Planning and Development Board - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. Uh this is the September 23rd meeting of the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board. The meeting is called to order at 6:06 p.m. Uh welcome to everyone who came in person and online. And can we go around with introductions, please? Jenny, I'll start with you. Jenny Cycliff, board member. Max Feifer, board member. Elizabeth Goden, board member and vice chair. Nikki Sarah, environmental and landscape planner and staff to the board. Emily Patrina, chair of the board. Lisa Nicholas, director of planning and development and staff to the board. Planner.

Thank you. We have emergency exits at the front of the room and the rear of the room. In case of emergency evacuation, we are to take one of two exits and wait at the trees on the same side of the street on South Kaunga and Green Street. We are not to cross Green Street unless absolutely necessary. Those with restricted mobility in the event of emergencies, it is best to move to one of the stairwells and first responders will arrive to aid you. In the event of other emergencies, you'll be notified at that time. We want everyone to be aware of their surroundings and offer to help when it is not to your own detriment as you are your own best advocate. Uh women's restrooms are located on the first and third floors and men's restrooms are on the second and fourth floors. Um we have do we have any changes to the agenda tonight?

We do not.

And we don't have any minutes to approve so we can move directly into public comment. This is a time for the public to speak about any item for which there is not a public hearing tonight. And we have no public hearings tonight. So, if anybody wishes to speak, now is the time. Members of the public will each have three minutes to speak. You'll be given a one-minute warning before your time is up. We do accept and encourage comments in writing. And as a reminder, this is not a question and answer session with the board. We are here to listen to your comments and take them under advisement. If you have specific questions, you can direct them to staff via email. I will now open public comments. Is there anybody in the waiting room online or here in person wishing to speak? Okay. Yes, please. Can you let them in?

Hi, Cheryl. Can you hear us? Okay, you're muted, Cheryl. Yes, thank you. Hi. Okay, we can see you and hear you. So, go ahead with your public comment. Thank you.

My comment is regarding the uh subdivision for the W's edge. Um, and I know others have expressed concern and I continue to have concern about the treatment or plans for the north part of the north subdivision that will not be developed immediately. Um, I know there's going to be some presentations tonight, so hopefully there's some good some good thoughts coming out of that, but perhaps not on this in this regard. I took a quick trip over on my bike to refresh myself more with what it's like over there, and there is a lot more asphalt and it comes closer to the edges of the fencing than I had recalled. But I would like to given especially that the changes to the um public amenities along the inlet side of the new development to the south and to the loss of the affordable housing. I'm really concerned that we do see something happen with that uh land that may be vacant for some time. Having been um involved in the community gardens nearby for many many years, uh I know that you know we can end up with properties that are vacant, sometimes maintained, sometimes not. And that one actually had grass and was meadowike at least, whereas this is not something we visually want to look at from the trail or the farmers market that as it is. So I saw some and I know Whidam and their planning group is really good at coming up with some creative ideas for and solutions. What I saw was that although it's very narrow along the trail as you approach the farmers market, there is a width within the on the inside of the fence that could if the fence was pulled back could be planted. Um and I would like to see the fence maybe pulled back at least and and softening in some manner along the edges. There's also an area at the entry

to the property. Um, as I look through the gate, I can't tell where the parking will be and the subdivision line is. I saw some pink flags stuck along. Um, but it looks like there's a fairly wide area there also that is not hardreated. And my You have one minute remaining.

Okay. So um and then there's the planning board actually for the gardens once was suggesting we could put um containers and things on asphalt parking lots and that would be another thing very large containers perhaps so they require less watering and maintenance but groupings of something like that would also be a way of softening some of the edges there. And ultimately there's also the possibility um there could be funding provided by the developers in as a benefit in lie of being able to do something there that would be for plantings along the farmers market edge of the fence. They are seeking money to do more plantings um and perhaps if the fence was pulled back along the trail edge um for plantings on the city property side of that. So those are my comments. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Uh, anyone else am in the waiting room? No. Okay. And seeing no one here in person. Uh, any board members wish to respond to our comment tonight? No. Okay. Oh, good. Thank you, Cheryl. I think it's nice to hear from the community on this project as well. Agreed. Thank you.

Okay. Um, as we have no one else, uh, public comment is now closed. Now we can move into reviewing projects for subdivision review. Our first project is the W's Edge, 683rd Street. We're going to be looking at um the subdivision in conjunction with design review. So, we have Ian. Hi, welcome up to the hot seat. Okay. Good evening everyone. Um, I'm Ian Hunter and with me online we've got Crystal Ross from Whim Planning and Design. Hopefully somebody can mute out. It might be yours. Is it yours?

No, I'm not on the Zoom. Okay. I heard some reverb, too. Yeah. Sorry. I'll try that again. Sounds great now. No. Oh, it's Brian. Okay.

Should be good.

Testing. Testing. One, two, three. Okay, great. Crystal Ross, Windham Planning and Design. Eric Colbear, ECA, uh are with me online. Um for the first item on tonight's agenda, as Emily said, you know, Crystal will be presenting uh an updated subdivision map. But before we get into that, uh I wanted to start by saying that our team collectively uh have been working to propose what we think are some elegant design solutions that address the questions and concerns uh that we've heard from you, the board. And while some of the documentation that we present may appear closer to sketches than final plans, that in part is intentional. And that our hope here tonight, we're not asking for any approval. Instead, we'd like to have kind of a collaborative conversation with the board about some of the options that we're presenting. Um, and we hope to do that before the change is being finalized rather than doing it in the opposite order. Um, and so we look forward to having a a fruitful discussion this evening. and I'll let Crystal take it away.

Thanks, Ian. So, first on this e this evening with this month's submission, we are providing an updated subdivision plat map that was prepared by Fiser, which reflects a simplified approach that we previously reviewed with city staff and confirmed as compliant with the city of Ithaca uh zoning administrator. We've made just one small revision and that was really to simplify just the geometry around the intersection of the lot line in the middle with the existing sewer easement. We'll jump now to some of the design changes. We've provided an updated site plan rendering illustrating the changes we are proposing to the pro project resulting from both the changes in the development team as well as the comments we've received directly from the planning board. We'll spend some time looking through each of these items individually, but the overall goal, as Ian mentioned, is to improve the site plan by creating additional street level interest on the ground floor and to optimize the circulation experience on the site, both from vehicular and pedestrian experience. So, first thing um you'll notice is that there has been a reduction in the southeast building footprint. If you recall, this was the mixed income building that has now um been adjusted. However, the um square footage of the footprint will be reduced from this 9,438 ft to 7,748 square ft. um to accommodate the reduction in the footprint but also still maintain the 40 units that we previously proposed and are maintaining. There will be a height increase in the building from four stories to five stories but still maintaining within the allowable uh zoning height. Additionally, you'll see we have shifted

this building to the west and that is for a couple reasons. You can see this dark black dotted line. This is the most current flood plane that we received over the summer. And so we wanted to shift the building quarter out of that and give it a little bit of a buffer from that zone. Additionally, this um about 30 ft here will help us to facilitate getting some of the utilities that we'll need for the new project through this area. We're pulling you back to one of the visualization viewpoints that we had shown previously and just wanted to highlight for you that the trail this this is the previous design and we haven't updated this but the trail as the previous design was planned to only be about 8 ft from the facade of the southeast building. In the new plan, we're now looking at closer to 22 feet. So, we're providing much more of a buffer from the trail from those ground floor units. Additionally, I mentioned to you that the height would have to increase from the four stories it was to five stories. So, this was the previous elevation that we had shown with you. Um, we wanted to just illustrate to you that not only um or sorry, the height may change, but the design elements and the primary ele elements of the building that were previously reviewed are not expected to change dramatically. the location obviously of some of these openings and um will be adjusted to accommodate some of the interior programming that will be reflected on the ground floor. Oh, sorry. So, one of the other changes you'll notice from the previous plan on the left to the new proposed revision on the right is the concept of expanding and relocating the retail commercial use

within the southwest building to this northwest corner. To refresh everyone's memory, here's what we had proposed before in plan view. And then again, we've got the perspective rendering that we had shown to the to the planning board. Um the micro retail was along this western facade fronting the CGA waterfront trail and we remain convinced that this would be successful. However, we have heard comments from the planning board regarding its location and access to both the parking lot as well as the trail and concerns about size and the the you know viability of all of that. So the project team has you know continued to review this and presenting to this evening presenting you an alternative solution that addresses those concerns. Um shown here is a proposal that would roughly triple the size of the propo of the available retail space by booming its location to this northeast or sorry northwest corner um and moving the tenant space further to the south. So you can see previously we had tenant amenities lounge fitness center that will get pushed to along the um western facade. We just wanted to note that in either option parking on the ground floor will remain screen from the CGA waterfront trail. Um there was a question about access and we just wanted to reiterate access will not change from the CUGA waterfront trail. There is a accessible route here near this number four as well as stairs that have direct access into the plaza space and start to provide access to this relocated um retail space on the corner. I just wanted to point to that in this visualization as well. We've got the accessible route here and then again the more direct route with the stairs um in the in the background there

with the retail here on the ground floor in this northwest corner. This is going to um provide, you know, more outdoor seating adjacent to the plaza space where we can kind of extend that inner outer relationship with the retail space with the more um larger space here at the end of the plaza retail. We just want to hit on, you know, part of the community comprehensive plan waterfront guidelines is activation alonging the waterfront trail. And while the internal programming of this building might change, we're still activating it with a different use. So the site design will remain conceptually the same, but with some just minor adjustments to coordinate again with some of those internal openings and doorways that will shift with the building program. As part of as we were kind of looking at this relocation of the retail, it started to have us look a little bit more closely at the vehicular circulation. And so we have reconfigured it in a way to try to simplify the design as well to create more of a single primary intersection here. You can see before it was a little bit more um different entry points into this access space as opposed and additionally as the muse. So, we've tried to align some of these driveways to minimize those intersections as well as facilitate a cleaner interaction here. In addition, in addition to reducing the opportunities for pedestrian vehicular conflicts, as I just outlined, we've also considered potential additional parking overflow for the expanded retail space. So, if you recall, um, previously we had shown retail parking would be in the muse. We're now looking at expanding that down this muse further and as well as considering this space over here as an overflow parking option for that.

Additionally, with kind of aligning these um the drive aisles here, it also provides us a clear point to provide um controlled access for the residential parking as well. You'll also see the internal pedestrian crosswalk going back to that safety has been relocated further away from this intersection as well to provide a more safer interaction for folks. In doing all of this and um a little bit adjustment to the southwest building, the parking count has changed just minor. We had about 215 parking spaces in the previous plan. We're now looking at about 220 spaces. Looking at the previously shown viewpoint, um we just wanted to show you know before this will be now be this intersection will be a little bit more simplified, easier navigation for vehicles as well as pedestrians. Um we we also wanted to highlight here the architectural punched openings on the ground floor. We have looked at alternatives for the design treatment of those and Eric will speak to that in detail in just a second here. Um but again there might be some site adjustments and a little bit of program change but the major design elements of the building that you have previously reviewed have not changed. Eric, do you want to talk about the the screening options?

Yes, thank you Crystal. So good evening uh me madam chairman person and members of the board. We're looking at you know one of the concerns that was expressed earlier by the board was the concern about visibility to parking and since we um you know the the soil conditions don't really enable us to have underground parking because of the water table. So we're trying to ac accommodate some of those on the ground floor and the in these legs of the building and um in order to you know there's a necessity to have ventilation to a certain extent in the garage areas. Um so to provide a separation between the plaza and the parking itself. Our recommendation is to uh create a kind of perforated screen that is dense enough so that uh one will see an image but not actually look into the parking itself and then also be able to provide the required ventilation. So we're looking at a couple different options. There's one that's kind of a more of an abstract uh pattern and then the one that is on the right hand side of this document has a kind of treelike form. We're also um the owner came up with a very smart um option that we might want to show you the next time where there's a view kind of looking up at Tiganic Falls and an abstraction of that could also be used as a way you know screening it so that in a similar way it has kind of a an abstraction to it. um something like that would would be able to enhance the the ground floor area where we have the parking. Thank you.

