HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2021-10-26 Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
1
Planning and Development Board Minutes
October 26, 2021
Board Members
Attending:
Robert Aaron Lewis, Chair; McKenzie Lauren Jones, Vice Chair;
Garrick Blalock, BPW Liaison; Elisabete Godden; Mitch Glass; Emily
Petrina
Board Members Absent:
C.J. Randall
Board Vacancies: None
Staff Attending: Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning, Division of Planning and
Economic Development
Anya Harris, Administrative Assistant, Division of Planning and
Economic Development
Applicants Attending: End of Campbell Ave, Parcel ID: 38.-1-1, Minor Subdivision
Brent E Katzmann, agent for owner
Cayuga Park
Jacob Von Mechow, Whitham Planning and Design
Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning and Design
Bill Warwick, Barton Partners
Matt Newcomb, Passero Associates
Andrew Bodewes, Park Grove Realty
Apartments (40 Units), 228 Dryden Road
Nathan Brown, HOLT Architects
Adam Fishel, Marathon Engineering
Cliff Street Retreat, 407 Cliff Street
Craig Modisher, Stream Collaborative
Adam Fishel, Marathon Engineering
Linc Morse, developer
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
2
Apartments (13 Units), 325 Dryden Road & 320 Elmwood Avenue
Declaration
Jason Demarest, architect
Greg Mezey, Red Door Rentals and
Chris Petrillose, AdBro Development
Ithaca Farmers’ Market – Major Site Improvements & New
Building, Steamboat Landing – 545 Third Street
Kate Chesebrough, Whitham Planning and Design
Yifei Yan, Whitham Planning and Design
David Stern, Ithaca Farmers’ Market
Jim Cummings, Shumaker
Catherine Commons
Kathryn Wolf, TWMLA
Arvind Tikku, iKon5 Architects
Phil Proujansky, developer
John Novarr, developer
Herman Sieverding, developer
Chair Lewis called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m.
1. Agenda Review
There were no changes to the agenda.
2. Approval of Minutes
On a motion by Glass, seconded by Petrina, the
• June 22, 2021
• July 27, 2021, and
• August 24, 2021 meeting minutes were approved unanimously.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
3
3. Public Comment
Chair Lewis opened Privilege of the Floor.
Sheryl Swink of 321 N. Albany Street expressed concerns about changes to downtown zoning
that allow for substantial increases in building height and mass and require little or no setbacks.
She said this reduces airflow and greenspace, and she said these changes exacerbate the heat
island effect in the downtown and in the neighborhoods in the Flats. She said the Planning
Board and Planning Department need to take this into consideration during their determination
of environmental significance and in design reviews going forward. She said she monitors the
min/max temperatures at her house, which is a few blocks from the downtown core, and that
temperatures were running higher than usual this past summer, into the 90s day after day with
humidity often in excess of 70 percent. She said that temperature and humidity levels like this
are predicted to be more common and will even increase as a result of climate change. She said
these temperatures can become lethal and that the City has an opportunity to moderate these
impacts by reconsidering how we treat density, mass and greenspace in the City’s core and
keeping a careful eye on these issues as new developments are being considered.
There being no additional members of the public appearing in order to speak, nor any written
comments submitted to be read into the record, Chair Lewis closed the Public Comment period.
4. Board Response to Public Comment
Jones thanked Swink for taking the time to comment.
5. Subdivision Review
A. Minor Subdivision, End of Campbell Ave, Parcel ID: 38.-1-1 by Brent E. Katzmann.
Preliminary & Final Subdivision Approval. The applicant is requesting a subdivision of
the 5.45-acre site, resulting in two parcels of approximately 2.2 acres (96,715 SF) and
3.2 acres (139377 SF). The proposed subdivision will permit the construction of (two)
single-family residences on the western portion of the property accessed directly off
Campbell Avenue. The property is wooded with immature second-growth forest and is
sloped to the east. The parcel is in the R-1a zoning district. An area variance for street
frontage will be required. This is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 and the State Environmental Quality
Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 for which the Lead Agency made a Negative
Determination of Environmental Significance on September 28, 2021.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
4
Brent Katzman appeared on behalf of the property owner to answer any questions from the
Board. He said their proposal for a minor subdivision to create two single-family lots had not
changed since the last time he appeared in front of the Board, and they had received BZA
approval for their variance.
Adopted Declaration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Godden:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for a minor subdivision of City of Ithaca Tax Parcel #38.-1-1 located at the end of Campbell Avenue by Brent E. Katzmann, and WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing to subdivide the 5.45-acre site, resulting in two parcels of approximately 2.2 acres (96,715 SF) and 3.2 acres (139,377 SF). The proposed subdivision is for the future
construction of (two) single-family residences on the western portion of the property accessed directly off Campbell Avenue. The property is wooded with immature second-growth forest and is sloped to the east. The parcel is in the R-1a zoning district. An area variance for street frontage is required, and WHEREAS: this is considered a Minor Subdivision in accordance with the City of Ithaca Code, Chapter 290, Article 1, §290-1, Minor Subdivision – Any subdivision of land resulting in the creation of one
additional buildable lot, and WHEREAS: This has been determined to be an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) and requires environmental review, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, did on September 28, 2021 issue a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the entire project and all its components, and
WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, did on September 28, 2021 review and accept as adequate: a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF), Part 1 submitted by the applicant and a SEAF Part 2 prepared by Planning staff; draft subdivision plat titled Campbell Subdivision Site Plan (L101) dated 12/5/20 and prepared by Stream Collaborative; and other application materials, and
WHEREAS: the Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted, and adjacent property owners notified in accordance with Chapters 290-9 C. (1), (2), & (3) of the City of Ithaca Code, and
WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on August 24, 2021,
and WHEREAS: the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) granted the required area variance on October 5, 2021,
now, therefore, be it
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
5
RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to the proposed Minor Subdivision of City of Ithaca Tax Parcel 38.-1-1 at the end of Campbell Ave subject to
the submission of three final original subdivision plats with the raised signature of a licensed surveyor. Moved by: Petrina Seconded by: Godden In favor: Blalock, Glass, Godden, Petrina Against: None Abstain: None Absent: Jones, Lewis, Randall Vacancies: None
6. Site Plan Review
A. Cayuga Park (formerly Carpenter Circle Project), Carpenter Park Road by Andrew
Bodewes for Park Grove Realty, LLC. Consideration of Final Approval of Mixed-Use
Project. The Planning Board granted preliminary site plan approval to the overall project
on May 26, 2020 and final approval of Phase 1 of this project on September 22, 2020.
