construction located in the
portion of the CBD-50 District directly fronting on the 300, 400,
and 500 blocks of West State/MLK Street have a maximum building
footprint of 7,200 SF,
x A 15 foot stepback is required between the 3rd and 4th stories of a
five story or 52 foot tall building, and
x
The public hearing will be held in the Common Council Chambers, City
Hall, 108 East Green Street, in the City of Ithaca, New York, on
Wednesday, September 11, 2019, at 6:00 p.m.
A copy of the proposed zoning amendments (and description of existing
zoning classifications) can be viewed in Planning Division, 3rd Floor
City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York.
JoAnn Cornish
Director of Planning & Development
8/27/19
To:PlanningandEconomicDevelopmentCommittee
From:LisaNicholas,DeputyDirectorofPlanning
Date:September4,2019
RE:CarpenterCirclePUD–PlanningBoardUpdatetoCommonCouncil
ThisupdateissubmittedinaccordancewiththeCity’sPUDOrdinance,whichrequiresthatthePlanningBoardupdate
CommonCouncilaftereachPlanningBoardmeetingwheretheprojectisconsideredandrequestongoingwritten
commentsfromtheCommonCouncil.PleasesubmitanywrittencommentsforthePlanningBoardtomeat
lnicholas@cityofithaca.orgorAnyaHarrisataharris@cityofithaca.org.Call(607Ͳ274Ͳ6557)oremailmedirectlywith
questionsorrequestsforinformation.
PlanningBoardUpdate
ThePlanningBoardreviewedthesiteplanandparkingfortheprojectataspecialmeetingwithCommonCouncilon
August27,2019.Brock,Fleming,GerhartandLewiswereinattendance.Theapplicantpresentedadetailed
descriptionoftheproposedparkingincludinghowtheparkingdemandwasgeneratedandreductionsthathavebeen
madesincetheoriginalproposal(seeattachedpresentation).Asshowninthepresentation,thetotalnumberof
proposedparkingspacesonsiteis532,183ofwhichareprovidedinsidethetwomixedusebuildingsand349ofwhich
aresurfaceparking.Ofthe349surfaceparkingspaces,157arededicatedtooneuseandtheremaining192spaces
aresharedbetweenalluses.Theapplicantstatesthatduetoparkingreductionsaswellassharedparking,thetotal
numberofspacesneededhasbeenreducedby158,or31%fromtheactualcalculatedparkingdemandof690spaces.
PlanningBoardandCouncilcomments/requestsincludedthefollowing:
1. Theapplicantshouldrefinetheparkingdemandfortheresidentialcomponent.Amultiplierof1.5spacesper
unitwasusedalthoughtheunitsareamixofsizes.
2. Theapplicantstatedthattheparkingdemandforthemedicalofficebuilding(MOB)isconsistentwithother
CMCsites.TheapplicantshouldlookattheactualutilizationofexistingCMCparkinglotstodetermineifthe
correctratioisbeingused.
3. WhathasbeendonetoincentivizeareductioninparkingdemandͲsuchascarpoolpriorityparkingetc?How
isthisreductionquantified?(ApplicantrespondedthatthisisansweredintheTransportationImpactStudy
(TIS)andwilllookintocarpoolparking)
4. Ifthesiteisnotsuitableforporouspaving,whatareotheralternativestoimpervioussurface?Theapplicant
shouldinvestigatethis.
5. Theaffordablehousingcomponentshouldbemoreintegratedintotheprojectasawhole.
6. Affordable/nonmixedusehousingisappropriatedplacedbecauseitisthefarthestfromRte13.
7. Considerconnectingparkingataffordablehousingbuildingtointernalroad.
8. Needtolookatthepositionoftreelawnandsidewalkinrelationtostreet.
9. Greenspaceinsouthwestcornerisdisconnected–canitbemovedandplaygroundexpanded?
10. MixedͲuseminimizesparkingbecauseofabilitytoshareparking.
11. Needmoreimprovementsto3rdstreetpedestriancrossing
12. East/Westpedestriancirculationneedstobestronger.
ThePlanningBoardexpectstocontinuereviewingtheprojectatasecondSpecialJointMeetingwithCouncilon
September17,2019at6pm.TheplannedtopicsofdiscussionareArchitecture/AestheticsandSustainability/Green
infrastructure.Theprojectwillbescheduledforthebeginningoftheagendatoaccommodateattendanceby
interestedmembersofCouncil.
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
Farmer·s MarketWaste Water Treatment PlanStorage TanksRailroadNYSEG Easement No Build ZoneRoute 13 Carpenter Park Site Constraints
Total Baseline Parking Demand 681Total Baseline Demand Minus Utilization of Structured Parking (183 spaces) 498 Total Mixed-Use/Shared Parking Demand – 11:00 AM 388 Shared Parking Reduction 20% DEDICATED SURFACE PARKINGMTIEDESCRIPTION SIZEPARKINGRATEPARKINGDEMAND64+ KSF4.5912948214251403.680.201.510.9922.27+ KSF71+ KSF166 Units40 UnitsMOBRetailCommunity GardensResidentialResidentialProposed Carpenter Park DevelopmentTABLE XII: PARKING DEMAND ANALYSISCity of Ithaca, NYDIFFERENCE BETWEEN DEMAND AND ACTUALSHARED62 -232-3-14-77-2479--16157Surface Demand: 507 SpacesSurface Provided: 349 SpacesBelow Demand: 158 Spaces or 31% below demand350 BELOW DEMAND 192192Note: 1. MOD parking rate is based on 85th percentile ITE rates. This rate is comparable to existing parking supply ratios at other Cayuga Medical Center sites. Given that the structured parking is dedicated to the residents of the mixed-use buildings, the actual effective parking supply available to all other users (including spillover from the market-rate apartments) is 349 spaces. The total baseline parking demand for the enitre project site is 681 spaces, of which 251 spaces is attributable to the market-rate apartments. After complete utilization of the structured parking, there is a remaining baseline demand of 488 spaces. 681 spaces, 68172 Units 26069050731%690507
6,'(:$/. 21675((73$5.,1*7:2:$<75$9(//$1(21675((73$5.,1*75((/$:1
)(1&()253*+*$5'(1
)(1&()253*+*$5'(175((/$:1$$
6,'(:$/.75((/$:121675((73$5.,1*7:2:$<75$9(//$1(21675((73$5.,1*75((/$:16,'(:$/.%,25(17,213/$=$0,;('86(%8,/',1*&%%':*12 &DUSHQWHU3DUN6(&7,216'$7( 6&$/( $66+2:15(9,6,21'$7(1&$53(17(5&,5&/(6&$/(
7+675((7(;7(16,216&$/(
127(
75$9(//$1(6$5(0$1'$7('%<),5(&2'(127(
75$9(//$1(6$5(0$1'$7('%<),5(&2'(
&DUSHQWHU3DUN,WKDFD1<&RQWDFW ZZZEDUWRQSDUWQHUVFRP1RUULVWRZQ(0DLQ6W6XLWH1RUULVWRZQ3$ 3KLODGHOSKLD'HODQFH\6WUG)ORRU3KLODGHOSKLD3$ %DUWRQ3DUWQHUV$UFKLWHFWV3ODQQHUV,QF$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG3URMHFW1XPEHU 3&OLHQW 3DUN*URYH5HDOW\'DWH 3HUVSHFWLYH9LHZ
&DUSHQWHU3DUN,WKDFD1<&RQWDFW ZZZEDUWRQSDUWQHUVFRP1RUULVWRZQ(0DLQ6W6XLWH1RUULVWRZQ3$ 3KLODGHOSKLD'HODQFH\6WUG)ORRU3KLODGHOSKLD3$ %DUWRQ3DUWQHUV$UFKLWHFWV3ODQQHUV,QF$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG3URMHFW1XPEHU 3&OLHQW 3DUN*URYH5HDOW\'DWH 3HUVSHFWLYH9LHZ
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Tom Knipe, Deputy Director for Economic Development
Date: September 6, 2019
Re: Short Term Rental Regulation
This purpose of this memo is to request Council’s support for staff to 1) develop recommendations for
policy objectives for short term rental (STR) regulation and 2) gather community input and further data to
inform the design of possible short term rental regulation.
As part of the phase two Comprehensive Plan, Planning & Development staff have been researching and
evaluating housing issues impacting the City. Short term rentals have been on the list of housing-related
topics to explore, and the issue has come up during recent Common Council discussions about infill
housing. We have also been receiving citizen complaints about short term rentals.
STR activity in the City has grown rapidly over the past several years (activity details below). Many City
residents are successfully supplementing their incomes by renting out their homes on Airbnb or by
making a room in their home or accessory unit on their property available for short-term rental, which
likely has a number of positive impacts on both the local economy and household finances. However, we
have also seen a number of properties in the City being converted into full-time use as Airbnb rentals,
which raises concerns about reductions in housing supply at a time when the City is working to expand
affordable housing options. Concerns have also been raised about neighborhood impacts and impacts on
the traditional lodging market.
Staff are seeking Council input on whether to move forward with exploring options for STR regulation.
Prior to designing options, it is critical to clarify what the policy objectives of any such regulation would
be. Possible policy objectives on which we would seek further community input include:
1. Preserve the availability of housing by ensuring that properties are not permanently converted
into short-term rentals.
2. Minimize public safety risks and noise, trash and parking problems often associated with short-
term rentals without creating additional work for City staff, including police.
3. Give residents the option to utilize their properties to generate extra income from short-term
rentals as long as all of the above mentioned policy objectives are met.
Further, staff seeks support from Council to proceed with the following next steps:
A. Gather additional data on the nature of STR activity in the City, particularly the number of units
that are in full-time use as STRs.
B. Gather community input, possibly through a community forum, to inform policy objectives and
options for regulation.
C. Explore possible third party tools for enforcement, and explore possible shared services
arrangements with Tompkins County and/or adjacent municipalities for enforcement.
D. Design options for STR regulation for consideration by Council.
Staff will attend the September Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting to discuss these
ideas further and seek Council’s input and support to proceed.
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
WhatisthenatureofShortTermRental(STR) activityintheCity ofIthaca*?
x Between450and512uniqueSTRunits
x $115Ͳ$138Ͳmediannightlyrate
x 64%singlefamilyhomelistingsand35%multiͲfamilyhomelistings
x 71%entirehomeunits,and29%partialhomeunits(e.g.privateroominsideahome)
x 27%annualgrowthinlistingsbetween2017and2018
x 90%+oflistingsareonAirbnb.OtherlistingsiteslocallyincludeBooking.com,
TripAdvisorͲownedsites,andExpediaͲownedsites
x 30%ͲapproximatepercentageoflistingsintheCitythatareavailablefullͲtime
(requiresconfirmationwithadditionaldatacollectionandanalysis)
*Source:HostCompliancereports,April,2019andJune,2019
Draft Resolution – Declaration of Lead Agency
09/11/2019
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Establish Minimum Story Height
Requirements in all CBD Zoning Districts, Maximum Height in the
CBD-60 Zoning District, a Maximum Allowable Footprint, and
Stepback Requirements for Properties on the, 300, 400, and 500
Blocks of West State Street, City of Ithaca Tax Parcels 71.-1-
10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15, 71.-1-16,
71.-1-17, 71.-1-18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-1-3,
71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14,
71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-
1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18,
71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-
4, 71.-5-5, 71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-
11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-17, 71.-6-18,
71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-24, 71.-
6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9, 72.-
3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17, 72.-3-
18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-
24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-
10, 72.-4-13, 72.-4-14, 72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9.
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 a Type 1 Action under the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance,§ 176-4 Type 1 Actions,
B.7, “The adoption of zoning map changes and changes in the
allowable uses within any zoning district, affecting 2 or more
acres in the district”, now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby
declare itself lead agency for the environmental review of the
proposal to amending the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning,” to amend the Municipal Code of The
City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Establish Minimum
Story Height Requirements in all CBD Zoning Districts, Maximum
Height in the CBD-60 Zoning District, a Maximum Allowable
Footprint, and Stepback Requirements for Properties on the, 300,
400, and 500 Blocks of West State Street, City of Ithaca Tax
Parcels 71.-1-10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-
15, 71.-1-16, 71.-1-17, 71.-1-18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-
22, 71.-1-3, 71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-
12, 71.-2-14, 71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4,
71.-2-5, 71.-5-1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-
17.2, 71.-5-18, 71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23,
71.-5-24, 71.-5-4, 71.-5-5, 71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1,
71.-6-10, 71.-6-11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-
6-17, 71.-6-18, 71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23,
71.-6-24, 71.-6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8,
71.-6-9, 72.-3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-
17, 72.-3-18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-
23.2, 72.-3-24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-
3-9, 72.-4-10, 72.-4-13, 72.-4-14,
72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9.
Draft Resolution – Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance, 09/11/19
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Establish Minimum Story Height
Requirements in all CBD Zoning Districts, Maximum Height in the
CBD-60 Zoning District, a Maximum Allowable Footprint, and
Stepback Requirements for Properties on the, 300, 400, and 500
Blocks of West State/MLK Street, City of Ithaca Tax Parcels 71.-
1-10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15, 71.-1-16,
71.-1-17, 71.-1-18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-1-3,
71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14,
71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-
1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18,
71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-
4, 71.-5-5, 71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-
11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-17, 71.-6-18,
71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-24, 71.-
6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9, 72.-
3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17, 72.-3-
18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-
24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-
10, 72.-4-13, 72.-4-14, 72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9.
WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Ithaca is considering
a proposal to establish minimum story height requirements in all
CBD Zoning Districts, maximum height in the CBD-60 Zoning District,
a maximum allowable footprint, and stepback requirements for
properties on the, 300, 400, and 500 b locks of West State/MLK
Street, City of Ithaca Tax Parcels; 71.-1-10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12,
71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15, 71.-1-16, 71.-1-17, 71.-1-18, 71.-
1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-1-3, 71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-
7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14, 71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-
2-19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11,
71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18, 71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-
5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-4, 71.-5-5, 71.-5-7,
71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-
13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-17, 71.-6-18, 71.-6-19, 71.-6-20,
71.-6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-24, 71.-6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-
6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9, 72.-3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-
3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17, 72.-3-18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-
3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3,
72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-10, 72.-4-13, 72.-4-14,
72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9, and
WHEREAS, the proposed action is a Type 1 Action under the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance,§ 176-4 Type 1 Actions,
B.7, “The adoption of zoning map changes and changes in the
allowable uses within any zoning district, affecting 2 or more
acres in the district”, and
WHEREAS, the appropriate environmental review has been conducted,
including the preparation of a Full Environmental Assessment Form
(FEAF) Part 1, dated May 22, 2019, and Part 2, dated May 23, 2019,
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, Part 1, dated
May 22, 2019, and Part 2, dated May 23, 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.
08/07/19
Page 1 of 2
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca,
Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Establish Minimum Story Height
Requirements in all CBD Zoning Districts, Maximum Height in the CBD-60
Zoning District, a Maximum Allowable Footprint, and Stepback
Requirements for Properties on the, 300, 400, and 500 Blocks of West
State/MLK Street, City of Ithaca.
The ordinance to be considered shall be as follows:
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF THE CITY OF ITHACA,
CHAPTER 325, ENTITLED “ZONING” TO AMEND All CBD ZONING DISTRICTS
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 325-8A, District Regulations Chart, be
amended to add minimum story heights in all CBD Zoning Districts, to
read as follows:
“All new construction in the CBD Zoning Districts are required to have
a minimum height of 12’ floor to floor on the first story and a
minimum 10’floor to floor for each subsequent story.”
Section 2. Chapter 325, Section 325-8A, District Regulations Chart, be
amended to change the maximum height in the CBD-60 district to 62’,
and to change the maximum height in the CBD-50 district to 52’. This
is intended to allow for a 12’ minimum height of the first story and a
10’ minimum height of each subsequent story.
Section 3. Chapter 325, Section 325-5 of the Municipal Code of the
City of Ithaca, entitled “Zoning Map” is hereby amended to change the
zoning designation of the following parcels, or some portion of these
parcels, as shown on the attached map entitled “Proposed West State
Street Rezoning from CBD-60 to CBD-50 – May 23, 2019”, from CBD-60 to
CBD-50: 71.-1-10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15,
71.-1-16, 71.-1-17, 71.-1-18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-
1-3, 71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14,
71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-19, 71.-2-20, 71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-1,
71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18, 71.-5-
19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-4, 71.-5-5,
71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-11, 71.-6-12, 71.-
6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-17, 71.-6-18, 71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-
6-21, 71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-24, 71.-6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-
6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9, 72.-3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-
15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17, 72.-3-18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2,
72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7,
72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-10,72.-4-13, 72.-4-14, 72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-
4-5, and 72.-4-9.
08/07/19
Page 2 of 2
Section 4. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, the City
Clerk and the Planning Department shall amend the zoning map and the
district regulations chart in accordance with the amendments made
herewith.
Section 5. Chapter 325, Section 325-8D, Additional Restrictions in the
CBD District, is hereby amended to add a subsection (4) to read as
follows:
325-8D.
4. All new construction located in the newly created CBD-52 Zoning
District directly fronting on the 300,400, and 500 blocks of West
State/MLK Street, cannot exceed a maximum building footprint of
7,200 SF,
5. In order to maintain the existing character and to preserve
the pedestrian scale along the street front, all new
construction located in the portion of the newly created CBD-
52 Zoning District directly fronting on the 300, 400, and 500
blocks of West State/MLK Street that is over 4 stories in height
must contain a stepback of 15’ after the first 32’ in height.
Section 6. 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 7. Effective date. This ordinance shall take affect
immediately and in accordance with law upon publication of notices as
provided in the Ithaca City Charter.
Page 1 of 13
Full Environmental Assessment Form
Part 1 - Project and Setting
Instructions for Completing Part 1
Part 1 is to be completed by the applicant or project sponsor. 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; indicate whether missing information does not exist,
or is not reasonably available to the sponsor; and, when possible, generally describe work or studies which would be necessary to
update or fully develop that information.
Applicants/sponsors must complete all items in Sections A & B. In Sections C, D & E, most items contain an initial question that
must be answered either “Yes” or “No”. If the answer to the initial question is “Yes”, complete the sub-questions that follow. If the
answer to the initial question is “No”, proceed to the next question. Section F allows the project sponsor to identify and attach any
additional information. Section G requires the name and signature of the DSSOLFDQWRUproject sponsor to verify that the information
contained in Part 1is accurate and complete.
A. Project and $SSOLFDQWSponsor Information.
Name of Action or Project:
Project Location (describe, and attach a general location map):
Brief Description of Proposed Action (include purpose or need):
Name of Applicant/Sponsor: Telephone:
E-Mail:
Address:
City/PO: State: Zip Code:
Project Contact (if not same as sponsor; give name and title/role): Telephone:
E-Mail:
Address:
City/PO: State: Zip Code:
Property Owner (if not same as sponsor): Telephone:
E-Mail:
Address:
City/PO: State: Zip Code:
FEAF 2019
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
300, 400, and 500 Block of West State Street, City of Ithaca
An Ordinance Amending The Municipal Code Of The City Of Ithaca, Chapter 325, Entitled “Zoning” to Establish Minimum Story Height Requirements in all
CBD Zoning Districts, Maximum Height in the CBD-60 Zoning District, a Maximum Allowable Footprint, and Stepback Requirements for Properties on the,
300, 400, and 500 Blocks of West State Street, City of Ithaca Tax Parcels 71.-1-10, 71.-1-11, 71.-1-12, 71.-1-13, 71.-1-14, 71.-1-15, 71.-1-16, 71.-1-17,
71.-1-18, 71.-1-19.1, 71.-1-19.2, 71.-1-22, 71.-1-3, 71.-1-4, 71.-1-5, 71.-1-7, 71.-1-8, 71.-1-9, 71.-2-12, 71.-2-14, 71.-2-15, 71.-2-18, 71.-2-19, 71.-2-20,
71.-2-4, 71.-2-5, 71.-5-1, 71.-5-10, 71.-5-11, 71.-5-12, 71.-5-13, 71.-5-17.2, 71.-5-18, 71.-5-19, 71.-5-2, 71.-5-20, 71.-5-22, 71.-5-23, 71.-5-24, 71.-5-4,
71.-5-5, 71.-5-7, 71.-5-8, 71.-5-9, 71.-6-1, 71.-6-10, 71.-6-11, 71.-6-12, 71.-6-13, 71.-6-14, 71.-6-15, 71.-6-17, 71.-6-18, 71.-6-19, 71.-6-20, 71.-6-21,
71.-6-22, 71.-6-23, 71.-6-24, 71.-6-25, 71.-6-26, 71.-6-5, 71.-6-6, 71.-6-7, 71.-6-8, 71.-6-9, 72.-3-10, 72.-3-12, 72.-3-14, 72.-3-15, 72.-3-16, 72.-3-17,
72.-3-18.1, 72.-3-18.2, 72.-3-19, 72.-3-2, 72.-3-20, 72.-3-23.2, 72.-3-24, 72.-3-26, 72.-3-3, 72.-3-6, 72.-3-7, 72.-3-8, 72.-3-9, 72.-4-10, 72.-4-13, 72.-4-14,
72.-4-3, 72.-4-4, 72.-4-5, and 72.-4-9.
JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development
607-274-6551
jcornish@cityofithaca.org
108 East Green Street
Ithaca NY 14850
607-274-6550
jcornish@cityofithaca.org
N/A Applies to numerous Properties
Page 2 of 13
B. Government Approvals
B. Government Approvals Funding, or Sponsorship.(“Funding” includes grants, loans, tax relief, and any other forms of financial
assistance.)
Government Entity If Yes: Identify Agency and Approval(s)
Required
Application Date
(Actual or projected)
a. City&RXQVHOTown%RDUG, Yes No
or Village Board of Trustees
b. City, Town or Village Yes No
Planning Board or Commission
c. City Town or Yes No
Village Zoning Board of Appeals
d. Other local agencies Yes No
e. County agencies Yes No
f. Regional agencies Yes No
g. State agencies Yes No
h. Federal agencies Yes No
i. Coastal Resources.
i. Is the project site within a Coastal Area, or the waterfront area of a Designated Inland Waterway? Yes No
ii. Is the project site located in a community with an approved Local Waterfront Revitalization Program? Yes No
iii. Is the project site within a Coastal Erosion Hazard Area? Yes No
C. Planning and Zoning
C.1. Planning and zoning actions.
Will administrative or legislative adoption, or amendment of a plan, local law, ordinance, rule or regulation be the Yes No
only approval(s) which must be granted to enable the proposed action to proceed?
x If Yes, complete sections C, F and G.
x If No, proceed to question C.2 and complete all remaining sections and questions in Part 1
C.2. Adopted land use plans.
a. Do any municipally- adopted (city, town, village or county) comprehensive land use plan(s) include the site Yes No
where the proposed action would be located?
If Yes, does the comprehensive plan include specific recommendations for the site where the proposed action Yes No
would be located?
b. Is the site of the proposed action within any local or regional special planning district (for example: Greenway Yes No
Brownfield Opportunity Area (BOA); designated State or Federal heritage area; watershed management plan;
or other?)
If Yes, identify the plan(s):
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
c. Is the proposed action located wholly or partially within an area listed in an adopted municipal open space plan, Yes No
or an adopted municipal farmland protection plan?
If Yes, identify the plan(s):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
✔Adoption of Ordinance
August 28, 2020
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Page 3 of 13
C.3. Zoning
a. Is the site of the proposed action located in a municipality with an adopted zoning law or ordinance. Yes No
If Yes, what is the zoning classification(s) including any applicable overlay district?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b. Is the use permitted or allowed by a special or conditional use permit? Yes No
c. Is a zoning change requested as part of the proposed action? Yes No
If Yes,
i.What is the proposed new zoning for the site? ___________________________________________________________________
C.4. Existing community services.
a. In what school district is the project site located? ________________________________________________________________
b. What police or other public protection forces serve the project site?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
c. Which fire protection and emergency medical services serve the project site?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
d. What parks serve the project site?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
D. Project Details
D.1. Proposed and Potential Development
a. What is the general nature of the proposed action (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial, recreational; if mixed, include all
components)?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b. 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
c. Is the proposed action an expansion of an existing project or use? Yes No
i.If Yes, what is the approximate percentage of the proposed expansion and identify the units (e.g., acres, miles, housing units,
square feet)? % ____________________ Units: ____________________
d. Is the proposed action a subdivision, or does it include a subdivision? Yes No
If Yes,
i.Purpose or type of subdivision? (e.g., residential, industrial, commercial; if mixed, specify types)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii. Is a cluster/conservation layout proposed? Yes No
iii.Number of lots proposed? ________
iv.Minimum and maximum proposed lot sizes? Minimum __________ Maximum __________
Yes No
_____ months
_____
_____ month _____ year
HWill WKHproposed action be constructed in multiple phases?
LIf No, anticipated period of construction:
LLIf Yes:
x Total number of phases anticipated
x Anticipated commencement date of phase 1 (including demolition)
x Anticipated completion date of final phase _____ month _____year
x Generally describe connections or relationships among phases, including any contingencies where progress of one phase may
determine timing or duration of future phases: _______________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
✔
CBD-50, CBD-60
✔
✔
CBD-52, CBD-62
Ithaca
Ithaca Police Department
Ithaca Fire Department
None
Page 4 of 13
f. Does the project include new residential uses? Yes No
If Yes, show numbers of units proposed.
One Family Two Family Three Family Multiple Family (four or more)
Initial Phase ___________ ___________ ____________ ________________________
At completion
of all phases ___________ ___________ ____________ ________________________
g. Does the proposed action include new non-residential construction (including expansions)? Yes No
If Yes,
i. Total number of structures ___________
ii.Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: ________height; ________width; and _______ length
iii.Approximate extent of building space to be heated or cooled: ______________________ square feet
h. Does the proposed action include construction or other activities that will result in the impoundment of any Yes No
liquids, such as creation of a water supply, reservoir, pond, lake, waste lagoon or other storage?
If Yes,
i.Purpose of the impoundment: ________________________________________________________________________________
ii.If a water impoundment, the principal source of the water: Ground water Surface water streams Other specify:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.If other than water, identify the type of impounded/contained liquids and their source.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iv.Approximate size of the proposed impoundment. Volume: ____________ million gallons; surface area: ____________ acres
v.Dimensions of the proposed dam or impounding structure: ________ height; _______ length
vi.Construction method/materials for the proposed dam or impounding structure (e.g., earth fill, rock, wood, concrete):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
D.2. Project Operations
a. Does the proposed action include any excavation, mining, or dredging, during construction, operations, or both? Yes No
(Not including general site preparation, grading or installation of utilities or foundations where all excavated
materials will remain onsite)
If Yes:
i .What is the purpose of the excavation or dredging? _______________________________________________________________
ii.How much material (including rock, earth, sediments, etc.) is proposed to be removed from the site?
x Volume (specify tons or cubic yards): ____________________________________________
x Over what duration of time? ____________________________________________________
iii.Describe nature and characteristics of materials to be excavated or dredged, and plans to use, manage or dispose of them.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iv.Will there be onsite dewatering or processing of excavated materials? Yes No
If yes, describe. ___________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
v.What is the total area to be dredged or excavated? _____________________________________acres
vi.What is the maximum area to be worked at any one time? _______________________________ acres
vii.What would be the maximum depth of excavation or dredging? __________________________ feet
viii.Will the excavation require blasting? Yes No
ix.Summarize site reclamation goals and plan: _____________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b. Would the proposed action cause or result in alteration of, increase or decrease in size of, or encroachment Yes No
into any existing wetland, waterbody, shoreline, beach or adjacent area?