Thanks, Eric. Um I'll just add too that I think that this approach really starts to improve the the visual activation of this northern facade along that muse um center street. Um, we realized that we were just given the neg negative declaration for environmental significance. Um, and so we wanted to confirm some of the following that were very key elements to that review. So the proposed updates would not increase the total number of unit count as proposed previously. It will still remain the 200 that's allowable. The southeast building is proposed to increase in height to five stories to achieve the reduction in its footprint. The respective unit counts of the two buildings would also remain unchanged. 160 in the southwest and 40 in the southeast. An increase in the size of available commercial space, retail space in the project of up to 3 4,000 square ft would not increase the previously reviewed trip generation for the project. So that was one thing is that we had the traffic engineer confirm that this would not have an impact. The estimated peak shared parking demand also remains unchanged. Um both um the trip generation and the parking demand was provided in a memo with um sorry provided in a memo from pass in our submission this month as well regarding um the interterm use of the northern parcel. The applicant intends to continue to use it as a secured maintenance and operation hub for the management of the other properties that they own in the city of Ithaca. Um, following the board's request that the feasibility of an alternative use be explored, the applicant has reached out to their insurance broker. And after

speaking to both the current carrier and then subsequently other potential carriers, the applicant was informed that if any portion of this existing access control is removed from the site, the existing coverage will be terminated. the applicant has not been able to locate another provider willing to provide coverage for this. So, in response um to the planning board's inquiries regarding intended future use of the the northern parcel um the project team has prepared a conceptual sketch illustrating a potential second phase to help address some of the board's concerns. Oh, sorry. So, in response, um, I'll just hit on some of these main features. We in phase two intend to complete the internal muse that leads to the central plaza and the waterfront space, creating a nice really public realm transition and highlighting on the end point of the water there. We also see potential opportunity as well to continue the commercial and retail space along the waterfront edge. Additionally, you'll see the intention to include the wateride amenities both for pedestrian or boating and pedestrian docks will be part of that future phase. While it's not included or intended, this plan is not intended to be included as part of the site plan review of the proposed project. We too obviously do not wish to see this site remain as is and look forward to progressing the design on a secondary emergency access point or progressing the design once a secondary emergency access point is secured. Thank you. Well, is there any questions now that the board may have?

Great. Thank you, Crystal, Eric, and Ian. Jenny, would you like to start with some comments?

Sure. Thanks so much, Crystal. Um, it's been really, you know, I missed last month and so it's fun to see some of these updates. Um, I I think that a restaurant or a retail space there will be great. Um, I feel committed to frequenting it many times now that we have really um discussed how we think important this is. Um, you know, I I um see what else did I judge in? Oh, yeah. really I was thinking too how I really think that that will sort of spill out really nicely into sort of the piaza space that you have created and especially I know in some of your earlier presentations you talked about having that as like popup event space and food trucks and things like that and I think having a retail space that's adjacent really kind of um will contribute to that in a really positive way and can make that those popup ideas sort of even more vibrant. Um yeah, the outdoor seating I think that is wonderful. Um, I think that would be really great and I and I do hope that we get the chance to work with you on other micro retail projects in the future because I do think micro retail is a really fun a fun thing in the right in the right spot. Um, I have a couple of thoughts on the northern parcel, but maybe we can come back to that.

Um, I don't know. You could do it now maybe.

Okay. I guess I'm I'm curious about the possibility of some of the components that you don't maybe necessarily need to wait on access for like the boating docks or also I think we had talked or maybe I've just talked about sort of drawing the the um the line to the farmers market back a little bit and then developing that area with some additional benches in the interrum. Um, and just sort of would be curious to hear what your thoughts are on that or if those things are just too cost prohibitive at this point or I mean it does seem like the docks, the boating docks and kind of activating that part of the waterfront is within the realm of possibility at least in terms of the way we're looking at the subdivision. I think

so. And I think as with our initial proposal so many months ago now, our our intent is to activate the water side of the waterfront trail eventually. I think unfortunately from a feasibility standpoint with a reduced project of only 200 units, we can't make the numbers work in terms of making that additional commitment at this time. Um, what Crystal was talking about with regard to insurance is tied up in this desire to expose some additional part of that site to public access. And what the insurers are really reluctant to do is take on any additional liability that comes with reduced access control. And so, as you heard, our current carrier has threatened to cancel the insurance if we take any portion of the fence down. Um, and we said, "Okay, can you give us a different policy that would allow us to open up some public access?" And the answer from that carrier and all of the ones that our broker has spoken to is unfortunately no. And I like I if we can't

So that includes even if you pulled back three feet. I I Yes. Okay.

Yes. I I think that you know there's obviously a gray area in terms of how contiguous that space is to the property that we're developing. Right. And we feel pretty confident that, for example, that green strip that's on the other side of the muse is something that we can roll up into a policy that covers the project as a whole. But when you're talking about something that's remote from the from the development or what's being developed, I think that's where you get into a situation where it's not access controlled, it's not actively patrolled, it's just too much liability for us to find a carrier for. Okay. Um, my last question. Can we put a nicer fence?

I think that's a legitimate question. Okay. Yeah, let's let us talk internally about Okay, great. Does it have barbed wire on it right now? It does. Yeah, that's a great question. Yeah. And it's interesting in talking to Tim Lo about that fence and the barbed wire. That was specifically something that the DOT required the city do in giving them the easement for the waterfront trail. So, it was the DOT, I guess, that really wanted that barbed wire.

I mean, you could still put a nice wooden fence that still has barbed wire on the top. I think if if you feel like it's a security issue, but you know, it could be there's opportunity for community murals or something else to kind of make it look nice, I think, while it sits in the interim would be interesting to consider. Thank you, Ann. Thanks, Jenny. Max, I

I'll stick on that and then get back to some of the design changes. So, I think that um so I understand the insurance problem and it's the issue of public access that's the big problem. Um in the interim though, I think what the board has been talking about is kind of the appearance of this if if there's an extended period when it's not developed, right? And so, what can you do to dress it up? So Jenny's idea about the fencing I think is is an important one to look at. I think when we had the public comment earlier today, you know, some kind of dressing up in terms of, you know, some pots or plantings or of some kind around the perimeters to at least make the area um more presentable than than it is now, right? In terms of kind of looking like an abandoned space. And so I I think we should explore some of that. And you know, and that takes into account not having public access there, right? Could still kind of work around the perimeter a little bit uh in ways that are helpful and also on the side on the farmers market side might be nice as well. So, so just to keep thinking about that, I think that would be maybe a way to get to address some of the concerns that have been raised here about uh leaving that space undeveloped for some time. Um, I had just a couple of questions uh in terms of the redesign uh that you have proposed. I think I like kind of some of the changes that you're thinking about and I think they're working pretty well. I have a do have a couple of questions. Uh, one is that I I really like that if you're expanding the retail space that you have additional some additional parking for the retail and so the the overflow parking um was interesting idea for me. Uh, one thing that wasn't clear for me from the presentation was what the pedestrian access uh, would be to the retail space from the overflow of parking and and it if there are any u safety considerations

or access considerations there that you've taken into account, Max, I can point to it on the screen, but we do have a sidewalk both on both sides of this entrance drive as you come in and then we're providing that internal pedestrian crossing kind of bringing folks on foot to this pedestrian plaza and then up and around to the retail through the muse. There's a at least a 5-ft walkway along this northern facade of the southwest building.

Okay, good. I think that I think it's important that that access be clear and easy for uh possible people. Then the other um other thing I wanted to know is with the change in thinking about the retail space was there any change uh in thinking about um the plaza and in particular I was uh curious if there had been any change in thinking before you had some access to that by vehicles for some some limited purposes. Uh what's the thinking about the uh traffic and that and that plaza now? You did mention that there'd be expanded um you know space outside for people to sit.

Max, I think the intent is to remain the same as the previous design, right? There's enough space here to facilitate deliveries, Amazon vehicles, those size trucks. Um in terms of servicing if this ends up being a food and beverage, that's something we'll have to consider as we work through the design. Yeah, there might be some safety considerations there if there's people and there's seating outside. That's just one thing.

Oh, there is um there is ballards around the plaza every six feet. Yep. Yep. And there um you know every other three are lit too as well to provide additional safety at night for pedestrians. So my final uh point and and is one that that um is a little critical in the sense that so I like the retail space. I think it's actually makes it more viable to expand it and I I think the types of uses that you're proposing are kind of interesting. You know, they're nice there. I continue to be uh a bit skeptical about the economic viability of businesses there, retail space there. And so that that's kind of on my mind. And I wonder if we can talk about how we can uh address that concern if you consider it valid um by some design features. So for example, what I what I'm thinking about there's a lot of retail space that's that's empty in Ithaca and you know and it's empty for a long long time. What if some of this retail space becomes empty for a long long time? Is there an alternative use that that could be put to and could that be designed at the beginning so there's not huge construction reconstruction costs associated with that so that you could anticipate you know multiple uh possibilities uh in addition to the retail space that would be useful for the residents of the buildings and perhaps for the for the general public that might be passing by. That's something that I hope we could think about a little bit and just in terms of being realistic about the future and and mitigating the possibility that there'd be empty space there that that really for this beautiful development would be would be a shame. So yeah, that's that's those are the only things on my mind. Yeah,

thanks for your feedback in in terms of making that space more flexible. I think that's part of the the interest with the change in footprint and location, right? One reason why we don't feel like just making more micro retail space makes a whole lot of sense is because the shape of those spaces isn't really conducive to something like a larger restaurant for example. And we feel like what we're proposing here could go either way, right? It could ultimately be divided up if we find there are a bunch of smaller tenants who want smaller footprints. we've got the square footage for that. Um, or if we find a single tenant who wants to run a cafe or restaurant in this particular location, this corner location, if you will, and the dimensions of it allow for some more of that flexibility. And and likewise, I'll go ahead and say that I think our tenants and their amenity space can expand to any footprint ultimately should this not end up working out. Um, but our goal, as we're showing on the plan, would be to have this be a publicly accessible commercial space because I think ultimately, um, that's probably going to be the best attractant for the project in terms of getting folks down here along the trail, getting them to walk down from the farmers market, etc.

To your latter point, I would agree that this is redesign is more conducive to that. Yeah. Thank you, Max. Elizabeth,

hello. Ian and Ross and um Crystal, thank you for the um presentation. Um I'm going to start with positives. I made a lot of notes, but my fellow board members have already um touched upon some of the concerns. Um, I think that the retail space in the corner will be more conducive to um, getting an anchor tenant and making it a more visible, attractive space. I really like the idea of a um, flexible multi-use um, concept of that plaza. Um, I think that you're going in the right direction. I don't see much change as far as the um fencing around. I see where your issue is. It's not a cost issue. It's just a feasibility issue with the um insurance, right? But, um, I think there are still things that you can be creative about, um, in the, um, in the perimeter of the fence, um, with plantings and murals and public art and other things that may not, you know, encroach on your property or significantly add to your insurance risk. Um, so with that, I hope that you will come up with some ideas to present to us because as I've said before, I'm not in support of a plane, you know, of just keeping the fence where it is and how it is. Thanks.

Thank you. Um, thank you for doing the work of contacting multiple insurance companies and kind of proving that maybe that idea is not viable. agree with what others have said that the quality of that fence matters in this case. If we can't see some space given back then, right, murals, all the ideas I think are great for you to to take home. Um, and I agree with everything else. The retail space on the plaza makes perfect sense and is kind of a critical mass there. The traffic control point and crossing is seems much safer. So, I think those changes are all very positive. Um, other than that, I don't have much to add. So, um, if there's anything else from staff or Lisa or Nikki,

um, what did you say you intend to use the northern parcel for? We we currently are using the site as a maintenance and operations hub for uh, the management business that runs uh, a number of our other properties in town. And so we would expect that that would continue. So just you're going to run into an issue that is not an allowed use in the waterfront to use the property in the way especially if the use has lapsed which I don't know that there was ever permission given granted to use the property that way. So that is a that is an issue that you'll run into. Yeah.

So from a code perspective it's a pre-existing use. It was a light and industrial use for the DOT. No, the the DOT used it as light industrial and upon us purchasing the property, we've continued that use. We spoke with the code enforcement officer at the city, Rob. Okay, we can speak with Megan about that. Also, the state has afforded some leniency on use of property. So, you're no longer the state own, you know, property. So,

they don't have to comply. Yeah. And I was just going to add, thank you for the changes, too. I do like the retail space there a lot better. I think you're exactly right, all of you. More flexible, conducive to different uh possibilities. um zoning. Do just send Megan still that building even though I know you say and I believe you all that it'll be under that height. She still needs to see it. Yep.

Uh elevation. Yeah, I'm sure you know that. Um and then I know you said insurance, but you kept saying it has to be it's public access. I'm just wondering because I was thinking exact thing Cheryl Swink was. I was like, "Wow, that's my exact thought was if it could just like two feet away from the waterfront." anything along that waterfront for me is the biggest piece and just like meadow, anything like simple there, just throwing it throwing it out. And I know that might not be a possibility, but just softening that edge. Um, and again, hopefully you might not even have to do that if all goes well, but just something to throw out there. Um, besides that, I think it looks great, too. Thank you.