The applicant now seeks minor changes to the residential building in Phase 1 as well as
final approval for the two mixed-use buildings and associated site improvements. The
applicant has reduced the originally proposed buildings from six stories to four, 171
dwelling units to 127, 23,800 SF retail/commercial space to 13,400 SF, and 187 internal
parking spaces to 113. The overall project was determined to be a Type 1 Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4(B)(1)(d), (i), (k), and
(B)(6) and (8)(a) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”)
§617.4(b)(11) for which the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency, issued a Negative
Declaration of Environmental Significance on May 26, 2020.
Applicants Jacob Von Mechow and Scott Whitham of Whitham Planning and Design, Bill
Warwick of Barton Partners, Matt Newcomb of Passero Associates and Andrew Bodewes of
Park Grove Realty appeared in front of the Board to present project changes.
Von Mechow said they had met with City Building, Zoning and Fire Department staff in the last
month and revised their project to meet all building, zoning and fire code requirements.
Glass moved an amendment to require the Board approve color selection of the buildings,
Petrina seconded. Amendment approved unanimously.
Glass moved an amendment to ask the applicants consider additional planting in front of alcove
area to create buffer, Blalock seconded. Amendment approved unanimously.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
6
Adopted Resolution of Final Site Plan Approval for Phase 2
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Jones:
WHEREAS: The Planning Board granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the entire project on May 26,
2020, Final Site Plan Approval for Phase 1 on September 22, 2020 and Final Site Plan Approval for the Community Gardens on August 24, 2021, and
WHEREAS: The applicant now seeks final approval with revisions for the mixed-use buildings known as Building B & C and associated site improvements, and
WHEREAS: the scope of the approval consists of the following revisions to the original proposal:
• Reduction in stories from six to four,
• Reduction in internal parking from 187 to 101,
• Reduction of dwelling units from 166 to 127,
• Reduction in commercial space from 23,810 SF to 17,481 SF,
• Associated changes to the floor plan layouts including introduction of parking on the ground floor,
• Changes to cladding materials transitions,
• Building B: additions of stepback in the second floor,
• Building B: addition of pool and railing on second outdoor amenity deck and addition of fourth
floor rooftop amenity deck,
• Building C; addition of garden walls enclosing gated surface parking area and addition of fourth floor rooftop amenity deck, and WHEREAS: this Board, has on October 26, 2021, reviewed and accepted as adequate the following new
and revised drawings: Building B Third and Fourth Floor Plan and Building B Roof Plan dated 9/21/21; Building B Ground Floor Plan, Building B Second Floor Plan, Building B Elevations A & B, Building B Elevations C & D, Building C Ground and Typical Floor Plans, Building C Elevations A & B and Building
C Elevations C & D, all dated 10/18/21 and prepared by Barton Partners; Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan (C102, 103 & 104), Layout Plan (C105, 106 and 107), Utility Plan (C109 & C110), Grading & Erosion Control Plan (C112 & C113), Lighting Plan (C116 & C117) and Details C201- 207 all prepared by Passero Associates with the latest update of 10/12/21 Planting – Full Site (L100), Planting Center (L102), Planting Plan – Bioretention Enlargements (L102.1), Planting Plan – Enlargement DOT Buffer (L102.2), Planting Plan – Enlargement Building B (L120.3), Planting Plan – Enlargement Building D (L103.1), Planting Plan – Enlargement Building D DOT Buffer (L103.2), Planting Plan Bioretention Enlargement (L103.3) all dated 10/19/21 and Landscape Details 1 (L104), Landscape Details 2 (L104.1) Landscape Details 3 (L104.2), all dated 9/21/21/21, and all prepared by Whitham Planning & Design and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the City Planning Board has determined that the project changes, because they reduce the scope and scale of the project, are consistent with the May 26, 2020, Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance an no addition environmental review is required, and
WHEREAS: the revised project has been reviewed by the Supervisor of Building and Code Enforcement who has determined that Buildings B & C do not comply with sections of the Building Code relating to
fire-separation/ wall openings due to their distances from the property line that borders the adjacent internal road, and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
7
WHEREAS: the applicant intends to pursue the establishment of a "public way" within the road to 1) make future building construction in the area legally impossible and 2) resolve the issue of compliance with fire
separation, and WHEREAS: The Project Sponsor understands that Phase 2 of the project cannot be occupied until the new intersection with Route 13 is operational, and WHEREAS: The City of Ithaca and the project applicant have executed the required Land Transfer Agreement and have closed on the property, and WHEREAS: A legally binding agreement between the Project Sponsor, Project Growing Hope, and the applicant has been executed, and
WHEREAS: the Project Sponsor has submitted an executed Letter of Commitment stating that they shall:
• Work (in collaboration with the City and another local partners, if necessary) to identify and secure funding for the implementation of off-site improvements on Route 13.
• Understand and acknowledge that the Project Sponsor(s) has/(-ve) the sole responsibility to permit, finance, and install the improvements if outside funding is not identified and secured.
• Identify and commit to a reasonable and mutually agreed-upon timeframe for completing the improvements.
• Understand and acknowledge that the project must be implemented in conformance with the approved site plan and must include any mitigations identified in the FEAF Part 3 of the Negative
Declaration dated May 26, 2020.
• Understand and acknowledge that any changes to the approved site plan must be approved by the Planning and Development Board (or staff, as allowed) before such changes can be implemented.
• Understand and acknowledge that any changes to the approved site plan will be reviewed for consistency with the Negative Declaration. Any changes that create impacts that were not analyzed in the Negative Declaration will require reopening of the environmental review.
• Understand and acknowledge that a Certificate of Occupancy will not be granted until these issues have been resolved.