If Yes:
i.Identify the wetland or waterbody which would be affected (by name, water index number, wetland map number or geographic
description): ______________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 5 of 13
ii.
iii.
Describe how the proposed action would affect that waterbody or wetland, e.g. excavation, fill, placement of structures, or
alteration of channels, banks and shorelines. Indicate extent of activities, alterations and additions in square feet or acres:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Will WKHproposed action cause or result in disturbance to bottom sediments?Yes No
If Yes, describe: __________________________________________________________________________________________
iv.Will WKHproposed action cause or result in the destruction or removal of aquatic vegetation? Yes No
If Yes:
x aFUHV of DTXDWLFvegetation proposed to be removed ___________________________________________________________
x H[SHFWHG acreage of aquatic vegetation remaining after project completion ________________________________________
x purpose of proposed removal (e.g. beach clearing, invasive species control, boat access): ____________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
x proposed method of plant removal: ________________________________________________________________________
x if chemical/herbicide treatment will be used, specify product(s): _________________________________________________
v.Describe any proposed reclamation/mitigation following disturbance: _________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
c. Will the proposed action use, or create a new demand for water? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Total anticipated water usage/demand per day: __________________________ gallons/day
ii.Will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public water supply? Yes No
If Yes:
x Name of district or service area: _________________________________________________________________________
x Does the existing public water supply have capacity to serve the proposal? Yes No
x Is the project site in the existing district? Yes No
x Is expansion of the district needed? Yes No
x Do existing lines serve the project site? Yes No
iii.Will line extension within an existing district be necessary to supply the project? Yes No
If Yes:
x Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
x Source(s) of supply for the district: ________________________________________________________________________
iv.Is a new water supply district or service area proposed to be formed to serve the project site? Yes No
If, Yes:
x Applicant/sponsor for new district: ________________________________________________________________________
x Date application submitted or anticipated: __________________________________________________________________
x Proposed source(s) of supply for new district: _______________________________________________________________
v.If a public water supply will not be used, describe plans to provide water supply for the project: ___________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
vi. If water supply will be from wells (public or private),ZKDWLVWKHmaximum pumping capacity: _______ gallons/minute.
d. Will the proposed action generate liquid wastes? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Total anticipated liquid waste generation per day: _______________ gallons/day
ii.Nature of liquid wastes to be generated (e.g., sanitary wastewater, industrial; if combination, describe all components and
approximate volumes or proportions of each): __________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Will the proposed action use any existing public wastewater treatment facilities? Yes No
If Yes:
x Name of wastewater treatment plant to be used: _____________________________________________________________
x Name of district: ______________________________________________________________________________________
x Does the existing wastewater treatment plant have capacity to serve the project? Yes No
x Is the project site in the existing district? Yes No
x Is expansion of the district needed? Yes No
Page 6 of 13
Yes No x Do existing sewer lines serve the project site?
x Will Dline extension within an existing district be necessary to serve the project? Yes No
If Yes:
x Describe extensions or capacity expansions proposed to serve this project: ____________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
iv.Will a new wastewater (sewage) treatment district be formed to serve the project site? Yes No
If Yes:
x Applicant/sponsor for new district: ____________________________________________________________________
x Date application submitted or anticipated: _______________________________________________________________
x What is the receiving water for the wastewater discharge? __________________________________________________
v.If public facilities will not be used, describe plans to provide wastewater treatment for the project, including specifying proposed
receiving water (name and classification if surface discharge or describe subsurface disposal plans):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
vi.Describe any plans or designs to capture, recycle or reuse liquid waste: _______________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
e. Will the proposed action disturb more than one acre and create stormwater runoff, either from new point Yes No
sources (i.e. ditches, pipes, swales, curbs, gutters or other concentrated flows of stormwater) or non-point
source (i.e. sheet flow) during construction or post construction?
If Yes:
i.How much impervious surface will the project create in relation to total size of project parcel?
_____ Square feet or _____ acres (impervious surface)
_____ Square feet or _____ acres (parcel size)
ii.Describe types of new point sources. __________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Where will the stormwater runoff be directed (i.e. on-site stormwater management facility/structures, adjacent properties,
groundwater, on-site surface water or off-site surface waters)?
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
x If to surface waters, identify receiving water bodies or wetlands: ________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
x Will stormwater runoff flow to adjacent properties? Yes No
iv.Does WKHproposed plan minimize impervious surfaces, use pervious materials or collect and re-use stormwater? Yes No
f. Does the proposed action include, or will it use on-site, one or more sources of air emissions, including fuel Yes No
combustion, waste incineration, or other processes or operations?
If Yes, identify:
i. Mobile sources during project operations (e.g., heavy equipment, fleet or delivery vehicles)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Stationary sources during construction (e.g., power generation, structural heating, batch plant, crushers)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Stationary sources during operations (e.g., process emissions, large boilers, electric generation)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
g. Will any air emission sources named in D.2.f (above), require a NY State Air Registration, Air Facility Permit, Yes No
or Federal Clean Air Act Title IV or Title V Permit?
If Yes:
i.Is the project site located in an Air quality non-attainment area? (Area routinely or periodically fails to meet Yes No
ambient air quality standards for all or some parts of the year)
ii.In addition to emissions as calculated in the application, the project will generate:
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Nitrous Oxide (N22)
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6)
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Carbon Dioxide equivalent of HydrofloXrocarbons (H)&V)
x ___________Tons/year (VKRUWWRQV) of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs)
Page 7 of 13
h. Will the proposed action generate or emit methane (including, but not limited to, sewage treatment plants, Yes No
landfills, composting facilities)?
If Yes:
i.Estimate methane generation in tons/year (metric): ________________________________________________________________
ii. Describe any methane capture, control or elimination measures included in project design (e.g., combustion to generate heat or
electricity, flaring): ________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
i. Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open-air operations or processes, such as Yes No
quarry or landfill operations?
If Yes: Describe operations and nature of emissions (e.g., diesel exhaust, rock particulates/dust):
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
j. Will the proposed action result in a substantial increase in traffic above present levels or generate substantial Yes No
new demand for transportation facilities or services?
If Yes:
i.When is the peak traffic expected (Check all that apply): Morning Evening Weekend
Randomly between hours of __________ to ________.
ii.For commercial activities only, projected number of truck trips/dayDQGW\SH HJVHPLWUDLOHUVDQGGXPSWUXFNV BBBBBBBBBBBBB
LLL
LY
v.
Parking spaces: Existing _____________BBBBBBProposed ___________ Net increase/decrease _____________BBBBBBBB
'RHVWKHSURSRVHGDFWLRQLQFOXGHDQ\VKDUHGXVHSDUNLQJ"<HV1R
Yes No vi.Are public/private transportation service(s) or facilities available within ½ mile of the proposed site?
vii Will the proposed action include access to public transportation or accommodations for use of hybrid, electric Yes No
or other alternative fueled vehicles?
viii.Will the proposed action include plans for pedestrian or bicycle accommodations for connections to existing Yes No
pedestrian or bicycle routes?
k. Will the proposed action (for commercial or industrial projects only) generate new or additional demand Yes No
for energy?
If Yes:
i.Estimate annual electricity demand during operation of the proposed action: ____________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Anticipated sources/suppliers of electricity for the project (e.g., on-site combustion, on-site renewable, via grid/local utility, or
other):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Will the proposed action require a new, or an upgrade to an existing substation? Yes No
l. Hours of operation. Answer all items which apply.
i. During Construction:ii.During Operations:
x Monday - Friday: _________________________x Monday - Friday: ____________________________
x Saturday: ________________________________x Saturday: ___________________________________
x Sunday: _________________________________x Sunday: ____________________________________
x Holidays: ________________________________x Holidays: ___________________________________
,IWKHSURSRVHGDFWLRQLQFOXGHVDQ\PRGLILFDWLRQRIH[LVWLQJURDGVFUHDWLRQRIQHZURDGVRUFKDQJHLQH[LVWLQJDFFHVVGHVFULEH
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Page 8 of 13
m. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, Yes No
operation, or both?
If yes:
i.Provide details including sources, time of day and duration:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Will WKHproposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a noise barrier or screen? Yes No
Describe: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
n.Wthill propeosactioed havneoutd lighoor ting? Yes No
If yes:
i.Describe source(s), location(s), height of fixture(s), direction/aim, and proximity to nearest occupied structures:
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Will proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? Yes No
Describe: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
o.Does the proposed action have the potential to produce odors for more than one hour per day? Yes No
If Yes, describe possible sources, potential frequency and duration of odor emissions, and proximity to nearest
occupied structures: ______________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
p. Yes No Will the proposed action include any bulk storage of petroleum (FRPELQHGFDSDFLW\RIover 1,100 gallons)
or chemical productsJDOORQVLQDERYHJURXQGVWRUDJHRUDQ\DPRXQWLQXQGHUJURXQGVWRUDJH?
If Yes:
LProduct(s) to be stored ______________________________________________________________________________________
LLVolume(s) ______ per unit time ___________ (e.g., month, year)
LLLGenerally describe WKHproposed storage facilities ________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
q. Will the proposed action (commercial, industrial and recreational projects only) use pesticides (i.e., herbicides, Yes No
insecticides) during construction or operation?
If Yes:
i.Describe proposed treatment(s):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Will the proposed action use Integrated Pest Management Practices? Yes No
r. Will the proposed action (commercial or industrial projects only) involve or require the management or disposal Yes No
of solid waste (excluding hazardous materials)?
If Yes:
i.Describe any solid waste(s) to be generated during construction or operation of the facility:
x Construction: ____________________ tons per ________________ (unit of time)
x Operation : ____________________ tons per ________________ (unit of time)
ii.Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of materials to avoid disposal as solid waste:
x Construction: ________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
x Operation: __________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Proposed disposal methods/facilities for solid waste generated on-site:
x Construction: ________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
x Operation: __________________________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 9 of 13
s. Does the proposed action include construction or modification of a solid waste management facility? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Type of management or handling of waste proposed for the site (e.g., recycling or transfer station, composting, landfill, or
other disposal activities): ___________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Anticipated rate of disposal/processing:
x ________ Tons/month, if transfer or other non-combustion/thermal treatment, or
x ________ Tons/hour, if combustion or thermal treatment
iii.If landfill, anticipated site life: ________________________________ years
t.Will WKHproposed action at the site involve the commercial generation, treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous Yes No
waste?
If Yes:
i.Name(s) of all hazardous wastes or constituents to be generated, handled or managed at facility: ___________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Generally describe processes or activities involving hazardous wastes or constituents: ___________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii. Specify amount to be handled or generated _____ tons/month
iv.Describe any proposals for on-site minimization, recycling or reuse of hazardous constituents: ____________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
v.Will any hazardous wastes be disposed at an existing offsite hazardous waste facility? Yes No
If Yes: provide name and location of facility: _______________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
If No: describe proposed management of any hazardous wastes which will not be sent to a hazardous waste facility:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
E. Site and Setting of Proposed Action
E.1. Land uses on and surrounding the project site
a. Existing land uses.
i.Check all uses that occur on, adjoining and near the project site.
Urban Industrial Commercial Residential (suburban) Rural (non-farm)
Forest Agriculture Aquatic Other (specify): ____________________________________
ii.If mix of uses, generally describe:
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b. Land uses and covertypes on the project site.
Land use or
Covertype
Current
Acreage
Acreage After
Project Completion
Change
(Acres +/-)
x Roads, buildings, and other paved or impervious
surfaces
x Forested
x Meadows, grasslands or brushlands (non-
agricultural, including abandoned agricultural)
x Agricultural
(includes active orchards, field, greenhouse etc.)
x Surface water features
(lakes, ponds, streams, rivers, etc.)
x Wetlands (freshwater or tidal)
x Non-vegetated (bare rock, earth or fill)
x Other
Describe: _______________________________
________________________________________
Page 10 of 13
c. Is the project site presently used by members of the community for public recreation? Yes No
i.If Yes: explain: __________________________________________________________________________________________
d. Are there any facilities serving children, the elderly, people with disabilities (e.g., schools, hospitals, licensed Yes No
day care centers, or group homes) within 1500 feet of the project site?
If Yes,
i.Identify Facilities:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
e. Does the project site contain an existing dam? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Dimensions of the dam and impoundment:
x Dam height: _________________________________ feet
x Dam length: _________________________________ feet
x Surface area: _________________________________ acres
x Volume impounded: _______________________________ gallons OR acre-feet
ii.Dam=s existing hazard classification: _________________________________________________________________________
iii.Provide date and summarize results of last inspection:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
f. Has the project site ever been used as a municipal, commercial or industrial solid waste management facility, Yes No
or does the project site adjoin property which is now, or was at one time, used as a solid waste management facility?
If Yes:
i. Has the facility been formally closed? Yes No
x If yes, cite sources/documentation: _______________________________________________________________________
ii.Describe the location of the project site relative to the boundaries of the solid waste management facility:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Describe any development constraints due to the prior solid waste activities: __________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
g. Have hazardous wastes been generated, treated and/or disposed of at the site, or does the project site adjoin Yes No
property which is now or was at one time used to commercially treat, store and/or dispose of hazardous waste?
If Yes:
i.Describe waste(s) handled and waste management activities, including approximate time when activities occurred:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
h. Potential contamination history. Has there been a reported spill at the proposed project site, or have any Yes No
remedial actions been conducted at or adjacent to the proposed site?
If Yes:
i.Is any portion of the site listed on the NYSDEC Spills Incidents database or Environmental Site Yes No
Remediation database? Check all that apply:
Yes – Spills Incidents database Provide DEC ID number(s): ________________________________
Yes – Environmental Site Remediation database Provide DEC ID number(s): ________________________________
Neither database
ii.If site has been subject of RCRA corrective activities, describe control measures:_______________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Is the project within 2000 feet of any site in the NYSDEC Environmental Site Remediation database? Yes No
If yes, provide DEC ID number(s): ______________________________________________________________________________
iv.If yes to (i), (ii) or (iii) above, describe current status of site(s):
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 11 of 13
v.Is the project site subject to an institutional control limiting property uses? Yes No
x If yes, DEC site ID number: ____________________________________________________________________________
x Describe the type of institutional control (e.g., deed restriction or easement): ____________________________________
x Describe any use limitations: ___________________________________________________________________________
x Describe any engineering controls: _______________________________________________________________________
x Will the project affect the institutional or engineering controls in place? Yes No
x Explain: ____________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
E.2. Natural Resources On or Near Project Site
a. What is the average depth to bedrock on the project site? ________________ feet
b. Are there bedrock outcroppings on the project site? Yes No
If Yes, what proportion of the site is comprised of bedrock outcroppings? __________________%
c. Predominant soil type(s) present on project site: ___________________________ __________%
___________________________ __________%
____________________________ __________%
d. What is the average depth to the water table on the project site? Average: _________ feet
e. Drainage status of project site soils: Well Drained: _____% of Vite
Moderately Well Drained: _____% of site
Poorly Drained _____% of Vite
f. Approximate proportion of proposed action site with slopes: 0-10%: _____% of site
10-15%: _____% of site
15% or greater: _____% of site
g. Are there any unique geologic features on the project site? Yes No
If Yes, describe: _____________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
h. Surface water features.
i.Does any portion of the project site contain wetlands or other waterbodies (including streams, rivers, Yes No
ponds or lakes)?
ii.Do any wetlands or other waterbodies adjoin the project site? Yes No
If Yes to either i or ii, continue. If No, skip to E.2.i.
iii.Are any of the wetlands or waterbodies within or adjoining the project site regulated by any federal, Yes No
state or local agency?
iv.For each identified UHJXODWHGwetland and waterbody on the project site, provide the following information
x Streams:Name ____________________________________________ Classification _______________________ Lakes or Ponds: Name ____________________________________________ Classification _______________________t Wetlands:Name ____________________________________________ Approximate Size ___________________ Wetland No. (if regulated by DEC) _____________________________
v.Are any of the above water bodies listed in the most recent compilation of NYS water quality-impaired Yes No
waterbodies?
If yes, name of impaired water body/bodies and basis for listing as impaired: _____________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
i. Is the project site in a designatedFloodway? Yes No
j. Is the project site in the 100year Floodplain? Yes No
k. Is the project site in the 500year Floodplain? Yes No
l. Is the project site located over, or immediately adjoining, a primary, principal or sole source aquifer? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Name of aquifer: _________________________________________________________________________________________
Page 12 of 13
m. Identify the predominant wildlife species that occupy or use the project site: ______________________________
______________________________ _______________________________ ______________________________
______________________________ _______________________________ ______________________________
n. Does the project site contain a designated significant natural community? Yes No
If Yes:
i.Describe the habitat/community (composition, function, and basis for designation): _____________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Source(s) of description or evaluation: ________________________________________________________________________
iii.Extent of community/habitat:
x Currently: ______________________ acres
x Following completion of project as proposed: _____________________ acres
x Gain or loss (indicate + or -): ______________________ acres
o. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by the federal government or NYS as Yes No
endangered or threatened, or does it contain any areas identified as habitat for an endangered or threatened species?
p. Does the project site contain any species of plant or animal that is listed by NYS as rare, or as a species of Yes No
special concern?
q. Is the project site or adjoining area currently used for hunting, trapping, fishing or shell fishing? Yes No
If yes, give a brief description of how the proposed action may affect that use: ___________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
E.3. Designated Public Resources On or Near Project Site
a. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in a designated agricultural district certified pursuant to Yes No
Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304?
If Yes, provide county plus district name/number: _________________________________________________________________
b. Are agricultural lands consisting of highly productive soils present? Yes No
i.If Yes: acreage(s) on project site? ___________________________________________________________________________
ii.Source(s) of soil rating(s): _________________________________________________________________________________
c. Does the project site contain all or part of, or is it substantially contiguous to, a registered National Yes No
Natural Landmark?
If Yes:
i.Nature of the natural landmark: Biological Community Geological Feature
ii.Provide brief description of landmark, including values behind designation and approximate size/extent: ___________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
d. Is the project site located in or does it adjoin a state listed Critical Environmental Area? Yes No
If Yes:
i.CEA name: _____________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Basis for designation: _____________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Designating agency and date: ______________________________________________________________________________
,I<HV
L6SHFLHVDQGOLVWLQJ HQGDQJHUHGRUWKUHDWHQHG BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
,I<HV
L6SHFLHVDQGOLVWLQJ BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
Page 13 of 13
e. Does the project site contain, or is it substantially contiguous to, a building, archaeological site, or district Yes No
which is listed onWKH1DWLRQDORU6WDWH5HJLVWHUof Historic PODFHVRUWKDWKDVEHHQ GHWHUPLQHGE\WKH&RPPLVVLRQHURIWKH1<6
2IILFHRI3DUNV5HFUHDWLRQDQG+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQWREHHOLJLEOHIRUOLVWLQJRQWKH6WDWH5HJLVWHU of Historic Places?
If Yes:
i.Nature of historic/archaeological resource: Archaeological Site Historic Building or District
ii.Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Brief description of attributes on which listing is based:
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
f. Is the project site, or any portion of it, located in or adjacent to an area designated as sensitive for Yes No
archaeological sites on the NY State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory?
g. Have additional archaeological or historic site(s) or resources been identified on the project site? Yes No
If Yes:
i. Describe possible resource(s): _______________________________________________________________________________
ii.Basis for identification: ___________________________________________________________________________________
h. Yes No ,Vthe project site ZLWKLQILYHVPLOHVRI any officially designated and publicly accessible federal, state, or local
scenic or aesthetic resource?
If Yes:
i.Identify resource: _________________________________________________________________________________________
ii.Nature of, or basis for, designation (e.g., established highway overlook, state or local park, state historic trail or scenic byway,
etc.): ___________________________________________________________________________________________________
iii.Distance between project and resource: _____________________ miles.
i. Is the project site located within a designated river corridor under the Wild, Scenic and Recreational Rivers Yes No
Program 6 NYCRR 666?
If Yes:
i.Identify the name of the river and its designation: ________________________________________________________________
ii.Is the activity consistent with development restrictions contained in 6NYCRR Part 666? Yes No
F. Additional Information
Attach any additional information which may be needed to clarify your project.
If you have identified any adverse impacts which could be associated with your proposal, please describe those impacts plus any
measures which you propose to avoid or minimize them.
G. Verification
I certify that the information provided is true to the best of my knowledge.
Applicant/Sponsor Name ___________________________________ Date_______________________________________
Signature________________________________________________ Title_______________________________________
JoAnn Cornish
August 28, 1019
JoAnn Cornish
PRINT FORM
Director of Planning and Development
Page 1 of 10
Full Environmental Assessment Form
Part 2 - Identification of Potential Project Impacts
Part 2 is to be completed by the lead agency. Part 2 is designed to help the lead agency inventory all potential resources that could
be affected by a proposed project or action. We recognize that the lead agency=s reviewer(s) will not necessarily be environmental
professionals. So, the questions are designed to walk a reviewer through the assessment process by providing a series of questions that
can be answered using the information found in Part 1. To further assist the lead agency in completing Part 2, the form identifies the
most relevant questions in Part 1 that will provide the information needed to answer the Part 2 question. When Part 2 is completed, the
lead agency will have identified the relevant environmental areas that may be impacted by the proposed activity.
If the lead agency is a state agency and the action is in any Coastal Area, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding
with this assessment.
Tips for completing Part 2:
x Review all of the information provided in Part 1.
x Review any application, maps, supporting materials and the Full EAF Workbook.
x Answer each of the 18 questions in Part 2.
x If you answer “Yes” to a numbered question, please complete all the questions that follow in that section.
x If you answer “No” to a numbered question, move on to the next numbered question.
x Check appropriate column to indicate the anticipated size of the impact.
x Proposed projects that would exceed a numeric threshold contained in a question should result in the reviewing agency
checking the box “Moderate to large impact may occur.”
x The reviewer is not expected to be an expert in environmental analysis.
x If you are not sure or undecided about the size of an impact, it may help to review the sub-questions for the general
question and consult the workbook.
x When answering a question consider all components of the proposed activity, that is, the Awhole action@.
x Consider the possibility for long-term and cumulative impacts as well as direct impacts.
x Answer the question in a reasonable manner considering the scale and context of the project.
1. Impact on Land
Proposed action may involve construction on, or physical alteration of, NO YES
the land surface of the proposed site. (See Part 1. D.1)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 2.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may involve construction on land where depth to water table is
less than 3 feet.E2d
b. The proposed action may involve construction on slopes of 15% or greater.E2f
c. The proposed action may involve construction on land where bedrock is exposed, or
generally within 5 feet of existing ground surface.
E2a
d. The proposed action may involve the excavation and removal of more than 1,000 tons
of natural material.
D2a
e. The proposed action may involve construction that continues for more than one year
or in multiple phases.
D1e
f. The proposed action may result in increased erosion, whether from physical
disturbance or vegetation removal (including from treatment by herbicides).
D2e, D2q
g. The proposed action is, or may be, located within a Coastal Erosion hazard area.B1i
h. Other impacts: _______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
"HFODZ6TF0OMZ<*GBQQMJDBCMF>
1SPKFDU
%BUF
FEAF2019
CBD 50, CBD 60 Amendments
May 23, 2019
✔
Page 2 of 10
2. Impact on Geological Features
The proposed action may result in the modification or destruction of, or inhibit
access to, any unique or unusual land forms on the site (e.g., cliffs, dunes, NO YES
minerals, fossils, caves). (See Part 1. E.2.g)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, move on to Section 3.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. Identify the specific land form(s) attached: ________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
E2g
b. The proposed action may affect or is adjacent to a geological feature listed as a
registered National Natural Landmark.
Specific feature: _____________________________________________________
E3c
c. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
3. Impacts on Surface Water
The proposed action may affect one or more wetlands or other surface water NO YES
bodies (e.g., streams, rivers, ponds or lakes). (See Part 1. D.2, E.2.h)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - l. If “No”, move on to Section 4.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may create a new water body.
D2b, D1h
b. The proposed action may result in an increase or decrease of over 10% or more than a
10 acre increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water.
D2b
c. The proposed action may involve dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material
from a wetland or water body.
D2a
d. The proposed action may involve construction within or adjoining a freshwater or
tidal wetland, or in the bed or banks of any other water body.
E2h
e. The proposed action may create turbidity in a waterbody, either from upland erosion,
runoff or by disturbing bottom sediments.
D2a, D2h
f. The proposed action may include construction of one or more intake(s) for withdrawal
of water from surface water.
D2c
g. The proposed action may include construction of one or more outfall(s) for discharge
of wastewater to surface water(s).
D2d
h. The proposed action may cause soil erosion, or otherwise create a source of
stormwater discharge that may lead to siltation or other degradation of receiving
water bodies.
D2e
i. The proposed action may affect the water quality of any water bodies within or
downstream of the site of the proposed action.
E2h
j. The proposed action may involve the application of pesticides or herbicides in or
around any water body.
D2q, E2h
k. The proposed action may require the construction of new, or expansion of existing,
wastewater treatment facilities.
D1a, D2d
✔
✔
Page 3 of 10
l. Other impacts: _______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
4. Impact on groundwater
The proposed action may result in new or additional use of ground water, or NO YES
may have the potential to introduce contaminants to ground water or an aquifer.
(See Part 1. D.2.a, D.2.c, D.2.d, D.2.p, D.2.q, D.2.t)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 5.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may require new water supply wells, or create additional demand
on supplies from existing water supply wells.
D2c
b. Water supply demand from the proposed action may exceed safe and sustainable
withdrawal capacity rate of the local supply or aquifer.
Cite Source: ________________________________________________________
D2c
c. The proposed action may allow or result in residential uses in areas without water and
sewer services.
D1a, D2c
d. The proposed action may include or require wastewater discharged to groundwater.D2d, E2l
e. The proposed action may result in the construction of water supply wells in locations
where groundwater is, or is suspected to be, contaminated.
D2c, E1f,
E1g, E1h
f. The proposed action may require the bulk storage of petroleum or chemical products
over ground water or an aquifer.
D2p, E2l
g. The proposed action may involve the commercial application of pesticides within 100
feet of potable drinking water or irrigation sources.
E2h, D2q,
E2l, D2c
h. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
5. Impact on Flooding
The proposed action may result in development on lands subject to flooding. NO YES
(See Part 1. E.2)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, move on to Section 6.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may result in development in a designated floodway.E2i
b. The proposed action may result in development within a 100 year floodplain.E2j
c. The proposed action may result in development within a 500 year floodplain.E2k
d. The proposed action may result in, or require, modification of existing drainage
patterns.