So, nobody commented on the screens, but I feel like we have a few minutes. Maybe we can just talk about that if anybody go ahead. Anyone has thoughts.

I'd say you're going in the right direction. Um I like the change in materiality like uh with the wood and if that's um metal screening or steel screening, I would discourage you from using any kind of vinyl or that kind of um uh solution. And um I really like the trees or or whatever you come up with. Um I think the the one that we saw with the trees is works better because it's all continuous whereas the punch holes don't work as well with like an image like that. Um yeah, I think that's that's going in the right direction. Maybe you can use some of that screening along the the waterfront. with some plantings, seasonal flowers and things like that. But I'm leaving it up to you guys to come up with a solution that will convince us to accept the plan as it is. And like I said before, um you should not count on the previous use because the state used that their higher authority and they didn't have to follow the zoning and a lot of the local um codes. They also kind of do their own when it comes to state codes also. So,

any other thoughts, Max? Yeah, I just thanks for reminding us about the screening. I like the screening. I was going to say that that I like the idea. I like the idea of exploring the toanic uh falls idea as well. That would be kind of a nice uh thing. And then I think Elizabeth raises an interesting idea. you know, why not consider this type of screening as a as a something with fencing. I mean, it's worth since we're throwing everything out and to for thought, maybe that's something to think about and might even be cost effective.

This is maybe just my own or this is my own personal opinion, but sometimes I think that there's like slight overkill of pictures of Tiganic around town. Every mural is a waterfall. All like the I know I said I I let Max go and then I Um, you know, there's just, yeah, there's a lots of I there's other things that you, you know, I don't know, like imagery of birds, you write on the inlet or who knows. I mean, also the waterfalls would be beautiful, but you can see them everywhere in real life and represented visually. I think the idea of the organic imagery makes a lot of sense compared to the building. So, I also like the screen concept.

Sure. Yeah. We'll continue to develop this. As Eric was saying, we'll bring a a fully baked proposal next month. Great. Well, thank you very much for the presentation. Okay. And ju just to to clarify in terms of our plan for a path forward. It sounded like generally the board was in support of the relocation and enlargement of the retail space. So, we're going to go ahead. I'm looking around the room seeing nodding hoping that Yeah, I think that's what I heard too. Okay. Okay. So, so, so we'll work on updating the set of technical drawings, which we haven't done yet because we wanted to have this conversation. Um, and then hopefully we'll come back next month and we can talk about preliminary site plan and subdivision approval.

Great. It's important for you to talk to us about logistics for the larger um retail, especially if you're thinking food retail because we don't want to see, you know, dumpsters and trash and that kind of stuff on the waterfront or in the public way. Understood. We don't want a dumpster in front of the building either. So, but that should all be from the parking area. Sure. We'll work on a diagram that shows how the logistics would be expected to work. Yeah. And I really um do feel like you see us as partners and collabor you know collaborative thought partners in this and so I just want to thank you. I appreciate the way you've like brought things to us and sort of work through some of these things.

I appreciate you all. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks everyone. Have a good evening. I'll see you later. Thank you. Next up we have 215 College of Redevelopments. Tonight we are looking at preliminary and final site plan approval. Hi Nick and Charlie. How are you?

Okay, great. Good. We're good. Take it away. Right. I don't think we have a whole lot to present. Just a quick couple slides. Um I think after the last conversations, we had really narrowed this down to needing to go through kind of the roof plan and lighting and and those details. So we prepared a slideshow talk about any kind of last questions, comments, but otherwise hoping to keep this easy. Um Annie, do you want to go through the the slides? Yep. Noah's got it.

Yeah, I'll talk through the roof design real quick. I'll let um Annie and uh Nick and Charlie weigh in on things as needed. But um yeah, in the submission this month as well as our discussion at PRC, uh we really kind of focused in on this last remaining piece of the the overall project, which is the the amenity space on the roof that faces Lynen A. Um and what you can see here is we've we've broken down this space. It's not a huge space, but it's it's big enough that we can actually have a couple of different zones. So, we've created uh an activity zone, kind of a gaming area, um table tennis, uh cornhole, things like that. And then we have this pergola, this lightweight pergola structure for some outdoor dining and kind of a bar grill kind of space. And then a lounge area which has kind of this wood uh deck feeling. One of the things we've also done is uh the the entire perimeter of course has a railing uh for fall protection, but we've also pulled that railing in from the edge of the building. And so what we're proposing is to plant a a natural uh sedum planting, you know, all around the perimeter. So it's a you know, a green roof type of system. And there are a couple of outdoor restrooms uh accessed um or restroom indoor restrooms but accessed from the outdoors um that serve this space specifically. Um one of the I'll show you another view here kind of some additional render rendered views of the space. I think it just gives you an idea of what this uh amenity space looks like. And then the um we've also in the packet we included some lighting information. So we're our goal here is to light this from a a

safety perspective. Uh there will be uh security cameras on the space to help control the activity. So we want to have just enough lighting for that purpose but not overlight this. So what we're proposing are some things like pendant lighting in the dining area under the pergola. uh some sort of continuous um railing lighting around the perimeter. And then of course every access point, every door will have a wall-mounted building mounted um wall sconces. So lighting at the restrooms. This is a connection to the taller building along College A. So there's light fixtures there. And then the stair tower that goes down on the lindenav side would also have a exterior lighting in addition to obviously emergency lighting as well that would only come on as needed. Um

and we have submitted the cut sheets for these lighting as well. So they're all dark sky compliant. Just want to point it out. Yeah.

Yep. Yep. And then um the one last thing last slide here I wanted to show was just what this looks like from the ground. Um you can see the railing. So, we've shown some of this early on. We had some sneak peeks of this, but you couldn't really see what was happening up there. So, this um this presentation tonight is give you a really good look at what's um proposed for the roof itself. But just as a reminder, it's really not visible very much at all. Uh this darker area is the pergola and then the railing um around the side. And of course, we're kind of uphill from it from this vantage point. So obviously further down the street you wouldn't see this at all. Um so yeah and the only other thing I know there were some questions uh at PRC about hours of operation and things like that and I don't know Nick or Charlie if you want to just kind of talk through kind of the security and access control to the space. That's that's something that's more of a management operations question.

Sure. Um, so yeah, there's a couple outstanding questions that we've tried to address. One, there was the PFAS question in terms of TUR, which we submitted information that we had from the manufacturer indicating that it's all PF PFAS free. And so we feel like, you know, we should be in good shape from that standpoint. We really like kind of the softness that we create with some of the turf like we feel like it really makes it more interesting space. So we're hoping, you know, everybody's comfortable with that. In terms of the lighting we already touched on, and then hours of operation, you know, we look at this as a really important amenity space and we think of it as a space that we want our tenants to be able to kind of enjoy and use responsibly. Um, we don't, you know, I think our our natural reaction is we don't want to restrict ours unless we have behavioral issues that, you know, we're obviously going to be aware of by virtue of the video surveillance and then we'll have the ability to start to restrict access, but you know, all our buildings, I mean, this we already have to comply with city noise ordinances, etc. I mean, so there's already some framework in place to try to, you know, contain noise. And we we feel like this is a building that's in central college town. You know, it's surrounded by other students. If you go to college town at midnight, right, on a Saturday night, there are kids in the street. You know, we feel like this is appropriate to, as long as it's being used responsibly, not restrict access. We're obviously open to hearing your guys' thoughts, concerns, suggestions, but I think because this is an exciting amenity for the kids and like we would prefer to allow it to be accessible. That's our thoughts.

Yeah. And with that, we do have, you know, we submitted a bunch of, you know, the full package previously, but rather than going through any of that, um, we can pull things up if needed if there are any other questions about the the plan. But other than that, you know, in terms of the overall design, I think we're we're feeling pretty good and um ready to answer any questions. Okay. Thank you. Um Elizabeth, can I start with you this time? Shake it up.

Sure. Thanks for the presentation. This looks like a great space to have fun in. And I agree with you that the uh city ordinance already limits you. Um you'll have to comply by dark sky. um uh fixtures and lighting anyway per code. So, I think um I think you're in a good shape. I don't really have much else to say. Okay. Thank you, Max. I like this a lot, too. Um just a question. Uh occupancy is that is there you envision any limits there or are there code uh restrictions on something like that?

Yeah. On what? Occupancy. Yeah. I was just curious. Yeah. You mean the occupancy type or the count? How many people? The counts. Okay.

Um, yeah. This this space allows a lot of people is, you know, it's around like 1500 square ft. With 15 square foot per person for a type occupancy, you could have up to, you know, 100 people. But with all the equipments and and you know circulation space we're anticipating around like 60 70 max with the calculation based on the building code by 15 square foot per person. But as you can see here with activities it's really hard to get to that that size. But it's a different kind of a you know is it with a reality and versus the code calculation. But in reality as you can see here it's about like you know 30 40 maybe 50 people and when is it you know a party maybe you know people will be a little bit more more in dense but the the calculation for egress um and you know for for the emergency exiting those are all considered as the worst scenario can accommodate for like you know 70 to 100 people. I think you make a good point is kind of the way that's designed there in the space is that's going to be self-limiting in a way. Yes. In terms of Yeah.

Thank you. Yeah. Next, Jenny.

Thanks. I mean, I was also thinking like this is a really nice space for people who don't want to be out in college town at bars or at parties. I mean, I having lived in New York City for a long time, I love a good roof roof deck. And it sort of offers, you know, it offers the opportunity for you to have friends over, gather in a space that isn't your own living room. Um, so I think that's really wonderful. You know, there's always the policy choice of like making a reservation policy if you're having parties over 15 people. Like you guys could think about that from the management perspective. That's not uncommon. Um yeah, and um I was just out of curiosity, is it like is it Cornell police that respond in Collegetown or is it IPD for like noise violation calls and things like that? Because yeah, you guys I sort of agree like yeah, you'll follow the city of Ithaca and if you get a lot of police calls to your building, you'll probably think differently about how you do it. But you know that yeah

so it's the city of Ithaca police that okay enforce the noise ordinance as you know from the squeaky clean it is extremely hard to enforce extremely hard to enforce. So it can be noise that is bothersome but doesn't exceed um decibel limits based on the background noise. So it's really hard to enforce. Um I'll just say that. Okay. And what is the cut off time typically for for noise for things like construction? Well, for Yeah, for construction it's 6:30 or 7, I can't remember. 7:30, I think. Yeah, noise producing construction. Any further thoughts?

Well, now Lisa's like, um, no, that was all I had. Thank you guys.

Speaking of new sense, we have our bongo starting. Um, okay. I wanted to ask about the lighting. Thank you for supplying the photometrics. Um, and I I just wanted to ask about maybe this railing light and the possibility of having phototrics outside the parapet submitted because they seem higher than typical at the edge and I think it's because of that railing. So I'm the highest I'm seeing right at the parapet is 8 above eight 8.3 8.5 which we would expect as it spills across your property to be zero. Um and so I wonder also looking up from the street if you see the underside of that the LED in the handle of that rail handrail of the railing there I understand it's for safety does make a really good hey there's a railing here don't like fall over it. It's a it's a great safety feature, but I am wondering about the phototrics of it spilling out off the rooftop. Um, so that was a lot of words and not really a question, but just a concern. Um, I'm still ready to approve it. I feel like it could be a condition where maybe it's a dimmed light that we just get fewer phototrics or that that phototric plan shows what it is past the parapit. So if it does drop off significantly after the building, I feel like that's also fine, but just something to think about. And did you

Oh, go ahead, Andy. Oh, sorry. No, I just understood. Um, did you you mentioned the the PAS free letter? Was that submitted to the city? It was okay. So then we don't have to have that condition. That's all I have. I think everything else looks wonderful. Great building. All our concerns are really met and exceeded. Just so we do talk about the noise just for another second since Lisa kind of raised this you know are there other rooftop just there's nothing like this there's nothing like this

there's nothing like this um and I I think it's beautiful and I I love it I would love to spend time there but I will say there is nothing like this in college town anywhere and the police spend a lot of time in college town breaking up parties and dorm you know frat parties and they already spent a huge amount of time doing that. I just think it might be very reasonable to have some restrictions to the hours like one o'clock in the morning or something. I mean, I know that you're gonna well or maybe you can talk about what are you going to tell your tenants how they can use it and how are you going to prevent 150 people from going up there with amplified sound and how are the police going to get up there if they have a complaint? Like, I mean, I there's nothing like this. I think it's beautiful, but I do worry about the noise because the noise will go off to the neighborhoods too and people right beside it. And we have talked about this before in other projects with balconies and rooftop even balconies like closing problem. So maybe you could just tell or if the board wants to say more about the how you intend to what you expect from this.