• Understand that other conditions must be satisfied in the sequence outlined in the final approval
resolution, now therefore be it RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant final approval for Buildings B & C and associated site improvements as described above, subject to the following relevant unsatisfied conditions from past approvals as well as new conditions specific to this phase of the project: Before Issuance of a Building Permit for Buildings B & C: i. Documentation of an easement agreement with the adjacent property for access from the terminus of the through-site road to Cascadilla Street, and ii. Establishment of a required ‘Public Way’ as defined by Building Code, to resolve compliance with fire separation distances, and iii. Documentation of discussions with TCAT and progress on restricted access mechanism for busses,
and iv. Development by the applicant and acceptance by the City of a plan and schedule for the financing, implementation and monitoring of a TDM program, and
v. Submission of information documenting number, location, and type of exterior and interior bike racks/parking, and vi. Noise producing construction activities will be limited to the hours between 7:30 A.M. and 5:30
P.M., Monday through Friday (or Saturday 9:00 A.M. to 5:30 P.M. with advance notification to and approval by the Director of Planning and Development), and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
8
vii. Verification that the following proposed noise mitigations have been incorporated into building designs for Phase 1:
a. Selection of packaged air-handling units: sound-producing fans are internal to these units and shielded from exterior sound receptors by insulated panels that both reduce heat loss/gain and provide sound attenuation; b. Sound-attenuating enclosures on all emergency generators; c. Scheduling emergency generator testing between 7:30 AM and 9:00 PM; d. Locating rooftop equipment away from the roof edge. Doing so maximizes the shielding of residents from rooftop generated sound, and viii. Acceptance of the SWPPP by the City Stormwater Management Officer, and ix. This site plan approval does not preclude any other permit that is required by City Code, such as sign permits, tree permits, street permits, etc., and x. Any changes to the approved project must be submitted to Planning Staff for review. Staff will
determine if changes require Board approval, and xi. Submission of a final Landscape Plan with planting schedule and planting specifications and details, and
xii. Submission to the Planning Board for review and approval of all site details including, but not limited to, exterior furnishings, walls, railings, bollards, paving, signage, lighting, etc., and xiii. Submission of Roof Plans, drawings and/or visualizations showing all proposed exterior
mechanicals and associated equipment including heat pumps, ventilation, etc, including appropriate screening if necessary, xiv. Development by the applicant and acceptance by the City of a plan and schedule for the financing and implementation of transportation and emergency access improvements detailed in the FEAF Part 3, or other alternative improvements deemed equally appropriate and effective by the City, and xv. Documentation from the Ithaca Fire Department that emergency access issues have been satisfied, and xvi. Final color choices to be reviewed and approved by Planning Board – both buildings. Applicant to submit revised renderings and elevations, and xvii. Consideration of additional planting in front of alcove area to create buffer Before Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy for Buildings B or C xviii. Documentation of the final design and specifications for the restricted access mechanism for buses, xix. Installation of bike racks/parking in accordance with approved site plans, xx. Confirmation from the City Transportation Engineer that all concerns have been addressed
xxi. Any damage done to City Property including roads, utilities, etc. shall be corrected by the applicant to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering.
Moved by: Petrina Seconded by: Jones In favor: Blalock, Petrina, Glass, Jones, Godden, Lewis Against: None Abstain: None Absent: Randall Vacancies: None
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
9
B. Apartments (40 Units), 228 Dryden Road by 228 Dryden LLC. Determination of
Environmental Significance & Recommendation to BZA. The applicant proposes to
demolish the existing two-story structure and to construct an apartment building with 40
units on the .185-acre project site. The building will be four stories above average grade
and one basement story below average grade for a total of five stories. The project
includes other site amenities such as landscaping, walkways, and outdoor patios. The
project site is in the CR-4 zoning district and requires an area variance for rear yard
setback. It is also subject to Collegetown Design Guidelines. This is a Type 1 Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 B.(1)(k) and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 b. (10) and is subject to
environmental review.
Applicants Nathan Brown of HOLT Architects and Adam Fishel of Marathon Engineering
appeared in front of the Board to present project changes and the planting plan.
The Board next reviewed Part III of the FEAF.
Adopted Resolution of Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Godden:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for site plan approval for construction of apartments (40 units) located at 228 Dryden Road by 228 Dryden RD LLC, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to demolish the existing two-story structure and to construct an apartment building with 39 units on the .185-acre project site. The building will be four stories above average grade and one basement story below average grade for a total of five stories. The project includes other site amenities such as landscaping, walkways, and outdoor patios. The project site is in the CR-4
zoning district and requires an area variance for rear yard setback. It is also subject to Collegetown Design Guidelines, and
WHEREAS: this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 B.(1)(k) and the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 b. (10) and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: the Tompkins County Department of Health has been identified as potentially Involved Agency in Environmental Review, and WHEREAS: City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on May 25, 2021 declare itself Lead Agency in Environmental Review for the project, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, did on October 26, 2021, review and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3 prepared by Planning staff; drawings titled Boundary and Topographic Map
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
10
No. 228 Dryden Road, City of Ithaca, Tompkins, New York dated 12/07/2020 and prepared by TG Miller P.C.; Demolition Plan C-1.0, Site Plan C-2.0, Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan C-3.0, Utility Plan
C-4.0, Landscaping Plan C-5.0, Detail Sheet D-1 all dated October 13, 2021 and prepared by Marathon Engineering; Floor Plans AP-100, Exterior Elevations AP-201, Exterior Perspectives AP-202, AP-203, and AP-204, Building Sections AP-301 and AP-302 all dated October 14, 2021 and prepared by HOLT Architects, and other application materials, and WHEREAS: interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project, and any received comments have been considered, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City Planning Board determined, as elaborated in the FEAF Part 3, that the proposed project will result in no significant adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be issued in accordance with the provisions
of Part 617 of SEQRA. Moved by: Jones
Seconded by: Godden In favor: Glass, Petrina, Godden, Blalock, Jones, Lewis Against: None
Abstain: None Absent: Randall Vacancies: None
The Board then drafted a recommendation to the BZA.
C. Cliff Street Retreat. 407 Cliff Street by Linc Morse. Consideration of Preliminary & Final
Approval. The applicant proposes to convert a 25,297 SF industrial building into a multi-
use building which will include long- and short-term residential rentals, small conference
and lounge spaces office, and retail. The applicant applied for a rezoning through the PUD
process as the project is in the R-3a zone, in which the past industrial use is legally non-
conforming. The renovated building will comply with 2020 NYS building code and the
Ithaca Energy Code Supplement. Site improvements include new building façades, more
well-defined parking areas, landscaping, dark-sky compliant site lighting, street-facing
entries, and garden/terrace spaces facing the hillside. This is a Type 1 Action under the
City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 B.(1)(h)[3] for which the
Lead Agency made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance on
September 28, 2021.
Craig Modisher of Stream Collaborative, Adam Fishel of Marathon Engineering, and Linc Morse,
project sponsor, appeared in front of the Board to answer questions.