D2b, D2e
e. The proposed action may change flood water flows that contribute to flooding.D2b, E2i,
E2j, E2k
f. If there is a dam located on the site of the proposed action, LVWKH dam LQQHHGRIUHSDLU
RUXSJUDGH"
E1e
✔
✔
Page 4 of 10
g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
6. Impacts on Air
NO YES The proposed action may include a state regulated air emission source.
(See Part 1. D.2.f., D2hD.2.g)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, move on to Section 7.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. If the proposed action requires federal or state air emission permits, the action may
also emit one or more greenhouse gases at or above the following levels:
i. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide (CO2)
ii. More than 3.5 tons/year of nitrous oxide (N22)
iii. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon equivalent of perfluorocarbons (PFCs)
iv. More than .045 tons/year of sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)
v. More than 1000 tons/year of carbon dioxide equivalent of
hydrochloroflRurocarbons (HFCs) emissions
vi. 43 tons/year or more of methane
D2g
D2g
D2g
D2g
D2g
D2h
b. The proposed action may generate 10 tons/year or more of any one designated
hazardous air pollutant, or 25 tons/year or more of any combination of such hazardous
air pollutants.
D2g
c. The proposed action may require a state air registration, or may produce an emissions
rate of total contaminants that may exceed 5 lbs. per hour, or may include a heat
source capable of producing more than 10 million BTU=s per hour.
D2f, D2g
d.The proposed action may reach 50% of any of the thresholds in “a”through “c”,
above.
DJ
e. The proposed action may result in the combustion or thermal treatment of more than 1
ton of refuse per hour.
D2s
f. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
7.Impact on Plants and Animals
The proposed action may result in a loss of flora or fauna. (See Part 1. E.2. m.-q.) NO YES
If “Yes”, answer questions a - j. If “No”, move on to Section 8.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a.The proposed action may cause reduction in population or loss of individuals of any
threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the Federal
government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site.
E2o
b. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by
any rare, threatened or endangered species, as listed by New York State or the federal
government.
E2o
c. The proposed action may cause reduction in population, or loss of individuals, of any
species of special concern or conservation need, as listed by New York State or the
Federal government, that use the site, or are found on, over, or near the site.
E2p
d. The proposed action may result in a reduction or degradation of any habitat used by
any species of special concern and conservation need, as listed by New York State or
the Federal government.
E2p
✔
✔
Page 5 of 10
e. The proposed action may diminish the capacity of a registered National Natural
Landmark to support the biological community it was established to protect.
E3c
f. The proposed action may result in the removal of, or ground disturbance in, any
portion of a designated significant natural community.
Source: ____________________________________________________________
E2n
g. The proposed action may substantially interfere with nesting/breeding, foraging, or
over-wintering habitat for the predominant species that occupy or use the project site.E2m
h. The proposed action requires the conversion of more than 10 acres of forest,
grassland or any other regionally or locally important habitat.
Habitat type & information source: ______________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
E1b
i. Proposed action (commercial, industrial or recreational projects, only) involves use of
herbicides or pesticides.
D2q
j. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
8. Impact on Agricultural Resources
The proposed action may impact agricultural resources. (See Part 1. E.3.a. and b.) NO YES
If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, move on to Section 9.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may impact soil classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the
NYS Land Classification System.
E2c, E3b
b. The proposed action may sever, cross or otherwise limit access to agricultural land
(includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc).
E1a, Elb
c. The proposed action may result in the excavation or compaction of the soil profile of
active agricultural land.
E3b
d. The proposed action may irreversibly convert agricultural land to non-agricultural
uses, either more than 2.5 acres if located in an Agricultural District, or more than 10
acres if not within an Agricultural District.
E1b, E3a
e. The proposed action may disrupt or prevent installation of an agricultural land
management system.
El a, E1b
f. The proposed action may result, directly or indirectly, in increased development
potential or pressure on farmland.
C2c, C3,
D2c, D2d
g. The proposed project is not consistent with the adopted municipal Farmland
Protection Plan.
C2c
h. Other impacts: ________________________________________________________
✔
Page 6 of 10
9. Impact on Aesthetic Resources
The land use of the proposed action are obviously different from, or are in NO YES
sharp contrast to, current land use patterns between the proposed project and
a scenic or aesthetic resource. (Part 1. E.1.a, E.1.b, E.3.h.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, go to Section 10.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. Proposed action may be visible from any officially designated federal, state, or local
scenic or aesthetic resource.
E3h
b. The proposed action may result in the obstruction, elimination or significant
screening of one or more officially designated scenic views.
E3h, C2b
c. The proposed action may be visible from publicly accessible vantage points:
i. Seasonally (e.g., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons)
ii. Year round
E3h
d. The situation or activity in which viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed
action is:
i. Routine travel by residents, including travel to and from work
ii. Recreational or tourism based activities
E3h
E2q,
E1c
e. The proposed action may cause a diminishment of the public enjoyment and
appreciation of the designated aesthetic resource.
E3h
f. There are similar projects visible within the following distance of the proposed
project:
0-1/2 mile
½ -3 mile
3-5 mile
5+ mile
D1a, E1a,
D1f, D1g
g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
10. Impact on Historic and Archeological Resources
The proposed action may occur in or adjacent to a historic or archaeological NO YES
resource. (Part 1. E.3.e, f. and g.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 11.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
E3e
b. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous
to, an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NY State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) archaeological site inventory.
E3f
c. The proposed action may occur wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous
to, an archaeological site not included on the NY SHPO inventory.
Source: ____________________________________________________________
E3g
D 7KHSURSRVHGDFWLRQPD\RFFXUZKROO\RUSDUWLDOO\ZLWKLQRUVXEVWDQWLDOO\FRQWLJXRXV
WRDQ\EXLOGLQJVDUFKDHRORJLFDOVLWHRUGLVWULFWZKLFKLVOLVWHGRQWKH1DWLRQDORU
6WDWH5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULFDO3ODFHVRUWKDWKDVEHHQGHWHUPLQHGE\WKH&RPPLVVLRQHU
RIWKH1<62IILFHRI3DUNV5HFUHDWLRQDQG+LVWRULF3UHVHUYDWLRQWREHHOLJLEOHIRU
OLVWLQJRQWKH6WDWH5HJLVWHURI+LVWRULF3ODFHV
✔
✔
Page 7 of 10
d. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
e.If any of the above (a-d) are answered “0RGHUDWHWRODUJHLPSDFWPD\
RFFXU”, continue with the following questionsto help support conclusions in Part 3:
i. The proposed action may result in the destruction or alteration of all or part
of the site or property.
ii. The proposed action may result in the alteration of the property’s setting or
integrity.
iii. The proposed action may result in the introduction of visual elements which
are out of character with the site or property, or may alter its setting.
E3e, E3g,
E3f
E3e, E3f,
E3g, E1a,
E1b
E3e, E3f,
E3g, E3h,
C2, C3
11. Impact on Open Space and Recreation
The proposed action may result in a loss of recreational opportunities or a NO YES
reduction of an open space resource as designated in any adopted
municipal open space plan.
(See Part 1. C.2.c, E.1.c., E.2.q.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 12.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may result in an impairment of natural functions, or “ecosystem
services”, provided by an undeveloped area, including but not limited to stormwater
storage, nutrient cycling, wildlife habitat.
D2e, E1b
E2h,
E2m, E2o,
E2n, E2p
b. The proposed action may result in the loss of a current or future recreational resource.
C2a, E1c,
C2c, E2q
c. The proposed action may eliminate open space or recreational resource in an area
with few such resources.
C2a, C2c
E1c, E2q
d. The proposed action may result in loss of an area now used informally by the
community as an open space resource.
C2c, E1c
e. Other impacts: _____________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________
12. Impact on Critical Environmental Areas
The proposed action may be located within or adjacent to a critical NO YES
environmental area (CEA). (See Part 1. E.3.d)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - c. If “No”, go to Section 13.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource or
characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA.
E3d
b. The proposed action may result in a reduction in the quality of the resource or
characteristic which was the basis for designation of the CEA.
E3d
c. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
✔
✔
Page 8 of 10
13. Impact on Transportation
The proposed action may result in a change to existing transportation systems. NO YES
(See Part 1. D.2.j)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - I. If “No”, go to Section 14.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. Projected traffic increase may exceed capacity of existing road network.
D2j
b. The proposed action may result in the construction of paved parking area for 500 or
more vehicles.
D2j
c. The proposed action will degrade existing transit access.
D2j
d. The proposed action will degrade existing pedestrian or bicycle accommodations.
D2j
H.The proposed action may alter the present pattern of movement of people or goods.D2j
I. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
14. Impact on Energy
The proposed action may cause an increase in the use of any form of energy. NO YES
(See Part 1. D.2.k)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - e. If “No”, go to Section 15.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action will require a new, or an upgrade to an existing, substation. D2k
b. The proposed action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission
or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two-family residences or to serve a
commercial or industrial use.
D1f,
D1q, D2k
c. The proposed action may utilize more than 2,500 MWhrs per year of electricity.D2k
d. The proposed action may involve heating and/or cooling of more than 100,000 square
feet of building area when completed.
D1g
e. Other Impacts: ________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
15. Impact on Noise, Odor, and Light
The proposed action may result in an increase in noise, odors, or outdoor lighting. NO YES
(See Part 1. D.2.m., n., and o.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - f. If “No”, go to Section 16.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may produce sound above noise levels established by local
regulation.
D2m
b. The proposed action may result in blasting within 1,500 feet of any residence,
hospital, school, licensed day care center, or nursing home.
D2m, E1d
c. The proposed action may result in routine odors for more than one hour per day. D2o
✔
✔
✔
Page 9 of 10
d. The proposed action may result in light shining onto adjoining properties.D2n
e. The proposed action may result in lighting creating sky-glow brighter than existing
area conditions.
D2n, E1a
f. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
16. Impact on Human Health
The proposed action may have an impact on human health from exposure NO YES
to new or existing sources of contaminants. (See Part 1.D.2.q., E.1. d. f. g. and h.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - m. If “No”, go to Section 17.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No,or
small
impact
may cccur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action is located within 1500 feet of a school, hospital, licensed day
care center, group home, nursing home or retirement community.
E1d
b. The site of the proposed action is currently undergoing remediation.E1g, E1h
c. There is a completed emergency spill remediation, or a completed environmental site
remediation on, or adjacent to, the site of the proposed action.
E1g, E1h
d.The site of the action is subject to an institutional control limiting the use of the
property (e.g.easementRUdeed restriction)
E1g, E1h
e. The proposed action may affect institutional control measures that were put in place
to ensure that the site remains protective of the environment and human health.
E1g, E1h
f. The proposed action has adequate control measures in place to ensure that future
generation, treatment and/or disposal of hazardous wastes will be protective of the
environment and human health.
D2t
g. The proposed action involves construction or modification of a solid waste
management facility.
D2q, E1f
h. The proposed action may result in the unearthing of solid or hazardous waste.
D2q, E1f
i. The proposed action may result in an increase in the rate of disposal, or processing, of
solid waste.
D2r, D2s
j. The proposed action may result in excavation or other disturbance within 2000 feet of
a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste.
E1f, E1g
E1h
k. The proposed action may result in the migration of explosive gases from a landfill
site to adjacent off site structures.
E1f, E1g
l. The proposed action may result in the release of contaminated leachate from the
project site.
D2s, E1f,
D2r
m. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
✔
Page 10 of 10
17. Consistency with Community Plans
The proposed action is not consistent with adopted land use plans. NO YES
(See Part 1. C.1, C.2. and C.3.)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - h. If “No”, go to Section 18.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action’s land use components may be different from, or in sharp
contrast to, current surrounding land use pattern(s).
C2, C3, D1a
E1a, E1b
b. The proposed action will cause the permanent population of the city, town or village
in which the project is located to grow by more than 5%.
C2
c. The proposed action is inconsistent with local land use plans or zoning regulations. C2, C2, C3
d. The proposed action is inconsistent with any County plans, or other regional land use
plans.
C2, C2
e. The proposed action may cause a change in the density of development that is not
supported by existing infrastructure or is distant from existing infrastructure.
C3, D1c,
D1d, D1f,
D1d, Elb
f. The proposed action is located in an area characterized by low density development
that will require new or expanded public infrastructure.
C4, D2c, D2d
D2j
g. The proposed action may induce secondary development impacts (e.g., residential or
commercial development not included in the proposed action)
C2a
h. Other: _____________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
18. Consistency with Community Character
The proposed project is inconsistent with the existing community character. NO YES
(See Part 1. C.2, C.3, D.2, E.3)
If “Yes”, answer questions a - g. If “No”, proceed to Part 3.
Relevant
Part I
Question(s)
No, or
small
impact
may occur
Moderate
to large
impact may
occur
a. The proposed action may replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures, or areas
of historic importance to the community.
E3e, E3f, E3g
b. The proposed action may create a demand for additional community services (e.g.
schools, police and fire)
C4
c. The proposed action may displace affordable or low-income housing in an area where
there is a shortage of such housing.
C2, C3, D1f
D1g, E1a
d. The proposed action may interfere with the use or enjoyment of officially recognized
or designated public resources.
C2, E3
e. The proposed action is inconsistent with the predominant architectural scale and
character.
C2, C3
f. Proposed action is inconsistent with the character of the existing natural landscape. C2, C3
E1a, E1b
E2g, E2h
g. Other impacts: ______________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
✔
✔
PRINT FULL FORM
To:Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Senior Planner
Date: September 5, 2019
Re: Draft Waterfront Plan
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding the draft Waterfront Area Plan.
In September of 2015, the Common Council adopted Plan Ithaca as Phase I of the City
Comprehensive Plan and in November of 2015. Staff was then directed to begin working on a
waterfront development plan as a part of the next phase for the Comprehensive Plan.
A waterfront working group made up of 17 members of the public and City Planning Staff was
established in the fall of 2016. The group began meeting regularly in September of 2016. They
began with drafting a land use chapter and then developing a recommendation for new zoning for
the area. In August of 2017, Common Council adopted the new waterfront zoning. The Waterfront
Working Group continued meeting regularly in order to draft the Plan Ithaca Phase II-Waterfront
Area Plan.
The plan includes the goals that are were established in Plan Ithaca, to address the topics of land
use, economic vitality, community livability, mobility and transportation, natural and cultural
resources, and sustainability, energy and water resources. However, the Plan Ithaca Phase II-
Waterfront Area Plan includes more defined recommendations and action steps specifically for the
waterfront area.
The recommendations of the plan were introduced to the public at two open house sessions that
were held at the Ithaca Farmer’s Market on July 11, 2019. Following these events, the Committee
revised the draft plan to incorporate comments from the community. Enclosed is the full draft plan
that is being recommended by the Waterfront Working Group.
If the Committee is in agreement, staff will circulate the enclosed draft plan and return next month
with any comments that are received.
If you have any questions or concerns about the draft plan, please feel free to contact me at 274-
6550 or jkusznir@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
1
Plan Ithaca
Phase II Area Plans
Waterfront Area Plan
1.0
Introduction
The City of Ithaca has undertaken a two-phase process for the
preparation of its comprehensive plan. Phase I involved the
preparation of Plan Ithaca, a city-wide plan that identified the
goals and vision for the entire city. Plan Ithaca was adopted by
the City of Ithaca on September 2, 2015 as Phase I of the City’s
Comprehensive Plan. Phase II includes specific neighborhood
or thematic plans that build upon the topics addressed in Plan
Ithaca.
Immediately following the adoption of Plan Ithaca, Common
Council identified a plan for the waterfront area as a top priority
for Phase II.
In order to develop recommendations for the plan and for the
zoning, the City established a waterfront working group made up
of members of the public and City Planning Staff. The group
began meeting in September of 2016. In December of 2016 they
hosted two open houses to solicit additional input from the
public. Initially, they worked on developing recommendations
for new zoning in the waterfront study area, which were adopted
in August of 2017. Over the course of next two years the working
group continued to meet and gather information and to draft a
plan to address issues in the waterfront.
Structure of the Waterfront Plan
Acomprehensiveplanisa
visionforthefutureanda
blueprintforchange,
particularlyasitrelates
bothtothephysical
growthofacity’s
buildings,streets,and
infrastructureandtothe
retentionand
enhancementofqualityof
lifeelements,suchas
parks,neighborhoods,and
socialequity.Once
adopted,itbecomesa
fundamentalpartofthe
City’sdecisionͲmaking
processes,servingasboth
aninspirationforabroad
rangeofCityactions,anda
standardbywhichthey
canbemeasured.The
comprehensiveplan
guidestheCommon
CouncilandCityboards
andcommitteesand
informsCitypolicies,
includingzoningand
fundingdecisions.
WHATISA
COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN?
2
The Waterfront Plan builds upon Plan Ithaca and incorporates the goals of the broader
document. It addresses in greater detail issues that are specific the waterfront area and
identifies specific recommendations to achieve the plan’s objectives.
In addition to this introductory chapter, the Waterfront Plan is organized into six chapters:
x Land Use
x Economic Vitality
x Community Livability
x Mobility & Transportation
x Natural, Cultural, & Historic Resources
x Sustainable Energy, Water, & Food Systems
Three thread-through themes serve as overarching concepts that guide the entire plan.
Each chapter reflects the principles of sustainability, equity, and collaboration, as
described below.
x SUSTAINABILITY: Living in a way that allows present generations to meet their needs
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. A
sustainable community must safeguard the health and well-being of its economic,
social, and environmental systems — including food security, clean air and water,
healthy ecosystems, and effective governance.
x EQUITY: The services, amenities, and opportunities that are available through City
efforts are accessible to all residents through means that preserve dignity and that
are free of discrimination. These may include participation in decision-making, as
well as access to information, housing, transportation, economic opportunity, jobs
and job training, recreation, and a safe and healthy environment.
x COLLABORATION: The City works in partnership with other municipalities,
educational institutions, and community organizations to realize the goals of Plan
Ithaca.
General Notes:
x Any mention of “Ithaca” throughout the plan refers to the City of Ithaca.
x The use of the word “City” (with a capital C) refers to the City of Ithaca as a
government.
x The use of the word “city” (with a lower case c) refers to the city as a geographic area.
x Phrases or words shown in SMALL CAPITALS are defined in the Waterfront Plan’s
Glossary (Appendix A).
x The topics included in the various chapters of Plan Ithaca are often connected to ideas
in other chapters. To help make this connection, color-coded cross-references are
provided in a text box next to each section. If you are interested in the ideas in a
3
particular section, you may also be interested in reviewing the referenced chapter.
The key to these cross-references is as follows:
o LU – Land Use
o EV – Economic Vitality
o CL – Community Livability
o M&T – Mobility & Transportation
o N&CR – Natural & Cultural Resources
o S – Sustainable Energy, Water, & Food Systems
A comprehensive plan is, ideally, a living document — a written agreement the City
makes with itself and its residents at a given point in time. A good comprehensive plan
evolves organically and ages gracefully, as the City and the community members involved
in implementing it “learn by doing.” As new trends emerge and community needs
change, our priorities will evolve and implementation strategies will be revised. As a living
document, the Waterfront Plan must be regularly revisited and updated to reflect our
community priorities. The Waterfront Plan is a snapshot of our community in 2018: our
collective effort to learn from our past, look into our future, and commit ourselves to a
course of action that will make our city a better place to live, work, and play for all Ithacans.
4
Plan Ithaca
A Vision for Our Future
The City of Ithaca is proud to be known as a place of great natural beauty, rich
heritage, diverse and vibrant community life, small city character, and steadfast
pursuit of social equity, physical accessibility, livability, and environmental
sustainability. By preserving and building upon these strengths, we strive to be a
model community in which to live and work, and an exceptional destination for
visitors.
Preserve & Enhance
Our Neighborhoods - Ithacans place a high value on the sense of belonging,
support and connection that are inherent in our neighborhood identities. The
character and livability of our existing neighborhoods must be protected.
Our Strong Community Bonds -Community cohesiveness relies on meaningful
bonds among residents, neighborhoods, and community institutions. A strong
sense of community is one of our greatest assets, and we must continue to
cultivate these connections.
Our Historic & Cultural Resources –Ithaca is fortunate to have a rich heritage
of historic buildings, an active arts community, and a diverse and significant
cultural history. Stewardship must remain a priority in order to preserve our
valuable cultural and historic resources.
Our Natural Resources –The striking beauty of our natural areas and open
spaces is a source of delight for residents and visitors alike. We depend upon our
water and land resources and use them actively. These must be protected and
preserved for the enjoyment, recreation, and use of current and future generations.
Our Educational Resources – Educational resources for children and adults are
of a high quality and draw many new residents to the City. Higher education is a
key economic engine as well as a source of Ithaca’s vitality.
Create & Promote
A Strong Economy That Provides Opportunities and Economic Security for
All Residents – To create a healthier, more prosperous community, it is essential
to strengthen and further diversify our economic base while supporting local
businesses and current employers. We will work to enhance our dynamic
downtown and commercial centers. We will seek to create job readiness and well-
5
paying employment opportunities for all our residents to secure a rewarding future
for both the individual and the community as a whole.
A Range of Mobility & Transportation Options – With an emphasis on
environmental sustainability, we aim to enhance connectivity and mobility by all
modes of travel for people of all abilities. We commit to improving universal
accessibility and livability for residents and visitors.
A Sustainable Built Environment – Following best practices, we will promote
forward-looking mixed-use, commercial, and residential development. We will
continue to expand housing opportunities for all income levels and life stages. We
are committed to investing wisely in the maintenance and improvement of our
infrastructure to foster the community growth and development for which we strive.
Engage & Embrace
The Diversity of Our Community & Our Cultural Heritage – The City celebrates
the strengths of the community that make Ithaca a truly special place for all of
those who call it home. It is the people who make Ithaca such an extraordinary
city, and we celebrate the diversity of our population and our cultural heritage. We
will continue to pursue equality, inclusion, and fairness in our political, economic,
and social systems.
Our Innovative Spirit & Creative Thinking – Ithaca has long been a place for
creative thinking and groundbreaking ideas. Realizing that every member
contributes to the community, we will continue to nurture this innovative spirit and
draw upon the knowledge, creativity, and energy available to us.
An Inclusive, Ongoing Public Dialogue – We want an ongoing, public dialogue
that reflects the diversity of our community and engages our residents to be co-
creators of their future.
Collaborative Efforts with Institutional Partners & Surrounding
Municipalities – We commit to working collaboratively as a community, with our
institutional partners, and with surrounding municipalities to achieve our vision.
6
1.1 A History of the Waterfront
The lands of the Cayuga Nation, a member of the five-nation Iroquois
Confederacy, were located roughly within the watershed of Cayuga Lake and
included the present day City of Ithaca. Like the other native tribes in the Central
New York region, the Cayuga Nation was driven out of the area during the
Revolutionary War period. At the conclusion of the war, New York State began
negotiations with members of the Cayuga Nation remaining in the area to
attain formal title to their lands. On February 25, 1789, the tribe ceded
its traditional lands in and around Cayuga Lake to the government, opening up the
area to European settlers.
The original white settlement in the area that would become the City of Ithaca took
place at the base of what is now East Hill because of the clear, dry soils and level
topography of that area. Most of the area surrounding the lake and the Inlet at that
time was very marshy, which created building difficulties. The development of the
Erie Canal system and the railroads that followed soon made the water resources
of the Lake and Inlet extremely valuable.
With the opening of the Erie Canal in 1825, the Cayuga Inlet became a busy
commercial waterway attracting water dependent trade. When the railroads
arrived, the Inlet was an important railcar-to-barge transfer point for coal on its
northbound journey from Pennsylvania to the Great Lakes. When the Erie Canal
was enlarged to create the Barge Canal in 1911, the City of Ithaca was successful
in having the Cayuga Inlet included as part of the Cayuga and Seneca Barge
Canal.
Large steamboats travelled the waters of Cayuga Lake between 1820 and 1907.
In the early to mid-19th century, timber, salt, and gypsum were transported to the
south and coal was shipped from Pennsylvania north to Cayuga Lake and beyond.
Cayuga Lake’s communities prospered from the commerce generated by lake
transportation during this period. Before the railroads, passengers used the lake
steamers as one leg of their journey between New York City and Buffalo. After the
arrival of train service, the steamers were scheduled to meet the arrival and
departure times of trains in Ithaca and Cayuga Bridge, at the north end of the lake.
The era of large steamboat travel ended in 1907 when the Frontenac dramatically
burned off Farley’s Point, towards the north end of the lake.
By the early twentieth century boat-building and coal yards, steam ships and most
of the barges had disappeared from Cayuga Lake and the Cayuga Inlet. The
railroads were also beginning a gradual decline. Commercial use of Cayuga Lake
and the Inlet diminished significantly beginning in the 1920’s. The waterfront was
no longer a focus of activity.
7
In 1935, a major flood covered large portions of Ithaca’s neighborhoods. The area
near the Inlet was hit particularly hard. This catastrophe led the City to petition the
Federal government for decades until an Inlet flood protection project was finally
placed in the Federal Flood Control Act of 1960 and work began on the project in
1964. The Flood Control Channel Project came in three phases. In the first phase,
the mouth of the Inlet was deepened and widened. In the second phase, a number
of projects at the south end of the city were completed, including a new bridge for
the Lehigh Valley railroad. In the third phase, a realigned Flood Control Channel
was dug all the way from the southwest corner of today’s Southwest Park, north to
Cascadilla Creek. New York State controlled easement rights over the project, but
the City retained property ownership. The Flood Control Channel Project was
finished in 1970, and a new bridge was built by New York State to carry State
Street traffic over the channel.
By 1970, the Flood Control Channel was complete. It benefited the city by
providing flood protection and a beautiful new waterway. However, an entire
neighborhood, known as the Rhine, was destroyed. Approximately 55 homes, a
playground, and various other structures were demolished in order to create the
Flood Control Channel.
With the alteration of natural features and processes, there has been a drastic
change in the appreciation of water. Much of the utilitarian, transportation value of
the water has been replaced by an aesthetic, recreation value.
8
2.0 Land Use
2.1 Introduction
The Ithaca Waterfront Study Area is bordered to the north by the Newman
Golf Course, to the south by Cecil Malone Drive and the City border, to the
west by the Flood Control Channel, and to the east by Route 13/Fulton
and Meadow Streets.
EVCL
M&TN&CR
S
9
The Ithaca Waterfront study area is home to a wide variety of uses including a
state of the art health care facility, restaurants, bars, industrial uses, community
gardens, and the Ithaca Farmers Market. However, there is still much
underdeveloped land that could be a potential area of growth for the City.
Plan Ithaca, the City’s recently adopted comprehensive plan, categorized the
waterfront study area as predominantly mixed use and enterprise areas intended
to encourage higher density growth in the form of well-designed, compact, mixed
use development. These areas are located on or adjacent to major transportation
corridors within the City, making it easy for residents to get to jobs and services
and for visitors to access local businesses. Additionally, there are some areas
classified as environmentally sensitive and important locations where special
consideration must be given to preserve unique natural features.
