View Single Post
  #1338  
Old Posted Apr 22, 2011, 11:13 PM
Ex-Ithacan's Avatar
Ex-Ithacan Ex-Ithacan is offline
Old Fart Forumer
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Live in DC suburbs-Maryland
Posts: 21,649
Some reaction to the Collegetown urban plan, not surprising. I agree the parking problem is a sticky point. The land in C-town is as valuable as Manhattan (no, really). So any developer is going to need big bucks to build, especially in the core area. I wish the height limit would be raised about 30 to 40 feet so it would be economically feasible for developers to provide a few stories of parking on the lower level of a building to cover the parking requirements in the plan. This would also mean the city would not need to build another garage in the neighborhood. Anyway, just a thought.
From the Ithaca Journal:

Collegetown residents concerned with Urban Plan

10:14 PM, Apr. 20, 2011
Written by
Liz Lawyer


Collegetown residents said they have several concerns with the Collegetown Urban Plan and several revisions discussed Wednesday evening.

A public hearing on the zoning changes in the Collegetown area was held at a meeting of Common Council's Planning and Economic Development Committee. Residents had various and sometimes-conflicting concerns about how the plan deals with parking, beautification of the area and residents' interest in having a grocery store.

Several portions of the plan were up for a vote Wednesday. The committee voted unanimously to approve the establishment of form districts and rezoning of certain areas. Three other items were not voted on by press time. About two dozen people attended the meeting.

Kathy Yoselson said: "Instead of office space and retail space, we want a grocery store. That will help the community more than having upper floors of office space."

Ann Clavel passed out plastic bags of trash to the members of the committee before urging them to consider how the plan's parking component will affect her neighborhood.

"I'm asking you to delay any action on the transportation aspect of this plan," Clavel said. "You do not have a study. You do not have any information on how many people drive here."

Clavel said students bring cars with them to Ithaca, and limiting parking will not discourage that. Instead, students will park in surrounding neighborhoods, including hers.

"Not allowing (new residential buildings) to have offsite parking means students will be parking in my neighborhood," Clavel said. "You will be putting the trash I have given you symbolically into my neighborhood."

Ithaca resident Todd Saddler said requiring any parking for new developments, however, is counter-productive if the goal is to reduce driving in Collegetown.

"If we don't want more cars in Collegetown, why require more parking?" Saddler said. "We should eliminate the parking requirement and let the developer build the amount of parking that makes sense for their building."


Here's the link:

http://www.theithacajournal.com/apps...=2011104200405


Here's another take on the issue from the Cornell Daily Sun:

Collegetown Plan Raises Concern Among Residents

April 21, 2011
By Liz Camuti

Common Council members and Collegetown dwellers discussed four initiatives intended to implement the 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines, plus an amendment that would have increased the chances of a full-service grocery store opening in Collegetown, at the City of Ithaca Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting Wednesday night.

The discussion followed a public hearing on four proposals set forth by the City of Ithaca earlier this month.

The proposals — which seek to increase the density in the core of Collegetown while protecting the character and aesthetic quality of single-family homes in surrounding residential neighborhoods — will likely be voted on by the Common Council May 4.

The major point of contention for community members and the committee was the potential addition of grocery stores under the approved year-round community benefits in the proposed “height incentive district” in the core of Collegetown.

Under the height-incentive proposal, developers would be allowed to build to a maximum of 84 feet — 24 feet higher than the current maximum — in exchange for including year-round uses on at least one story. Currently hotels, Class A office space, and non-tax-exempt research and development space are included under such approved uses.

During the public hearing, Collegetown resident Graham Kerslick identified “the need for a full service grocery store as an essential component of any real community,” but one that “seems to have been ignored” in the plan.

“There needs to be a more creative and preemptive approach to this aspect of Collegetown’s vision,” Kerslick said.

Alderperson Jennifer Dotson (D-1st), who chaired the meeting, proposed the addition of a grocery store under the approved community benefits in the height incentive district proposal, but the amendment was unanimously rejected by the committee with a vote of 0-5.

Although she said that she was in support of the the grocery store “in concept,” Alderperson Ellen McCollister ’78 (D-3rd) said that she was skeptical of the feasibility of the amendment because of the decreased population in Collegetown over academic breaks.

“A grocery store would require a full-year community [in Collegetown] to ensure that it would not fail,” McCollister said “And then there is the question if a building would not be able to get a new certificate of occupancy if the store were to fail.”

Alderperson Dan Cogan M.S. ’95 (D-5th), a committee member, said he shared similar concerns about the ability of a building to renew its certificate of occupancy under the proposal, should the requirement to provide non-student uses fail to be met.

“We could say that once your certificate of occupancy ends, you have 90 days to provide us a better benefit over time,” Cogan said. “But with a lack of buildings being able to obtain a building permit, this could take years.”

Alderperson Svante Myrick ’09 (D-4th), was skeptical of whether building owners would have an incentive to renew their certificates of occupancy, should the grocery store fail.

“I lived in a building in Collegetown that hadn’t renewed its certificate of occupancy in 20 years, and when there was a fire in the basement we all got evicted,” Myrick said. “There are good, responsible developers and families in Collegetown, but I think there are far too many for whom this would be unreasonable.”

Cogan also added that before the amendment passes, “more studies need to be done to show that the grocery store will succeed.”

During the public hearing, many town residents also voiced concern over the proposed “parking overlay zone,” one of the four proposals stemming from the 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines. This proposal aims to reduce the number of cars in Collegetown by allowing developers to pay into a fund dedicated to transportation improvements in lieu of providing parking for their tenants.

Collegetown resident Anne Clavel J.D. ’77 passed out bags of trash to committee members in an attempt to convince committee members to “delay any action on the proposed transportation aspects of the plan.”

According to Clavel, by reducing the demands on landlords to provide parking for their tenants, students would resort to parking outside of single-family homes — passing the “trash of Collegetown” into her neighborhood.

“Ithaca, N.Y., is in the middle of nowhere … Most upper class students and graduate students drive by car,” Clavel said. “You can’t just wish cars away.”

The committee did not propose any amendments to the parking overlay zone during the action portion of the meeting.

here's the link:

http://www.cornelldailysun.com/secti...mong-residents


btw, here's a shot of the core of Collegetown (from Bing):

__________________
Get off my lawn you whippersnappers!!!!!
Reply With Quote