Yeah. Do you have further thoughts on it? Yeah. If you don't it's okay. I mean I do just I mean what I've been thinking about this is you know we are have good relationships with all of our neighbors right we have lots of buildings

you know we know most of the folks who are neighbors on this property and our reputation is on the line right so like if this building becomes an issue you know Nick and I both manage these properties and if this becomes an issue then we need to shut it down you know and we need to start restricting stuff but we'd like to give her tenants I mean the way I kind of look at this too is like this This is the yard for this building, right? So, like we don't put restrictions on new buildings that have yards that might have, you know, things that tenants can do in those in those yards. And I think it's a great space and I think our tenants can be responsible. You know, it also has to blend with our building. If this becomes, you know, starts interrupting our our tenants within the building, then it's going to be a problem for us. So, I think we're going to have to control it and and make sure that it's going well. I think Squeaky Clean was very unfortunate like to watch that process unfold. Um, but you know that noise was taken from like their day-to-day operation. You know, like if this starts turning into like, you know, a Friday night party every night, then yeah, we're going to have to restrict it. So, I hope the board can trust us that we, you know, we'll do this like we manage all of our other properties and keep our good relationship with our neighbors and our community and make sure that it doesn't get out of control.

Yeah. I mean, I if I mean, it's not about trust or your your or anything like that. It's about designing something not to happen rather than something to happen. You know, it's very hard to pull back. Um, you know, it's very hard to, you know, you're great property managers. I'm not this not it's but it's this is designed to be loud, you know, and to be a nuisance. It's like it's that's the way it's designed as far as I see, you know, like it's designed for that to happen very easily without any restrictions on anything. And I will stop.

No, no, I think this is all good feedback. I I think I mean like I was recently like right right now we're operating the Cath building, right? And we put the nipper in this wine bar, right? and I was there this weekend talking to them and we're talking about the type of kids that live in central college town and kind of what their behavioral habits are and how that impacts business and how it impacts how they use buildings. You know, what we see in central college town kids is they tend to, you know, they go out, they go to a house party, they come back, you know, they'll go to the wine bar at 1 in the morning, they'll sit quietly and they'll have a drink, right? And they don't have a lot of those behavioral issues. We see that more kind of in the downtown scene. And so like where we imagine is like this could be a great place for kids after they go out, they do whatever they want and they want to sit with a couple of friends on the rooftop and have a drink. And if that's at 2 in the morning and they're doing it responsibly, we don't really want to restrict that. Um, you know, I I get all of it and it could turn out to be, you know, there's 150 kids trying to cram out there and it it's a disaster, but we can't tolerate that. Like we won't tolerate that. And so, you know, we don't want to get calls at 2 in the morning, you know, from our teams because the police are there and there's issues. Like, we're going to stop it. And I understand that, you know, some of this you can try to just engineer out by saying like, we're just going to set a policy doesn't even allow this to happen. But I do think that, you know, the base case here is that this is going to get used responsibly. And I think that if we're doing a good job of, you know, making kids understand there's video surveillance. We're watching what's happening. We're not going to tolerate complaints. If there's complaints, we're going to be able to know who is the problem. And more often than not, when the kids know that they're going to have to be accountable, like you can keep them within a reasonable construct of

behavior. And so, again, for us, we think the kids are going to love this. To your point, there is there's nothing like this other than to Charlie's point. I mean, there are some properties on college that have big front yards and you can go out there on a Saturday morning in front red cups all over and they're out there all night. So, like I agree with this is kind of like our yard and so I don't know that it's completely unprecedented. Um, it just happened to be up in the air versus now. So, we really feel like we can make this authority.

Yeah. Max, further thoughts? So, uh, just a kind of a a thought and a question is, um, well, one one thing we mentioned at PRC is you can you can cut it off because you're going to have key access up there, right? So, that you know, so that just putting that on the table so all of us can think about that. But, um, the other thing is, uh, is kind of a question for you as managers. uh you know, for something like this, do you how do you communicate expectations to your uh residents about the use of of a space like this? And would that be something would that be signage up there, you know, that that's just kind of like, you know, here here's like good use of this that we kind of expect or is it something you give orientation when you you know, they come in and rent the place or something like that? I guess it's a question and and maybe a suggestion because maybe maybe there could be some signage, you know, that would help ease our concerns a little bit.

I think it's a lot like some of our other amenities spaces that are unique and that we include language in the lease that talks about the space and kind of what the parameters for responsible use are and to the extent that we as landlord reserve the right to take away their ability to use the space if they're not complying with those parameters. And u you know whether it's an addendum to the lease or it's just in the base lease. I mean, we we both have these on all sorts of properties and this would be no different. Like we would have very clear acknowledgements that there's video surveillance and you know what the acceptable use, the unacceptable use is. And that way we can make sure we have the kind of legal ability to tell them that they can't use the space or that they're using it appropriately.

So, what do we feel like we should or shouldn't ask for here? Um, I feel like it would be reasonable to ask for a cut off time and restricted access that aligns to bars closing. That seems like there's no reason I hear what you're saying. Go up and have a drink after bars close, but that's a reasonable time that neighbors can expect things to die down to after that time. Um, so I might propose that as sort of a condition that would be implemented in rental language, but curious what your thoughts are. I think I'd lean more towards like, you know, no no large gatherings after a certain time. I, you know, I think it it it could be appropriate to have people go up there at 2 in the morning and like have a drink with a friend.

Um, smoking. Yeah. Smoking porch.

Yeah. So, I, you know, I I think I I don't know. This is it's tricky. Like I'm I'm curious like what the if there's like other like structural or engineering things that could go in that help buffer the sound. I mean I think the difference between a yard and is is sort of like that all of the sound is buffered by the buildings versus this and like it is true to Lisa's point like I live over on South Hill and we hear things across the gorge like clear as day. Um, so I mean I do think that like it does have a potential for a reverberating effect around the community beyond just your immediate neighbors. I mean like the Cornell did a siren test recently and I could hear it word for word at my house over on South Hill. So I I I think that is sort of worth keeping in mind. But I I appreciate and I I think I kind of align and agree with your, you know, your view of this and and maybe there's something there around just like no large gatherings after a certain time or um Yeah, I'm trying to think what the other like policy solutions.

Yeah, I feel like it would be easier to start off with the restriction and pull it back if it if it doesn't become a problem um rather than trying to restrict after the fact. I guess it has. Is this like within our authority? It's just a question that I have right now. It is. Yeah, it is. After after preliminary and final approval, it becomes not within our authority at all. So that's why it's much harder to ask for changes if there's continuous problems. Okay. And we're not revisit like you guys are trying to put a bow on this here today. Yeah. Okay. I have a comment. Mhm.

I think, you know, when we're talking about gathering 75 people, I can see that getting out of hand here and it being very difficult to control even if you know people from your building, security or police come in. And so limiting the occupancy beyond what the code allows, it will do two things. It'll limit the noise and also the potential for overcrowding and things to become out of hand. Um,

so I don't know if we can limit cuz I don't think two or three people at 2 a.m. are going to be making that much noise, right? But if if it's still a party of 50 people up there, that'll be a problem no matter, you know, and it'll be a problem for you to control. Um, so maybe after a certain time you limit the amount of occupancy like to I don't know 12 people. I can't see 12 people getting that loud and no music after a certain time, right? Music is Yeah, I would say no amplified music ever. It's not really, you know, the place to have ampli a amplified music up there.

So I don't want to hold preliminary and final up for this. Um, but it feels like there's some compromise between nothing at all and asking for something. Is it a condition we could ask for? Nick, maybe or this is maybe an Annie question too because I know you guys develop a lot of buildings like this. Like I'm be curious what other best practices are, right? How do other buildings that have this kind of set aside what it you know good neighbor standards I guess on sort of rooftop access? I'm sure that this is not the first time that this is being discussed you know so I'm sure there's some examples of

issues issues are potentially limiting occupancy after a certain time limiting music and potentially just completely limiting access after a certain time. Those are things that we've all talked about. So I would propose maybe we move this resolution and talk about a little bit of language as a contingency. Can I just make one more point is you know I want to come back to maybe some signage or something that that states some expectations and they could be some of these expectations. I'm not reluctant to make

too many rules because I I kind of um I take the point that you know we yeah you can't pull it back but on the other hand you can't over control and I I I feel like there's a chance a possibility that we over control this but you could say that you know the expectation is that there will be over 75 people up here whatever uh that you know there's uh no loud music after such and such an hour and make that really that also helps you from a management perspective because if you do have a problem you can say look this is it you know violating but something like that I I'm more inclined to

do that is a little more permissive uh than just putting out restrictions but then I I feel like I'm not really qualified to make all these restrictions on use of space so we talked about signage um we talked about limiting occupancy after a certain time limiting music and being closed after a certain time those are kind of the four mechanism. Two other sort of quick questions. Do you have like like an existing guest policy? Is it like guests have do you like is it like a door man building?

No. Okay. So guests can just come in. It's not like they're like signing in or checking in or Okay. And do you are you you're not going to have security on site? You were going to have key access though up there, right? The other thing too is there's other amenity spaces we can always encourage our tenants if they want to gather and have a social setting. You know, this is they can they can do that throughout the rest of the building. I mean, we have a lounge, we have game room, we have study pods, lobby. So,

well, that kind of leans towards closing it after a certain time because you have other options within the building. I think from my perspective, I'm very comfortable with the idea of like I think we're all aligned that we don't want this to be a problem, right? And so we're all saying the same thing. It's just more about how do we get everybody comfortable. I I I think limiting occupancy at a certain point in time sounds reasonable to me, right? As long as the numbers reasonable. Saying no amplified music period, I don't know if I feel as comfortable with that, but after a certain point in time, absolutely right. after no amplified. I think that makes a lot of sense. Like, so why don't we put a If you move the If you guys move this, I do have a Why don't we put a possible condition?

Yeah. You bring your language back for review. That's fair. We're definitely on the same page because as I sit here and think like, I haven't thought that this would be a problem. I really haven't. And I could see how you could think that, you know, yeah, sure, there could be a wild party up here one night and that turned into a consistent wild party. It's the first roof deck. It's going to be cool, right? Like people are going to want to go hang out there. All right. Charlie will tell you if there's a hundred people out there at 3 in the morning, I'm going to be driving there to break it up myself. Yeah. You won't be able to get up there. You won't be able to get

What if you sell What if you like I know you're not like what if you sell this building, right? And then we're stuck with someone who isn't a a responsible local partner. I mean, I I can't help but think of like other like issues with the steerie and other and very different population. I get it. But like I think like we just want to be thoughtful about this and it is what does this what can the city control now where it can't be controlled later. So yeah it's all fair. Okay. So I think that's our only outstanding thing. Let's um can I have a motion to open this yellow proposed resolution? Elizabeth moves. Who seconds? Jenny seconds. Okay. So now we can actually talk about conditions. Um do you want to you said you wrote something down Nikki about this.

Yes. Please word Smith as you will. Um, and this could be submission to planning staff um for review to manage amenity roof noise via signage, limiting occupancy, music access, etc. And this could be or access, etc. So, leave it completely open to you to bring back what you feel is appropriate. Does that sound good to everybody? Okay. Thanks for the good discussion, guys. I would also propose a contingency to resubmit um the lighting

the lighting plan. Thank you. Yeah, just to either just make it larger so area so we see that that lumen drops off after in the parapit or consider something to dim that railing LED so that we can get it below eight. You want me to include that on um the following conditions must it's the one issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Maybe we could add that to that first one, right? Because they ask for photometrics. Just an updated phototrics then. Yeah. Okay.

If that's LEDs that are often solves. Okay. So, I'll put updated right before that. Updated photometrics and specs on the railing. lighting specifically if it's dimable. Does that sound good?

Any other things that we want to change or add there? Lake view on the roof. No, too bad. Is that you? Yeah. In this here. Okay. So, with those two changes. Um, I think we are ready to vote on this. Let's do I think you you have to vote on the changes. Vote on the changes first. So, let's do a roll call vote on those two changes. Resubmitting the photometrics and LED railing specs and then language from the applicant about noise reduction strategies. Okay. Roll call vote on those two changes. Jenny, yes. Max, yes. Elizabeth, yes.

And I am a yes. And so now, let's do a roll call vote in general on preliminary and final approval. Jenny, yes. Max, yes. Elizabeth, yes. Congratulations. And I am also Yes. So, thank you for hammering out the last few details. It's gonna be a great building. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Okay. Next up, we have Ginspoon Hell at Cornell, 722 University Avenue. And tonight we're looking at the seeker determination.