10
Future Considerations
As the Waterfront Study Area grows, there are considerations to address in order
to encourage positive development trends:
x Building Water Frontages – Opportunities exist to encourage
businesses along the waterfront to develop inviting water
frontages. A 25-foot maintenance easement exists along the
Flood Control Channel in order for the Department of
Environmental Conservation to protect the water edge and
have access for care of the channel itself. However, beyond
the easement, developers have the opportunity to treat the
water and the water’s edge as a front yard.
x Waterfront Identity – Opportunities exist to develop
cohesive signage, art, and landscape elements that could help
create an identity for the waterfront.
x Housing – The City has a documented need for
increased housing located on public transit routes and within
walking distance to desirable amenities. The waterfront area
has several locations that would be ideal for additional
housing and that would provide easy pedestrian, bike, and bus
access to parks, the Farmer’s Market, and downtown retail
centers.
x Business Improvement District – There is an
opportunity to develop a business improvement district that
can provide a platform for a unified vision for commercial and
residential activity in the area.
x Limited Season – Ithaca’s climate does not provide a
lengthy season for water-dependent uses. Any development
options that rely on the water as an amenity could suffer during
the winter months and should consider how to overcome the
economic challenges of the off-season.
Mostofthewaterfront
areacontainssoils
madeupofsand,silt,
andclay.Thesepoor
soilsmakeitdifficultto
supportstructures
becauseoftheirregular
settlementthatoccurs.
Thisposesasignificant
challengetothe
financingand
constructionofnew
projects.Inorderto
overcomethis
challenge,new
constructionmust
eitherbelimitedin
height,ormusthave
veryexpensive
foundations.
POORSOILS
11
x Develop Financial and Management
Resources – Unlike downtown Ithaca,
this area does not have an established
Business Improvement District, or any
sense of established identity.
Merchants, property owners, and
business owners lack an organized
structure for addressing concerns in
the waterfront area or planning for
future needs. Developing these
resources would aid future planning
initiatives and could also provide
assistance for new and existing
businesses.
x Potential Flooding – Potential
flooding is a challenge for all portions
of the waterfront area. Any new
construction has to consider and be
prepared for potential flooding.
Similar to the accommodations that
must be made for poor soils, special
construction techniques must be
used, which may result in higher
building costs.
AftertheFloodControlProject
wascompletedin1970,
responsibilityforperiodicand
emergencymaintenance
dredgingwastransferredto
theNewYorkState
DepartmentofEnvironmental
Conservation(NYSDEC).
Portionsofthechannelwere
dredgedbytheArmyCorpsof
Engineersin1973and1999,
andthelowerchannelwas
dredgedbytheNewYorkState
DepartmentofTransportation
intheearly1980’s.Sincethe
midͲ1990’s,theCityhasbeen
workingwithresponsible
agenciestodesignatea
dewateringsitethatwould
allowdredgingtotakeplace.
Thedelayinmaintenance
dredginghasmadethelower
channelinaccessibletolarger
boats.Thischallengepertains
toallareaswherecommercial
activityexistsalongthe
waterfront.
DREDGING
12
Goals
The following are Land Use goals outlined in the City of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plan,
“Plan Ithaca: A Vision for our Future” that are specifically applicable to the Waterfront
Area. Goals that are specific to the Waterfront Area Plan are bolded and explained.
1. The city’s role as the economic, social, and cultural
center of Tompkins County will be strengthened by
attracting and retaining a larger proportion of the
County population, reversing a half-century trend of
population loss to the County. –The Waterfront
provides the City with a unique opportunity for a
space in which the City can encourage additional
growth and retention of people looking to live in the
City.
2. Additional housing will provide opportunities for
people of all incomes, ages, and abilities to live in the
city. —The Waterfront should be developed to include
additional housing opportunities for people of all
incomes, ages and abilities.
3. As the city continues to develop, green spaces will be
enhanced and located to best serve residents and
visitors. —As the waterfront develops, green spaces
should be maintained and enhanced to serve the
growing population in this area.
4. Transportation and housing options will reduce
commuter traffic. —Housing along the waterfront
provides opportunities for people to live within
walking distance of major employers and to public
transit, which may reduce commuter traffic into the
City
5.An increased tax base will reduce the tax burden for
residents. —The Waterfront offers ample opportunity
for new development, which will increase the tax base
and reduce the tax burden on others.
6.The community will be economically vibrant and offer a high quality of life.
—Encouraging mixed-use development in the Waterfront will create an
economically vibrant residential and commercial district.
PlanIthaca
LandUseGoalsͲNot
Specifictothe
Waterfront
x NeighborhoodCHARACTER
willbepreservedand
enhanced.
x Greenspacesurrounding
thecitywillbepreservedto
minimizesprawlandprotect
openspaceandagricultural
lands.
x Housingwillbelocatedso
thatjobsandservicesare
easilyaccessible.
x Permittedlanduseswill
promotebusinessexpansion
andjobgrowthwithinthe
city.
x Newdevelopmentwillbe
consistentwiththeCity’s
landusegoalsandmapand
willbeofhighͲqualitydesign.
x Landuseplanning
decisionsandinvestments
willbecoordinatedwiththe
goalsoftheMobility&
Transportationchapter.
13
Land Use Recommendations
A.Encourage Mixed Use Development. The City should encourage and
support mixed-use development in the entire waterfront area that will enhance the
existing character of each of the waterfront districts. Development should be
sensitive to the predominant use in the district, including the industrial nature of
the Cherry Street District, the West End Waterfront District as a vibrant
commercial district, the Market District as a food production district, and the
Newman District as a recreational/residential district.
B.Encourage Housing Opportunities for all Income Levels.The City
should encourage residential opportunities for people of all income levels to be
developed in the waterfront area. This can be accomplished by offering zoning
incentives or tax abatements that encourage the inclusion of lower income
housing opportunities along with market rate development.
C.Encourage Public Access to the Waterfront. As the waterfront develops,
the area should remain a space open and accessible to all. The City should
ensure that all new development reserves space for public walkways along the
waterfront.
D.Encourage Better Multi Modal Connections.The City should encourage
development at the waterfront to have better multi modal connections to all areas.
New development should consider pedestrian, bike, and public transit
connections and reserve space for these modes to allow access to and from all
portions of the waterfront.
E.Encourage a Vibrant Waterfront. The City should encourage mixed use
development that includes commercial and residential uses that will allow the
waterfront area to be occupied at all times of day throughout the year, resulting in
a more vibrant space.
14
2.2 Waterfront Area Map
As part of Phase II of the Comprehensive Plan, the Waterfront Study Area can be
divided into five character area districts that elaborate on Phase I by identifying
areas of similar existing and future planned uses. These districts are the Cherry
Street District, the West End/Waterfront District, the Market District, and the
Newman District. The trail network throughout this area acts as a link connecting
the districts to the waterfront and to each other.
Waterfront District –Character Area Boundaries
15
2.3 Character Areas
The Cherry Street District
Location
The Cherry Street District is bordered on the west by the Flood Control Channel,
to the north by Six Mile Creek, and to the east by Nate’s Floral Estates. A portion
also includes land between Cecil B. Malone Drive and Six Mile Creek.
Waterfront Character Areas- Cherry Street District
EVCL
M&TN&CR
S
16
Existing Characteristics
This district has an industrial character featuring several long-standing local
businesses, including a metal scrap yard, manufacturing and high-tech
businesses, and other commercial establishments. There is also a 25-foot
permanent maintenance easement between the water and the buildings, in which
construction is prohibited.
Challenges
The Cherry Street District has a unique set of challenges that should be addressed
in order to facilitate successful new and existing development.
x Visibility — Much of the district has little or no visibility from Route 13 and
other main roads. This could pose a challenge to some businesses that might
require street visibility.
x Traffic Circulation — The Cherry Street District has only one through street
with no sidewalks. In order to develop this district, a plan for safe multi-modal
transportation in and out of this area is needed. Any traffic planning should
also consider the opportunities that exist with the planned reconstruction and
realignment of the Brindley Street Bridge, as well as a potential pedestrian
bridge that would cross the Flood Control Channel and create a connection
to West Hill.
x High Development Costs — As this area develops, the demand for
waterfront land may drive up the cost of land. This, coupled with the
expensive foundations that are required to offset the impact of poor soils,
could pose challenges to development of non-residential uses, which could
make it difficult to include a mix of uses.
Opportunities
This district has several opportunities for development/redevelopment of sites,
including the following:
x Cherry Street Extension - There is a large section of undeveloped City-
owned land at the southern end of Cherry Street. This area contains some
wetlands; however, there are approximately 3 acres of land for potential
future development.
x Infill Opportunities – Throughout this district there are several large
underutilized parking lots. With planning and sharing of parking, there is
potential for infill sites to become available for development. There are also
opportunities to increase density on several sites.
x Industrial Character —This district has developed with a predominantly
industrial base. This industrial base can be used as a guide to develop a
17
cohesive look and to encourage additional development that is compatible
with the existing character. The types of buildings include warehouses,
factories, and commercial structures. Supporting these and similar uses will
foster development that creates more jobs and helps the area serve as an
economic engine for the City. While industrial uses are desired, businesses
that locate in this district must have a low environmental impact, particularly
given its proximity to the water. Housing is also a desired use in this area.
The district’s character creates an ideal location to encourage alternate types
of housing that makes use of industrial-style buildings and creates spaces for
live/work activities.
x Future Black Diamond Trail Connection — Portions of the Black Diamond
Trail are currently under construction outside of the City.
A small segment has been constructed in the city on the western side of the
Flood Control Channel between the water and Route 13A/Floral Ave. Current
plans are for this segment of the trail to connect to a new bridge over the
Flood Control Channel and continue along the eastern side between the
water and Cherry Street, in a southerly direction, eventually connecting to a
segment ending at Robert H. Treman State Park. The anticipated use of the
trail will be for both commuting and recreation, improving multi-modal
transportation opportunities and connecting the district to the regional trail
network.
x Expansion of Business Opportunities —This district contains several
long-standing, well-established businesses. The City should encourage new
or expanded opportunities to create well-paying jobs.
Planned Characteristics
x Encourage Mixed-Use and/or Live/Work —The City should encourage and
support mixed-use development that is compatible with the existing industrial
uses and that allows for live/work opportunities. Mixed-use development can
include residential uses and commercial uses. Additionally, light industrial
and manufacturing uses would encourage job creation and allow for
residential uses to coexist.
x Retain Industrial Character —The Cherry Street District is one of the few
areas in the City that has existing industrial uses. This industrial character
defines this district and should be retained and encouraged.
x Improve Multi Modal Transportation Connections —Given the limited
road network in this district, alternative transportation is critical for
development to expand in this area. The completion of the Black Diamond
Trail will provide more opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle transportation.
In addition, the planned reconstruction/realignment of the Brindley Bridge will
allow for better automotive access into the district.
x Seek Development Opportunities that Result in 24/7 Activity —The
encouragement of mixed residential/commercial development in this area will
also encourage 24/7 activity.
18
19
The West End/Waterfront District
Location
The West End/Waterfront District is bordered to the south by Six Mile Creek, to the
west by the Cayuga Inlet, to the north by Cascadilla Street and by the Flood Control
Channel, and to the east by Route 13/Meadow Street.
Waterfront Plan Character Areas-West End/Waterfront District
20
Existing Characteristics
This district is the most developed portion of the waterfront area. It is
characterized by several long-standing local businesses and a mix of historic
buildings. There are still several areas of underdeveloped land that have potential
to be redeveloped.
Challenges
The following challenges will need to be addressed in order for existing and future
development to be successful:
x Traffic — One of the largest challenges to existing and future development
in this district is traffic. The district is bound on the east by the southbound
section of Route 13, which also contains major connections to the east and
west. Several times throughout the day this area becomes heavily congested
and can cause travel delays and difficulty for cars exiting businesses along
Route 13. This results in patrons avoiding this area during peak times and
diverting to other routes. In addition, trains can block traffic, further
exacerbating the congestion.
x Pedestrian and Bike Safety — Parts of this area feel unsafe and stressful
to bicyclists and pedestrians. This is due in part to the high levels of traffic,
but also to the lack of infrastructure for these modes of travel.
Opportunities
Despite challenges that exist, the West End/Waterfront District has many
attributes that encourage new and existing businesses.
x Trail Connections — Connections to the Cayuga waterfront trail. This is the
only district not yet connected to the waterfront trail.
x Development/Redevelopment of Underutilized Properties — Support the
relocation of the Coast Guard Auxiliary
21
Planned Characteristics
x City Gateway and Transportation Hub — Work with TCAT to develop direct
transport between the West End, downtown, and college campuses.
x Safety — Improve safety perceptions by creating improved, consistent
lighting
x Signage — Create better way-finding signage, including electronic directory
of places around the city.
x Connections — Enhance connections between the waterfront and the Ithaca
Commons, particularly across Route 13 (Meadow and Fulton Streets) and
along the State Street Corridor.
x Retention of Existing Businesses — Encourage and promote existing local
businesses.
22
The Market District
Location
The Market District is bordered to the south by Cascadilla Street, to the west by
the Cayuga Inlet, to the north by Cascadilla Creek to the north, and to the east by
Routh 13.
Waterfront Character Areas-Market District
23
Existing Characteristics
Existing uses in this district include the Ithaca Area Waste Water Treatment Plant,
the Ithaca Farmers Market, the Ithaca Community Gardens, the undeveloped
Carpenter Business Park, surface parking, several commercial businesses, the
NYS DOT Maintenance Facility, and the Cornell and IC Boathouses.
Challenges
Challenges related to the Market District include:
x Railroad — The Norfolk Southern Cargo railroad tracks run through the
center of the Market District, dividing potential development sites. A single
railroad crossing limits the district’s entry and exit options. When the trains
arrive in the City, they are very long and slow moving, causing traffic to back
up while waiting for them to pass. The trains also create noise and vibrations,
a potential source of disturbance to future residential uses.
x Fuel Storage — Currently there is a fueling station with fuel storage located
adjacent to the water. This is a potential safety risk for future residential
development and of environmental concern due to the potential for leakage
in such close proximity to the water.
x Power Lines — Currently, high tensioned power lines run through the Market
District. This is a challenge for development of some parcels, since structures
are not permitted beneath the power lines, reducing buildable area. Future
development will need to take into consideration the limitations of particular
sites.
Opportunities
This district has several opportunities for development/redevelopment of sites:
x Highway Access — The Market District is located along NYS Route 13. The
proximity to this highway provides easy access for deliveries and excellent
visibility for any future development of this site.
x Future Microgrid — The Tompkins County Waste Water Treatment Plant
(WWTP) is located in the Market District. This facility provides an excellent
opportunity to utilize excess energy to provide alternate sources of electricity.
Plans are currently being developed to create a Microgrid system that would
distribute electricity to surrounding area.
x Make Use of WWTP Excess Heat Energy — Future development
opportunities should consider how to incorporate waste heat from the WWTP.
x NY State Department Of Transportation Site (NYSDOT) — A large 6-acre
site located within the Market District is currently being used as a NYSDOT
maintenance facility. The land is valued at approximately $1.5 million. The
site is located beside the Ithaca Farmers Market and is adjacent to the
24
waterfront. The City and the County have been working with the NYSDOT to
try and re-locate the DOT facility and free up the land for redevelopment. This
parcel has tremendous redevelopment potential and has generated a great
deal of developer interest over the years.
Planned Characteristics
x Encourage Mixed-Use Development — Future development should include
a mix of development types and uses, including commercial and residential
uses.
x Support Established Uses — Future development should enhance/protect
the existing uses, including retaining a space for the Ithaca Farmers Market
and rowing and boating users.
x Encourage Synergistic Uses — This area could benefit by incorporating
synergistic uses into planned projects, such as food production and
community kitchens, which could enhance the Ithaca Farmers Market.
25
The Newman District
Location
The Newman District is bordered to the south by Cascadilla Creek, to the west by
the Cayuga Inlet, to the north by the Newman Golf Course, and to the east by
Route 13 to the East.
Waterfront Character Areas-Newman District
26
Existing Characteristics
Existing uses in this district include the City’s Streets and Facilities buildings,
Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) facilities, and docks. Several
existing, long-time businesses are located in this area. A fire-training center is
located to the north in Stewart Park.
Challenges
Challenges to development in this district are similar to those in other parts of the
waterfront, including poor soil conditions and expensive construction costs.
Further challenges in the Newman District include:
x City and TCAT Facilities — Much of the land in the Newman District is
occupied by the City’s Streets and Facilities building and storage and by the
Tompkins County Area Transit Facilities. The City and TCAT have discussed
the possibility of relocating these facilities in order to free up this prime
waterfront land for other development options.
x Limited Railroad Crossing — There is only one crossing over the railroad
tracks into this district. Since the railroad company is unlikely to grant
additional crossings, any development will have to deal with a single point of
access into the site.
Opportunities
While there are challenges that need to be addressed in order to allow for any
additional development in this area, there are also several attributes that are
unique to this area that make it very desirable for future waterfront development,
including:
x Location — This district is located adjacent to Stewart Park, the Newman
Golf Course, and has potential for access to and views of the water.
x Trails — The Cayuga Waterfront Trail runs through this district. This allows
for easy walking or biking to Stewart Park, the Ithaca Farmers Market, and
other points beyond.
Planned Characteristics
x Relocation of City Facilities — The City should consider the relocation of
TCAT, Streets and Facilities, and the Fire Training Center to provide
additional waterfront land for future development.
x Future Development of Water Related/Dependent/Enhanced Uses —
This district is an ideal place to encourage development of condos and
townhomes, ground floor retail and/or restaurants and other uses that would
be enhanced by their location along the waterfront. In addition, water
27
dependent uses, such as boating centers and docks should also be
encouraged.
x Encourage Public Access — This area should be developed to allow for full
public access and enjoyment of the water. Housing communities that restrict
public access should be discouraged.
x Waterfront Trail — The waterfront trail should be realigned to be located
along the waterfront at the Newman Golf Course and the Cornell Biological
Field Station or a loop trail should be added.
28
3. ECONOMIC VITALITY
3.1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
The waterfront is home to many forms of commercial activity. Many businesses already
take advantage of their close proximity to the water and the expansion of water related
activities throughout the waterfront is encouraged. Proximity to the water provides a
unique opportunity to encourage the growth and development of water-enhanced
activities.
Specifically, in the West End Waterfront District, there is limited land area and businesses
are able to encroach closer to the water. Uses that take advantage of the water, including
restaurants, housing, and shops that can leverage waterfront seating and views, as well
as boating outlets are strongly encouraged. Protecting the experience along the water,
by requiring buildings to treat both the street and water faces as buildings fronts, allows
for strong waterfront commercial activities to develop. In addition, there are many
established businesses in this area that should be supported and encouraged to remain.
In the Newman and Market District the trail network provides for contiguous public access
to the water and should be utilized as an economic engine for tourism.
Both districts contain large areas of land along the water that will likely be redeveloped in
the coming years. The City should encourage private development to leverage the unique
characteristics of the area to enhance and support businesses offering water-related
activities along the waterfront.
The City is the economic and employment center of the region, and it is therefore our goal
to capture new business growth within the city, including high-technology and knowledge-
based businesses and manufacturing. The Cherry Street District is one of the few
locations within the City where industrial uses are permitted. This is a critical use that
creates jobs and provides opportunities for production companies and industries,
including high tech industries, to locate in our community. While other compatible uses
are also permitted in this district, the City should actively work to attract and retain
employment generating businesses and other uses that will not interfere with the
industrial nature of this district.
29
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS
1. The City will attract and retain firms valued by the community, including low
environmental-impact manufacturing, green businesses, locally-owned
businesses, and businesses owned by under-represented groups.
2. The economic environment will retain, nurture, and grow new and existing
businesses within the city.
3. The creation and expansion of local employment, particularly well-paying jobs,
will provide opportunities for all income levels and age groups.
4. A variety of businesses will diversify the economy and reduce economic
dependence on a single sector.
5. Business start-ups and expansions will have adequate access to capital.
6. Tourism will remain a vital component of the city and regional economy.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Support the creation and expansion of business opportunities, especially those
related to tourism.
B. Work on retention of established local businesses and union training programs
C. Encourage water dependent uses and uses that interface with the waterways
D. Maintain the Cherry Street District for industries that create employment
opportunities.
E. Encourage tourism related businesses to utilize the trail systems as an economic
engine.
F. Identify opportunities for development of underutilized waterfront properties.
G. Embrace the unique characteristics of the waterfront area in order to enhance
and support businesses.
30
4. COMMUNITY LIVABILITY
4.1 HOUSING
The City of Ithaca has a critical need for more mixed
income housing across all income ranges, specifically for
workforce or middle income units. The shortage of
availablehousing has resulted in significant increases in
residential rents and for sale housing with prices
increasing dramatically in recent years.
Since 2006, 1175 new housing units have been built in
the City. Of those new units approximately 23% of them
have been housing for those earning low to moderate
income levels. The vast majority of these new housing
units have been market rate housing and much of it has
been housing for students. This has left a major
shortage in housing options for the majority of the
workforce for whom market rate housing is not
affordable. In order to address this situation, it is critical
to increase the supply of high quality, safe, accessible
housing that is affordable to people across all income
levels.
Until 2016, much of the Market, Newman, and Cherry Street Districts did not allow for
residential uses. Most of the waterfront, with the exception of the lower Cherry Street
District, are now zoned to encourage residential and mixed use development. Current
zoning in the Waterfront Districts does not allow for single-family homes in order to
prevent construction of market rate private homes along the waterfront. This type of
development is prohibited in order to encourage more density along with public access to
the water. However, opportunities exist for various types of residential options, including
rental units and for sale owner-occupied condominiums and townhomes. As this area is
developed it is important to encourage a mix of housing types that includes both for sale
and rental housing options.
The waterfront area is also within walking distance to downtown and has access to public
transportation to various locations, including major employers, shopping, and business
centers within the City and beyond. It also has easy access to the Ithaca Farmers Market,
the Ithaca Community Gardens, Cass and Stewart Parks, the Waterfront trail, and the
Finger Lakes Trail network. All of these attributes make the waterfront an ideal location
for residential uses.
WorkforceHousingisaterm
thatexpandstheideaof
affordablehousing.It
generallyreferstohousing
thatisaffordabletothose
withincomelevelsranging
between50%Ͳ120%ofthe
AreaMedianIncome(AMI)
WORKFORCE
HOUSING
31
Much of the land adjacent to the waterfront is underdeveloped and offers many desirable
locations for residential development, including a large City-owned parcel in the Newman
District that currently houses the City’s Division of Streets
and Facilities. As a part of the City’s Master Planning for
City Facilities, which began in 2016, the City has outlined
a goal of relocating this department out of the waterfront
area in order to make this site available for
redevelopment. This site is located on approximately 10
acres of land adjacent to the City Newman Golf Course.
The Market District contains over 8 acres of currently
undeveloped land located adjacent to the Ithaca Farmers
Market, the Ithaca Community Gardens, and the Cayuga
Waterfront Trail. In addition, the New York State
Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) owns a 6 acre
parcel of land adjacent to the water that has been
identified as having tremendous redevelopment potential.
This redevelopment potential provides a unique
opportunity to plan for and encourage new developments
that accommodate mixed income levels, diverse age
groups, and a variety of uses.
Historically, the high cost of construction and zoning
restrictions limited development in the waterfront districts.
However, the recently adopted waterfront zoning has
opened up opportunities for residential uses and
development interest has increased in this area. In 2018,
the City also adopted a Planned Unit Development
Overlay District (PUDOD) that includes most of the
waterfront. This allows for greater zoning, flexibility
encouraging projects that provide additional benefits to
the community.
Beyond zoning flexibility, the City can encourage desired development in this area by
offering tax abatements to projects that will benefit the greater community and fill these
needs. In 2000, the City established a Density District where projects that meet specific
criteria may apply for property tax abatements for a portion of the taxes on new
ThePUDODisanoverlay
districtthatwasestablished
in2018.Thisdistrictallows
forpropertieslocated
withintheboundariesof
thedistrictpropose
developmentprojectsthat
maynotconformwiththe
underlyingzoning,but
demonstratebenefitstothe
communitythatwould
mitigateanyimpactsfrom
notconformingwiththe
zoningrestrictions.
PLANNEDUNIT
DEVELOPMENT
OVERLAYDISTRICT
(PUDOD)
32
development for a period of 7-10 years. This
abatement program has been amended several times
and is now part of the established Community
Investment Incentive Tax Abatement Program
(CIITAP). The Density District does not currently
extend to the Waterfront Districts. A proposal to
expand the Density District to include the Waterfront
Districts is currently being considered. This would
further encourage investment in this area and would
help to offset the high costs of foundations for new
construction along the waterfront. This tool can also
allow for the City to mandate desirable types of housing
and prevent new development from being used
exclusively for high-end housing.
Tools such as the PUDOD and the CIITAP can be used
to encourage projects that provide benefits to the
community, and have the potential to satisfy identified
needs such as:
x Housing for Mixed Ages and Incomes,
Including Affordable/Work Force Housing
x Senior and Family Housing Options
x Public Recreational Opportunities,
including Options for Universally
Accessible Amenities
x Universally Designed Buildings that are
Accessible to People of All Ages and
Abilities
x Net Zero Buildings
This area of underutilized land, with direct visual and physical access to the waterfront,
within walking distance to the Commons, the Ithaca Farmers Market, Cass and Stewart
Parks and the Cayuga Waterfront Trail, offers a unique opportunity to plan for and realize
a completely new area of development in the City. Capitalizing on these assets and
amenities will not only offer tremendous economic benefits that include strengthening our
tax base, but will open up housing possibilities that will help to address many of the current
needs of the community.
TheCIITAPwasadoptedby
theCityin2012.Itallows
forpropertyownersto
applyforanabatementfor
aportionoftheirproperty
taxesforaperiodof7Ͳ10
years.Theobjectiveofthis
programistoencourage
developmentintheCity
thatwouldincreasejobs,
increasethetaxbase,
promotedensityinthe
core,encourage
rehabilitationandreuseof
underutilizedsitesandhelp
createavibrantCitycenter.
COMMUNITY
INVESTMENT
INCENTIVETAX
ABATEMENT
PROGRAM(CIITAP)
33
HOUSING GOALS
1. Ithaca will have an adequate supply of safe, accessible, and affordable housing
available to all residents, regardless of their life circumstances or special needs.
2. The city will be home to a range of housing options, including different levels of
affordability and housing types, in each neighborhood.
3. New residential units will be compatible with the essential character of established
neighborhoods, in coordination with the goals of the Land Use chapter.
4. Homeownership and owner-occupancy of residential units will increase throughout
the city.
HOUSING RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Support the construction of new housing throughout the study area.
B. Encourage home ownership opportunities within new development projects,
including condominiums and townhomes.
C. Encourage housing that is designed to accommodate families with children by
offering open spaces, play areas, and multiple (3+) bedrooms.
D. Encourage housing for single adults, professionals, and live/work spaces.
E. Work with developers to ensure that new housing in the West End is designed to
be sympathetic to the area’s existing character.