The Board had no questions.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
11
Adopted Resolution of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval
On a motion by Godden, seconded by Glass:
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for site plan
approval for a conversion of a 25,297 SF industrial building into a multi-use building by Linc Morse, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to convert a 25,297-SF industrial building into a multi-use building
which will include long- and short-term residential rentals, small conference and lounge spaces, office space, and retail. The applicant applied for a rezoning through the PUD process, as the project is in the R-3a zone, in which the past industrial use is legally non-conforming. Site improvements include new building
façades, more well-defined parking areas, landscaping, dark-sky compliant site lighting, street-facing entries, and garden/terrace spaces facing the hillside. The property is located in the R-3 zoning district; however, the applicant has applied to Common Council for a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The applicant has stated that the renovated building will comply with 2020 NYS building code and the Ithaca Energy Code Supplement, and WHEREAS: this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176‐4 B.(1)(h)[3] and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: the Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency, Tompkins County Department of Health, NYS Department of Transportation and the City of Ithaca Common Council, all potentially
Involved Agencies in environmental review have consented to the Board acting as Lead Agency, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, being the local agency, which has
primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on June 22, 2021 declare itself Lead Agency in Environmental Review for the project, and issued a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance on September 28, 2021, and
WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 (B) (4) and 176-12 (A) (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on July 27, 2021, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review, did on September 28, 2021, review and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3 prepared by Planning staff; drawings titled Layout Plan (L101), Floor Plan(A1), Floor Plan (A2), Elevation (A4), Elevation (A5), North Elevation (A6), and Exterior Perspective(s) (A8-A11) all dated August 12, 2021 and prepared by Stream Collaborative; The Cottages
(A13-A19) all dated June 28, 2021 and prepared by Stream Collaborative; Grading, Drainage & Erosion Control Plan (C-3.0), Utility Plan (C-4.0), Detail Sheet (D-1.0), Detail Sheet (D-2.0), and Truck Turn Plan all dated June 14, 2021 and prepared by Marathon Engineering; Survey Map Showing Lands of 407
Holding, LLC Located at NO. 407 Cliff Street dated December 21, 2004 and prepared by T.G. Miller; Boundary & Topographic Map No. 407 Cliff Street dated May 27, 2001 and prepared by T.G. Miller; and As-Built Floor Plan Incodema 407 Cliff Street Ithaca, NY dated August 2020 and prepared by GeoLogic
NY, P.C, and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission, and other interested
parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, and
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
12
WHEREAS: the Planning Board has, on October 26, 2021, reviewed and accepted as adequate new and
revised drawings titled Truck Turn Plan (T-2.0) dated September 1, 2021 and prepared by Marathon Engineering; Exterior Façade Materials dated September 30, 2021 and prepared by Stream Collaborative; Elevation (A4), Elevation (A5), Layout Plan (L101), Planting Plan (L103) all dated October 18, 2021 and prepared by Stream Collaborative, and other application materials, now therefore be it RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval to the project subject to the following conditions: Before Issuance of a Building Permit: i. Adoption of the proposed PUD by Common Council
ii. Submission of colored and keyed building elevations of all facades with building materials
samples sheet
iii. Submission of final Landscape Plan with planting schedule & specifications and soil volumes
iv. Submission to the Planning Board of detailed plans, including hardscape and landscape, for the
garden/terrace spaces of the residential units facing the hillside
v. Submission of a draft maintenance easement with the City of Ithaca for stormwater pipe underneath the southern parking lot
vi. Acceptance of the SWPPP by the City Stormwater Management Officer
vii. Confirmation from the City Transportation Engineer that all concerns have been addressed
viii. Submission of review of sight lines from the revised curb cuts to ensure safe exiting
ix. Documentation from Ithaca Fire Department emergency access issues have been satisfied
x. This site plan approval does not preclude any other permit that is required by City Code, such as sign permits, tree permits, street permits, etc.
Within Six months of Final Site Plan Approval:
xi. Submission to the Planning Board for review and approval of all site details including but not limited to exterior furnishings, bike racks, walls, railings, bollards, paving, signage, interpretive signage, lighting, etc.
xii. Final detailed plans for the proposed multi-use trail through city property
Before Certificate of Occupancy for any phase of the Project:
xiii. Submission of and executed maintenance easement with the City of Ithaca for stormwater pipe underneath the southern parking lot
xiv. Submission of any other executed easement or other legal agreements, including
maintenance of public walkway
xv. Bike racks must be installed before a certificate of occupancy is granted
Moved by: Godden Seconded by: Glass In favor: Glass, Petrina, Godden, Blalock, Jones, Lewis
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
13
Against: None Abstain: None Absent: Randall Vacancies: None
D. Apartments (13 Units). 325 Dryden Road & 320 Elmwood Avenue by Red Door Rentals/
AdBro Development. Project Updates. The applicant has recently revised the project. The
current proposal is to combine two existing parcels, 325 Dryden Road, zoned CR-3, and
320 Elmwood Ave., zoned CR-2, to create a new parcel totaling .23 acres (~10,000 SF).
The applicant proposes to demolish (1) two-story residential unit located at 325 Dryden
and (1) existing three-story residential duplex at 320 Elmwood Ave., and to construct two
buildings: a three-story multiple dwelling with a footprint 2,857 SF containing eleven units
on the CR-3 portion of the site, and a duplex with a footprint of 1,003 SF on the CR-2
portion of the site. Combined, the site will have 13 dwelling units with 29 bedrooms. The
project will require several area variances, including lot coverage by buildings, the
minimum amount for green space per lot basis, rear yard setback, and parking. The
proposed design will provide four parking spaces, whereas zoning requires 13 parking
spaces. It is also subject to Collegetown Design Guidelines. This is a Type 1 Action under
the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 B.(1)(l) and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 b. (9) and is subject to environmental
review.
Jason Demarest, architect, Greg Mezey of Red Door Rentals, and Chris Petrillose of AdBro
Development appeared in front of the Board to present project updates.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
14
E. Ithaca Farmers’ Market – Major Site Improvements & New Building, Steamboat Landing
– 545 Third Street by David Stern for Ithaca Farmers’ Market. Presentation, Public
Hearing & FEAF – Transportation & Utilities. The applicant is proposing to construct a
new two-story market building to allow for year-round commerce and programing, to
reconfigure and pave the existing parking area and drive lanes, to create outdoor amenity
space for dining and gathering, to install shoreline stabilization, and to make other site
improvements. The project requires the demolition of most site features, relocation of
the Cayuga Waterfront Trail, removal of numerous trees, and installation of enhanced
stormwater infrastructure. The project is on City-owned land and requires approvals from
Common Council, the Special Joint Committee of the Ithaca Area Water Treatment Plant,
NYS DEC, and the Army Corps of Engineers. The project site is in the Market District and
is subject to Design Review. This is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental
Quality Review Ordinance §176-4 B.(1)(b), (h)[2] and (i) and the State Environmental
Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) §617.4 b. (10) and (11) and is subject to environmental
review.