Crystal and Sarah. Okay. Crystal and Lisa. Hello again. Hi Crystal. Do we have everybody in the team? Okay. Um if you do you have a presentation you want to walk us through? Sure. Sure. We just had a short presentation to go over the lighting options for the exterior site lighting. Um, so I didn't know if you wanted to walk through the seeker first or if you wanted us to present that. Let's do your presentation first if you don't mind and we'll do seeker right after. Thank you. Sure. Yep.

All right. So in the submission that we included for this month's for the Ginspoon at Hal or Hal at Cornell, we included the lighting plan um in associated with the colors, we also included the lighting fixture selections, all of which are dark sky compliant as required by code. Um the precedents shown are really just to show the lighting aesthetics. Um, we'll determine the color finishes with uh the architects later to make sure all of the metal fixtures um mesh well together once we get the final samples. Um, but I'm just going to flip back and forth real quick. The gold color are these two here along ADP Drive. Those are existing light pole fixtures that we're proposing to relocate just to better situate between the building and the proposed canopy trees that we have for the project. Um the two kind of teal colors are these here in the middle. They're just a pole top area fixture to help light that parking area. And then you'll see here the light ballard. We've got that placed along the entry paths coming from University A to just help illuminate those pedestrian pathways to the building. The last one we've got on the plan is just these purple fixtures are the architectural light features. We've got a few of the wall packs and then some of the underlighting on that secondary second story um canopy that overhangs over the plaza space. And so again, you can see those here on the right. We'll look at colors. Again, these are just uh representative of what the fixtures look like. In the submission, you did see a phototric plan. Um, one area that we made sure to light well was the pedestrian pathway along the eastern property line. Um, there was some concerns mentioned from the planning board members about the kind of cavity between the two buildings, the 722

University and 726. And so we wanted to make sure that pedestrian path was lit um well so that um pedestrians felt safe in that corridor. couple renderings just to illustrate um what the light levels would look like and that's really it. Looking for any um feedback on the lighting fixtures and then happy to answer any questions from the seeker. Okay, great. Thank you. Let's do comments on the presentation first um as a first round and we'll come back and do seeker second. So Jenny,

yeah, I mean nothing major. They look great. I think the lighting ballards are kind of neat. Okay, thank you, Max. I don't have anything to add except that I, you know, I like what you presented. Thanks, Elizabeth. I agree. Looks good. Also agreed. I think these are nice selections and thank you for paying attention to that um that east walkway there to make sure it's well lit. Um okay, so then let's take a look here at the seeker. Um, Nikki, there's nothing outstanding if I'm right. Great.

Okay. When I read through this earlier, nothing jumps out at me. I'm not going to go through each section. If you have questions, let's just bring it up now. But I feel like this is very close to being being done. I really don't have anything to add either. So, I move to open the All right. She's ready. Any comments from Lisa or Nikki before we do it? Okay, I feel the same. So, let's have a motion. Well, let me get out the right thing. We're looking at this purple resolution for the secret decoration. Can I have um motion to open it? Elizabeth moves a second. Max seconds. Okay. Seeing no discussion, speak now forever. Hold your peace. Uh let's do a roll call vote on a negative declaration. Uh Jenny. Yes. Max,

yes. Elizabeth, yes. And I am also a yes. So, you have a neg. And I believe that is short and sweet for tonight. If there's anything else you want to talk about, I think we're good, but we are happy to move forward and see you next time. We're happy as well. So, thank you all very much and we'll see you next month for preliminary site plan approval. Thank you. I do want to add that the lighting plan I love it. Love it. Yeah. Very easy to follow. Yes. So, thank you. Good. You're welcome. Thank you. Good night, everyone. Good night. Good night. Thank you.

Okay. Next up, we're looking at potential signage package approval for 445 East State Street. Hi, Brian. Wonderful. Gets me in the rhythm. So, um, Brian Bousard with CHA Consulting. where the um engineer working on behalf of the owner for uh the sign package um at 445 East State Street. This is the theory residential apartment building. We had uh presented to you the initial sign package probably not the last meeting but the meeting before and we spent some time going through this with the signed vendor um as well as the owner to address basically three comments that you had. One was the number of signs, two was the illumination and lighting of the signs, and then third was the size of the signs. Um, so I will share my screen to present to you um the revised signage package that we did submit to staff. So the first in terms of the number of the sign, we had one blade sign on State Street and we had one facing SixMile Creek and then we also had the archway sign. We have completely removed the blade sign that was proposed on the six mile creek side. We are allowed two building mounted signs. We believe the two on State Street are important. One because of more of the artistic um you know archway sign that kind of captures like the residential entry in the center of the building and then also the blade sign which would be more indicative of the public access that's going to come down the stair to the public way that could access the creek or get people back to the parking garage and things like that. Um so we did remove the third

sign. We only have two signs. The blade sign um that would be on um the state street side near that um monument and the stair. Uh we it's the same size sign. It's 50 square feet. Previously we presented this as being internally illuminated channel letters. Um so we have left the size the same but we did change the lighting um so that it is a halo lighting uh which we did show a graphic of um kind of the nighttime illumination. So this should kind of scale back the actual presentation of the light. It still makes the sign visible um during nighttime. And we also changed the color temperature um so it's 4400 Kelvin which is more of if you remember when like LED lights came out right this is more of the warm glow and not like the bright um white. So it is a halo lit um sign of 50 square feet for the blade sign. Um it's an aluminum cabinet. I think we went through the materials last time but it's aluminum cabinet uh in dark gray with the accents around the borders. It has a 4-in deep channel letter that would be navy blue that is actually bordered by a white um border so that it can um splash that halo lighting. So there's a um the uh back plate which is aluminum um back plate for the the white that you see and then behind that the body is a decorative polished um diamond plate pattern there. So it's the same materials. It's just lighting that we changed on that one. Um, this is obviously the the elevation where it sits here and then we can show that to you in the rendering which is by that monument where it would go down to the public way. The second sign is the theory sign on the archway. And there's a couple things here. This was proposed as a slightly larger sign before. It was 75 square ft.

So we have reduced the size to 50 square ft. um as well as changing this again from straight internally illuminated channel letters to be um the same aesthetic as that blade sign which is um halo lighting to create that shadow effect. This also um is an alum aluminum fabricated channel letter which would have a white backing to um create the shadow effect for the um halo lighting there. It's the same temperature, so it'll match in terms of its um color, which is the 4,400 Kelvin. Um the other thing that you had asked for was it not just to be presented. We were talking about the depth of this. This courtyard is very deep. Um so I did bring up sort of what we had looked at when we went through um the design review committee. Um obviously this sign is way bigger, right? It was kind of placeholder as gateway, but I wanted to more or less show you that it's recessed slightly. It's a few feet, but it is kind of in line with like the um the front facade of the building. Some of these architectural elements stick out beyond that and the porches do as well. But this is kind of to give you a flavor of what it looks like to kind of cross over that pedestrian bridge and enter this courtyard space. Um so this would be the location of the trellis understanding that the size is significantly smaller than what's presented from the previous gateway image there. Um so reduce from three to two we reduce the lighting to be halo lighting and color temperature and we reduce the size of the theory sign at the um archway element here. That's what we have for uh comments and questions.

Great. Thank you. And that 3D image is helpful. Thank you for bringing that. Uh okay, Jenny, can I ask you for feedback? Yeah, I need to orient myself. So the arch sign looks where? Okay. So um if if you look at this image right here, yeah, there's these building blocks as you come down State Street. Um so this is the Blade sign. You can almost see in the center of the building is where the pedestrian bridge would cross over um into that courtyard space. So it's kind of like right in the middle of the building.

Where's the pedestrian? What pedestrian bridge? So our building there there's like a state street wall that was constructed. It's a vertical wall. So we would be connecting the pedestrian way to our building on the third level. So there's almost this um pedestrian bridge that you can kind of see in this this rendering to basically bridge the gap over the um city's property that exists as a very steep retaining wall and get us onto our building. Okay. And it's not across a road. No, it's not across the road. It comes directly from the sidewalk. Okay. Sorry. I wasn't here when this project was originally brought to us. So, I was really I you confuse me because there is the pedestrian bridge on the creek. No. Yeah. Guy, so I just got a little bit turned.

Let's call it a the pedestrian walkway. Although it's an elevated walkway, but it's private. Correct. If you look at this rendering, this is the roadway. This is the new sidewalk that was constructed. There's a hill that we start to bury ourselves in and the going up 79. Yeah. The elevated walkway would be directly from the pedestrian sidewalk directly into the building. Correct.

Okay. Okay. Got it. Um I mean, you know, I don't like lighted signs. I think we have also sort of shared that. We've made that decision in other buildings. Um as a board, um I don't think it's necessary. Residents know where they live. People know the address of the residence that they are going to. Um I I think that you know if we sort of allow the per proliferation of um really large lit banner signs on every new building that's going up in Ithaca. It will really change the overall fabric of what I looks like and how it feels as you walk around. Um so I um would be a no vote on any backlit signs. Um, I uh I also think they seem very large. Um, but I'll sort of stop there and hear what my colleagues have to say, too.

Sure. I'm sorry I started with you. I forgot you weren't here last week and you haven't seen this building. So, we can we can circle back. Max,

last time we talked about and I think there was kind of a well unanimous feeling, but a strong feeling of no light. Um, so that's something maybe come back and talk about. I The one thing I wanted to ask you about is the uh elevation of the blade. We talked about that again last time, but I wanted to come back to that and wanted to know if there's like just having a hard time uh thinking about it. So there's some functionality there, right? Because you want to show the entryway there corner. Uh but then also the placement on the building in terms of uh how um distracting it is or how it fits with the with the neighborhood is kind of a question. And so what what is the thinking on in terms of the elevation of that sign and is there any flexibility on that? Um, I mean obviously

as a Excuse me, just one more. I I just thinking of as a driver up state street, which I frequently am. Uh, how that would look. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, um, you know, it's really, let's say, two stories above the grade plane. Um, there's some of these elements that are not our design, but are an adjacent property. Um, that's I think still to be constructed. I don't know if you guys have seen that. Yeah. necessarily, but yeah, I mean, we've seen a little bit of

So, to answer your question pointedly, in the shadows here, you can kind of see what was represented to us as being kind of this very narrow monument with some of these walls. So, I guess our thought was if you put it any lower, you probably wouldn't see it as you approach um coming down the hill. Obviously, you'd see it um coming the other way, but if we needed to lower it a little bit, I don't it wasn't trying to get it as high on the building as we could. It was more or less just to make it visible. So, this is for, if I remember this correctly, if I'm wrong, there is a historical black fraternity that has uh is going to put a monument here. And so, I think what's obscured by the trees is part of that. And the design is still being fleshed out. Is that right?

Yeah. I mean, we it has changed that element.

During our design review, we coordinated with them partially because our subdivision necessitated a piece of property for them to place this. It also necessitated our subdivision to provide a public way to receive the foot traffic from State Street. We can't guide their design, but we had taken some of what their thoughts were and probably represented it to you so that we could get an idea of how the projects would coexist together. And to what end they've advanced that project, I'm not sure because it's really we're not like directly engaged with them. Our office isn't working with them. I guess as that monument design evolves, it might make sense to well, I don't know if your sign is going to be installed before that design evolves or not, but if you I guess I would encourage you to have more communication with them so that your sign is placed appropriately and not in conflict with their design nor there's yours. Does that make sense?

Understood. Yeah. Um that sort of indirectly relates to your the height question of of this sign. Yeah. So I that thank you. I mean that actually u more questions amplifies. Yeah. It's more questions that amplifies a bit. I I was mine was more about the appearance um from the street and you know and how how distracting it would be and how much it blends in with the neighborhood and building.

Thank you Elizabeth. Thanks. Um, I was going to say that 4,400 Kelvin is not night sky compliant, that we have regulations here that need to be 3,000 Kelvin, but that doesn't matter because I agree with Jenny that there should be no lighting on the signs. I also think they're really large. Um, and I think that they are too high up on the building. So, I don't know. I think I agree with what Jenny and um Max have said. I'm not ready to um approve any of these.

Um well, thank you for removing the one on the creek side. I think that's really important. Um and I have to apologize to you. Last time I was sure that the city center blade sign was not lit and then I went and look at it and it is in fact lit. So, I apologize. Um, I do think though that that has a commercial component to it and this being all residential does not. And so I I agree also with Jenny and Elizabeth that um for an all residential building, I would like to see no illumination on these signs. Um, also they're across from historic Argos in historic neighborhood as well. So that will blend better in that sort of historic setting to have no illumination. Um, I too I think Max, you're right. I would like to see that uh blade sign lower or just I mean I think we also don't want it to I guess I don't think there needs to be a blade sign there. I I think the arch is kind of neat. Like I think that's a unique architectural feature of your building and you're right like there's lots of places that have these kind of like beautiful arches that have really nice signs. So to me that like

and it is a gateway. Yeah. And so I think that that one is really neat. I I think the blade sign is kind of unnecessary. Um I think if it's lower it has the potential to like block or distract from what is probably like a historic monument. I assume I'm pretty sure that Cornell is the first black fraternity in the United States. So I would guess that that ties into the history of whatever they're putting in there. And so I think we also want to like acknowledge that space. And so we don't want to have a sign that detracts or takes away from what they're putting in.