F. Look for opportunities to renovate and retain any existing housing
G. Incentivize affordable housing units through tax abatements and zoning.
H. Strongly encourage new housing units to be universally designed so they are
accessible to people of all ages and abilities.
I. Consider requiring redevelopment projects on publicly owned land to include
higher amounts of affordable housing at all income levels.
34
4.2 HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Major infrastructure changes in the mid-20th century and the subsequent commercial,
industrial and residential development of the waterfront area have resulted in a significant
loss of historic fabric and context for this area of the city. However, architectural remnants
of the area’s historic use as an industrial center, transportation corridor, and residential
area are scattered throughout the district and reflect
the visual, social, economic and political characteristics
of the area from the early-19th through mid-20th
centuries. Examples include a few factory buildings,
architect-designed passenger train stations, service
industry buildings, and humble residences. These
resources connect residents and visitors to the history
of the area and contribute significantly to its sense of
place, identity, and vibrancy. Preservation is a way to
celebrate and interpret this history and protect the
cultural value of these resources.
The Lehigh Valley Railroad Station at the 806-810
West Buffalo Street is the only LOCALLY DESIGNATED
HISTORIC RESOURCE in the waterfront. Built in 1898 and
designed by a locally prominent architect, this yellow-
brick passenger train depot represents the importance
of passenger rail service in Ithaca during the late-19th
and early-20th centuries and the railroads’ influence on
the character and development of the waterfront during
this period.It was listed on the State and National
Registers of Historic Places in 1974 and designated an
INDIVIDUAL LOCAL LANDMARK that same year.
Whatdoesitmeantobea
“designatedhistoric
resource”?
Ǥ
ǡ
Ȁ
Ǥ
HISTORICDESIGNATION
35
There are also several undesignated historic resources
that represent the area’s historic land use patterns. Listed
in the Waterfront Resources Worthy of Further Research
and considered in more detail in Appendix XXX, they
contribute to the district’s unique identity, sense of place
and economic vitality, and their protection is essential to
preserving important connections to the past as the area
develops according to the goals of the Land Use chapter.
These resources should be appropriately protected
through local landmark designation, CONSERVATION
DISTRICTS, design guidelines, or restrictions with a form-
based code.
Our understanding of the architectural, historical, and
cultural heritage of the waterfront continues to grow as new
information about the area is discovered and interpreted.
In response, we must continually work to identify resources that represent newly
discovered aspects of its heritage.
ǣ
-Ǧ
-ǡ Ƭ
ǡ
-ȋ Ȍ
-
- ȋƬ
Ȍ
- ǡ
-
Ǥ
-
36
HISTORIC PRESERVATION GOALS
1. The community will understand the importance of historic preservation and take
pride in the collective history represented by the built environment.
2. All historic resources worthy of preservation will be protected, whether formally
designated or not.
3. Improvements to designated structures will conform to the Historic Preservation
Ordinance.
4. Existing historic buildings will be rehabilitated or ADAPTIVELY REUSED rather than
demolished.
5. New construction within or adjacent to historic districts or individually listed
landmarks will be compatible with the existing built environment.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Install signage identifying and explaining the historic context and significance of
the Lehigh Valley Railroad Station.
B. Provide similar denotive and interpretive signage for all future landmarked
properties.
C. Make accessible to the public information on designated historic resources through
its inclusion in publicly assessable online repositories or applications like
HistoryForge or PocketSights: Tour Builder.
D. Identify all properties with architectural or historic value in the waterfront district,
particularly those noted as Waterfront Historic Resources Worthy of Further
Research, and designate an appropriate level of protection for each.
E. Continue to annually notify owners of historic properties about the designated
status of their property; local, state and federal tax incentive programs for the
maintenance and rehabilitation of designated historic resources; and the Ithaca
Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) approval process.
F. Conduct intensive-level surveys of identified historic resources in the waterfront
area, particularly those included as Waterfront Historic Resources Worthy of
Further Research, to determine the appropriate level of protection for these
resources.
G. Draft design guidelines and adopt a form-based code for the area to ensure new
buildings reflect the architectural quality and character of the historic resources.
37
4.3 – PUBLIC SAFETY
The City anticipates that there will be new development and redevelopment of the
waterfront districts. Public safety is critical when planning for new neighborhoods and
commercial districts. The City Police Force currently struggles to maintain adequate
staffing to serve the existing population. Given the potential growth for this area it may
be beneficial for private development to be encouraged to provide private security. This
can cut down on the number of non-essential police calls.
Water Safety
The adjacent waterways pose safety issues that are not present in some other areas of
the City. With increased residential development anticipated, it is essential that residents
be educated and provided with the tools for water safety. While water provides many
recreational opportunities, it can also create hazardous conditions when safety
precautions are not respected, especially with families and children living near the water.
As construction occurs, private development should be encouraged to install tools along
the water such as blue light emergency phones and water rescue devices on private land.
The Coast Guard Auxiliary provides courses on boating and water safety. Developers
should encourage tenants to use this service or should provide alternative water safety
educational opportunities to their tenants. In addition, the City should explore locations
along the waterfront trail where life vests, safety ropes, and life preservers can be installed
on public land.
The City currently does not patrol the City waterways. Police presence on the water only
exists with the County Sheriff and the State Parks Police, which have a much broader
jurisdictional boundary and are therefore not often able to have a presence on the City
waterways. Given the City’s scarce resources, it would be advantageous to develop
relationships with the other jurisdictions. In addition, given that the City contains several
waterways within its boundaries it is critical that all emergency response personnel be
trained in water and boating safety. Currently City Police are not required to be trained
for water/boating specialties, however, given the expected growth in the waterfront area,
this should become a City priority.
Emergency Response
The waterfront area is a unique part of the City that requires alternative forms of
emergency response in order to keep residents and guests safe. In addition to water
safety, the City should be prepared to respond to emergencies on the water and will need
to have access to boats or other water vehicles. Similarly, the first responders in the City
should have access to alternative vehicles that can respond to emergencies on trails. As
38
with trainings and educational opportunities, it may be possible to share
resources/equipment with other agencies.
Another obstacle to first responders in the warfront area is the train. The train tracks that
are located along the edge of the waterfront districts carry trains that are required to travel
at highly reduced speeds while in the City limits. These slow moving and sometimes
lengthy trains prevent access into or out of several of the Waterfront Districts while they
are passing through. In the event of an emergency this is an obstacle for first responders.
Currently, the police are informed when a train will be arriving so that they can be located
on either side of the tracks. This is an important practice that needs to continue and should
be mandated so that both IPD and IFD can be prepared to respond in the case of an
emergency.
Traffic Issues
Traffic issues are a major safety concern in the Waterfront Districts. In the past two years
over 40% of all of the police calls from this area were related to traffic concerns. Heavy
congestion, irregular traffic patterns, and missing bike lanes and sidewalks create difficult
conditions for vehicles as well as pedestrians and bicyclists. Planned infrastructure
improvements to this area should address some of these issues; however, the City should
continue to recognize that a high level of traffic related issues creates a strain on Ithaca’s
understaffed police department.
39
PUBLIC SAFETY GOALS
1. The city will be a safe and secure environment for all members of the community.
2. The City will provide a timely and appropriate response to emergencies.
3. All segments of the community will have strong relationships with first responders
that encourage collaboration, communication, trust, and understanding.
4. The community will be well educated on personal safety and emergency
preparedness.
5. Members of the public will have a way to communicate with neighbors or first
responders in an emergency situation.
PUBLIC SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Encourage private commercial businesses and residential developments to
contract with qualified, well trained private security to manage their properties and
reduce the number of non-essential police calls.
B. Encourage residential developments along the waterfront to provide water safety
educational opportunities for tenants living in these areas.
C. Encourage private residential developments to implement water safety
infrastructure, including blue light phones and rescue devices along the waterfront.
D. Explore areas along trails and waterways where life vests, safety ropes, ladders,
and life preservers should be installed.
E. Consider installing emergency communication devices, such as blue light phones,
along the trails and in other locations in the waterfront district.
F. Explore options for Alternative City Safety vehicles that could get on the trails in
emergency situations.
G. Encourage the public to bring safety concerns and suggestions to the City Public
Safety and Information Commission (PSI).
H. Support ongoing boating and water safety educational programs by the Coast
Guard Auxiliary.
v
40
I. Offer volunteer opportunities for community members to engage in waterfront
clean-up activities.
J. Provide public safety personnel with all tools — including personnel, equipment,
and training — necessary to meet city and regional public safety needs and strive
to meet the minimum recommended safety personnel quotas for the existing
population.
K. Work with the railroad company to request that emergency personnel be notified
when a train will be coming into the City, so that emergency response officers can
locate on both sides of the railroad tracks when a train will be coming through.
L. Evaluate the intersection of Cherry/Taber for safety measures that could reduce
traffic issues.
M. Consider how City emergency personnel could work collaboratively with Sheriff,
Coast Guard, and Parks Police in order to patrol the waterways.
N. Mandate water/boating safety training for all City emergency responders.
O. Investigate locations for establishing an emergency shelter on the west side of the
railroad tracks.
P. Consider creating a City box in the local papers to inform the public of emergency
response tools, such as SWIFT 911.
Q. Explore methods to educate residents and visitors on water safety, safety during
flooding, and ice safety.
R. Improve lighting along public spaces, north of Green Star towards the Farmers’
Market.
41
4.4 – PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Many of the goals established in this plan rely heavily on the availability
of appropriate and reliable physical infrastructure. While much of this
infrastructure may not be visible to the general public, it is essential to
the growth and livability of the community. The City is responsible for supplying and
maintaining municipal water, sewer, and stormwater services, as well as maintaining
bridges, roads, sidewalks, creeks, and parks. Additional utilities are supplied and
maintained by utility companies and are usually located within the City-owned right of
ways.
Unfortunately, much of the anticipated growth in this area is not attainable without
upgrades to the underground utility services. In addition, the Market and Newman
Districts currently do not have adequate water supply available for major commercial
development. The Market District, in particular, contains the large NYS DOT parcel that
is expected to be redeveloped if the DOT relocates. This site is currently served with 6”
water pipes that will not have adequate capacity for a large redevelopment and ` will
need to be increased to 8”. As new development options arise for these areas it is
important to consider the necessary upgrades that will need to be completed in order to
support this growth.
In addition to underground utility needs, various upgrades to transportation infrastructure
are required to support existing and future development. The City is currently planning for
an expansion and realignment of the Brindley Street Bridge which will allow vehicles to
travel a more direct route between the West End/Waterfront District and the Cherry Street
District. This realignment will likely encourage additional traffic to re-route their travel to
this alternate route. The Taber Street-Cherry Street intersection is dangerous due to very
limited visibility. As improvements are completed in this area and traffic increases, it may
become necessary to realign the roadway to extend Brindley Street directly to Cecil A.
Malone Drive.
It is expected that the old Brindley Street Bridge will be maintained as a non-vehicular
bridge. The City recently completed a large pedestrian improvement project on the Route
79 bridge across the Flood Control Channel. These improvements are expected to
alleviate some of the existing and anticipated congestion and make for safer pedestrian
travel in this area. The Newman and Market Districts will require new road networks,
including a possible Fifth Street extension to connect these areas to the neighborhoods
on the other side of Route 13.
A major concern beyond expansion of infrastructure is the ongoing maintenance of
existing infrastructure. The City’s Department of Public Works does not have the staff or
resources to cover all of its required maintenance work. The Department regularly seeks
funding form the New York State Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and various
other funding sources in order to make infrastructure improvements.
PP&CLUEV
M&TN&CR S
42
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE GOALS
1. City infrastructure and private utilities will be regularly maintained and upgraded to
ensure continued operation and service to the community.
2. Physical infrastructure will be designed to be compatible with the built environment.
3. Investment in infrastructure will be prioritized based on existing condition and level
of use as well as impacts on commercial activity and quality of life.
4. Construction activity by City departments, New York State, Tompkins County, the
Town of Ithaca, utility companies, and private developers will be well-coordinated.
PHYSICAL INFRASTRUCTURE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Invest in increased staffing and resources in order to maintain physical
infrastructure and keep up with the demands of new development in the waterfront
area.
2. Consider extending the new Brindley Street directly to Cecil A. Malone Drive to
avoid the Taber/Cherry Street intersection with very limited visibility.
3. Consider upgrading sewer capacity in the Cherry Street District to allow for
additional development.
4. Construct a second sanitary sewer crossing over Six Mile Creek, to increase
capacity for recent and future growth.
5. Plan for necessary water and sewer upgrades on Inlet Island to support ongoing
development.
6. Plan for additional water upgrades to support redevelopment of the NYS DOT site
and other areas of the Market District and the Newman District.
7. Consider areas where new roads, sidewalks, and bike lanes may need to be
added, including a possible Fifth Street extension into the Market District.
43
4.5 – HEALTH AND WELLNESS
Health and Wellness are essential components to developing
neighborhoods with high standards of living. The waterfront area contains many
recreational opportunities that can enhance physical and mental well-being. Given the
growth potential for this area, it is critical to maintain and expand these opportunities.
Trail Networks
Expanding the trail network to create a waterfront trail that is not only for recreational
use, but also serves as an alternate commuting route can create living conditions that
encourage alternative transportation. This has tremendous health benefits to the
residents, as well as to the greater community, as it would reduce traffic congestion,
exhaust, and improve safety. The completion of the Black Diamond trail should remain a
priority for the City. A connection across the Flood Control Channel to Cecil Malone Drive
would create an alternate route into the City from the West Hill neighborhoods.
In addition to expanding the trail, ongoing maintenance of the existing trails is also
essential. In order to encourage residents to use the trail as a regular transportation
route, the City has to ensure regular maintenance. Unfortunately, trail maintenance can
become a costly expense that may not always be covered in municipal budgets. The City
should seek alternate sources of funding for ongoing maintenance, including exploring
the possibility of creating “Adopt a Trail” programs, or “Friends of Trail”. The community
could also be engaged to help with ongoing maintenance by creating “Clean up the
Waterfront” days.
Open Space/Recreational Opportunities
Access to parks, water, open space, and other recreational resources is also a critical
element in creating healthy living conditions. As new development expands in the
waterfront, it is critical to maintain access to these elements for both waterfront residents
and the general public.
PP&CLUEV
M&TN&CR S
44
HEALTH,WELLNESS,&SUPPORT GOALS
1. The community’s use of active modes of transportation will improve individual
health and wellness, as well as environmental sustainability.
2. All residents and visitors will have access to parks, trails, recreational facilities, and
community activities that support social interaction and physical activity.
3. Recreational opportunities will be provided for youth throughout the city.
4. Preventive, ongoing, and emergency health care will be accessible and available
to all.
5. Physical, economic, and social barriers to health and wellness will be eliminated.
6. Public spaces will be welcoming to all residents and visitors.
7. The built environment will be accessible for people of all ages and abilities.
Accessibility
8. Public and private properties will be free from contamination.
HEALTH,WELLNESS,&SUPPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Complete the Black Diamond Trail.
B. Seek funding to construct a pedestrian bridge over the Flood Control Channel that
would connect the Black Diamond Trail to Cecil Malone Drive.
C. Seek funding for maintenance of the Waterfront Trail, including exploring the
possibility of creating an “adopt a trail” program or a Friends of the Cayuga
Waterfront Trail program.
D. Create waterfront clean-up days.
E. Encourage environmentally-friendly businesses to locate near the waterfront.
F. Create access points for paddle boats.
G. Ensure access to the water and to playgrounds, include open space in new
development.
H. Plan for new neighborhoods to include community gardens and trail connections.
I. Consider adding amenities along trails, such as electrical outlets and additional
seating areas, in order to allow for individuals with needs and abilities to utilize the
trails.
45
5.0 Mobility and Transportation
5.1 Introduction
As stated in Plan Ithaca, the City’s current transportation system is primarily designed for
vehicular traffic. It is the goal of the City to create a balanced transportation network that
supports vehicular traffic while creating comfortable and sustainable options for
alternatives to single occupancy vehicular trips.
The intent of this chapter is to document specific concerns regarding the transportation
network in the waterfront area and to examine how the transportation goals of Plan Ithaca
should be implemented in the waterfront area.
The waterfront area is a City gateway from areas to the west and north. Portions contain
heavy vehicular traffic congestion without adequate amenities for safe pedestrian and
bicycle travel. Other parts of the waterfront area also lack adequate internal circulation
and transit connections.
This plan will make recommendations for improvements to the transit system to create a
safer and more welcoming experience for all modes of travel.
N&CR
LU
46
Goals for the Waterfront Area
1. Ithaca will provide an interconnected transportation network that makes it
convenient, routine, and feasible for all residents and visitors to walk, bike, and
use transit.
2. Ithaca’s transportation infrastructure will be designed to increase multi-modal
connectivity, creating an interwoven network that extends into adjacent
municipalities.
3. To reduce auto dependency, transportation modes shall be prioritized in the
following order: pedestrian, bicycle, transit, private cars, and goods movement.
4. Every City street will be a complete street that accommodates multiple modes of
transportation, including active transportation modes.
5. Pedestrian travel will be supported on all city streets through well-maintained and
enhanced facilities that meet, at a minimum, Americans with Disabilities Act
requirements.
6. Attractive new pathways will run along natural features — such as creeks and
gorges — and connect to the street system, enhancing neighborhoods and serving
as active transportation corridors.
7. Convenient, well-designed, and well-maintained bike facilities will encourage
increased bicycling on city streets.
8. Frequent transit service, along with improved stops and shelters, throughout a
broad service area will offer increased comfort, safety, and accessibility,
particularly in areas serving low-income and elderly people.
9. The public parking supply will be managed to enhance vitality in city
neighborhoods and commercial areas, support programs that provide alternatives
to private car use, and be cost-neutral to the City.
10. Innovative ways to improve the delivery of goods and services will be in place.
11. Pedestrian, bike, and transit improvements will be spread equitably throughout the
city so people of all income levels and abilities will benefit from them.
12. Shared transportation services, such as bike and carsharing programs, ridesharing
and vanpooling, will be actively supported.
13. Coordinated regional transportation improvements — ranging from better
pedestrian, bicycle and street connections with adjacent municipalities to better
bus, rail and airline connections with other cities and states — will help ensure
convenient regional mobility.
14. All city streets, including State highways, will meet transportation needs while
knitting together, rather than separating, adjacent city neighborhoods and areas.
47
Recommendations for the Waterfront Area
A. Conduct a formal traffic study of the entire waterfront area and evaluate the
feasibility of complete streets in each of the waterfront districts. Where complete
streets are not feasible, consider how to accommodate all modes of transportation.
B. Work with Tompkins County Area Transit to ensure that there is easily accessible
local public transit throughout the entire waterfront area and to encourage the use
of “right sized” transit in the neighborhoods. Explore the uses of smaller transit
options.
C. Include accommodations for pedestrians and bikes on all streets in the waterfront
area and complete an off street trail network that connects the entire area.
D. Encourage developers in the waterfront area to work together to develop and
implement traffic demand management plans in order to reduce the number of
single occupancy vehicles and reduce traffic congestion.
E. Consider locations for shared parking.
F. Explore alternatives to surface parking and encourage private properties to have
shared parking areas.
G. Explore locations for pedestrian bridges over the water to enhance pedestrian
connections.
H. Encourage private boat ferry or water taxi between Cass Park and the Farmers
Market and other areas in the waterfront.
I. Strengthen connections across Route 13 between the waterfront area and
downtown.
J. Work with Ithaca Carshare to provide additional vehicle locations throughout the
waterfront area.
48
5.2 West End/Waterfront District
Traffic
One of the largest challenges to existing and future development in this district is traffic.
The district is bound on the east by the southbound section of Route 13, which also
contains major connections to the east and west. Several times throughout the day this
area becomes heavily congested and can cause travel delays and difficulty for vehicles
patronizing businesses in the area. In addition, trains occasionally block traffic, which
further exacerbates the congestion. This results in patrons avoiding this area during peak
times and diverting to other routes.
Pedestrian and Bike Safety
Heavy traffic in this area, along with areas lacking sidewalks and dedicated bike lanes,
make this district feel unsafe and unwelcoming to pedestrians and bicyclists. Between
Court Street and State Street there are only sidewalks on one side of Route 13.
Sidewalks on the side streets that turn onto this road make it appear that pedestrians
should walk along the railroad tracks, which is not a safe or acceptable option. This area
would also benefit from a dedicated bike lane for the protection of bicyclists on these
heavily trafficked roads.
Trail Connections
Improvements need to be made for connections to the Cayuga waterfront trail. There is
an opportunity to realign the waterfront trail so that it is adjacent to the water.
CL
N&CR
LU
49
Recommendations for the West End/Waterfront District
1. Install protected bike lanes wherever possible, particularly in high trafficked areas,
such as West Buffalo and West State Streets, and also consider installing
protected bike lanes on the outside of the West State Street bridge.
2. The City should encourage multi-modal transportation by providing amenities
throughout the district, such as covered bike shelters with bike pumps, and bus
shelters.
3. Work with NYSDOT, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC),
and other interested agencies to transform the Route 13 corridor into a complete
street.
4. Consider replacing the traffic light at Rt. 13 and Cascadilla Street with a traffic circle
or other options for managing speed and traffic flow.
5. Work with the Town of Ithaca and Ithaca Tompkins County transportation Council
to provide seamless pedestrian and bicycle linkages, such as continuous
sidewalks between destinations in the two municipalities, and secure
transportation connections along the west City line to allow for alternatives to
Route 79 for travelers.
6. The City should install crosswalks at Buffalo and State Streets to allow for safe
connections for pedestrians and bicyclists to the (old) Brindley Street Bridge and
to enhance the pedestrian connections to the planned new Brindley Street Bridge.
7.The City should investigate the feasibility of installing bus shelters on West State
Street, in front of Cayuga Lumber or some other nearby location, in order to create
paired bus stops for incoming and outgoing transit service at this location.
8.The City should work with private property owners to install a screening with
plantings, decorative fence, or landscaping stones between the railroad tracks and
Route 13 between Court Street and State Street.
9.Consider installing sidewalks along Fulton Street between the railroad tracks and
the area business on the 100 and 300 blocks. Where space doesn’t exist within
an existing right of way, explore options for installing the sidewalk on private
property.
10.The City should complete the construction of the seawall on Inlet Island and
complete the Promenade Plan and consider adding docks off the north point of the
island.
11.Explore options to realign the Cayuga Waterfront Trail to be located directly
adjacent to the water and improve signage and trail markings.
12.Explore the possibility of creating a dedicated trail connection to the Cayuga
Waterfront Trail from Court Street.
13.The City should complete the planned portion of the Black Diamond Trail that
would create a continuous trail connection under the West State Street Bridge.
50
14.Work with the Railroad to formalize the crossing at Cascadilla Street.
15.Consider the feasibility of a Southwest Area Connector Road and explore options
for more direct connections from West Hill to the Southwest Area.
16.Consider locations for additional connections to the waterfront trail.
17.Consider options for encouraging pedestrian and bicycle travel on Inlet Island,
while reducing or prohibiting vehicular traffic in certain portions of Inlet Island.
51
5.3 Market District
Railroad
The Norfolk Southern Cargo rail runs through the center of the Market District and divides
potential development sites. The few railroad crossings limit entry and exit options into
the district. When trains arrive in the city, they create significant congestion along these
crossings. Further the trains also create considerable noise and vibrations, which has the
potential for creating disturbances to future residential uses.
Highway Access
The Market District is located along NYS Route 13. The proximity to this thoroughfare
provides easy access for deliveries and excellent visibility for any future development of
this site.
Internal Circulation
Currently there is only one way in and out of the district and there is no established internal
road. The existing roads lack sidewalk or bike infrastructure and do not provide through
access to the waterfront from the major thoroughfare.
Traffic /Parking
The popularity of the Ithaca Farmers Market causes heavy traffic congestion in this area
on weekends. During peak times the number of visitors to the Market exceeds the parking
capacity. Alternative parking for the Farmers Market takes place across Route 13 in the
parking lot at the corner of Hancock, Adams and Third Street, in Stewart Park, or along
the road of the undeveloped Carpenter Business Park parcel. These overflow parking
areas do not currently provide for safe, easy travel for pedestrians to and from the
Farmers Market. Parking in the Hancock/3rd/Adams Lot requires pedestrians to cross the
heavily used Route 13. Parking areas along the road in Carpenter Business Park may not
be available in the future depending on the development of the site.
Transportation Recommendations for the Market District
1. Consider how to connect the Market District to the adjoining Northside
neighborhood and to downtown, including creating safe connections for
pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Route 13, and possibly connecting this area
with the Northside grid network by adding a connection at 5th Street.
2. Work with property owners to develop a plan for internal circulation that
accommodates pedestrians, bicycles and public transit vehicles.
3. Work with NYSDOT, the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council (ITCTC),
and other interested agencies to transform the Route 13 corridor into a complete
street, including exploring the possibility of installing a pedestrian island in the
center of the roadway to provide an area of refuge for pedestrians.
CL
52
4. Work with the Ithaca Farmers Market to encourage alternative transportation for
accessing the Market.
5.4 Newman District
City and TCAT Facilities
The majority of the land in the Newman District is currently occupied by the City of Ithaca
Streets and Facilities buildings and storage and the Tompkins County Area Transit
(TCAT) facilities. The City and TCAT have discussed the possibility of relocating these
facilities to provide additional waterfront land for other development opportunities.
Limited Railroad Crossing
There is only one crossing over the railroad tracks into this district. Since the railroad
company is unlikely to grant additional crossings, any development will have to deal with
the challenge of having only one point of access into and out of the site.
Trails
The Cayuga Waterfront Trail runs through this district. This allows for easy walking or
biking to Stewart Park, the Farmer’s Market, and other points beyond. The trail currently
diverts away from the water as it crosses the Newman District.
Lack of an Existing Transportation Network
There is no established network in this district. Currently the only roads that exist in this
district serve the city facilities. If City and TCAT facilities relocated as recommended, a
multi-modal network would need to be established to ensure visual and physical
connections to the water, as well as pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular access to Newman
Golf Course, Stewart Park, and to the Market District.
Transportation Recommendations for the Newman District
1. Create a trail along Fall Creek that connects to the Cayuga Waterfront Trail and
creates a continuous trail loop around the district.
2. Improve connections between the Newman District and Cayuga Street by creating
a safe crossing or perhaps a pedestrian – Formal walkway across Route 13 (near
the high school)
3. Any new development in this district should make accommodations for
pedestrians and bicyclists throughout the site, including internal walkways through
large blocks.
CL
N&CR
LU
53
4. Evaluate potential pedestrian bridge locations to span Cascadilla Creek and
directly connect the Newman District and Market District
5. Look for more opportunities for boat docking locations and slips for launching
boats.
5.5 Cherry Street District
Traffic Circulation
The Cherry Street District has only one through street and no sidewalks.
Furthermore, once the planned construction of the new Brindley Street Bridge
is completed, vehicular traffic in the area will likely increase.
To develop this district, a plan for safe multi-modal transportation into and out of this area
is needed.
