Planning Board Recap: Asteri project hits turbulence as Harold’s Square pushes back – The Ithaca Voice

ITHACA, N.Y. For the mixed-use Asteri Ithaca project, it was a rough meeting last night. Repeated push-back from its neighbors developing Harold's Square was enough to give the Planning Board pause on whether or not the large Downtown mixed-use project could move forward as proposed. Several other projects also went through the board's nearly five-hour meeting last night on their road to final approval.

For those who like to read the agenda alongside their recaps, the 281-page PDF can be found here.

Rather unusually, the first major item on the agenda this month was a Special Permit, which can be triggered for uncommon use considerations in certain property zones. In this case, a family living in their home on Belle Sherman's Eastwood Avenue, which is zoned for one-family and two-family homes, wanted to take an existing mother-in-law apartment at the rear of their house and rent it out as a studio apartment rental. One neighbor wrote in support of the couple, while three spoke or wrote against renting out the studio in-law unit, with one letter saying "(w)e are concerned about changing the family-friendly cul-de-sac into a space occupied by unknown individuals...which would not be in keeping with the intended neighborhood street feel and the safety of the residents."

The board disagreed. So long as the tenant lease mandated the tenant parked in the driveway, they were comfortable with the proposal. "Everybody has the intent of this being a nice neighborhood. We need housing in Ithaca...the board is favored towards accessory dwelling units in owner-occupied housing," said Planning Board member McKenzie Jones. The board briefly discussed the short form environmental review, passed it unanimously, and passed the Special Permit unanimously.

Next up were lot subdivision reviews - these are when property lots in the city, legally known as parcels, seek some kind of reconfiguration, either to be split up, reshaped or consolidated. These tend to move quickly through the board, because they aren't physical changes that trigger an in-depth review.

The only one before the Planning Board was 209 Hudson Street, covered last month in the Board of Zoning Appeals summary here. The state court has told the board they have to issue the subdivision because the city of Ithaca lost its court battle, twice, over what the judges felt was an "arbitrary and capricious" subdivision denial two years prior. The new lot to be carved off of the north side of 209 Hudson Street's double-lot would be used to build a new duplex, and the board was comfortable with the design of the duplex. The subdivision passed unanimously.

Next on the agenda is the Site Plan Review, where the review of new building proposals happens. In the interest of not pushing 5,000 words like last month, if you want a description of the steps in the project approval process, the "Site Plan Review Primer" is here.

Just a quick refresher, the Planning Board looks at sketch plans, declares itself lead agency for environmental review, conducts a review and declares negative (adverse effects mitigated) or positive (potential harmful impacts, needs an Environmental Impact Statement), while concurrently performing design review for projects in certain neighborhoods for aesthetic impacts. Once those are all good and done, they vote on preliminary site plan approval and, after reviewing a few final details and remaining paperwork, final site plan approval.

At the top of the agenda this month, was the City Harbor project, proposed by Lambrou Real Estate, Edger Enterprises and businesswoman Elizabeth Classen on the site of the former Johnson's Boatyard at 101 Pier Road. As previously detailed, the two-phase project consists of a restaurant, waterfront promenade and marina, and 156 market-rate apartments. A 60,000 square-foot medical office building for Guthrie Clinic is part of the project. Phase one would also rebuild Pier Road to include sidewalks, street trees, a fire engine turnaround, and new and improving parking areas. While the project team plans to partner with the city to rebuild the golf course clubhouse in phase two, almost all improvements in phase one are on private property, with the exception of some of the greenspace and reconfigured parking areas.

Tonight's meeting didn't have any votes scheduled, it was focused strictly on design review. Preliminary project approval was granted last month, but the board wanted some aesthetic tweaks as one of the stipulations prior to final site plan approval.

T.G. Miller's David Herrick walked the board through new perspective renderings, while HOLT Architect's Steve Hugo fielded questions on the architecture and floor plans for the mixed-use buildings, and Whitham Planning and Design's Kate Chesebrough addressed questions on the landscaping. The board has brief questions regarding signage, trash collection, and whether three large willow trees will be maintained (two will be removed after an arborist noted they weren't healthy, but hundreds of new trees will be planted on-site.)