Kate Chesebrough and Yifei Yan of Whitham Planning and Design, David Stern of the Ithaca
Farmers’ Market, and Jim Cummings of Shumaker appeared in front of the Board to present
project updates.
Public Hearing
On a motion by Jones, seconded by Godden, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing.
Written comments from Anya Gibian and Sheryl Swink were read into the record and are
included as an addendum to these minutes.
There being no members of the public appearing in order to speak, Chair Lewis closed the
public hearing, on a motion by Godden, seconded by Jones.
Stern, President of the Farmers’ Market committee, said they had incorporated vendors’
requests and wishes into consideration. He said the architectural firm was selected after an RFP
process. He also said they were looking at ways to allow safe access for pedestrians and cyclists.
The Board and applicants discussed bicyclist and pedestrian circulation around the site, with
emphasis on how to accommodate them safely in light of the vehicular traffic onsite.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
15
F. Ithaca Catherine Commons, Intersection of Catherine Street, Cook Street, and College
Avenue by Kathryn Wolf, Sponsor. Presentation & Public Hearing. The applicant
proposes to demolish the existing (11) two-story wood frame houses and construct a
primarily residential mixed-use development. The applicant proposes three multi-story
buildings on the Catherine North Site and three multi-story buildings on the Catherine
South Site (six buildings total) with a combined total gross floor area of 265,000 SF. The
buildings will contain approximately 360 residential units, a 2,600-SF commercial space
along College Avenue, a 1,600-SF private fitness center, and a small parking lot for ADA
compliance and service vehicles. The project includes streetscape improvements, several
ADA-compliant plaza spaces, pedestrian amenities, and public bus stop infrastructure.
The project is in four Zoning Districts: the MU1, in which the maximum building height is
five stories/70 feet; MU2, in which the maximum building height is six stories/80 feet;
CR3, in which the maximum height is 35 feet; and CR4, in which the maximum height is
45 feet. The project will require several area variances including maximum building
floors/height (two), minimum off-street parking, maximum street façade, doors and
entries, recessed entry, chamfered corner, and rear yard setback (two). It is also subject
to Collegetown Design Guidelines. The project involves 12 tax parcels totaling 1.45 acres,
seven of which are located north of the Catherine Street /College Avenue intersection
and four of which are to the south. Parcel consolidation will be required. This has been
determined to be a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance §176-4 B(1)(h)[4], (k) & (n), and the State Environmental Quality Review Act
(“SEQRA”) §617.4 (b)(5)[iii] and is subject to environmental review.
Kathryn Wolf of TWMLA; Arvind Tikku of iKon5 Architects; and developers Phil Proujansky, John
Novarr, and Herman Sieverding appeared in front of the Board to present project updates. In
particular, material selections, a shadow study, and contextual project views from places where
the façades will be most visible.
Public Hearing
On a motion by Glass, seconded by Petrina, Chair Lewis opened the Public Hearing.
Written comments from Graham Kerslick were read into the record and are included as an
addendum to these minutes.
Gregar Brous, owner of Collegetown Bagels, spoke in favor of the project. He said that the
project location is very much an entrance to Collegetown and that they deserve an elegant
building there that makes a statement. He said the street has been underserved, and that this
project will improve the street dramatically.
There being no more members of the public appearing in order to speak, Chair Lewis closed the
public hearing, on a motion by Godden, seconded by Jones.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
16
Glass asked about the historic buildings referenced in Kerslick’s letter and he asked for
clarification on the possibility of a mid-block crossing as suggested by a previous comment.
The Board discussed which buildings were to be demolished and suggested possibly salvaging
materials to be reused. Signage indicating the new development to come was also suggested.
7. Recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals
• #3198 – 228 Dryden Road, Area Variance
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts and supports this
appeal for the following reasons:
• Maximum lot Coverage and Green Space Deficiencies: The project site is steeply and
additional coverage was needed to provide accessible ramps. The applicant
proposes to mitigate the increased lot coverage necessitating the removal of mature
trees by planting several new trees along Dryden Road, including a large shade tree,
and a robust planting plan for the front of the building.
• Rear Yard Deficiency: The Lead Agency finds that due to the dense multifamily
development surrounding the site, the rear yard setback is compatible with the
surrounding development and has no significant impact.
• Side Yard Deficiency & Maximum Building Length: These variances were triggered by
a design revision that changed the project from a row house to a multiple dwelling.
The Lead Agency feels that the project is compatible with the aesthetic of a row
house and that the elimination of the ground floor unit allows for enhanced
vegetation in the front yard, including a shade tree. Due to the surrounding density
these variance do not have a negative impact.
• #3200 – 201 E. Tompkins Street, Sign Variance
The Planning Board does not identify any negative long-term planning impacts and supports this
appeal. The sign does not include illumination and is in keeping with the neighborhood
character.
Approved by the Planning and Development Board December 21, 2021
17
8. Old/New Business
• Potential Special Meeting for Catherine Commons
A special meeting would be scheduled sometime in January 2022.
• November & December Meeting Schedule
The December meeting was scheduled for December 21, 2021.
• Recruitment of New Members
9. Reports
A. Planning Board Chair
No report.
B. Board of Public Works Liaison
Blalock said the retaining wall on State Street is complete, College Avenue is all torn up, and
there has been a lot of public outcry over new streetlights being installed.
C. Director of Planning & Development
Acting Director Nicholas noted the retirement of the former Director of Planning and
Development JoAnn Cornish.
She also said Capital Projects are underway.
She also alerted the Board of several upcoming training opportunities.
10. Adjournment:
On a motion by Petrina, seconded by Godden, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
10/26/21, 10:05 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkADcxOTc0NzI1LTA5YTMtNDI2YS05NDEzLWJkMDgyNTE4NGY5OQAQAO84543fa%2FdHjbdz6KSYs%…1/1
Planning Board Public Comment on Proposed Ithaca Farmer's Market project
Anya Gibian <anyagibian@gmail.com>
Mon 10/25/2021 4:05 PM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>; Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Comment on the proposed parking lot renovation and demolition of the existing Farmer's Market
Pavilion:
Please read into the record:
On the fifth page of the attached traffic study is this important sentence: "Currently vendors are
allowed to park at their stalls along the building. The vendors have stated that this direct access to
their vehicles during the market is critical for them to perform inventory management and other back
of house functions." As far as I can tell, this is the only mention of the concerns and needs of a crucial
group of stakeholders in this decision: the Ithaca Farmers' Market vendors who make the Market a
vibrant tourist attraction. This concern about how they are going to manage their stalls if they no
longer have access to their vehicles during Market hours is weighed lightly against the non-
existent problem of people getting lost on their way from the parking lot to the market. I have not
encountered anyone unable to find the Market pavilion from their car. Quite the opposite, in fact, the
Market has been very crowded every time I have visited this summer.