Any traffic planning should consider the following:
x The planned reconstruction and realignment of the Brindley Street Bridge
x A potential pedestrian bridge that crosses the Flood Control Channel and
creates a connection to West Hill.
x Protecting bikes and pedestrian traffic from large truck traffic, which may
increase if additional industrial uses develop in this area.
Improve Multi Modal Transportation Connections
Given the limited road network in this district, support for all modes of transportation is
critical for the continued development of this area. The completion of the Black Diamond
Trail will provide more opportunities for pedestrian and bicycle transportation. In addition,
the planned reconstruction/realignment of the Brindley Bridge will allow for better
vehicular access.
Future Black Diamond Trail Connection
Portions of the Black Diamond Trail are currently under construction outside of the city.
A small segment has been constructed in the city on the western side of the Flood Control
Channel between the water and Route 13A/Floral Ave. This segment will connect to a
new bridge over the Flood Control Channel and continue south along the eastern side
between the water and Cherry Street, eventually connecting to a segment ending at
Robert H. Treman State Park. The trail will be used for both commuting and recreation,
improving multi-modal transportation opportunities and connecting the district to the
regional trail network.
N&CR
S
LU
54
Transportation Recommendations for the Cherry Street District
1. Look for opportunities to reduce driveway widths, while keeping them suitable to
the use of the property.
2. Consider design widths of curb cuts to ensure proper circulation for the property
as well as to ensure pedestrian safety
3. Planning for this area should include a continuous sidewalk and tree lawn along
at least one side of the street, especially from the Brindley Street Bridge to the
intersection of Cecil A. Malone Drive and Taber Street.
4. The sidewalks along Cecil A. Malone Drive should be contiguous all along the
street
5. Work with property owners to share and consolidate parking on Cherry Street.
6. Provide lighting for the bridge across the Flood Control Channel and the
Waterfront Trail during the evening hours that is safe for trail users, but also
minimizes light pollution to nearby residential areas.
7. Consider locations where protected bike lanes may be appropriate to minimize
sharing roadways with the large trucks that service the industrial businesses in
the Cherry Street District.
55
6.0 Natural & Cultural Resources
6.1 Natural Resources
We are fortunate to have an abundance of natural resources in Ithaca, and the waterfront
area is home to many of the city’s parks, trails, and scenic views. Residents and visitors
alike have the rare opportunity to interact with the natural environment while being close
to an urban setting. Waterfront parks and trails offer a wide variety of recreational
opportunities ranging from ice hockey, soccer, and swimming to playgrounds and open
fields for games as well as quiet spaces to enjoy scenic views of the lake or a good book
on a nice afternoon.
Our natural resources also have critical ecological functions. In parks, trees, native
grasses, and other plantings can remove greenhouse gases from the air and harmful
pollutants from groundwater. While the focus is often on parks, green spaces and
plantings in and around development are essential for collecting and filtering stormwater
runoff. This is particularly important in the waterfront area, as these natural filtration
systems form a final barrier before pollutants enter our waterways.
The City currently owns and operates over 280 acres of waterfront parkland and more
than three miles of publicly accessible waterfront.1 While most of this property is outside
of the waterfront study area, two of the City’s smallest neighborhood parks, Brindley and
Van Horn Parks, are located in the waterfront area. This study area plays a critical role
as a corridor that connects the two largest regional waterfront parks, Cass Park and
Stewart Park. These parks are directly linked by the Cayuga Waterfront Trail, which runs
through most of the waterfront area. The trail itself is an amazing recreational resource
and is also an important means of travel for pedestrians and bicyclists. As development
occurs in the waterfront area in the coming years, we must ensure that these connections
to important green spaces are maintained and enhanced so that they are accessible and
welcoming to all. As the Cayuga Waterfront Trail begins to age, maintenance of the trail
will become a critical issue and resources must be dedicated to preserving and enhancing
the trail. In addition to routine maintenance, the City should also collaborate with partners
to consider expanding maintenance to allow all-season use of the trail.
Our access to the natural environment is a distinctive feature that makes our community
unique. As the waterfront area continues to change, we must ensure that this access is
preserved so that all residents and visitors will continue to experience the natural beauty
that the area has to offer. Private developments are encouraged to provide direct public
access to the water through waterfront shops and restaurants, play areas, public
walkways, marine activities, and other uses that take advantage of the area’s unique
1 This chapter focus on natural resources (including parks and trails) within the Waterfront Study Area, as
shown on page X. For more information on goals and recommendations for Cass and Stewart Parks
(including the Newman Golf Course), please see the City of Ithaca Parks and Recreation Master Plan at
www.cityofithaca.org.
LUCL
M&TS
56
location. Additionally, new development should consider visual access to the waterfront
and should be sited to preserve this access when possible. These types of uses and
activities will help make the waterfront a lively commercial area while providing additional
access to the water for members of the community.
Natural Resources Goals
1. The City will provide and adequately fund well-maintained and safe parks,
trails, and natural areas.
2. Community partnerships will support the maintenance, enhancement, and
promotion of parks, trails, and natural areas.
3. City parks, trails, and natural areas will form a well-established network of
interconnected green spaces.
4. All members of the community will have access to the waterfront.
5. Existing green space in the city will be preserved and opportunities for
additional green space will be strategically considered.
6. Distinctive, noteworthy, and characteristic community viewsheds will be
protected.
7. City trees and plantings will help preserve and enhance local vegetation
diversity. Existing tree canopies in City parks and on streets and right-of-ways
will be maintained, enhanced, and, where appropriate, expanded.
Natural Resources Recommendations
A. Provide ongoing maintenance of waterfront trails and ensure their accessibility
for all residents.
B. Explore opportunities for funding, including public-private partnerships, for trail
maintenance and winter maintenance of the Cayuga Waterfront Trail.
C. Seek funding to complete the Inlet Island Promenade, in accordance with the
2003 Inlet Island Promenade Master Plan.
D. Work with Tompkins County to complete the city’s trailheads of the Cayuga
Lake Blueways Trail as well as needed site improvements at these locations.
57
E. Formalize informal boat launches on City property, and identify additional
locations for public boat launches, docks for muscle-powered boats, and boat
rentals.
F. Install wayfinding signage to direct residents and visitors to parks, recreational
facilities, and other key destinations throughout the waterfront area.
G. Work with TCAT to provide regular bus service to the waterfront parks
throughout the year.
H. Protect the RIPARIAN ZONE immediately adjacent to the water and provide
landscaping for wildlife where appropriate.
I. Install educational signage at key locations to inform both residents and visitors
about waterfront ecology.
J. Encourage developers to incorporate green spaces and play areas into new
construction projects.
K. Guide new construction to allow views of the water and the surrounding
hillsides through façade breaks, materials, building siting, and other design
techniques.
L. Design future roadways to provide visual breaks to the water and to be
sensitive to residential needs and impacts.
M. Preserve the undevelopable portion of City-owned property at the south end of
Cherry Street as open space and possible substitute parkland.
N. Implement the park improvements for Brindley and Van Horn Parks identified
in the City of Ithaca Parks & Recreation Master Plan, including park signage,
additional lighting, and trail enhancements.
58
Cultural Resources
The waterfront has a rich and diverse history that is unique to this particular area.
As the waterfront redevelops and the character of the area begins to change, it is
important to embrace this history. We must seek ways to celebrate the past and
educate residents and visitors on the waterfront’s unique story. Community
events, festivals, public art, historic markers, and educational signage could all
play a role in commemorating history and culture.
In addition, the anticipated redevelopment and renewed focus on the waterfront
area present an opportunity to create a cohesive identity for the district. Such an
identity or brand can be a great way to celebrate and promote the area’s past as
well as its current cultural resources. Tourism and local businesses would also
benefit from this as a marketing tool.
Cultural Resources Goals
1. The City will provide and adequately fund City-sponsored events, programs,
and other resources, such as GIAC and Ithaca Youth Bureau programming, the
Martin Luther King Jr. Walkway, neighborhood investment programs, and
public art.
2. Privately-sponsored events and organizations will be encouraged and
supported.
3. The community will be aware of events, exhibits, and other programs open to
the public.
4. Collaboration with community partners will help preserve and promote cultural
and historic resources.
5. Cultural resources will be accessible to the entire community.
Cultural Resources Recommendations
A. Support community festivals, particularly those that encourage use of the water
or highlight the historic culture of the area (e.g.,, cultural festivals, such as the
Rhine festival in the West End, the underground railroad)
B. Work with community organizations to offer winter festivals to increase off-
season use of the waterfront.
C. Identify locations for public art and seek funding for new installations,
particularly those that highlight the history, culture, and identity of the waterfront
area.
M&TS
LU
59
D. Create interpretive signage and art to celebrate the history of Ithaca’s
waterfront and explain the importance of individual historic sites.
E. Install comprehensive wayfinding signage to direct residents and visitors to
cultural resources and other key destinations throughout the waterfront area.
F. Involve local businesses in developing a brand for the waterfront that will help
identify the area as a cohesive district and celebrate the area’s rich and diverse
history.
60
7.0 Sustainable Energy, Water & Food
Systems
7.1 Energy
In Plan Ithaca, we identified our goals of becoming a carbon-
neutral community, reducing community-wide emissions to 80 percent
below 2010 levels by 2050, encouraging energy conservation and waste
reduction, and promoting renewable energy infrastructure. In order to
achieve these goals we must look at energy consumption in all areas of
the city, particularly locations where additional growth is expected.
Potential development opportunities make the waterfront area a great
location to build to these higher energy standards and to meet city
objectives related to energy conservation and waste reduction.
The Ithaca 2030 District, which includes much of the waterfront area, is one
of 18 other districts around the country that carry forth the principles of
“Architecture 2030.” Their mission is to rapidly transform the built
environment to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to the energy
reduction goals of the 2030 Challenge (carbon neutral buildings by the year
2030). Nationally, these districts are meeting incremental energy and
greenhouse gas reduction targets for new and existing buildings while
validating the cost efficiency of high performance buildings. The City is a
founding adopter and member for the steering committee for the Ithaca
2030 District. Within the waterfront area, private property owners,
businesses, and community organizations can become members of the
district and help work toward meeting these goals in Ithaca.
The waterfront area also has the unique opportunity to pursue innovative,
shared energy sources that would benefit surrounding properties while
reducing our carbon footprint. The City has been exploring options for a
DISTRICT ENERGY SYSTEM that would share excess heat produced at the
Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility (IAWWTF) with nearby
properties. Steam or hot water from the IAWWTF would be shared for
heating nearby properties. In addition, the City is considering a possible
microgrid at the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility. A microgrid
would connect the facility’s electrical infrastructure to a network of nearby
buildings and allow the whole system to “island” itself, ensuring delivery of
services, even in times of electric grid failure.
With the potential for new green buildings, shared energy resources, and
ongoing community collaboration on reduced greenhouse gas emissions,
there are a lot of exciting opportunities to advance our collective goals for
sustainable energy within the waterfront area, and as these ideas are
M&T
LU
61
successfully implemented, the waterfront area can become a model for
other areas of the city and beyond.
Energy Goals for the Waterfront Area
1.Ithaca will be a leading model, facilitator, and educator for small-city transitions to
higher energy efficiency, energy conservation, waste reduction, and reuse.
Energy Recommendations for the Waterfront Area
A. Continue to investigate the feasibility of a microgrid based at the IAWWTF.
B. Continue to investigate the feasibility of a district energy system based at the
IAWWTF and encourage new developments to be designed with consideration
given to the future possibility of accepting excess heat from the IAWWTF.
C. Encourage synergistic relationships with neighboring businesses, for example a
partnership with a food manufacturer could provide organic waste to fuel the
biogas production system at IAWWTF.
D. If upgrading or relocating City facilities, consider energy efficiency improvements
and the installation of onsite renewable energy sources.
E. Provide support for the Ithaca 2030 District and encourage developers and
building operators to participate in the District.
F. Ensure compliance of new development with the City’s Green Building Policy.
G. Consider offering incentives for pervious paved streets
H. Work with local developers to learn about opportunities to utilize energy from the
IAWWTF.
62
7.2 Water Resources & Stormwater Management
Water is a tremendous resource to the Ithaca community. Our
water resources are treasured for their natural beauty, their
ecological significance, their recreation opportunities, and their
economic value. Protecting our water resources is and will
remain a top priority.
Stormwater Runoff
As development increases in the waterfront area, a major concern is
stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff carries pollutants such as oil,
dirt/sediment, chemicals, and lawn fertilizers into the nearby water, where
they can harm water quality. To protect surface water quality and
groundwater resources, development should be designed and built to
minimize increases in runoff. It is critical to educate developers, property
and business owners, and residents on practices that will reduce both the
overall amount of runoff from a property and the amount of pollutants in the
water. Such practices include incorporating more pervious surfaces,
maintaining vegetation near waterways, and avoiding chemicals that can
contribute to water contamination. These techniques should be
incorporated into new development and on existing properties where
feasible.
Dredging
Periodic dredging is needed to maintain the navigability and flood
protection properties of the waterways. The Cayuga Inlet has the highest
concentration of boat traffic in the county and many boating -based
businesses rely on the significant annual sales for boating specific
uses. This sector of the local economy depends on the channel to Cayuga
Lake being maintained to a depth that insures navigability. The waterways
also serve a flood protection function and require periodic dredging to
effectively convey stormwater and prevent winter ice jams.
The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and NYS
Canal Corporation are responsible for maintaining Cayuga Inlet and the
Flood Control Channel, while the City is responsible for maintaining Six
Mile, Cascadilla, and Fall Creeks. Until recently, inability to secure funding
and the need to determine an appropriate location for storing the dredged
spoils has prevented maintenance dredging. However, in the last several
years, state funding has been allocated and the City has been working with
the NYS DEC, Canal Corporation and other involved parties to finalize and
implement plans for dredging the Cayuga Inlet, the Flood Control Channel,
and Cascadilla Creek. Once these projects are completed, these
navigational channels will be improved, but ongoing maintenance dredging
must occur on a regular basis.
CLLU
N&CR
63
Water Resources and Stormwater Management Goals for the
Waterfront Area
1. Cayuga Lake, its tributaries, and the local watershed will be protected from
pollution, sedimentation, erosion, flooding, invasive species, and other threats to
drinking water supplies, wildlife, recreation, and economic development.
2. Stormwater run-off will be significantly reduced.
Water Resources and Stormwater Management
Recommendations for the Waterfront Area
A. Commence the dredging project as soon as possible in order to support the
economic vitality of the waterfront area, allow for boat access in the channels, and
prevent flooding and ice jams.
B. Develop a plan for regular maintenance dredging with suggested time frames.
C. Maintain water channels, ensuring navigability, especially after flooding or other
weather-related events.
D. Consider requiring the use and maintenance of pervious surface materials for all
new paved surfaces and encourage conversions of existing impervious
pavements.
E. Encourage the use of green roofs in new development and major renovations.
F. Consider allowing GRAYWATER and rainwater harvesting for use in buildings,
landscaping, and for irrigation of the golf course.
G. Explore state of the art technologies to help deal with stormwater runoff, such as
pervious pavement and vortex units.
H. Encourage bioswales and other natural means for filtering stormwater runoff
along streets, in tree lawns, and as part of sidewalk plans and parking lot
landscaping.
I. Identify existing areas that filter stormwater runoff and preserve and enhance that
function.
J. Develop a review process to address potential impacts on stormwater runoff
caused by the removal of trees and large areas of vegetation.
K. Consider areas where it is feasible or more effective to have shared stormwater
facilities.
64
L. Educate property owners on why it is important to maintain vegetation near water
edges and in the waterfront area.
M. Discourage any new development from using fertilizers, salts, and other
chemicals that may contribute to water pollution and degradation of water quality.
N. Consider installing educational signage along the waterfront trail that would
educate people on watershed protection and the importance of maintaining a
healthy waterfront ecosystem.
65
7.3 Food Systems
It is our goal to have a sustainable, locally-based food
system that makes nutritious food affordable and accessible to all Ithacans.
The waterfront area is fortunate to be home to businesses and
organizations that are working to achieve this goal, and as we move
forward, we can work together to continue to improve the community’s
access to foods and offer new economic opportunities for local food
production businesses.
Community gardens are an important asset for residents. They allow
families and individuals the opportunity to produce their own food while also
increasing a sense of community ownership and stewardship. The City will
continue to encourage and support community gardens throughout the
waterfront area. The City will also encourage developers to include gardens
in private development projects.
In addition to having access to sites for growing produce, it is also beneficial
to provide spaces for local food producers to provide their goods to the
community. Farmers’ markets offer residents access to fresh local produce
and are a strong generator of economic and tourism activity. The very
successful Ithaca Farmers Market is located within the waterfront area. Due
to its success, the Market faces issues with excess traffic, insufficient
parking, and inadequate loading/unloading areas. Currently, there is not
enough on-site parking to cover the needs during busy summer weekends.
The City recognizes this as an incredible community asset and will continue
to support the Ithaca Farmers Market and any other farmers’ markets in the
waterfront area.
The waterfront is also an ideal location for businesses that could support or
enhance the existing food system. Local food production and processing
enterprises are welcomed in the Cherry Street and Market Districts, and
coordination among businesses that can expand the community-based food
network is encouraged. The Market District could also offer possible
collaboration with a future district energy system at the Ithaca Area
Wastewater Treatment Facility.
Residents and visitors rely upon safe and easy transportation connections
to patronize the farmers’ markets and local businesses and purchase local
foods. Safe transportation is thus critical to the economic viability of those
enterprises. The Ithaca Farmers Market, local businesses, and the City
must collaborate to address accessibility needs, such as bicycle paths and
sidewalk connections, access to nearby parking, and/or access to regular
public transit.
EVCL
M&TN&CR
66
FOOD SYSTEMS Goals for the Waterfront Area
1. Residents will have opportunities to grow their own food locally through private or
community gardens.
2. Ithaca will be home to local food-production and food-processing enterprises that
capitalize on our location at the heart of a thriving agricultural region.
3. All city residents will enjoy food security.
Food Systems Recommendations for the Waterfront Area
A. Support community gardens in all waterfront districts and work with non-profit
agencies and private property owners to find suitable locations.
B. Encourage developers to create small gardens on their properties or set aside
land for tenants to do so.
C. Encourage roof top gardens in new development.
D. Encourage edible landscapes in new development and along public spaces.
E. Promote physical connections for bicycles and pedestrians and public transit
connections to the Ithaca Farmers Market and to agricultural sites outside of the
study area.
F. Continue to support and encourage the growth and economic vitality of the Ithaca
Farmers Market as a source for fresh and local foods and to support local farmers.
G. Collaborate with TCAT to establish a regular shuttle to the Ithaca Farmers Market
from other areas of the city, especially on Sundays.
H. Encourage food production and food processing businesses throughout the
waterfront districts, particularly in the Market District, and especially regional
sourced food suppliers.
I. Maintain fishing access to Cayuga Lake and the creeks
J. Explore options for alternate transportation options that would ensure access by
all portions of the community to the Farmers Market, grocery stores and other
food providers
From: Bryan McCracken, Historic Preservation Planner
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
Date: Monday, September 9, 2019
Subject: Communication from the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission regarding
Stewart Avenue paving
The 100-400 blocks of Stewart Avenue are located in the East Hill Historic District, listed on the
State and National Registers of Historic Places in 1986, and locally designated in 1988. The
iconic and historically significant red brick paving is considered an important character-defining
feature of the Stewart Avenue streetscape and is a protected feature under the Section 228 of
the Municipal Coder, or the Landmarks Ordinance.
In May 2019 the entirety of the brick paving in the 100 block and a portion of it in the 200 block
were overlaid with asphalt without first receiving a Certificate of Appropriateness. An
improvement of this nature affecting a protected, city-owned historic resource should have
been reviewed by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission (ILPC) per Section 228-12 of
the Landmarks Ordinance. The project was discussed by the Commission at their June meeting
and the attached resolution was adopted in July. The purpose of the resolution is to address
concerns about the completed project and provide recommendations to the Board of Public
Works and Common Council regarding the treatment of this designated historic resource per
Section 73-4(K) of the Municipal Code.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Telephone: Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission
RD – Stewart Avenue Brick Paving
RESOLUTION: Continued Repair and Maintenance of Remnant Brick and Masonry Streets
WHEREAS, Stewart Avenue is located in the East Hill Historic District, as designated under Section
228-3 of the City of Ithaca Municipal Code in 1988, and as listed on the New York State
and National Registers of Historic Places in 1986, and
WHEREAS, remnant brick and masonry streets, such as found on sections of Stewart Avenue, West
State Street, East State Street and Ferris Place represent a finite historic resource
available to the general public, and
WHEREAS, remnant sections on Stewart Avenue and Ferris Place are an important character-defining
feature of the East Hill Historic District and provide a physical representation of the
affluence, influence, and prestige of the neighborhood during the late 19th century and the
achievements of the City’s first mayor, David B. Stewart, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council adopted a Green New Deal on June 5, 2019, establishing goals to
address climate change and the community’s adverse impacts on the environment, and
WHEREAS, brick and masonry paving materials have several environmental and economic
advantages over asphalt paving that would complement the objectives of the Green New
Deal; advantages include a semi-permeable surface that reduces stormwater runoff,
greater durability and reduced long-term maintenance requirements, long life expectancy,
a smaller contribution to the heat island effect, a smaller carbon footprint, and reduced
consumption of and reliance on fossil fuels, and
WHEREAS, Common Council endorsed a request to the State of New York to amend Vehicle and
Traffic Law Title 8, Article 38, Section 1643 to allow all communities to establish a city-
wide speed limit as low as 25 miles per hour in March 2019. The intent of the requested
change was to improve pedestrian safety in the City, and
WHEREAS, masonry paved streets act as pieces of traffic calming infrastructure, improving
pedestrian safety by reducing vehicle speeds, and
WHEREAS, the Common Council adopted resolutions in October 1986 and October 1984 (copies
attached) establishing the City’s policies concerning retention and reimplacement of brick
and masonry paving materials, and
WHEREAS, the policies include the following key points:
x Prioritize the retention and reimplacement of brick and masonry paving on local
streets and appurtenances within National Register listed or eligible historic districts
or on which National Register buildings are located;
x Prioritize the retention and reimplacement of brick and masonry paving on local
streets and appurtenances within locally-designated historic districts or proposed
districts;
x That all utility and other openings are required to be repaired with identical historic
brick and stone paving materials and reimplacement techniques;
x That Department of Public Works personnel would be cross trained to
repair/maintain such streets and appurtenances, ensuring the brick laying skill
remains within the department;
x That annual maintenance scheduled be included in the Department of Public Works’
work program, and
WHEREAS, as set forth in Section 228-12 of the Municipal Code, all changes to City-owned
property affecting an individual landmark or within an historic district are subject to
the provisions of the Landmarks Ordinance unless “there exists…a substantial hazard
to public health, safety or welfare” and immediate remedial action is required, and
WHEREAS, recent repairs to Stewart Avenue have not been in keeping with the City’s policies, most
notably the overlay of brick paving in the 100 and 200 blocks with asphalt in May 2019,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission requests
that the Board of Public works (BPW) continue its previous practice of repairing new
cuts and openings with identical historic brick and stone paving materials and
reimplacement techniques and include the regular maintenance and systematic restoration
of surviving masonry streets in the Department’s work program, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the ILPC respectfully requests that the BPW give particular
attention to remnant brick and masonry streets within the East Hill Historic District, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the ILPC respectfully requests that Common Council consider
including policies as part of the Green New Deal that encourage the retention,
reimplacement and restoration of brick- and masonry-paved streets in the City.
RECORD OF VOTE:
Moved by: K. Olson
Seconded by: D. Kramer
In Favor: S. Gibian, K. Olson, A. Smith, E. Finegan, D. Kramer
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Absent: S. Stein, M.M. McDonald
Vacancies: 0
Infill Development
Public Comments-Received via Email
I currently own my family home at 410 S. Geneva Street and rent out two appts in that structure.
The only other structure on this small lot is a garage.
With the lots being small in this neighborhood, it would really decrease the quality of life by
increasisng the size of any strutures on the small lots in this area of Ithaca. Building additional
structures could block the natural light reaching the houses as well as back and side yards of the
existing properties and would decrease the privacy each resident enjoys inside their homes and
in their already, small yards, especially if the infill structures are larger than existing buildings in
the area.
Therefore, I am opposed to adding new structures which are larger that the ones they are
replacing or if they will be built on the existing green spaces on each lot.
If you approve changes to current regulations to allow infill structures you will be decreasing the
quality of life for the individuals and families that live in Ithaca and pay very high taxes to stay
there.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Donalt T. Rohel
Hi Jennifer,
I won't be able to attend that infill meeting, but I wanted to send some comments.
I own and live in106 Second St. I've got a dilapidated garage/barn/shed thing in the back that is
sitting being an eyesore - I'd like to turn it into an income generating apartment. It has been such
a long process to work with the City to figure out what is allowable. Almost every inquiry is met
with "but you might be able to get a variance." This is really maddening, as after months of
investigating, I don't have any hard answers that I can take to my bank or an architect or other
people who would need to be involved. I don't have the money to pay an architectto draw up
plans that *might* be possible with a variance. The whole process needs to be streamlined.
Keeping downtown full of "cute" rental units that blend in with the overall historical look is very
valuable to Ithaca's character. Facilitating this type of infill helps single income professionals
like me own homes and contribute to the social fabric of downtown.
Thanks so much, Deborah Justice
Dear Planning Department,
I am unable to attend the open meeting scheduled for August 29th so am writing to express some
of my views on infill development.
I am a resident of the Belle Sherman neighborhood and feel it is important for zoning to be
structured in such a way as to help keep the neighborhood affordable and accessible- particularly
to families with elementary school age children who can then walk to the Belle Sherman school
and to individuals who would like to be able to walk or bike to work downtown, in Collegetown
or at Cornell University. The benefits of the ICSD needing to provide less school buses and the
city/university needing to provide less parking spaces while children and employees get more
exercise goes without saying.
One of the threats to affordability and family friendliness in this neighborhood are investors who
do not live in the neighborhood (some do not even live in the country) who buy up properties at
expensive prices in order to rent them out. They do not care about the quality of life in the
neighborhood and their goal is to make as much money as possible. Investors typically make
more money renting to multiple unrelated people rather than families. The current zoning
regulations are not well enforced and there are multiple violations going on. Infill development
may only exacerbate this situation.
I think we need to be thoughtful with regards to infill development in R1 zoning. Similar to
current regulations on accessory apartments, if we allow small accessory structures, there should
be regulations on the size of the structure. We also need requirements to maintain green
space. This neighborhood already has almost no city park land.
The secondary units should only be allowed to be rented out if the primary structure is owner
occupied, in order to discourage non-resident investors whose only interest in our neighborhood
is to make money. This is critical.
There should be regulations limiting short term rentals of the accessory properties so they do not
all become air bnbs. If the goal is to maintain affordable housing for Ithaca residents, renting out
entire structures as air bnbs tends to create the oppositie effect and may also impact the viability
of the newly constructed downtown hotels.