On the materials side, the waterfront buildings will use a rough-cut stone on the ground floor, with standing seam metal panels in a few different sizes and colors (Ascot White and Dark Bronze), and wood decking panel accents. Hugo said the design was inspired by the Sagamore Hotel in Lake George, which maybe it is, obliquely. Mechanical equipment is hidden in a "bathtub" concealed by the roof. Planning Board Chair Robert Lewis noted that it was a lot of metal on the outside, but it was well-differentiated. The project team is working on meeting the last of the preliminary final approval stipulations, and it sounds like July could be the final meeting for City Harbor.

Next up on the list for this month's review was the 11-story Asteri Ithaca Green Street Garage redevelopment at 120 East Green Street. The Asteri proposal by The Vecino Group includes a 218-unit low-moderate income apartment building with commercial space on the lower levels, and an expanded publicly-accessible garage next door, which will grow to seven floors with an additional 241 parking spaces (350 total).

As noted by city planners, the lower three floors of the U-shaped building will house amenities, a 49,000 square-foot conference center and a small amount of retail space. The Cinemopolis Plaza will keep its current public pedestrian passage between the Commons and Green Street, with lighting, signage, art, and landscaping improvements, though Cinemapolis will have to temporarily relocate for part of the construction period. The Vecino Group and their partners are also requesting consideration of a City Hall Plaza next door on the small parking lot between the project site and City Hall. That plaza would feature a large outdoor gathering spot with paving, lighting, landscaping, and furnishings while retaining a limited number of parking spaces.

This month, the board intended to go through some additional sections of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) Part 3, which is a detailed report encapsulating impacts and proposed mitigation, and the board awaited more comments as part of the public hearing they held open from last month. From the agenda filings, it appears the general contractor for the project will be Welliver out of Montour Falls.

Vecino had at least nine people in on the Zoom meeting, able to speak on various aspects of the Asteri project. On the public hearing side of the discussion, a few local residents co-signed a letter advocated for the project and lauding its walkable location and affordability. The owners of the Cayuga Green Apartments across the street sent a letter opposing the plan, citing the impacts on Cinemapolis (who they have a sub-lease with), parking, and said the project was interfering with their legal rights. The owners of the Yellow Deli once again expressed concern about parking and impacts on loading zones for their business. Brent Bossard of Cinemapolis was taken aback by the Cayuga Green letter, and made clear that Cinemapolis was fine with the project, contrary to what Cayuga Green wrote, but Bossard did encourage the city to include Cayuga Green in the project conversation.

There were also several call-in speakers, mostly representing Harold's Square, who have been generally opposed to a neighbor blocking the views of their new apartments and taking up a lot of parking in the Green Street Garage. With all fairness, the buildings are close to each other (as shown in the video still above), and Harold's Square's developers are feeling anxious about two more similar-sized buildings a stone's throw from their brand new tower - relevant aside here, they struggled for years to get construction financing. The Harold's Square developers had submitted one of the four proposals (and the smallest proposal) to redevelop the garage in 2018, but it fell short in the scoring and was not selected by the IURA.

Chesebrough noted that Asteri is a U-shape purposely to provide light and air circulation for Harold's Square, and after meeting with the board for Design Project Review earlier, they are willing to consider pulling back 4.5 feet from the north side of Asteri's tower portion by reconfiguring the north face, deleting the balconies and some amenity space. City Planning Director noted concerns regarding the facade on the north and west side near street level, and Department of Public Works truck access at the rear.

"I'm a little bit torn. The visualization of the two buildings, trying to imagine the proposed building being there....I think my gut reaction is that the buildings are too close, or too tall. A part of me is feeling like this is a little too much and these need to be a little further apart. Part of what's troubling about this to me is that it does if you build a tall building and a second building comes along and has to be pushed back, that too is troubling to me in terms of property rights," said board member Garrick Blalock.

His colleague Mitch Glass largely agreed. "I'm also a little bit conflicted about this. 218 affordable housing units downtown is a great opportunity. The tower elements feel close. I appreciate the setback at terrace level, but I wonder if there are ways to set it back further. I'm troubled by what Harold's Square is pushing for. In terms of the parking, I'm concerned by the counts Jamie (Gensel, of the Harold's Square team) providing for parking, they seem too high...I feel like their parking comments are overstated, but I do feel a trip generation report is needed."