Um, and I think, yeah, it's also interesting. The blue doesn't really match to me personally with kind of the rest of the building, which has this really nice um I don't know. I love the building. I think the building is really beautiful. I I think the sign detracts actually from the from the building to be honest. Exactly what I was gonna say or the blade in my opinion. Well, I I like the arch as well. Um, I like the reduction in size. If it didn't have the illumination, I feel like the arch is there. Um, and it is a gateway. It is monumental. It like marks the place and the the actual entrance. And so, I think I would

suggest maybe just removing that second blade sign, focusing on the arch, and then I would feel comfortable with the proposal. My only question because I don't disagree with anything that or double negative. power that I I do agree with everything that you've said. Um, illuminated signs are allowed in the code. So, um, obviously what I'm going to carry back to the the owner is that, you know, no lighting. It's this is the second time, you know, we tried we had the channel letters and then like the intermediate was kind of trying to tone that down but still have them visible somehow at night. Um,

well, I will say the planning board has full discretion over over the signage, right? I mean, whether it's allowed in the code or not, we we're able to enforce no lighting or lighting. And I think as a trend, we've been leaning against illumination for 100% residential buildings. So, for other projects, we would say the same thing. And we have when there's a commercial component, it starts to change, I think. But we're also asking for blade signs that are like we just did this for Kaya Park. A blade sign. What I was thinking about

just adjacent to um units that we asked for that to not be illuminated even though there was a commercial component below because it's right next to the unit and potentially living room. So that's that's good. So yeah, I I mean I think one of this I I um I like the market this Yeah. I like the marketplace sign next to the Aldi building. It's just letters like right on the building. I think that is like a tasteful way to do a sign. I just think the the blade signs it doesn't bl it doesn't blend I think with like the architectural components of the building

and that is part of the signage requirements that it should reinforce the architectural aesthetic of the building in the neighborhood. So I think that's what you're saying that this feels really delicated sign and

I kind of want to chime in too is I I think that a key point that here is that this is really a residential neighborhood because you're kind of moving from kind of a commercial residential part of downtown into really a residential neighborhood. And I I think that the the gateway sign is good. I like that. I think it's it's good and appropriate. The the blade unattractive and I mean that is my opinion and I think uh it attracts from the neighborhood as well and it doesn't do justice to your building which I agree with Jenny is is a beautiful building and I'm by the way I'm the neighbor in that area and I really glad you guys are building this so it's not not a dis you guys the the but the archway sign I mean that that I do like that and I think it's appropriate and it's not it's unobtrusive to the to the neighborhood it still gives kind of way to the to the building, which is what you wanted to do. And every the blade sign is just obtrusive. And even comparing it to other buildings, it it doesn't fit in this neighborhood is not the same as some of those other buildings.

Yeah, I think Emily had mentioned that before in terms of I tried comparing it to city center, but yes, city center is one block away, right? So, it is sort of we're outside maybe that transition zone. Has the board ever entertained? Obviously not channel letters. I know we've done Halo letters, but it was a mixeduse project with the Ithac um on one side. We did leave I think the the common side unlit. Something like um external, you know, if it was like gooseeneck lighting or something like that that would probably more or less match the light coming from the windows, still illuminate the sign but not be internally illuminated. You know, for instance, if So, I want to make a comment about the gateway sign and um I I don't feel like maybe the cursive theory is part of your brand, right? But I don't think the cursive theory really goes with the industrial look of that arched like a, you know, steel gateway. And I could almost see that theory above the um door canopy. That probably would look better. And I could see maybe gooseeneck lighting there because it's closer to the pedestrians. It's lower. It's not as obtrusive. And I think it makes more sense to have a sign there at the entrance, much lower at like 10 foot or whatever, 12 foot. Um because you're not going to be, you know, you're walking up there because you're not driving there. You're walking up there and you're, you know, you're almost straining your neck to see that, you know. So, is that sign for cars? Because I don't think that, you know, the building itself is kind of very visible from the roadway. Um I don't know. I really disagree with most of you. I don't like the cursive theory on that

gate archway at all. It it disrupts my aesthetic. Um, that's okay. You're allowed to disagree. I don't like I don't like the perspective. I don't particularly like the cursive either. To me, it kind of looks like a sports like I feel like I'm looking at a major league baseball team sign like the Cubs or it just it evokes sports vibes to me. it doesn't invoke like thoughtfully redesigned industrial apartment housing,

right? So, I think you're hearing a lot of I likes and I don't likes and it's really it's not about us. I think we're responding to how this sign is different than the building. And so, if we bring this all back to the signage, um what do the guidelines? Well, if you compare it to the original one, like that gateway one, right? Kind of that aesthetic makes more sense compared to the building and everything else. But like this cursive theory, like it's there's just dissonance there. Like it just, you know, if this were an orchestra, it'd be really out of tune. So, I think we should take this apart because we're kind of confusing a few different things. One is the the

so well the blade is we already finished that discussion I think but on this I think there's a few different points one is the type print type of the word theory so that's one thing which apparently we don't like I'm not very crazy about it either but that so that's one question the other is uh something saying theory on the gateway that's a second thing that's regardless of the cursive or whatever And then the third is what Elizabeth was saying about the placement uh of of the sign which uh I think she raised a really interesting point and I don't think we should lose track of that is changing the placement uh lowering it and using a different type of lighting um the the type of lighting that you were proposing. So those are three different things and I think each one has is useful to think about in its own right. So, what I'm hearing is generally the sign doesn't match the building or the neighborhood. Generally, everybody is not in favor of lighting at the sign of any kind, but perhaps would be interested in seeing lighting if it were building mounted and at the first story level. Is that helpful?

Sort of. Okay. Go ahead, Lisa. I think the font of the lettering is beyond your purview as long as the sign itself court, you know, meets the guidelines. Um, so that is their branding that is they're allowed to do that. The sign could be designed to be more compatible.

What I was going to mention is we have allowed at building entrances for there to be like string lighting or whatever, which is similar to what is across the street at Argos. And if you were to move that sign lower to the building entrance, you may be able to have string lighting and, you know, kind of make that arch makes s more sense of the arch especially if it meets the night sky compliant um temperature which is 300 KV or lower or K or lower. Um, I don't think I know that we can't say anything about the the font, but it just um the aesthetic and with the building, it just doesn't all jive. So, can we give some clear direction because we could go on forever. Did I give clear? I think I'm in the minority, but I would be fine with the arch as proposed minus the lighting and no blade sign. I'll just put that out there, but I hear a lot of other um

I think we'll just table it and we'll just I I need to take this back and we'll figure out what the owner wants to do. It sounds like absolutely like that there wasn't anything that could stick. So, we kind of have to rethink things, right? Give you better direction. Can we vote about a the blade? Is that a no for everybody? I wouldn't want to do a formal vote, but we could do an informal. Yeah. And then um the lighting element like I think we all agreed no lighting, right?

I think we're in pretty unanimous configuration. No lighting. Um we can just do a poll straw poll of um blade stays or or would we prefer to see the blade stay or go? Um, who wants to see the blade stay? Okay, I think who wants to see the blade go?

What if the blade was turned so that was just a building mounted sign? Because we are dealing with this problem where our building doesn't have like an entrance except for the residential entrance. So, if you're wayfinding trying to find a public parking garage, you have to go in around the corner or if you're trying to find the public walking trail or you're coming anywhere and you want to walk around. This sign is the private entry. So, but doesn't say entry the same spot with the blade sign, but minus the, you know, diamond plate. And I don't know what it'll be. I'm just saying like if we needed to still have a sign that's near there, maybe it's just turned flat on the

pilap parking or entry? Like, does theory really say that this is an entrance or this is where the parking goes? Because if you look at the Ithacan, I think it's it doesn't say by the parking, right? Yeah, it does. Yeah, it says by the door at the parking. It says parking. Yeah, the public entrance to the parking garage says the Ithac and there is a exit and entrance to the parking garage. But

um I would So the question was like in deleting the blade sign is not good. It aesthetically doesn't fit the building. Maybe we have to change the lettering and it sticks out too far. That's a violation of code too. if it was just a building mounted sign that said theory or something else or whatever we would choose to come up with would be better than the projecting blade sign. I think so. Yes,

I I I agree. I I think maybe we should consider that. But um I I will say that I take your point about that being an enterprise and and that there's some indication of that being there that that is persuasive to me. Uh the look of the thing is a is more of a sticking point. I do feel like a building mounted letters would match the aesthetic of the building better though.

That's fair. It at least gives me something to work with and come back with. And then I fully understand this. And I think being that there was little progress, it may be me asking the owner and the sign vendor to come up with different options rather than just us internally discussing our options. Sure. And maybe it is like I don't know if they'll change the font, but for instance, that's an example of like this is what they want, but they're also willing to do this. Is either one of these better? That's help us options

like the lighting thing. Yes. No lighting. And we will come back with one with no lighting, but maybe we will be creative. One of the things that I talked about instead of the halo letters was moving this sign down so that the entire trellis could have, you know, um, gooseeneck lighting and that the sign just happens to fall under two of them, but that the trellis is being lit as a, you know, as an I don't know if that makes sense, but like you just have to make it night night sky compliant. Um, similar to across the street. Um, and I I think it might be nice for that area, the seating area, to have some of the same similar element as across the street. Yeah. So, that's what I'll try and do.

Yeah. Um, I think it is better for us to react to things that you're proposing, a series of options rather than trying to come out of nowhere with what we don't know your brand. We don't know. The good thing is the building's still being built and we have a little bit of time before we have to get the the sign up on it. So, we're excited about the building. Yeah, the costs are what we were trying to um um get back into like the the budget, but um timing wise, it's not like the building exists and we have to open tomorrow, so we have a little bit of time. Well, then you get the gold star for coming early. Thank you. Um thank you. So, I'll I'll work with Nikki to get I was going to say just keep in touch about when you want to

I know the turnaround because you guys have meetings twice a month. The turnaround may not be appropriate for us. I think we skipped the meeting last time to make sure that we had enough time to and we're doing some minor changes to the sign ornate so it might actually end up being in your favor if you okay yeah wait a month another month or so capture that lighting in there so I don't have to validate it to the owner please okay thank you for your time thank you very much these are all good discussions about signage um okay we are looking next at the yes great for what we're going to tell you about sign work okay um I think our final project for the night is the Collegetown dispensary at 105 Dryen Road. We're looking at a potential signage package approval there as well.

Hello. Good. I will say you guys have the packet, the new packet on your in front of you, right? So, this is different than the materials that were emailed. Hello. Hi, I'm Carly. Hey guys. Hello. Do you have a presentation you want to walk us through the project?

Sure. Um, okay. Looks like you guys can see my screen. Um, so yeah, we're here to present a signage for College Town dispensary located at 105 Dryden Road. Uh, the store is currently open and operating. Um, we've been trying to get a sign up. Uh, we're we're almost coming up to our oneyear anniversary now. Um so the proposal for the sign is to have two signs uh made of wood that um are hung in the windows. Um the landlord of this building requires signage to be hung um only in this location on the building. He will not allow it to be hung anywhere else. Um so the proposal is to have two signs, one on each side. Um, and that is within we did all the measurements within code um to the one and a half times the linear square footage. So, we're allowed to have one sign of 25 ft and one sign of 24 square ft on either side of the building. These signs are 22 square ft. So, they are within the allowed um sizing for the building. Um the original drawing showed the um the mockup a bit bigger than they actually will be. Um so this is the actual sizing. You will still see the left and right windows. Um and it fits kind of right within those window sizes. Um so that is the the current proposal.

Okay. Thank you. Um questions, reactions? Uh Elizabeth, start with you please. Um, and there's no internal lighting. It's just um mount mounted on wood. Yes, that's correct. And those are the colors that you are proposing. That's correct. Okay. I honestly don't have any comments. Okay. Thank you, Max.