On the one hand, having an accessory unit bringing in rent may help homeowners afford their
mortgages. On the other hand, it will vastly increase the overall purchase value of the property
making it potentially unaffordable for anyone other than the very wealthy to be able to quality
for a mortgage to purchase the property on a resale.
We should proceed very cautiously with regards to infill development as there may be many
unintended consequences.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about what I have written here.
With regards, C. Vivian Lorenzo 217 Cornell Street
Hi Jennifer,
I’m very much in favor of infill development. But an important aspect of housing should be the
regulation of Airbnb & other homesharing services.
By allowing infill development you’ll allow folks to densify neighborhoods in order to create
housing available for rentals which will be an expensive process both for the individuals that
build the infill housing and for the City to regulate, permit, & oversee the process.
But by regulating homesharing services the City will reintroduce a whole host of currently off
the market housing back into the City’s housing stock with little cost. I personally know of at
least 12 houses (not apartments, but *entire* buildings) that are rented solely for short term
rentals such as Airbnb. And I hear of houses and units being removed from the normal rental/for
sale market on a regular basis.
I’m in favor of infill, but I think it’s far more important that the City regulate homesharing
services first.
Marshall McCormick
Marty Kaminsky [lakkip@me.com]
Hi Jennifer- I can’t attend the upcoming meeting on infill so I wanted to share my thoughts via
email. I live on Linn Street in Fall Creek. Recently a developer bought a house with a large plot
on Aurora Street. He tore the house down and is erecting two buildings with several rental units.
I am upset about this kind of development. It ruins the character of the neighborhood by
encouraging short term rentals rather than families that remain in the neighborhood. The double
building on a single lot crams a large amount of people into a small amount of space. This will
affect neighborhood comings and goings, parking and noise in a negative way. Fall Creek has a
long tradition of family own houses in neighborhoods where people stay and get together over
the long term. I guess I am trying to describe long term “community”. Anyhow that’s my two
cents. Thanks for listening! Martha Levine
Dear members of the Common Council,
My name is Hope Gillette. I am President of the Northeast Hub of Minka Homes and
Communities, a technology company focused on small-footprint, attainable housing. In addition
to environmentally-friendly house building, I have been a health research journalist for the last
10 years. I am passionate about ADUs and more sustainable living, and I would like to offer
some comments and insight in support of more lenient infill/ADU regulations in the city of
Ithaca.
x Predictions from Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies indicate we’ll
see an exponential increase in housing needs in the next 10 to 15 years, but we’ll find
them in the areas of affordable housing, single households, and accessible dwellings.
x Growing bodies of research support cluster housing options, particularly for multi-
generational family living and senior care.
x Isolated seniors and those living in multi-storied homes have difficulty overcoming
physical and mental health issues. Stairs become an issue. Lack of transportation
becomes an issue. Isolation and the distance from loved ones becomes an issue. A study
published in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2010 reveals how spending time
enjoying the right leisure activities with friends and loved ones protects cognitive skills
and keeps them intact longer.
x Infill and ADU homes provide a way for seniors to maintain their independence longer
while still having access to community and family support networks.
x Infill and ADU buildings offer a way for families to remain closer, longer, be them senior
members living on property, or children who want to live at home longer but want their
own privacy. The Center for the Study of Social Policy, as well as a number of studies
from the National Library of Medicine, indicate strong familial ties and interactions are
crucial to positive development in children. These ties encourage healthy relationships
well into adulthood, and create a sense of community responsibility.
x ADUs and infill housing within the city decrease the the need for commuting, which has
been linked to adult obesity. Walking or biking to the city decreases air pollution and
promotes a healthier, active lifestyle.
x A higher density of homes in the city means more customers for local businesses.
x Smaller homes have a smaller ecological impact and are designed to be energy efficient.
x Concerns about AirBNB should be minimal; AirBNB is a self-regulatory entity. Rentals
and those who rent them must pass a review process; poor reviews are bad business, and
no one will rent to visitors who have left a previous AirBNB a disaster.
x The AirBNB option not only offers Ithaca residents a source of income, it is a great way
to showcase the city and offer university visitors more options when graduation/special
events come around. Families can rent out their ADU for some extra income, or save it
for when family is in town.
x Concerns related to unappealing student housing can be handled with regulation rather
than with the complete banishment of ADUs and infill housing. Minimum/maximum
square footage for the structure, limit of units per acre, limit of occupants, and property
maintenance requirements can all be implemented. Ultimately, a site plan needs to be
submitted for approval anyway, and this can be the time to ensure ADUs and infill homes
remain aesthetically pleasing.
x From my experience living in Ithaca, any aesthetic concerns related to student housing
tend to come from large, multi-bedroom homes that house 5+ individuals. ADUs and
infill homes can be smaller, and a single resident, (or two) is more inclined to be someone
not looking for that party lifestyle.
x The owner as primary property residents requirement is also too limiting. Landlords
should be able to rent their ADU to a family member without having to live on the
property as well. I spoke with a brother and sister earlier this year who wanted an ADU
within city limits. The brother rented out the primary residence on his property out, but
wanted to put an ADU up for his sister who wanted to be closer to town. Unfortunately,
even though the property was large and could accommodate the build, he was unable to
proceed because he, himself, didn't live in the primary dwelling.
The bottom line is that heavy restrictions on ADUs and infill homes are hurting members of the
Ithaca community that want better care for their senior loved ones and want to be closer to
brothers, sisters, parents, cousins, etc. No one ever grows up and says, "I can't wait to be in a
nursing home." No one wants to have to commute from a hotel to go visit their family on a
weekend. We should be working toward encouraging closer community networks, not hindering
them.
Dear Jennifer,
As a resident of South Hill for over 30 years, I would support infill housing on South Hill in R-1
and R-2 districts but only if three requirements are adopted along with the infill legislation:
1) An owner occupancy requirement
2) A building size requirement and
3) A stormwater management requirement.
The first two requirements if adopted by the City, I believe would reverse the troubling trend we
have been watching ever since Ithaca College moved it campus to the top of South Hill. Over the
years that my wife and I have lived on South Hill we have watched as affordable workforce
housing has almost completely flip-flopped towards more expensive student housing.
If the City is interested in affordability and steering future infill projects towards families and
responsible tenants (including students) it will be necessary to limit the size of infill projects
to NO MORE than 30% of the primary dwelling size and require the owner of the property
to reside in ether the primary or the auxiliary infill housing unit. These two zoning requirements
could very well start a new trend towards more families and responsible renters moving to South
Hill and possible even bring the cost of housing down in the process.
Stormwater management on South Hill is a serious issue and should be evaluated when
discussing the pros and cons of infill housing. The increased frequency of major rain events have
created serious problems for some residents on South Hill, especially for homeowners that have
uphill neighbors. Infill projects or major renovations on these properties will and have
exacerbated the stormwater runoff problems for downhill neighbors by creating costly erosion
and flooding issues. In my opinion, all infill projects and major renovations on South Hill must
be required to retain the first one inch of rain on site.
In terms of infill housing legislation, one-size-fits-all may not be the best fit for South Hill
because we have our own set of unique housing issues. I certainly hope you can develop infill
legislation for all but I also hope the City’s Planning Department can help South Hill build a
healthier environment.
Thanks,
John Graves
319 Pleasant Street
To whom it may concern,
I am writing to make an official comment on the proposal to allow “infill development” in the
city of Ithaca. I am opposed to infill development for the following reasons:
1. I believe that infill development will lead to a loss of character in many neighborhoods, such
as our reputation as a “forest city” or “tree city USA” and the introduction of greater exterior
lighting and noise.
2. I believe that infill development will strain already tight parking availability.
3. I believe that backyards provide valuable habitat for various species of songbirds and lead to a
reduction in tree cover within the city (see# 1).
4. I believe that a study needs to be conducted on how the addition of how impervious roofing
and gutter systems will impact flash flood potential, especially in neighborhoods already prone to
flooding.
5. The impact on traffic needs to be fully studied and presented to the public before any decision
is made.
6. In keeping with the city and county commitment to combat climate change, a study is needed
on the greenhouse gas emissions and energy demand from infill development compared to large
multi story development on a per square foot basis.
In summary, I believe that infill development is the wrong direction for Ithaca. A better
alternative is for more multi-story housing with underground parking facilities and centrally
controlled heating, cooling, hot water heating etc.
Please feel free to respond if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Alexander Hyland
Ithaca NY
Joel Fredell [jfredell@selu.edu]
Dear Jennifer,
I will not be able to come to the meeting on backyard infill this Thursday (August 29), but I want
to contribute these comments, and ask that they be read at the meeting along with other public
comment.
thanks,
Joel
My comment:
As Seph Murtagh has pointed out there are two separate issues for backyard infills in Ithaca.
1. The rules for owner-occupied properties adding housing are not controversial for any
members of Council (or Ithacans generally) judging by discussion so far. Everybody
wants owner-occupants to get what help they can with expenses, particularly property
taxes, and the zoning rules governing these infills have been around since 1984 and
allowed homeowners to develop barns, mother-in-law apartments, etc. as new housing.
So those rules may be tweaked but will probably remain substantially the same.
2. No such rules have been in place for infills created by developers and commercial
landlords until the South Hill zoning overlay was put in place recently. The recent
Northside infills fall into this category.
We all want more housing and more affordable housing—that is NOT the argument. And
backyard infills will NOT provide affordable housing in the official sense—only large projects
can create the means to qualify for the tax breaks that make such projects affordable. Every
backyard infill in this second category will be offered at market rates by landlords whose
intentions are to make money and who will have none of the incentives to work with neighbors
or preserve green space that an owner-occupant would.
So the main question is how to control developers and commercial landlords if the Mayor and
Council support them over owner-occupants, as several of them, including Northside’s two
representatives, have done so far? Ducson Nguyen recently posted on the Northside listserv the
justification that he and Mayor Myrick are using: backyard infills will lower commuter traffic,
and so the environmental effects from lost green space, lost trees, and impermeable surfaces
would be more than made up in a lowered carbon footprint. Ducson estimated that 5000
commuters would move to city if the housing were built. So some questions we need to ask:
1. Where would we put housing units for 5000 new residents and their
families? Assuming some would be absorbed into recent bigger projects such as
Carpenter Park, let’s say 1000 or so, would that mean that the City would need 4000 new
backyard infill units? Whose backyards would absorb those huge numbers?
2. The Northside developments on First and Monroe Streets were built under Limited
Site Plan Review, which means no environmental review, no Planning Board review, no
notice of any kind to the immediate neighbors. Would developers and commercial
landlords continue to be given this treatment by the Mayor and his Planning staff? Will
immediate neighbors continue to be shut out of the process by the Mayor and his staff?
3. Since the flats of Ithaca are floodprone, how can stormwater control be supported
given the inevitable loss of trees and greenspace, along with the addition of thousands of
new impermeable surfaces?
4. If thousands of backyard infills are the only way to counterbalance the negative
environmental effects of commuting, what properties will be left for the small percentage
of homeowners (only 25% of housing units in the City of Ithaca)? And for everybody
what will be left for children’s playspace, for family greenspace, for Ithaca’s residential
character?
5. Will Common Council make all Ithaca’s R2 neighborhoods into R3 zones by
supporting thousands of backyard infills? Or will Council go through a deliberative
process neighborhood by neighborhood, acknowledging this change of zoning status
directly?
6. Will Common Council be able to control developers and commercial landlords who
buy multiple properties and then consolidate those properties to get around zoning rules
for set backs and lot sizes?
Thank you for your attention.
Dear Jennifer,
I am writing to share a couple of comments re: Infill regulations.
As a resident of the city for over 30 years, this is a topic to approach thoroughly for its
unintended consequences.
I live on Elmwood Avenue near Collegetown, and have lived here since coming to Ithaca. Over
this time, we have seen very creative definitions of owner-occupied. These creative definitions
don’t meet the spirit of what attaching this designation means for the property – that it be
maintained and cared for, as an owner might. Parents purchased homes for their students, and
those students did not know the regulations of everything from garbage to noise to parking
across sidewalks. In addition, before and even after regulations existed, we have seen back yards
paved over in the night, over-occupancy that is known but hard to prove, and more.
Another issue in this area is lack of green space. Cornell has improved activity outreach since
the 1980s, but students still lack green space to us. More infill would take more and more of that
away.
Another concern in the Belle Sherman neighborhood is underground streams. Taking away more
permeable space would exacerbate the basement flooding issues many people face. One
example of this was just fixed by the city at great expense, where a sidewalk was dangerous due
to continual moisture. This situation was created when the current owner took down all
vegetation on the land.
I don’t have the answers, but I encourage long and hard thinking about exacting definitions and
conditions that would go with any recommendations created.
The larger challenge in our area is incentivizing rehab of older home stock and conversion back
to single family homes. As newer student housing is built, this would serve the larger
community.
Thanks for your work.
Martha Frommelt
308 Elmwood Ave.
I am out of town and unable to attend the community meeting tomorrow, but wanted to submit
my comments in support of the rezoning. I was brought up in Ithaca, graduated from high school
here, and have just recently moved back. I am writing in support of the infill legislation. As my
wife and I contemplate purchasing or even renting a home, we are daunted by the limited
housing market and high prices. Increasing the number of available units in the city will help
ease the pressure on rents and make purchasing more affordable, especially if homeowners are
allowed to rent out ADUs for additional income. Increased density is a positive for
neighborhoods, transit/walkability, and community life. ADUs are often small or “tiny house”
sized, making less energy-intensive living units available, and reducing new construction, which
consumes a huge amount of natural resources.
While I understand concerns of those who dislike the behavior of certain renters, it is unfair to
cast the existence of renters as a problem for neighborhood “character”. Almost everyone will
rent a place to live at some point in their life - not just students, but people in any kind of
transitional phase of life, from people ending relationships, to retiring, to moving for a new job.
It’s understandable to want a mix of long-term and short-term people in a community, but trying
to limit a neighborhood to only people with the life stability and financial capital to own a home
is exclusionary. I do not believe this is a valid argument against ADUs.
Thank you,
Rebecca Costello
Good Evening,
I'm writing to support the concept of infill development in the City of Ithaca. My apologies that I
cannot attend the meeting tomorrow evening.
As you're likely aware, the Tomkins Chamber and Community Foundation recently
commissioned a study to discover creative solutions for adding more affordable, middle income
workforce housing in Tompkins County. You're no doubt painfully aware that lack of affordable
housing at all income levels is among our biggest challenges as a community--impacting
residents, businesses, our tax base, and our broader economy in turn.
Across all the focus groups we hosted-- including resident groups, small developers, large
developers, municipal planners and elected officials--one idea had common support. That idea
was more infill/accessory dwelling unit development, particularly in the City of Ithaca where
land is at a premium, transportation and employment options are nearby, and increased density a
shared goal.
Given the City's goals around increased density, energy efficiency/green building policy, adding
housing stock, lifting residents out of poverty and supporting shared prosperity among more
members of our community--a sensible infill development policy would align well with these
focus areas, and the timing is right to continue adding them in many areas of the City.
We'd welcome the opportunity to share more about other recommended Workforce Housing
Strategies in the near future, at your convenience. Good luck to you as you consider public
feedback and your options moving forward.
Best,
Jennifer Tavares
President, Tomkins Chamber
I am both a landlord and home owner in Belle Sherman. I can only rent to a "family" at 423
Mitchell St and have had to lower the rent amount significantly over the past two years. This
would not be the case if I were able to rent to three graduate students.
The home in which I live, 962 East State St. is on air b and b. Again the nightly/weekly fees have
been reduced (at least by a third) this year as a result of the increase in b and b listings in Ithaca.
There is a lot of discussion regarding air b and b and the limits that can/can not be placed.
Renters via air b and b often bring multiple cars and invite their own guests to dinners/parties etc.
Even if the main home is owner occupied renters have "rights" and the rules are very unclear.
While frustrating, I respect the restrictions placed on landlords in Belle Sherman. Infill housing
serves to undermine the very well thought out city plan that currently exists.
I have worked as a School Social Worker in Ithaca for 25 years. Each neighborhood/school has
it's own unique qualities.
Given the driveway restrictions and small lot sizes, in addition to a neighborhood that is
centered around well used school playgrounds and activities, the last thing that I would like to
see is even MORE opportunity for transient short- term rental units. There are already so many
opportunities to rent in/near Belle Sherman as evidenced by "for rent" signs in front of
residential/ one family homes.
There are issues that need immediate attention and advocacy in our city. Infill housing in Belle
Sherman is not one of them
Why are we trying to fix something that's not broken?
Liz Cohen
Hello Jennifer,
I saw that the city was hosting an open house tonight regarding infill development in the Ithaca
City area. Unfortunately I am not able to make it, so I wanted to write in support of the
amendment to allow for moderately sized infill houses. While I am currently a homeowner
(residing on Fayette Street), I grew up in Ithaca and was a renter for 15+ years.
I have experienced first-hand how expensive apartments are in the downtown area due to the
limited supply and overwhelming demand. I support the amendment of zoning laws that makes it
as easy as possible to construct infill housing on city lots in order to address our rental housing
needs.
I know that the counter arguments to infill housing hinge on the concern for the impact of
character of the downtown aesthetic; However, I think that restricting infill housing is not the
answer. Instead, concerns about the quality and character of the neighborhoods should be
addressed with reasonable design guidelines that require quality but do not push the cost up so
much that affordability is impossible. Restrictive zoning that prohibits walk-able human scale
infill development do not accomplish the stated goals of preserving quality but only serve to
reduce the number of available homes for people that need them.
Thank you for your efforts on this matter. I am hopeful that the city can come to a resolution that
helps to support those in need.
Regards,
Heather Dengler, Home owner
114 Fayette Street
Dear Jennifer, Seph and Members of PEDC,
Thank you for holding the Community Conversation on Residential Infill Development and for
taking our comments for the Planning and Economic Development Committee and the Common
Council.
We at Historic Ithaca, as Tompkins County’s only preservation organization, offer the following
comments:
1. Throughout Ithaca’s history, buildings were used to adapt to economic, familial or other
conditions.. Infill housing as either newly built structures or adding on to an existing house
would be considered common practice
2. As a practice, infill housing is a good idea for reasons of practicality for property owners, for
housing choices for the general public, and for supply/demand reasons. We cannot address
affordable housing per se, as it is a complicated discipline, but support housing for all in our
community.
3. While more restrictions are not always desirable there must be regulatory practices that set
regulations for neighborhood context; follow design guidelines in non-historic districts; and have
appropriate size, siting and massing. City regulatory policies could be written to capture those
details of size, siting and massing, and the issue of context for each neighborhood. The ILPC
regulates what happens in the historic districts. Decisions about who regulates in non-historic
districts should be considered, perhaps by the Planning Board?
4. We do not believe that the current regulation, “as of right,” should be allowed. Within a
review process, there should be an opportunity for community input which can also aid in
keeping neighborhood context.
5. Infill housing should enhance and improve what is already existing (buildings, landscapes,
setbacks, green spaces).
6. Ithaca is getting ready to adopt the Green New Deal. Materials allowed should be sustainable
and repairable, as most of our existing building stock is. Landscaping and contiguous green
space should be of great importance. Paving should be only allowed if paving is used. Asphalt or
concrete paving over greenspace should not be allowed. Parking will have to carefully
considered under these regulations. Historically, in residential neighborhoods, streets were tree
lined, and properties had some greenspace. In the quest to fill up land, care should be given to
achieve this goal with respect for the Green New Deal ideals.
7. Costs to already taxed and outdated infrastructure should also be considered and mitigation
measures built in to every new infill structure (more on incentives below).
212 Center St. Ithaca, NY HistoricIthaca.org (607) 273-6633
8. The definition of ADU should be clearly defined and restricted to secondary structures only.
At Historic Ithaca, we are not in favor of demolitions to create much larger, 100% lot coverage
buildings in what has been classified recently as “infill housing.” We do not want to see this type
of development encouraged.
9. Incentives for infill housing should be developed for good and positive outcomes such as
green technologies, green space, affordable housing, local labor and community benefits not yet
identified.
10. Infill is also part of gentrification –in this case, the use of properties to gain the most revenue
from the land/ property. Economic development is fine but community benefits and incentives
are needed for those willing to develop in an appropriate manner for Ithaca and to avoid
displacement of long term residents with limited economic resources.
We thank you for your consideration of our comments and suggestions. If you need further
information or have questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
Susan Holland
Executive Director
cc. Members of PEDC
Common Council Members
JoAnn Cornish, Planning/Development Director
Bryan McCracken, Sr. Planner, Preservation
Nancy Brcak, HI Advocacy Chair
Dan Hoffman HI President, Board of Directors
Dear Jennifer,
I first want to thank you for the presentation on ADUs. It was very well done, civil in tone and
informative. My only criticism is that you only used very large cities like Portland, Oregon (est.
p. 653,00)and Seattle, Washington (est. p.725,000) as your comparative examples. Some of us
following the ADU developments wondered why your staff also did not reference Burlington,
Vermont. As a college town with a population around 42,000 it seemed much closer in character
and population to a Ithaca. I found the following report very enlightening. I assume your staff is
familiar with it, but just in case some council members are unfamiliar with it, I am mentioning it
and providing a link.
https://www.burlingtonvt.gov/sites/default/files/tiles/ADU_Whitepaper_2_6_19.pdf
Now to my comments on the regulations themselves.
1. Contiguous green space should be required. Developers have turned too many back yards into
parking lots for cars. Green space also is critical in absorbing runoff, especially on hills. While
Ithaca has been spared a major flooding event in the flats in recent years, we know a major one
probably will occur sooner than later. Yards on the hills serve as vital “mops” in rain events.
The numerous trees planted in yards also serve our City as precious carbon sinks.
2. I suggest an extra parking space not be required for ADUs unless no street parking is
available.
3. Design Requirements. Good design does not need to be sacrificed for affordability.
4. Only one ADU be allowed per lot.
5. Drainage Studies Requirement. East and South Hill have particular water issues. Anyone
building a new structure must take drainage problems into account and assume liability for
basement flooding in adjoining properties.
6. Owner occupancy. This is controversial. One City Council person told me he opposed it
because it affected the resale value of houses. I found this odd because other studies say the
opposite happens. I do believe the owner occupancy requirement is absolutely necessary in
neighborhoods that abut Cornell and South Hill. Residents in rest of the City might have a
different perspective. There is no reason why owner occupancy cannot be required in certain
neighborhoods.
7. Short term rentals. I know the Planning Department wants to defer this, but I see no reason
why not to append this to ADU regulations now. Since an ADU used only as a lodging house is
a business, they are illegal in most residential neighborhoods anyway.
Thank you for reading this and thank you for all your good work.
Best,
Ann Sullivan
109 Irving Place
NotesfromInfillCommunityConversation
August29,2019
ShouldconsiderclarifyingairBandBregulations.Needpredictabilityforpeoplemakingimprovements
thatthenmaynotbeableuseforintendedpurpose.
WhydidyouchooseSeattleandPortland?
Tighthousingmarketandonly7unitswithspecialpermit
Canownersoccupythesmallerunit?
Couldmorethan2unrelated?Yes
Shouldbesomeconsiderationforopenspaceandgreenspace
ConversionsͲcancompostingtoiletsbeused?Canelectricityandsewerberunoffthemainhouse?This
wouldmakeitmoreaffordable
Howcanwemakethemoreaffordable?
RestrictinRͲ1?OpposedtotheideabecauseSFHismoreexpensive.
AllowingADU’sonlargelotsonlywouldrestrictittopeoplewhocanpayforlargerlots
PeterBarklystudyͲ2nddwellingunitsareaffordablewhencomparedtoothertypesofrentals
Allowingbackyardinfillonthesmallerlotsintensifiesimpactontheneighbors.Thereisalogicto
restrictingtolargerlots
Tinyhousesorhouseswithoutfoundation
SupportADUs,(commentfromMinkeHomes–acompanythatdoeslowcost/hightechconstructionof
smallunitsandsmallhouses).Offeredtobearesourceforaffordableminihomes
Clarificationoflandusepatterns–differentneighborhoodshavedifferentpressuresinowner
occupancy.Thereforeowneroccupancyisgoodtohelpwithstudentpressure.Manyaccessory
apartmentsEastHillaredifferentthanthoseonSouthHillandtheflats(downtown).
ImportanttohavegreenspacerequirementͲeliminateparkingtodothis
HousingpressureͲyoungpeoplecan’tpayhigherrents.Infavorof‘fullblowninfill’withrentsinthein
$3Ͳ400dollarrange.Moreinfillwillallowforhousingpricedtogodown.
Tinyhomes
Taxesaretoohightohaveaffordablerentsallforinfillbutnotfeasibletohaveaffordablerentsfortiny
houses
10yearpaybacktimeisrequiredformostinvestors.
Greenspaceespeciallyonhillshelpswiththestormwaterrunoff.Thisisanimportantissue.
Havehydraulicstudiesbeendone?
Infillwillnotsolveaffordablehousingissuebecauseitistooexpensive.Cannotrelyonprivatesectorto
addressaffordabilityofhousing
WestHillhasalotofgreenspace
Startwithsayingthatyoucan’ttakeupanymoregreenspaceͲonlyconversionorregsthatdonotoccupy
morespace.
NeedtotalkaboutaffordablehousingͲADUwillnotsolvethisproblem.
DotaxesgoupwhenyoubuildandADU?Needincentives
SeniorhousingishardtodowithexistingstructuresͲADUsareidealforseniors
Thoughtfulinfilldevelopmentstrategies(regulations?)isawaytonotcompletelyrelyonlarge
developers.
Needlandlordeducation.
Shouldstudytheeffectofadministrativecostsonthetotalcostofdevelopment
Waytoreducetaxburdenistoincreasedensityinthedowntowncore.
Homeownershipisalsoanissue.iIthereaplaceintheconversationforinfillthatcouldbeforsale
Affordablehousingisnotonesizefitsall.Needmultiplesolutions.
SubdivisionoflargerlotstoencourageforͲsalehomeownership
Historicperspective:infavorofmoreaffordableunits.Havetobeawareofdurabilityofmaterialsand
quality.
Intheflats(downtown)manyhomeshavereachedtheendoftheirusefullife.Subdivisionandrezoning
couldchangehomeownershippatterns
Howdowepromotehomeownership?Whatdoesahomemeantoday?Whatnewsupplycouldoccur
asthehomesreachtheendoftheirusefullives?
Newstructurearemuchmoreefficientthanexistingoldbuildingsandwilluselessenergy
Moredensitydowntownwillgetpeopleoutofcars
Reducecarbonfootprintwithmoredensity/lessdriving
Toomuchfocusononeunit.Havetoconsiderthewholehousingmarket.Housingrentaregoingdown.
Morehousingwillequallowerrents.Affordablehousingismoreimportantthangreenspace
Tendencytowardonesizefitsall.Housingismorenuanced
Affordability=supplyanddemand
Buildmorerental=creationofmoreopportunityforhomeownership
Bothhomeownershipandaffordabilitywillbesuppliedbymoreunits
Keepupthisdiscussionthankyou
Pleaseputthepresentationonthewebsite
Homeownershipowneroccupancyrequirementwouldsupportthis
Basementfloodingduetoinfillshouldbetakenintoconsideration
Corridorsformasstransitmoredensity.Morerestriction=socialengineering
City of Ithaca
Planning & Economic Development Committee
Wednesday, July 10, 2019 – 6:00 p.m.