"I could get on board with supporting the height variance if you pull it back more," said board member Emily Petrina. "I'd like to see what it would look like at 25 feet (set back from Harold's Square)." Petrina and board member C. J. Randall both suggested it may be time to remove the conference center from the project, given the space concerns as well as COVID.

Chair Lewis summarized the wobbly position the Asteri team now seemed to find itself in. "You've heard a lot of concern about the spacing, you've heard some concerns about heights, and for my piece, when this project first came before the board, I liked the sense of life that was in the architecture, but as the design has developed, I'm not seeing that as much. I'm seeing something that is much more sterile. I'm sensitive to the trade-offs, taking back the corners while removing 4.5 feet. But I don't see how you can get at some of these concerns without deleting units. Maybe this can be resolved through cladding and articulation, but I don't see it." Lewis further encouraged the project team to show them what the project would look like without any zoning variances.

Project architect Bruce Adib-Yazdi said that the setback is largely driven by the ballroom of the conference center, and shrinking that as well as shrinking the number of affordable units would be the trade-off. Lewis said that they need to be shown what would be lost if the variances aren't allowed, so that they understand what happens and what exactly the negative trade-offs are, and help them decide whether to support the variances.

All in all, it didn't seem like anyone was pleased as the project's time wrapped up and the project's design seems much more uncertain. The discussion didn't go well for Vecino last night, and it seems like a major redesign will be needed, likely leading to the deletion of some apartments in the tower, which is 100% affordable housing.

One thing that did become clear after the discussion; the board was angry that Harold's Square hijacked a half-hour of the Public Hearing. Lewis seemed especially annoyed, describing the scene as developers "crying" about other developers. So while the Harold's Square developers might have gotten their desired pushback on Asteri, the board doesn't plan to let this commandeering of their meeting happen again.

Developer Jeff Rimland's 13-story proposal on the eastern end of the garage came back to the board to continue its public hearing and go through Design Review on the architecture and aesthetics. Unlike earlier incarnations, the latest design for the mixed-use building proposed for 215 East State Street no longer builds into the Rothschild Building and displaces the shops and shop-owners along the Commons, but went back to the initial proposal which builds atop a rebuilt eastern third of the garage.

Rimland's proposal rebuilds the eastern third of the garage with two levels of public parking (about 130 spaces), one ground-level private parking area for the building's occupants (34 spaces) and 10 floors of residential with approximately 200 apartments. A residential lobby would front Green Street, as well as an access hallway between the shops lining the Commons. Due to a professional conflict, Chair Lewis recused himself from the discussion, with Jones taking over as chair.

Project engineer James Trasher of CHA Inc. walked the board through the latest drawings, including program space plans. Trasher stressed they did negotiate with the Marriott for a mutually-agreeable amount of space between the buildings (30 feet). One letter was received in public comment, from Todd Kurzweil of the Sunny Days with various concerns, which sparked Jeff Rimland to remark on the letter as "slanderous", but there's also no love lost between those two.

Architect John Abisch highlighted the extensive accent lighting for safety and to draw attention to the lobby, and the use of corten steel on the facade. The materials and window trims are changed up along different faces of the building to make it not seem so "monolithic", and the accent lighting on the architectural bump-outs would be dimmable so that it's not overly obtrusive on tenants and neighbors.

Generally, the planning board's response was favorable to the project. Board member Glass said he loved the lighting and appreciated the articulation of the facade, but encouraged an enlivening of the garage facade, more work on making the windows articulated, and that tasteful signage would be welcome. His colleague Petrina liked the overall design, but had questions on planters and the unit layouts for apartments facing the taller central wing of the Green Street garage, to which Abisch said they are working with Vecino on it.

"Every time I see this project, I like it more and more, it's looking fantastic," said Blalock. "Is the Commons entrance meant to be a shortcut entrance for residents to the apartments, or is it a public entrance?...Is the entrance from the Commons meant to blend in, or look like a separate building?"

"It is a public way through, that is the plan. But as far as creating that dynamic between the tower and the Commons entrance, we saw that as a way to draw the tenants back into the structure," said Abisch. "We can go through a little further at the (Project Review Committee) meeting." Trasher later clarified it would be controlled public access, given potential security issues for the Rothschild Building's commercial tenants after hours.