This is a a nice building. Uh the look of the store right now is really nice. I like what you don't have here is the signs that are currently in the window that just look really nice and it looks you know what it looks like is a a old classic pharmacy. It gives that appearance the way the building is and the way the signage is and the window. um this uh this sign is is really um uh clashes with with with that and I think it kind of takes away from the attractiveness of the building and the store by the way. Um and I I think part of what I think is uh clashing is the is the color uh design and maybe the size of it as well. So that's and I I went by and and looked at it today and actually the store and the building and everything looks quite nice. Compliment you.

Thank you. Thanks, Max. Jenny,

I think it's too big. Um, you know, Aman, just sort of looking in the comparison to the subway sign, you know, it's like half a foot longer than the subway sign. there was only one subway sign and you're proposing two um dispensary signs. I think you know I think you think I would recommend just one sign um and I think it's a little bit too large. Yeah, thanks. I mean I had the same thoughts. It seems too large and I would I would uh reduce to a single sign as well. Um, a question though. The name of the business is not dispensary I assume, right? There's a there's a name.

It's college town dispensary is the name of the business. So that feels like that should be

it's I mean the the point is to try to do two things to try to attract on one side the people who are driving up the road and have it be prominent and also the people that are walking on college a that are you know up away from the building to look down and see it. It's a weird building with like how the angles work and it's really difficult to get both sides without having two signs. And so, you know, there have been signs in those locations for a very long time with the subway thing. And, you know, we feel like the sign is actually smaller than the subway sign. And since it's the only one place that the landlord let us put it, we're constrained. I mean, I I I understand your comments about, you know, color, but but that's like the brand's color. And so, that's not something that they they want to move, you know, away from. Um, you know, I think there's things that we can potentially talk about and and try to work forward. I mean, I know that there was concerns about having the signs on the windows and also having the signs, you know, above. And we would rather take the signs off the windows and leave the ones above because they can be seen. the ones on the window can't be seen from anywhere. And so all the feedback we've gotten is we can't see your signs. You know, it looks nice when we're right up next to them, but we can't see them from the places where we want them to be seen from.

Well, that's helpful context. Um, I will say the subway letters you could see through, which is a bit different. Um, they were just individual letters as opposed to a a full board. There's so much glass on that wall that getting light into the building is the least of the problems, right? No. You think it's more about the architecture character? You're actually not allowed. I mean, you have to have them covered to try to like for for estate rules. So, there's like, you know, it's a whole thing that like really the we don't want the light. We, you know,

you have to have them covered. Can you explain that a little more? So that you're not seeing in from the outside or so there's not light. But the transom windows could be can't see in through trans windows. I understand that point point taken. Um, okay. So, that is helpful context. Looks like a lot of things. I think most people who are trying to go to a dispensary know they want to go to a dispensary and they're going to look up where the dispensary is. You would be shocked by the number of people who have come in and said that they struggle to find us. Like I know that that's hard to hear, but you know, I'm just trying to be Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm talking like because you're right. Like it does

like you know there's a lot of activity in that neighborhood. There's a lot of people vying for attention. There's a lot of signs and a lot of moving pieces and a whole bunch of humans that are walking around looking at their cell phone while they're walking around. And so to try to garner their attention in any way, shape, or form is challenging to say the least. And so, you know, because we're within the guidelines, because we're in the required size, because it's like a college townish commercial district, it's not like a neighborhood type thing. We would kind of seek the grace of the board to allow us to move forward, you know, with this sort of project. and you know if there's some accommodation that you wanted to make with a number of signs or something I understand the whole like concern around you know colors but like you you can't tell a person that they shouldn't be allowed to advertise the the color of the brand or whatever like

no on that point is well taken the red is the color of the brand so I think this building is a more interesting architecturally than other buildings in collegetown um and the transom is a key feature so I'm glad to hear you say there's a reason for why you're putting the sign there. It's the only place the landlord allows it, but I would still push for one on the street facing side instead of two to preserve some of that transom look. Um, I think the size of one is fine. It makes sense. It's the same as the subway. Nikki, do you have something?

I was just going to say, and if you're a minimal to the one, you could maybe keep the window decal on the other. I think I agree with Max. Those window decals are very they're really classy and look really nice, but you understand your issue, but I think that's a good compromise. A good compromise. Have the single sign. Oh, like you have the image up right now. The single. Yeah. So, one single sign and then maybe keep the um the gold in the other window. I would be okay with that. How does everybody feel? Don't you have to cover the window anyway? The co covering is on the inside and the gold letters are like, you know, stuck.

Yeah, I think that sounds like a good compromise. Sounds like the applicant is willing to make that reduction to one sign. Um, any further thought? I'm fine with that. If everyone is, I think we could move this and talk about it as a a change to the proposal. You don't seem convinced. No, I mean I don't I really dislike the color, but if we don't have any purview on selection of the color. I mean, maybe it could be I think it's a little bit like the font of the previous project where it's a brand identity. Yeah.

I think what you're reacting to is the what they said like they're trying to get everybody's attention and these are the two colors that are going to do that. What's the next person to get more attention than this? Like yes, a sign is supposed to draw you into a business, but it doesn't have to black out every field. So I think that's the I would be interested to see this. You say it's your branding. So like what is the branding? What is it? Do you have another sign that you used in another place that It just seems extremely utilitarian.

I think it would look Yeah, I think it would look really good if it was just the white lettering without the red background. Yeah. I think from our perspective too, you know, I think imagine if every storefront on College Town had these really giant signs. Like I think I I understand your perspective as a business owner and sort of thinking about and advocating for your business and we are also trying to think of like the entirety of the look and feel of walking around College Town and if every single building had these like giant signs that kind of like blasted you in the face, it would sort of decrease like the walkability and the character of College Town as a whole.

Uh two points. I mean Just to kind of restate the point, the building looks really nice now that I like and your store looks really nice, right? So the nothing taken away from that. In fact, I like it a lot now. I don't I still don't like the sign. U but one one idea could you know in terms of the it's so jarring with the lettering. Uh your your web site has the college town dispensary that that cursive actually that would soften it. Now, one of the reasons that I don't like it is because it's so glaring. I know that's what you want, but I don't like it. And so, I wonder if if that would be something you could consider. I don't know.

And I think it's jarring with the building is what we're saying. Like, architecturally, it's not fitting in. It's not compatible. Just for my own, even if you take take just that dispensary with that font with the white, you know, that would actually look better against the just the dispensary. Yeah, just just for my own feedback and try to articulate, you know, for clients, is it is it like a color of the building with the sign or what is the Gosh, I think it's it's the color and the font that we're trying to make more harmonious with the architecture of the building. So,

you guys like the building a lot more than I do. It has more character than other buildings in College Town, for sure. Yeah, I think our concern with the cursive is that it's a bit hard to read. Um, we did look at other signs um up and down the street um that seem to be also like College Town Pizza sign is massive and bright red. Back it wouldn't be a Yeah, but what I was going to say is about your cursive, but that's your brand, right? So if the color is your brand then and the cursive is your brand as well.

Um I think you know we we have different formats of the logos that is used in different areas for different reasons. So I think it works um on the website but you can see in the website header on the top left um dispensary is in the same font as college town. um we use it differently for um you know different purposes for legibility reasons and design reasons. Um so the choice was to make it as legible as possible so that cars driving by, people walking by um would understand what we are. Unfortunately the the kids of today aren't taught cursive anymore and uh cannot seem to read it unfortunately. Um it's just the world we live in these days. Um, yeah. So, those would just be

that you had on your website just a minute ago. Can you go back to it? There's three different They're up on the top. Even that would be more um than the the the on the sign now. Yeah, it's the same. Is that the same? It is the same font. They're just um different different weights of the same font. Okay, she's a bit bolder. Okay, so where does this leave us? Can we ask for a vote with the one sign

potentially? I think the red background is What is their brand? But their brand changes depending on the spot. I guess are you guys open to rethinking it or are you feeling very um committed to wanting this particular sign?

Unfortunately, I have already made the sign. So, we are quite committed to utilizing it. Um it would be a shame to have to go back and remake them. Um this is a new process for me. So, um, I was not aware that we had to go through the planning board approval in College Town. We we had been giving given guidance that signs in Collegetown didn't need approval, which clearly was, uh, poor advice. Um, so, our preference for sure, uh, there's a lot of work put into these. They're already manufactured and we've been open for almost a year. We would love to get them up. Uh, we would, so if we could hang one of them, it would be greatly appreciated. I wouldn't have known either, Carly. The fact that planning board review signs was uh also news to me when I joined the planning board.

Now, we're trying to comply with everything. Yeah. So, while I don't I do feel for you that they're already made, that is not necessarily something that we take into consideration. Um Yeah, understood. But I I will say we want to support local businesses. They're open. We do want to do what we can to help them get signage up quickly. Um, so that being said, I would be okay with one sign as is. Um, we can ask for if you are not or you want different fonts or something else, we can ask for something um for next time as well.

Go ahead, Lisa. I know that I I know that um and it is very true that the fact that it's already been done is not part of should not be part of the conversation. However, it is wood. It's painted wood, right? Yeah. Much could it not just be repainted? It's not like that has I don't know what

true. It's not a diecut metal plastic thing. Yeah, I could fully redo them and spend another whole week of my life hand painting the signs. That is a possibility. Uh it's just been a already a very large uh time commitment and I'm not honestly sure that I have time to do it again. Um so I think probably what would happen if we couldn't put these signs up is we would end up with no signage on the building, which would be pretty unfortunate for the business. um cuz we're, you know, due to um you know, just the advertising uh restrictions that we have on cannabis dispensaries in the state of New York, getting the word out that the dispensary exists is extremely challenging. Um and one of the only options that we do have is clear signage. So, um it would be really unfortunate. you know, the business is is brand new and it does uh it's struggling a little bit and it needs to get the word out and so we are um really needing to have a a better sign on the building.

Thank you. Because I would correct that you do have two signs right now. Those are those are counted as signs, those decals. They are, but they have very low visibility. I get it. I get it. But they're not as Yeah.

I'd be willing to um vote for one sign with the background painted black instead of red. So the white the white lettering. I think that would look well, you know, it would it would go with the building and I think it would match your um branding and um I think that would be a good solution. Anyone else agree with that or accept that as a possibility? I think there's two things there. It's a one sign versus two and a change in background color from red to black is what Elizabeth was proposing. Thoughts? I'm okay with the one sign um and the red as is or one sign.

Max, I'd like to uh have some uh alternatives uh proposed and I wouldn't be in favor of the existing options.

Okay. So, because we are a bare quorum tonight, we have to have four votes that agree. And I hear two Jenny and I feel like one sign in the current color is fine. And I hear Max and Elizabeth. One sign might be fine, but different colors. So, I don't know that we're going to come to a decision tonight. Okay. Max does not agree with that. So, unfortunately, I think we should table it, not vote on it, and ask for reconsidered Yeah. disabilities. If we had more people, I think it would be a different different story, but we have to be a unanimous vote tonight. And I don't see us getting to that. Can they bring this same package next month if Andy's also here to weigh in?

So, only three. Oh, okay. Okay. So, if we're not voting tonight, we should give some very clear advice on what we would need to see next time to get to a vote because it is a business that is open. So, they want to get signage up. Um, so Elizabeth, I heard a black background, same white letters, same font. And Max, do you have anything you would prefer to see or you just want to see alternatives? I'd just like to see alternatives both in terms of the uh font and and in terms of the colors and and perhaps even the sign size um you know the Yeah.

Okay. Yes. Just the you know the again what you're using to is are the design guidelines that say that it should be you know compatible with the building subordinate to the building. That's the I just I'm I'm confused because like what what I'm hearing is we don't like the brand color. We want you to change your brand color. And that seems to me to not be consistent like the purpose of of the sign ordinance.

Well, I mean I think as Lisa said, going back to the language in the design guidelines, the signs have to be subordinate to the building. And I think the color and the font and the size are making the sign not subordinate to the building. So there's besides your branding changes also red and white.

It's the red and the white with the scale and where it is. And I know Yeah. Um, so the word dispensary is just a long word. Um, there are there is some space to the left and the right of the D and the Y where we could potentially cut down the sign and probably lose six in or more. Um, would that be an acceptable solution to making the sign smaller? because I don't think we can really, you know, I don't know how it would look to make the the word dispensary smaller. The goal was to kind of make it take up that space of the windows so it felt like it was to a proper scale. But if we make it smaller, then we're going to end up, you know, kind of at a weird scale compared to the um the windows themselves. Um, so I don't know how much narrower um, we could go and it is already narrower than the subway sign um, by 4 in that was there before. Um, so we could reduce the width a bit by, you know, cutting these ends off on the left and right side. Would that be an acceptable size adjustment?