Common Council Chambers, City Hall, 108 East Green Street
Minutes
Committee Members Attending: Joseph (Seph) Murtagh, Chair; Cynthia Brock,
Laura Lewis, Donna Fleming, and Stephen Smith
Committee Members Absent: None
Other Elected Officials Attending:Mayor Svante Myrick (6:25 p.m.) and
Alderpersons Gearhart, Kerslick, McGonigal, and
Nguyen
Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director, Planning and
Development Department; Jennifer Kusznir,
Senior Planner; Alex Phillips, Planner; Gino
Leonardi, Zoning Administrator; and Deborah
Grunder, Executive Assistant
Others Attending: None
Chair Seph Murtagh called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
1) Call to Order/Agenda Review
Alterations to Non-Conforming Uses was moved to Item #5b
2) Public Comment
Linda Holzbaur, 111 Monroe Street, spoke in support of infill development. She is from
the Northside Neighborhood Council. There is a severe need for affordable housing.
We supported the 210 Hancock Street project and did not support Maguire Dealership’s
plan for the Northside.
Ed Swayze, 309 McGraw House, spoke in support of infill housing. It’s a fairly harmless
way of providing affordable housing.
Karl Pillemer, 135 Hudson Street, spoke against infill housing. For his neighborhood,
this would be disastrous. It will only benefit landlords. There is no evidence that this will
help the City. The impact to South Hill will not work. There will be more traffic, landlords
will construct low quality housing, etc. It doesn’t offer more affordable housing options
since it’s targeted to student housing.
Dan Hoffman, 415 Elm Street, spoke on West State Street Zoning and Infill housing. If
the goal is to preserve the character of the current State Street neighborhood, this plan
will not work. Small dwellings for businesses would be obsolete. The infill housing plan
does not conform to the City’s comprehensive plan. Development should not be of the
suburban type. Maintaining the trees is also important. They provide quality of life.
Sheryl Swink, 321 North Albany Street, spoke in favor of infill housing.
Nancy Brcak, 5214 Jacksonville Road, from Historic Ithaca spoke in favor of the State
Street rezoning. The 60’ height is consistent with the City of Ithaca Downtown Plan.
Let’s not lose the character of the West State Street.
John Efroymson, 408 Columbia Street, spoke on neighborhood zoning. Infill will work for
student housing on South Hill. It’s not a affordable housing option.
Ken Jaffe, 218 Lake Avenue, spoke on infill housing. His written comments were
provided and are attached to these minutes.
Mayor Svante Myrick joined the meeting at 6:25 p.m.
Mike Moritz, 134 East Spencer, spoke in favor of infill development. Northside is not for
the student population thus infill development will not work in this neighborhood. Signed
petition regarding infill housing and sustainability and green new deal. And climate
control are being circulated. This is an opportunity to make Ithaca more walkable
Anna Kelles, 139 Linn Street, spoke on infill housing. We realize that there are many,
many people who drive into the City because they cannot afford to live here. We need to
provide infill not only in downtown, but everywhere within the City. The picture of infill
housing is bad design, etc. Northside neighborhood is a prime example of good infill
housing. She owns, but rents to others in order to stay in Ithaca.
Warren Schleslager, 217 Linn Street, spoke in favor of infill housing. The arguments
already heard are valid. Infill housing will work
Carol Dennis, 408 Columbia Street, spoke on infill housing. The infill housing on South
Hill is not owner occupied. Ithaca College enrollment is going down. The potential of
student housing in going down. She is concerned that many of the infill housing on
South Hill will become vacant. Many trees have been taken down, parking has been
taken their place. Trees and green space are crucial for climate change.
Alderperson Brock stated she disagrees with the comments that 210 Hancock is infill
housing. She appreciates those who commented that many are in favor of such infill in
some areas. South Hill development has not made it possible for people to stay in their
homes. These new structures going in are not meant for family housing. What we lack
in the City is owner-occupied housing. We all need to support owner-occupied housing.
Alderperson Smith stated that infill housing can work. Collegetown is not dead. A new
grocery store is there now. There are many less bars than in past years.
Mayor Myrick stated Collegetown doesn’t have the regulations in zoning that the
downtown core has is.
Alderperson Lewis thanked all who came and spoke. She agrees that the City needs
more owner-occupied housing, but we also need affordable rental units.
Alderperson Fleming commented to those who stated there being a ban on infill housing.
We have never suggested a ban. She agrees that more housing is needed in the City.
She feels when the new West Campus housing is complete it will help a great deal. She
further stated that we must be careful when we assume or state that there are many
people who would like to live in the City but cannot due to the cost. There are many
people who choose to live in the outlying areas.
Alderperson McGonigal stated there is two types of housing he is interested in.
Affordable owner-occupied for sale housing and affordable tenant housing. West Hill is a
prime example of infill that is not what we want. If we design our infill where developers
buy up the housing stock and put up tenant housing, it’s not going to work.
Alderperson Kerslick stated that he doesn’t feel infill housing alone will solve all the
housing concerns in the City. Owner-occupied housing is slim. Maintaining green space
and trees is crucial. We need this regardless of whether we have infill housing.
Mayor Myrick is in favor of infill housing because we just don’t have enough housing. We
are all concerned about what type of people will be next door, etc. if infill housing is
obtained. We also have a senior population who wants to stay in their homes or be able
to rent an affordable place to live.
Alderperson Ducson stated he feels very fortunate he can own a home. Infill housing
needs to be done creatively,
Chair Murtagh stated that he doesn’t agree with the comments made regarding infill
housing not complying with the comprehensive plan. The negative things that are
happening on South Hill shouldn’t make us against infill housing. Our zoning as it exists
makes it difficult for homeowners and smaller developers to grow housing. He agrees
with Alderperson Fleming that not all people want to live in the City.
3) Action Items (Voting to Send on to Council)
a) City Mural Project
Resolution to Select Artwork for City Mural Program
Alderperson Brock questioned what looks like the mural jets out on the sides. Planner
Phillips stated that there is nothing that jets out. It’s the rendering of the photo that looks like
it does.
Moved by Alderperson Brock; seconded by Alderperson Smith. Carried Unanimously.
WHEREAS, in 2010, the City created a mural and street art program to beautify blank
walls within the city, while providing local artists from all sections of the community an
opportunity to showcase their work, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved Columbia Street Pedestrian Bridge for
future murals and street art, throughout the city, by resolution on May 11, 2015, and
WHEREAS, Lynn Golan has submitted a proposal to paint a mural on a pier of the
Columbia Street Pedestrian Bridge, and
WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission formed a mural subcommittee to assess
mural proposals, hold public comment and recommend proposals for consideration, and
WHEREAS, the Mural Subcommittee held a public comment period on the mural designs
and locations at its meeting on June 13th, 2019 to gather input on the proposed murals,
and the responses to the proposals have been mixed, and
WHEREAS, the installation of the murals will be funded by the artists and will be budget-
neutral to the City, and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on June 17th, 2019, the Community Life Commission voted to
recommend that the Common Council approve the mural project at their proposed
locations on condition to consider the needed treatment of the surface and liability of
painting on the site; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the City of Ithaca Common Council selects the proposals by Lynn Golan
as recommended by the Community Life Commission, for installation on a pier of the
Columbia St Pedestrian Bridge, and be it further
RESOLVED, that the selected artist may proceed with the installation of their murals upon
the execution of an agreement with the City as reviewed by the City Attorney.
b) Alterations to Non-Conforming Uses
Gino Leonardi stated the memo provided in the packet was the same memo
submitted to the attorney’s office for their interpretation and necessary changes.
A bedroom size dictates the number of occupants for that bedroom. They must be
limited to this determined number.
Mayor Myrick left the meeting at 8:00 p.m.
Alderperson Brock thanked Leonardi for his explanation.
Any zone change doesn’t change the property’s zoning. They are grandfathered in.
The only way the grandfather is no longer valid is if the owner relinquishes his rights or
the property is no longer useable.
It was decided that a resolution will be generated and brought back next month for
consideration.
To:Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Gino Leonardi, Zoning Administrator
Date: July 5, 2019
Re:Alterations of Non-Conforming Uses and Structures
As zoning evolved over the years, non-conforming uses and structures were the byproduct
of the changes to the zoning ordinance. At first it was believed that all non-conforming
uses would be eliminated over time. But instead, non-conforming uses have enjoyed
longevity within our neighborhoods. In 2016, Building Commissioner, Phyllis Radke
adopted a policy concerning extensions and enlargements of nonconforming uses and
structures. The policy was enacted to allow these structures to be altered and repaired
without causing the structures to be defined as an extension or an enlargement. The intent
of the policy was to give land owners the opportunity to maintain the buildings and prevent
the structures from deteriorating. Otherwise, if the land owner wanted to alter the structure
of a non-conforming use, the only method available was a use variance from the Board of
Zoning Appeals. To obtain a use variance the applicant would have to prove financial
hardship and that the hardship was not self-created. In the case of improving a non-
conforming use, a variance has proven to be impossible to obtain.
The 2016 policy was specific to the internal changes in nonconforming uses and structures
and how to determine if a proposed alteration to a building would be permitted. The
ordinance is clear that increasing the number of unrelated individuals residing in a
residential structure is an extension and adding a new dwelling unit is an enlargement
under the ordinance. Therefore, a reasonable objective method was needed to determine
if the proposed alterations to a building, constitute an extension or enlargement of a
nonconforming use or structure. The method implemented was based on the
measurements of the bedrooms and habitable space that affected the occupancy within a
single dwelling unit. If the bedrooms sizes and the habitable space were increased to allow
additional unrelated individuals to occupy the dwelling, then the alteration would be
considered an extension or enlargement. Adding a bathroom or other alteration that did
not increase the occupancy or the number of dwelling units, would not be considered an
extension or enlargement. This standard worked well as an objective measure for
determining if the use or structure was extended or enlarged. But, the method was applied
to individual units rather than to the building as a whole.
Recent concerns about the lack of housing and the need for land owners to upgrade their
apartments and/or property has prompted a review of the past determination. The purpose
was to determine if non-conforming uses should be allowed to continue and in what
condition. Non-conforming uses within neighborhoods have been and will continue to be
an integral part of the neighborhoods. The continuation of these structures would be better
served if the structures were allowed to be upgraded and brought up to code. The
proposed interior alterations would not include any increase in occupancy or enlargement
of the building footprint. Amending the current policy to allow non-conforming uses be
altered throughout the building and not restrict the alterations based on the occupancy
within on one unit requires your consideration.
For additional information, please see attached document Alterations to a Nonconforming
Use or Structure.
Re: Alterations to a Nonconforming Use or Structure
In 2016, Building Commissioner Phyllis Radke adopted a policy concerning extension and
enlargement of nonconforming uses and structures. The subsequent determination was
specific to the internal changes in nonconforming uses and structures and how to
determine if a proposed alteration to a building would be permitted. The ordinance is clear
that increasing the number of unrelated individuals residing in a residential structure is an
extension and adding a new dwelling unit is an enlargement under the ordinance, but a
reasonable objective method was needed to determine if the proposed alterations to a
building constitute an extension or enlargement of a nonconforming use or structure.
The adopted interpretation was based on a method of measurement for habitable space
within the dwelling unit. If the habitable space was increased to allow additional unrelated
individuals to occupy the dwelling, then the alteration would be considered an extension or
enlargement. Adding a bathroom or other alteration that does not increase the occupancy
or the number of dwelling units would not be considered an extension or enlargement.
This standard worked well as an objective measure for determining if a use or structure is
extended or enlarged, but the method was applied to individual units rather than to the
building as a whole. The ordinance refers to extensions and enlargements as expanding
the use or a larger scope of operations for both structures and property. It does not
emphasize individual units, rather it measures the extent of change to the whole structure.
Specifically, the definitions of extension or enlargement seem to be more specific
concerning occupancy than the rearrangement of an existing building: extension, “an
addition of unrelated individuals residing in a residential structure,” and enlargement,
“additional numbers of dwelling unit and additional number of unrelated individuals
occupying residential buildings”. The ordinance outlines the usage of these requirements
and applies them to the building as a whole.
Further review of this determination reveals that the standards for a “change of use” may
also have to be considered when determining the legitimate use of the proposed method
for extensions and enlargements. Meaning, can the limits of an alteration of a
nonconforming use or structure be determined by the extent of the alteration if it does not
meet the definition of an extension or enlargement? Can the alteration cause a change in
the intensity of the use if the occupancy remains the same? If the zoning ordinance
specifically limits extensions and enlargements to meet the definitions, and a property
does not exceed these requirements, can it be considered an extension or enlargement?
Example, the owner of an existing nonconforming four-unit dwelling, wants to redistribute
the bedrooms in the building. The proposal includes taking three-bedrooms from a seven-
bedroom unit and adding them to a studio apartment. The result would be a four-bedroom
apartment and a three-bedroom apartment that would maintain the overall occupancy
previously permitted in the building, and the alteration does not create or exacerbate any
other deficiency.
Using the current method, this type of alteration would not be permitted. The original
occupancy of the studio apartment was permitted to have one unrelated individual. The
alteration increased the occupancy by adding two unrelated occupants to the studio
apartment for a total of three unrelated in the unit. But, if the strict application of the
ordinance were used, the ordinance would permit this alteration because it does not
increase the occupancy in the building or add additional units to the building.
A nonconforming use of a property is not affected by the rearrangement of rooms within
the apartments¹. The rearrangement of rooms due to alterations would not constitute a
change of use. The adding or subtracting unrelated individuals within an apartment,
without increasing the overall occupancy of the building, does not change the volume of
use². In order to meet the definition of extension or enlargement, the building would have
to make greater or expanded use of a property or enlarge buildings, structures, or land
with respect to bulk or mass. An alteration to a nonconforming property, unless it makes a
significate change in use to the building or land, would not be an extension of use ³.
In conclusion, the determination by Phyllis Radke should be amended to include the
calculation of habitable space based on the building as a whole. The adopted measure for
using the habitable space, as it applies to the Housing Code, is a reasonable method to
use and should continue, except it should apply it to the entire building. The criteria for the
using the habitable space calculation must maintain the established occupancy and be
determined by the bedroom sizes within the building. The number of occupants must be
limited by the allowable number of unrelated individual and shall not include the related
occupancies in the calculation. The occupancy of a building should not be imposed rather
it must be the result of the bedroom sizes and overall habitable space as outline in Section
210-8.
¹ Salkin 10:22 Change of use, note²ͼ: Rearrangement, resulting from renovations, of a
nonconforming dormitory to apartments, both for students, is not a change of use. Keim v.
City of Syracuse, 12 Misc.2d 616, 480 N.Y.S.2d 86 (Sup. Ct. Onondoga City 1984)
² Salkin 10:23 Change in volume of Use: Footnote ¹, the mere increase in volume of a
nonconforming use does not affect its validity or constitute a change of use. (Town of
Ithaca v. Hull)
³ Salkin 10:23 Change in volume of Use: Footnote , an increase in the volume of use,
without a significant change in the kind of use, is not a proscribed extension of a
nonconforming use. However, an increase in volume or intensity when coupled with a
variation or alteration in the specific type of use will result in an illegal extension.
Sincerely,
Gino Leonardi, Zoning Administrator
4) Action Items (Approval to Circulate)
a) Revision to West State Street Zoning
To: City of Ithaca Common Council
FROM: JoAnn Cornish, City of Ithaca, Director of Planning and Development
DATE: Revised July 5, 2019, (Original May 17, 2019, Updated June 5, 2019)
RE:Proposal to Amend Sections of Chapter 325, Zoning, of the City
Municipal Code Pertaining to Proposed Revisions to the CBD 60 Zoning
District
In response to concerns and suggestions made at the July 3, 2019 Common Council
meeting, the vote to rezone certain blocks of West State Street was tabled for further
discussion at the July 10, 2019 Planning and Economic Development Committee of
Common Council.
Originally proposed were:
x Minimum story height of 12 feet, floor to floor on the ground floor, and 10 feet floor
to floor on subsequent floors, and
x Limit the overall height to 52 feet and 5 stories (12 feet floor to floor height on the
first story and 10 feet floor to floor on subsequent stories) with an opportunity to
build an 10 additional feet in height for a 6th story, under the City’s Planned Unit
Development Ordinance, if the developer includes 20% of the total unit count as affordable
(50% to 80% of Area Median Income) or other community benefit(s), and
x All new construction located in the existing portion of the CBD-60 Zoning District, directly
fronting on the 300, 400, and 500 blocks of West State Street, contain a stepback of 15 feet
after the first 32 feet in height. (In reviewing step back requirements for Collegetown, a
minimum of 12 feet is required. We may want to consider changing the proposed 15 foot
stepback to a 12 foot stepback to be consistent with Collegetown Zoning)
Suggested additions to the proposed revisions to the CBD 60 Zoning District on the 300,
400, and 500 Block of West State Street were to limit the façade length to 60 feet and limit
the building footprint to 7,200 square feet.
Because we are taking a second look at this revised zoning, and because it was also
brought up at the Common Council meeting, I wanted clarification as to whether or not
Common Council wants to require a first floor active use requirement similar to that of the
Primary Commons.(Section 325-8D (3) in the City Code “Zoning Regulations-Additional
Restriction in the CBD Districts”)
Active street-level uses are one of the keys to the vitality of the West State Street Corridor
and are defined as uses that encourage high levels of pedestrian activity, enliven the
streetscape, and create well-lit space with ample visibility into the storefront area. Active
uses include, but are not limited to:
(a)Retail store or service commercial facility.
(b)Restaurant, fast-food establishment, or tavern.
(c)Theater, bowling alley, auditorium, or other similar places of public assembly.
(d)Hotel.
(e)Public Park or playground.
(f) Bank or monetary institution.
(g) Confectionary, millinery, dressmaking, and other activities involving light hand fabrication as well
as sales.
Additional uses may be permitted if the Planning and Development Board determines
them to be an active use and grants special approval for the use. The Planning Board may
also grant a special approval of a non-active use if a property owner is able to show that
the physical structure is not easily adaptable to be used as one of the above listed active
uses.
As I mentioned at the Council meeting, we also have design guidelines to help influence
the design of new buildings in the downtown core. When looking at the vocabulary of the
West State Street buildings the section below seems most relevant:
Please feel free to contact me should you have questions, corrections, or comments.
Alderperson Nguyen stated he is not in favor of the rezoning.
Alderperson Brock stated she doesn’t have a problem with the façade length. She
doesn’t see the need for a maximum lot coverage.
Alderperson Smith stated he doesn’t have an issue with a long façade as long as it is
done tastefully.
Director Cornish stated a lot can be done to a façade to make it look not as long. It
can look like it’s broken up.
Chair Murtagh asked with the 60’ feet façade could look like it’s broken up but really
isn’t. Director Cornish stated it most certainly can be done. City Center is prime
example of this.
Chair Murtagh stated that what a lot of people like is the idea of smaller buildings
throughout the block rather than just one big building.
Alderperson Brock asked whether limiting the façade length will limit developers from
buying up the whole block in one building. Director Cornish responded yes to that
question.
Alderperson Brock stated that if we are viewing State Street as the entry point to the
City, it makes sense that both sides of the street be the same.
Alderperson McGonigal stated that a four story building is the max for a wood
structure. Local contractors can construct this without the use of cranes, etc. Aurora
Street’s ‘restaurant row’ is a good example of this. Those buildings are three to four
stories.
Chair Murtagh stated what we need to look at and decide what it is we would like to
keep in this area and what we want to allow.
Alderperson Lewis stated that a lot of this area is small businesses and residential
housing whether it be owner-occupied or tenant housing. She would like to see this
remain.
Alderperson Brock would like to see us use the correct feet in the CBD areas. Rather
than CBD 50, use CBD 52 since that’s the correct figure. She further stated that
West State Street has many small businesses. She would not like to see an ‘active
first floor use’ added to the rezoning. If we don’t want residential use, can’t we just
say that?
Alderperson Nguyen stated that code enforcement must be also considered when
changing the zoning.
It was decided that this will be circulated and brought back next month.
5) Discussion
a) Immaculate Conception PUD
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Economic Development Planner
Date: July 8, 2019
RE: City of Ithaca Planned Unit Development (PUD) –Proposed Zoning: INHS
Redevelopment of the Former Immaculate Conception School
The purpose of this memo is to provide information regarding the proposed Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning for the Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services project to be
located, for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) project to be located at 320-324 & 330 W.
Buffalo St, and 309 N. Plain Street.
The Common Council granted this project an approval in concept at the July Common
Council meeting. The next step in the PUD process is for the Common Council to
consider the proposed zoning proposal for the project site. The site is currently zoned R-
2b. Attached is a comparison chart of the existing R-2b zoning and the applicant’s
proposed PUD zoning. The applicant is proposing two subzones, the boundaries of which
can be seen on the enclosed layout plan.
If the Committee is in agreement with the proposed rezoning, then staff will circulate the
draft zoning and return next month with any comments that are received.
If you have questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact me at
jenniferk@cityofithaca.org.
A new chart was provided to include the gymnasium which wasn’t included in the
previous one.
It was recommended by Nels Bohn, Director, Ithaca Urban Renewal Agency, to
include the zone P-1 to enable GIAC to use the gym.
It was decided that it will be circulated and brought back next month.
b) Infill Guidelines
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Jennifer Kusznir, Senior Planner
Alexander Phillips, Planner
Date: July 3, 2019
Re: Amendments to the Infill Housing Regulations
The purpose of this memo is to provide additional information regarding proposed amendments to the City’s Zoning
Ordinance concerning proposed infill housing regulations.
This proposal was last discussed at the June Planning Committee meeting. Since that time, staff has done additional
research on infill housing and accessory dwelling units (ADU’s). We would like to present this information and discuss
how to proceed.
Existing Zoning Regulations
Below is a brief overview of the existing zoning regulations regarding construction of a second residential structure in
an R-1 or R-2 zone. A more in depth presentation of current regulations will be provided at the meeting.
R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts
Currently, the only permitted primary residential uses allowed in the R-1 and R-2 Zoning
Districts are single family dwelling units (R-1) and single family dwelling units and
duplexes (R-2).
Accessory dwelling units are allowed only if the dwelling unit is owner occupied and if a
temporary special permit has been obtained. The temporary special permit, a building
inspection, and an affidavit stating that the conditions as originally set forth have not
changed in any way, must be renewed every three years.
There shall be no more than one accessory apartment per lot.
No owner occupant shall occupy an accessory apartment as his or her primary
residence unless he or she has occupied the main unit in the property after the development
of the accessory apartment for a period of five years.
By omission, two or more primary residential structures are allowed on a single tax parcel in the R-1 and R-2 zone
provided certain area requirements are met.
All primary structures on a lot are required to meet the minimum lot size requirements. This means that in order to
have more than one primary structure, a lot must have double the required minimum lot size, and the total building area
of all of the buildings cannot be greater than the maximum percent of lot coverage.
Infill Development Research
Staff has researched information about various communities to understand different approaches to infill development,
standard regulations that encourage and manage infill development, and challenges other communities have faced.
Below is a brief overview. A full presentation will be provided at the meeting:
x What are Accessible Dwelling Units (ADUs)? ADUs can include dwelling units in any of
the following configurations:
Detached (Backyard Cottages, Carriage Houses)
Attached (Basement Suites, Garden Apartments)
Conversions (Garages)
x Why encourage ADUs?
Promotes affordable housing options, supplements income, offers a variety of
housing choices, and reduces sprawl
x What are tools for encouraging/managing infill development?
Zoning Regulations
Special Permits
Additional Requirements
Infill Development Questions
In order to determine how to proceed with establishing regulations to encourage/manage infill development within the
City, staff is seeking Council guidance on the following questions:
1. Should the City restrict or encourage infill development within residential zoning
districts? Yes = 4 = Depends = 1
2. Should more than 1 primary structure be allowed within residential zoning districts (R-1, R-2,
R-3)?
3. Should the City restrict infill development to residential lots that are owner occupied,
within the R-1 and/or R-2 zoning districts?
4. Should the City require a special permit for any residential infill development projects
within the R-1 and/or R-2 Districts?
5. Should the City require inspections, permits, and/or fees for ADUs? Should these be
waived for owner occupied properties?
6. Should the City establish minimum contiguous green space requirements?
7. Are there R-1/R-2 areas that should be rezoned to R-3 zones?
8. Should secondary structures be limited in size, or have other design requirements?
9. Should ADUs be subject to parking requirements?
10. Should infill development be restricted to larger lots? Currently all structures on a lot are
subject to a total maximum percent lot coverage (20% - 25% in R-1 zones, 30% - 35% in
the R-2 zones). Two possible options can be considered:
x Require all secondary structures be subject to area requirements for a primary
structure. This will restrict infill development to larger lots.
x Allow secondary structures, by special permit, on lots that do not meet the minimum
lot area requirements for a second structure. Special permits could be granted to
properties that are able to maintain the minimum contiguous green space
requirements.
Staff Proposal
x New Definitions-Staff proposes that the following new definitions be established
Contiguous Green Space
Secondary Structure
Rear Yard Infill Development
Street Front Infill Development
x New Regulations
Exempt ADUs from parking requirements
Restrict R-1, R-2, CR-1, and CR-2 to 1 primary structure
Create a minimum contiguous green space requirement
Create Design and Orientation Restrictions
Orient buildings towards the street
Require the roof of an ADU have a similar pitch to the primary structure
Require the height of the infill structure to be similar to the height of other
buildings on the street (no taller than tallest, no shorter than the shortest)
Limits size of new structures to no more than 60% of the existing structure
If you have any concerns or questions regarding any of this information, feel free to contact
me at 274-6410.
Jennifer Kusznir, Senior Planner; Alex Phillips, Planner, and Gino Leonardi, Zoning Administrator
provided a presentation on positive infill examples in order to give the group a better understanding
as to how infill can work in the City.
The staff began going through the questions outlined in the memo provided in the packet. Only the
first question was answered by the committee. Alderperson Fleming suggested we keep what we
currently have on the books until we can agree on what to do next.
Chair Murtagh stated he isn’t in any rush to make a decision. We already have the overlay district in
south hill. We are not seeing what happened on South hill elsewhere in the City.
Alderperson Fleming suggested we keep what we currently have on the books until we can agree on
what to do next.
Chair Murtagh stated he isn’t in any rush to make a decision. We already have the overlay district in
South Hill. We are not seeing what happened on South hill elsewhere in the City.
The Committee agreed to circulate for further comment and bring it back to the Committee at a later
date.
6) Review and Approval of Minutes
a) June 2019
Moved to approve by Alderperson Smith; seconded by Alderperson Fleming. Carried
unanimously.
7) Adjournment
Moved by Alderperson Smith; seconded by Alderperson Lewis. Carried unanimously.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m.