Has the committee heard from any longtime Market vendors about their current needs and issues?
These are the people that are there every week, have been coming and selling for decades. They are
the ones who can tell this committee better than architects from two hundred miles away what
improvements are needed. I will also note that to sell at the Ithaca Farmers' Market, you must be
within 30 miles of Steamboat landing. Why are we looking to a Brooklyn architectural firm when
everything else about the IFM is local?
The proposal lists the frustrations the public has with the parking lot's potholes and overgrown brush.
My biggest question is about the current maintenance log and schedule for the existing parking lot.
When was the last time it was re-graveled? Who is trimming the trees and bushes that provide shade
in the summer heat? What is the budget for maintaining the parking lot? If the current lot cannot be
maintained with the budget and staffing required, how is a new construction project going to be
funded and then maintained?
Thank you.
-Anya Gibian
--
Anya Gibian
she/her/hers
607.592.4974
10/26/21, 4:28 PM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.04 1/1
Public Hearing comment - Ithaca Farmers Mkt
Sheryl Swink <sns7@cornell.edu>
Tue 10/26/2021 3:57 PM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>
(Note: Please read aloud during public hearing)
Dear Planning and Development Board members,
I love the Ithaca Farmers Market, but there is a gaping hole in the Market’s Traffic Impact Study and site plan for
circula on that I hope you will give serious thought to and address with them and their designers:
An increasing number of people are already biking to the Farmers’ Market to do their shopping, many arriving
from 3rd St, not just the recrea onal Waterfront Trail (WFT). Mixing bicyclists in parking trafficways is just as
hazardous as it is for pedestrians. Many of us cyclists coming in from 3rd St are currently using the pedestrian
paved path that comes out at the bike racks by the Market building.
Was really hoping the Farmers Market folks would get bike accessibility (not just parking) on their radar in the
proposed redesign. However, there is no labeled bicycle access route shown on the circula on plans nor any
men on in the Traffic Impact Study other than brief men on of future bicycle parking sta ons on pg. 4 and
reference on pg. 5 to inadequate bicyclist parking space (currently) and comment on bicyclists on the WFT
interfering with pedestrian patron circula on.
The emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan and especially the Waterfront Plan on pedestrians first, then bicyclists,
then motor vehicles, as the City’s transport mode priori za on in new development, really needs to be addressed
by the Farmers Market site plan. Once cyclists have arrived at the Market property from 3rd St, they need to be
separated from parking traffic – an extreme hazard for cyclists as they stop, go, back out, etc. This is o en done
with wider, traffic separated walkways with markings zoned to designate cyclist and pedestrian lanes.
It is an cipated that there will be increasing numbers of persons from the local neighborhoods, including the soon
to be built apartments adjacent to the Market, who will opt to bicycle or walk to the Farmers’ Market in response
to limited parking and decreasing ownership of cars in the walkable/bikeable Ithaca future.
Thank you for addressing this issue,
Shery Swink
321 N Albany St
Ithaca, NY
10/26/21, 4:29 PM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.04 1/1
Safe bike access can reduce car use at Farmers Market
Sheryl Swink <sns7@cornell.edu>
Tue 10/26/2021 4:11 PM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>
Hi Anya,
Addi onal thought/argument for bicycle circula on plan to forward to PBD board members re importance of
considering bicycle considera on in Farmers Market redevelopment plans:
While cars greatly outnumber bicycle and probably pedestrian arrivals at the Farmers Market, making bicycle
circula on into the Ithaca Farmers Market safer and more comfortable for cyclists by separa ng bikes and cars,
just as is the case with pedestrians, will encourage more use of alterna ve means for locals to get to the Market
and help to reduce parking conges on there and off-site.
Thanks,
Sheryl Swink
October 21, 2021
To: Planning and Development Board, City of Ithaca
I am writing in support of the Catherine Commons project for Collegetown and encourage you to
recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals that they grant the necessary variances to allow the project
to proceed. I am a former member of the P & D Board and longtime resident first of the City of Ithaca
and more recently of the Town.
Catherine Commons will replace a worn‐out section of Collegetown with attractive buildings and spaces
for people to sit and enjoy a pleasant streetscape. It will house several hundred people, mostly
students, whose search for apartment space would otherwise spread into surrounding neighborhoods.
It is within walking distance of Cornell University, negating the need for residents to bring more
automobiles to Ithaca. The developer already provides shuttle bus service from Collegetown Terrace
which can readily be used to serve residents of Catherine Commons who desire to ride. In every
respect, this project is consistent with the positive changes we have seen in recent years in downtown
Ithaca which provide for greater urban density in a pleasant and attractive setting. It is not consistent
with other development projects in Ithaca in that the developer is not asking for, nor dependent upon,
tax‐abatements.
The accommodation the City needs to make for the project to proceed as designed is to grant a height
variance. The difference between the overall height allowed by right and the height requested by the
project is on the order of 10 feet or less, depending on whether it is measured from the roof or the
structure surrounding the roof. I don’t think this will be especially noticeable to the person walking
along the street, especially given the sloping terrain. It certainly will not be noticeable as a drawback to
the overall improvement to the project area. The other issue with height is the number of stories called
for by the project. Since the additional stories can be built within the requested height and make the
street‐level seating areas and more aesthetic overall design of the buildings economically viable for the
developer, this is not only not a problem – it is an advantage, and allows for housing that many more
residents in walkable proximity to campus.
Thank you for your kind attention and for your volunteer service to Ithaca.
Steven Ehrhardt
109 Juniper Dr
Ithaca NY
10/26/21, 9:42 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 1/2
Fw: Catherine Commons Development Project
Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Tue 10/26/2021 9:33 AM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>; Nikki Cerra <ncerra@cityofithaca.org>
Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning
Department of Planning & Development
607-274-6557
From: John C. Gutenberger <jcg3@cornell.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 3:54 PM
To: Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Subject: Catherine Commons Development Project
City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
City Hall
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
October 25, 2021
Dear Planning Board members,
We are writing in support of the Catherine Commons mixed-use development project currently under
review by the Planning and Development Board. The proposed development will greatly enhance this
portion of Collegetown by replacing existing substandard wooden structures with new, safer housing
and commercial space along with much needed streetscape improvements. The project will also support
the City of Ithaca Collegetown Improvement Plan developed in the 1980s, the recommendations of the
Collegetown Visions Task Force and the subsequently adopted Collegetown Urban Plan and Conceptual
Design Guidelines and the Collegetown Area Form Districts.