"This is really coming along nicely, I really appreciate the materials you're using and the colors, it feels contextual. I hope for a positive resolution with you, Jeff and your tenants, best of luck with those issues," added Jones.

There is still much discussion to come on this and Asteri, as a special meeting is being planned in the second half of July to meet with those two project teams to coordinate plans and mutual concerns of the board on parking, aesthetics and other related matters.

Returning to the Planning Board this month after a brief hiatus were the mixed-use additions for the Aeroplane Factory on Taber and Brindley Streets, previously covered here. The project is proposed to be built in two phases. The first phase will consist of a four-story building with office space and retail on the first floor, office and residential on the second and third floors, and residential on the fourth floor, for a total of five apartments, 1,100 square feet of new retail space and approximately 6,000 square feet of new office space. Site improvements will include two new curb cuts, an outdoor patio (which sounds great for a warm summer evening like last night's meeting), landscaping, and a sidewalk and tree lawn along Taber Street. Phase 2 will include a 2,000 square-foot addition on the building closest to Taber Street.

This month, the board was set to vote on the "Determination of Environmental Significance", the likely negative declaration of State Environmental Quality Review that would mean all adverse impacts are effectively mitigated, and the project can be considered for preliminary site plan approval.

Like the project itself, the project team was a little smaller for the meeting, consisting of developer Jerry Dietz and the architect, Jason Demarest. Demarest led the board through the latest submission, and not a lot had changed, with some modest changes to the sidewalk and stormwater plans based on the recommendations of city engineers.

Being a fairly modest proposal, and with the board previously expressing support for the project and any proposed mitigation, the last part of the environmental review was uneventful, with only minor concerns about up-lighting and soils. But the vote to issue a declare a negative declaration passed unanimously, allowing the project to pursue preliminary approval next month.

New to the board this month was Cornell University's plan to renovate the freshmen woman's dormitory on their North Campus, Balch Hall. The details on the renovation for that nearly 100-year-old, 167,000 square-foot building were covered in the Voice earlier this month here.Renovations that affect the exterior of the building include replacing the windows, rebuilding and/or replacing gutters, downspouts, and minor exterior walls to allow for new waterproofing and facade work, and installing four roof bulkheads and dormers to accommodate new elevators. On the outside will be numerous landscaping and accessibility improvements, including new stairs, ramps and lighting.

Frankly, going into this there are two reasons to expect this project review to be smooth sailing. For one, Cornell's campus zoning is extremely flexible and allows just about anything the university could reasonably want so long as it directly supports the school's operations. For two, this is just a renovation with few exterior changes, so it doesn't usually receive the same level of scrutiny as a new build.

Cornell Project Manager Ram Vankat and university architect David Cutter presented the plans to the board. Vankat stressed the need to make the building ADA accessible, more environmentally sound (going for LEED Gold Certification), and address deferred maintenance now that brand new dorms were underway. The only area with any real controversy was Cornell's choice to replace the original steel-trim windows with steel replica aluminum windows. This was opposed by Historic Ithaca's Susan Holland, as well as a Rutgers professor who specializes in historic preservation. To give an idea of how quickly Cornell expects this to move, they hope to have approval by August, and plan for a one-year renovation period starting in the summer of 2021.

Board member Blalock encouraged a historic placard somewhere, and Glass expressed concerns over the window issue, noting that they would really, truly have to be replicas in form to be appropriate for Balch. Petrina generally supported the elevators dormers, but expressed hope to reduce the size of them if possible. She also supported the aluminum windows, but wanted to see more imagery of them to ensure they were a good fit.

"Those dormers are quite slick, and I hope those windows end up looking good," said chair Lewis. "It looks like you have a pretty tight timeline for approval, I hope that's feasible." The board quickly moved to declare themselves lead agency for environmental review, and the project will be back before the board next month.

As for the board itself, they're planning a working/training retreat for June 30th. Although the word "retreat" is in there, it's really just a day-long meeting to talk about policies and how to best utilize their roles on the board to advance the city's urban planning and economic goals.

See original here:
Planning Board Recap: Asteri project hits turbulence as Harold's Square pushes back - The Ithaca Voice