We and our family have long ties and deep roots in Collegetown. We and our family owned and
operated Egan's Supermarket at 301 College Avenue from 1964 to1988, across the street from the
proposed Catherine Commons. We then built the Egan's College Square apartment building at 301
College Avenue. The Egan family first opened a grocery store at 403 College Avenue in 1936. We raised
our family in the Collegetown area two blocks away on Delaware Avenue and later a few blocks further
away in the Belle Sherman neighborhood.
We have seen many changes in the Collegetown area over the past many decades and welcome the
enhancements embodied in the Catherine Commons proposal. The 300 block of College Avenue was
once home to a full-service bank, drugstore, gas station, Collegetown Motor Lodge, Arnold Printing
Company, Honey Butter manufacturing facility, barbershop, a variety store and a furniture store, to name
a few activities that have disappeared from the fabric of this block.
The modern, safe housing and commercial components of the Catherine Commons proposal will help
restore this portion of Collegetown to its former glory and reactivate the vibrancy of the streetscape. We
10/26/21, 9:42 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 2/2
respectfully urge the Planning Board to join us in support of this proposal and this vital housing and
commercial sector of the Ithaca community.
Thank you for your consideration.
John and Mary Gutenberger
8 Arrowood Lane
Ithaca, New York 14850
10/26/21, 9:48 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 1/3
Catherine Commons public comment for planning board
John Zhang <johnzhang5326@gmail.com>
Mon 10/25/2021 4:25 PM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>; Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Dear members of the Planning Board and City Staff,
I am a resident of East Hill and I am writing to submit the following public comment on the Catherine
Commons project proposed by Coll-Cath Associates, LLC and Cook Coll, LLC. In its Application Report
cover letter, the applicant claims that Catherine Commons will advance the city’s vision for Collegetown
as expressed in the 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines. While some
aspects of the project may meet some of the goals articulated in the Urban Plan, at least one part of the
vision is missing: a desperately needed off-street mid-block pedestrian connection in the 300 block
where the project is located.
The Urban Plan acknowledged that
the topography and street layout in Collegetown mean that many desired pedestrian routes do
not coincide with streets. Small blocks have been recognized for some time in the transportation
planning field as conducive to walkability; the long block faces that are prevalent in Collegetown
have the opposite effect (pedestrians must frequently walk far out of the way to reach
destinations).
The challenges for pedestrians in Collegetown are numerous. One way pedestrians get around more
efficiently is by passing through blocks wherever a formal or informal path is present or can be created.
Due to the sheer size of many blocks, especially this block, pedestrians actually prefer to wind their way
through alleyways, parking lots, stairs, patches of weeds and backyards, rather than walking out of their
way to stay on the city-provided sidewalks. This reality was known to the Common Council when it
adopted the Urban Plan in 2009. The plan identifies one block in particular that would benefit from the
addition of a formal pedestrian connection:
Particularly, the “superblock” bounded by College Avenue, Dryden Road, Eddy Street and
Catherine Street acts as a significant impediment to efficient walking routes, and pedestrians
would benefit from more permeability in this block… Developers on this block and on other long
or wide blocks should be encouraged to plan sites to maximize within-block pedestrian
connections.
The Plan includes a map of the block in question. You will note that, as proposed, the Catherine North
project directly blocks and prevents the east-west pedestrian way that the Urban Plan envisions:
10/26/21, 9:48 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 2/3
The Urban Plan specifically called for “any proposed redevelopment of the superblock” to consider a
highly desirable mid-block pedestrian passage:
In conjunction with any proposed redevelopment of the “superblock” bounded by College Avenue
to the east, Catherine Street to the south, Eddy Street to the west and Dryden Road to the north,
opportunities should be explored, whenever possible, to establish the mid-block “pedestrian
through connections” illustrated conceptually in the “early concept / framework plan” on Page 3.2
of the 2008 Goody Clancy Plan & Guidelines. At the March 8, 2008 design workshop, the
Collegetown planning consultants emphasized how the addition of pedestrian passages (or
pedestrian and bike passages) within extra-long or extra-large Collegetown blocks could help
transform Collegetown into a much more pedestrian-friendly place. One key idea suggested by
the consultants, and depicted on a map they distributed at that meeting, was to introduce
pedestrian passages through what they called the “superblock.”
A more perfect opportunity to ensure that pedestrians will finally be able to traverse the superblock
safely and efficiently may never come along. The Catherine North project faces College Avenue and if a
pedestrian connection is not created through Catherine North or between Catherine North and 312
College Avenue, the ability for people to cross in an east-west direction on foot may be lost forever. The
Urban Plan could not have been clearer about the transformative potential that a well-designed formal
pedestrian connection would have for the residents of Collegetown and I hope you agree that now is the
time to seize that opportunity.
10/26/21, 9:48 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 3/3
One factor making the creation of a connection on the College Avenue side of the superblock even more
attractive is the existence of a partial connection on the Eddy Street side of the block. This partial
connection is called the “Collegetown Park Apartments” pedestrian passageway and it is a perfect
example of what is possible when developers give thought to the needs of the community and its
pedestrians. The passageway features a grand and inviting entrance and conveniently connects
pedestrians coming from Eddy Street and further down the hill with destinations in the mid-block and
vice versa. It is well maintained and highly visible. I would love to see what kind of convenient, attractive,
and safety-enhancing pedestrian connection the applicant could create at Catherine North and have it
connect to the partial passageway that already exists off Eddy Street. Another example of a Collegetown
pedestrian connection created by a developer is the “Collegetown Crossing” passage that conveniently
breaks up a very long block between College Avenue and Linden Avenue.
I urge the Planning Board to make the creation of a pedestrian connection a condition of approval of the
Catherine Commons project. The whole community will benefit greatly from such a connection and this
would be consistent with one of the important goals articulated in the Collegetown Urban Plan &
Conceptual Design Guidelines. Thank you for considering my comments.
Sincerely,
John Zhang
10/26/21, 10:21 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 1/2
Fw: Support for Catherine Commons Development
Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Tue 10/26/2021 10:14 AM
To: Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>
Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning
Department of Planning & Development
607-274-6557
From: John Novarr <jnovarr@twcny.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2021 8:03 AM
To: Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>
Subject: Fwd: Support for Catherine Commons Development
Lisa-----David should have sent this to you. Thanks—John
Begin forwarded message:
From: david beer <davidbeer6886@yahoo.com>
Subject: Support for Catherine Commons Development
Date: October 26, 2021 at 7:53:58 AM EDT
To: "dgrunder@cityofithaca.org" <dgrunder@cityofithaca.org>
Dear JoAnn and the City of Ithaca Planning Board,
As an interested property owner-neighbor of the Catherine Commons
development, I've been reviewing the submittal material for this development.
Although I was initially skeptical of the projects' size and massing, all things
considered, it seems to offer more "pluses" than "minuses" to the Collegetown
neighborhood. I especially appreciate the projects well conceived and developed
plans to improve the streetscape. In my opinion, Collegetown's aesthetics have
suffered from two factors that have been exacerbated in recent decades. Zoning
codes have allowed building construction to be too close to the street thereby
leading to narrow, unattractive sidewalks. These are functionally problematic and
aesthetically unattractive. The Catherine Commons development with its wide
sidewalks and plaza type spaces is an excellent feature that will improve the
pedestrian experience in Collegetown.
Additionally, routine maintenance of these public spaces has been lacking.
Whether it's the City's responsibility or the property owners, many areas of the
Collegetown commercial area lack basic housekeeping upkeep (litter and gum
removal, weed trimming, etc.) and repairs (replacement of broken paving bricks,
repair of benches). Novarr-Mackesey has a proven record of keeping the exterior
and grounds of their properties in excellent condition.
The competition of additional development in Collegetown always makes me
nervous but through the decades, the market has absorbed new units. I believe that
the competition is heathy and keeps all landlords on their toes.
I think that City approval of the Catherine Commons development is appropriate.
10/26/21, 10:21 AM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 2/2
David Beer
Member - Beer Properties LLC
607-280-5755
10/26/21, 1:17 PM Mail - Anya Harris - Outlook
https://outlook.office.com/mail/deeplink?popoutv2=1&version=20211018001.03 1/1
Letter of Support - Gregar Brous for Catherine Commons
Vicki Taylor Brous <vicki@ithacaflair.com>
Tue 10/26/2021 1:00 PM
To: Lisa Nicholas <LNicholas@cityofithaca.org>; Anya Harris <AHarris@cityofithaca.org>
Cc: Gregar Brous <gb8134@yahoo.com>
Hello Lisa and Anya,
Below please find a le er of support for the Catherine Commons project to be submi ed on behalf of GregarBrous to the Planning and Development Board mee ng this evening. Gregar would also like an opportunity tospeak at the Public Hearing.
Please confirm that this is received and that Gregar is able to speak via Zoom this evening.
Best regards, Vicki Taylor Brous
October 26, 2021
Planning and Development Board City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca NY 14850
Re: Catherine Commons, Collegetown
Dear Planning Board Members:
I am wri ng today to voice my support for Catherine Commons, a project by Novarr and Proujansky inCollegetown.
Our businesses, including Collegetown Bagels and Agava Restaurant, are located within and near to Collegetown.The construc on of the three mul -story buildings on the Catherine South Site including approximately 360 unitsof housing and 2600 square feet of commercial space will add vibrancy and density to the Collegetown district.
The Novarr and Proujansky team have demonstrated their commitment to quality development andprofessionalism. They understand that infrastructure improvements are needed within the Collegetown district,including landscaping and safe public spaces, and are aware of what it takes to grow the area into a year-roundcommunity. They also strive to help others appreciate the density, walkability, and private investment that isneeded to support the businesses that are located within the high rent area.
I wholeheartedly support the project and the variances that are required to move it forward. If you have anyques ons, please do not hesitate to contact me at 607-592-9773 or email gb8134@yahoo.com.
Best regards,
Gregar Brous Owner, Collegetown Bagels and Agava Restaurants
Vicki Taylor Brous
Owner & Consultant | Flair Strategic Communications
E: vicki@ithacaflair.com C: 607.280.4490
www.ithacaflair.com
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification."
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-6590
Graham Kerslick, Fourth Ward Telephone: 607-273 4620
gkerslick@cityofithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6432
October 26, 2021
Dear Planning & Development Board Members,
I write to you regarding item 6F on the agenda for your October 26th meeting: Site Plan Review -
Catherine Commons.
As you know after significant community engagement and diligent work from city staff over many years
the Collegetown Area Form Districts were approved by Council in March 2014, followed by approval of
the Collegetown Design Guidelines in February 2018. These efforts and our current regulations have
resulted in many innovative projects which have improved housing options for residents in the core of
Collegetown while preserving the character of surrounding residential neighborhoods.
The proposed Catherine Commons project has the potential to continue such progress by further
increasing housing options in Collegetown. However, the proposed project seeks an excessive number
of variances and will likely have a significant impact on two historic building adjacent to the project site.
The excessive variances sought will undermine public confidence in city’s ability to guide and regulate
development. It will also set alarming precedents for future projects. I urge the Planning Board to seek
revisions to the proposed project, especially reducing the height of the buildings on College Ave, which
will enable the project to move forward within the framework of our existing city zoning.
The impact of the height variances requested for buildings 1 and 3a on College Ave are consistently
minimized throughout the project application. Shadow studies (p24) ignore the benefits of mid-block
breaks between existing buildings which provide light and views from College Ave. Views of West Hill
are focused on Catherine St (p63) and Cook St (p67) and do not adequately represent the significant
impact the buildings will have on streetscape of College Ave.
The inclusion of public space in large scale projects is an essential element in the city’s plans for
Collegetown. It is encouraging to see the rendering of such space integrated into the Catherine South
Building (3a) between Cook and Catherine (p14). However, the creation of such space does not require
the height variance requested. The recently completed Student Agencies Building has provided similar
attractive space within existing zoning regulations and building height requirements.
It is encouraging to read that the project team appreciates the City’s reconstruction of College Ave
including the burying of overhead utilities, which “will improve views of the Grandview House.” (p64).
This city project will also improve the views from this historic building. Sadly, the proposed project will
undo much of this improvement. I urge the board to take a critical look at the negative impact of the
project on the two neighboring historic buildings. (In the FEAF I believe question e. Does the project
site contain or is it substantially contiguous to……….? should be marked YES rather than NO - p43
since the buildings are listed in the following If Yes: section)
Thank you for your public service and your consideration of this issue.
Sincerely,