What do you think, Max? Well, again, you know, I'd like to see what it looks like with the with the changes and and and how it appears on the building. I mean, that the the the issue for me is just that it clashes with the with the style of the building. And if you read the guideline, it says design assigned to be compatible with the primary building. Use materials, colors, and details that are compatible with those used for the building. That's that's the guideline. Like not Yeah. the boundaries. But

so right now the building is white and maroon. Is the is the color problem with the maroon on the front of the building with the red? Um,

and I think the I think the red it is very hard to articulate these uh these things that we're asking changes for, but I think the red is completely different from the building, but understood that it's your brand color. So, it should be used in a different way on the font um as instead of the background color to the sign which is not compatible with the building. But going back to Carly's question about if we shorten the sign, does that help you guys get there? I mean, like we are really hoping to leave this meeting with a decision. You don't want to have to come back in a month.

I just want to be really clear about that. And I don't know if you guys want me to take a minute and explain the the nightmare of advertising under the state regulations, but it's it's near impossible. And so like to Carly's point earlier, this is pretty critical for the business.

Okay, I'll lean back to board members on this further. Um Carly, is the you know, you've you've mentioned that you have painted it. Is the red um less vibrant in real life than in the renderings? Because like I could see also like a painted version of this not necessarily popping quite the same way that like this kind of like very cardinal red

comes off pretty neon. Um here I I think it's a a little bit more muted, but it is a it is still a bright red, you know, Cornell red kind of color. Yeah, I was gonna say I do think there is also like a nod to the Cornell red here that

Right. We're trying to be collegiate. It's varsity font. You know, we're trying to play into the Cornell vibe. Um we are a college town store. Um so that was kind of the whole purpose behind the brand. Um is to follow kind of the Cornell colors and be in the spirit of College Town. I'm not sure where to go with this. Um, I don't think we're getting to a consensus tonight. Um, and I don't know what guidance to give other than what's in the design guidelines. So, well, I think I think we have to table it. think we should come back and ask for alternatives and we can't really tell you what those are other than compatibility with the signage design guidelines and architecture the building unfortunately.

Yeah, that's unfortunately vague but I will um Nate and I will discuss and we'll see what we can do. Okay. And you and do signs come to PRC? Signs can come to PRC. They can. Nope. No. No. But they can give you guidance for the planning board. Like, okay, that looks great. The issue with the black background. I mean, Elizabeth did give you one alteration. Yeah, that was a compromise. The issue with PRC is we're only allowed to have three people there. And for quorum, you need four. So you're not going to get like even if everyone in PRC agrees, that's not going to give you the quorum that you need.

If the background was changed to black and the um sign was shortened a bit, would that be something that this board would approve? I I would I can only speak for myself. Well, let's go around. I think Max is the hold out here, not to put pressure on you, but um yeah, you don't have to be pressured. Um, do you Good. Good. Then take is there a compromise that leads us to a vote tonight understanding that the business is open um or not? So that would be shortening like cutting off the dead space on both sides and changing the red to black or do you still feel like you'd like to see other options? Well, I'd like to see that option

visualized before we're voting on it. Before we vote on it. I wouldn't vote on it now. But the problem with that is that that would be another month that we wouldn't be able to have signage. So I Are there temporary signs allowed? I mean, the decals are signage. The decals are signage. Yeah. And they're up without a permit, but they are signage. Is there I thought you said that this is Yeah.

Yes. But it was a very slow start in October of last year and then lots of people were gone in December and January. There was some time over the spring where it picked up and then the students have just returned. And so we're getting lots and lots of feedback about people that, you know, don't see it, can't find it, whatever. And so we really are coming to you saying, can we please do this and can we figure out like what it is that you need so that we can try to move this forward without having to lose another, you know, month of time.

I mean, what I hear is you got a lot of feedback from really the sign you've got a lot of feedback but you haven't changed the sign. So what you're asking for is to accept the sign as it is after you've gotten a lot of feedback. So um that that is what I'm observing right that again. Sure. Um I don't think you heard that.

Yeah. What I'm observing is, you know, this went for staff level approval and you got a lot of feedback about it and didn't change the sign. So it came to the board and you didn't change the sign. So you're still asking for approval for something that you haven't actually responded to. That's the problem I think you're having here. Like that's As I'm seeing it, um, you're asking for the sign to be approved.

The feedback that we initially got from the staff was the the same guidelines that you guys have repeated back to us that it's not compatible with the building. Um, we waited a month to try to get clarity on what that meant exactly and didn't receive clarity. So, um, the color was said right away. We can look back on the thread of open gov. Right away it said the red color is not compatible with the building and the scale which is funny because I didn't see all those comments and I'm coming up with the same comment. It's on the staff memo that I sent. Yeah. Well, I didn't see that. Again, I think you can

I guess I wasn't understanding what it wasn't compatible with. Um like what part of the building is not is it not compatible with? So, I think we should take a look at different options. And if it's shortening the sign and the black background, we would need to see images of that. To Max's point, um, is there a way to get some sort of preliminary approval and then we'll, you know, come back to you and staff can approve it so we don't have to wait a month?

I don't think so. Um, because this is a voting item. So you could submit things to PRC and get very hopefully very clear feedback on some changes that could then be voted on at the next month. But I don't think there's a way to correct me if I'm wrong. I don't think there's a way. No, the board does all of its business in public. It can't vote outside of the public. Can we give a waiver for a one month sign that's temporary with the intent to review? We don't have time for that. Oh, okay. That is true. So, okay. All right.

See you guys in a month. Yes. I'm sorry we can't send you off with uh a vote tonight, but I think if if we do see materials next time, it will be a much easier vote. And Carly, if you do want to come to the PRC, that can be when you get like that solid feedback from at least three members. If you show, you know, it with the black background, whether I would encourage you to actually bring a sign because it's maybe it has a texture or an interest to it that is not coming through in this picture. That's totally that's what Jenny was kind of saying. Maybe it looks different in person than actually, you know what I mean? If it is really And you're saying bring pictures of the actual sign. Oh, bring like the sign,

you know, or I mean this I think the feedback you're getting is this just looks extremely utilitarian. It doesn't compel, you know, it doesn't have any relationship to the building. Yes. And you could use all those colors and say the same thing and it would be um a sign that had But that's what it looks like from this picture. again. Maybe the sign painted on wood has a different feeling to it that might change. All right, understood. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, next up we're looking at the director's well listening to the director's report. Okay, so um sign ordinances.

Well, actually uh this is a great conversation to talk about that afterwards, but I did want to touch base about um uh morning board comments for um the center of government. Um I had said that I was going to write a letter encouraging the legislature to follow the local law um requirements, which would be to go through planning board. Um, I don't really believe they're going to do that, but I was wondering if it would might be better and I'm happy to do that, but if it might be better to have a letter from the board asking that we can have it from board and staff and if there's any um comments you would like to make about the conceptual designs to include that in there, I'm happy to draft it and we can do it. We can do that. It's fine to do something like that over email if can. Yeah.

Yeah. Yep. So, I could compile those and turn it into a letter. Does that sound reasonable? Yeah, that sounds great. I think they have they do have a meeting where they're I think they're going to vote on the concept in early October. So, I would try to get this done in the next two weeks. Get it to you for review. I did encourage them. What' you say? I was going to say, you know, um I did encourage them as a county employee um to to bring it to the planning board even as like a courteous as a discussion, you know, as a courtesy. Um but I guess I didn't I hadn't been paying so close attention to the timeline because I I thought that they had actually seemed open to that idea, but maybe not if they're voting on it at the end.

They're voting on the concept. The design still has a long way to go. Okay. I mean, you know, I thought the same feedback. I have been not open to it. Yeah. Or no, I I got the sense that they were open to it. Oh, just as like, you know, they understand that they're not beholdened, but it is like as it's a nice thing to do in partnership and it is a building that fits into the fabric of downtown. So, absolutely. I've seen I think it would be good to send the letter just because it put our board on record that this is something we'd like to have.

Okay. All right. All right. So, I'll draft it using um Emily and starting with Emily and Andy's comments and then we can just uh edit it over the next like week or so. Okay. Right. Um, that's it for director's report. Okay. Um, old new business, the draft SPR ordinance.

Yes, we'll be having there's going to be two draft ordinances coming your way. Um, there is a site plan review ordinance that you're all very familiar with and a sign ordinance that you all now know pretty well. Um, but we have made some changes. So, we want to show you and get your feedback and your edits before we take it to common council. Um, and how much I should go into that. So, one of the things for sign that we're thinking about right now, it comes to you all right for design. If it if they're smaller, it comes to staff and we can do that, but it comes to you like through site plan review, then it has to get your approval before it goes to BCA. And what we have found is that that's really causing And you know the small um businesses a lot of a lot of long time waiting like it's kind of impractical to come here and then back there and if they scheduled for November but they didn't really get it with approval. So we are now suggesting that it just comes to the planning board

because size is really a design of signage and we can do the we'll provide you with the allowable limits and everything to say this is a special circumstance. You can have more signage or you can have less signage. So the planning board would make all the decisions. Yes. So you' approve it on design and then you'd have the however many criteria it is for the B what the BZA does looking at signs and seeing if it you know it's a design issue the size doesn't have to go it can be taken out of zoning and put into just a because the ordinance is under the zoning too. So

I think that's helpful for applicants to streamline the process. So many we're hoping efficiency size, right? And we might approve a size that then BZA doesn't approve and that's in direct conflict. So it's better to have it in. Yep. Um so that's something and you can comment too when you see it and read it. Um can you get that in the next week and so you guys will have time to talk about it in October.

What were the changes to the SPR? Oh, there's many many it's a lot actually of language just to make it a lot easier to read and efficiency and also um the lawyers looked at it so a lot of changes so that it's easier to change another policy you know what I mean like so it's not so repetitive and not so um so that if you change something in another ordinance it'll another policy still makes sense in this one um a lot of that and then there are some changes to the thresholds of um staff site plan review. Um so for seeker a type one action gets one of the the thresholds that gets kicked up to a type one I know that's different than site plan review but this is how we lined it up is 15 units. So we made the threshold now for staff level review at 14

recommend recommending it can always be kicked up to the board but and and recommending the c the council makes policies of course and you all feed into that but um also just to help streamline that review as well because right now it's for single family and with staff level review you don't see that but we basically We don't use a lot of discretion. It's not allowed. They have to meet all standards. They don't want to.

It would be the same kind of thing. You know, it would be larger projects that the recommendation is staff can approve larger projects, but it has to meet all the criteria. Yeah. So you'll see effort to kind of move barriers from smaller housing in middle housing really that middle housing from yeah single family to more multin and recommendations thank you Lisa yes does it happen to include um notification distances that radius we have been talking about to to align what the code requires for

it's not to align but um you'll see those exact It's the director can ask for a longer a bigger radius depending on where it is. Yeah. Yeah. Yes. And that and they'll all be highlighted where we they'll be underlined where we changed and you'll see verbiage also, you know, strike down. So should be easy to follow. And if you have any questions too, we can always talk about it. Yeah. And if you want to change it before it goes to common council and then council to direct that from there. Next October's meeting, it'll be soon you said. Yes. Yep.

Yeah. Does anyone have any questions on it without seeing it? Say it on scene. Okay. And then the other updating that we like to update it a couple times a year so you can see impact of your projects. currently construction or completed and so the ones that the percentage that were um lower or accessible

affordable sorry the right word um were there thresholds or uh uh goals that the city had on that and are we meeting those

um the city doesn't have specific goals except that we want more. Um there are certain requirements under if a project gets tax abatements, they have to either set aside 20% for to be affordable or they pay into a community housing trust fund that then is um is used to uh finance or provide a piece of the financing for affordable housing projects. But I will say that because we have, you know, such, you know, a great partners, uh, locally, uh, we have averaged about 20% of the units, um, to be affordable, which is pretty, it's not enough, but it's pretty good.

So, I don't know if that is does that answer your question? I mean, I'm just trying to see what kind of, you know, what goal posts we have, you know, that and so is does the county have some goals on that? They have they do a house the other night but I don't remember.

Yes. I mean they have they have a yes they have uh they tell us how much is needed and I think everybody's working in their own way. They don't have any land use authority but everybody's working in their own way to try to create a situation in which we're not having barriers to affordable housing. I think that this board has done a fabulous job with that over the years. Um, and there's only so much you can I mean some of it is market conditions too, right? Um, so we are always looking for ways like changing this thing in the site plan review ordinance, getting ADU legislation, regulating short-term rentals. We're always looking for ways to um remove barriers. And so I think you're going to see that too as we do the zoning rewrite. there'll be a lot of um recommendations put into place to things that have I been proven to potentially you know given the market conditions uh encourage more building of more affordable housing or more housing in general. So

I think what they said the other day the county is is pretty far behind in terms of the goals that they had that they had set out. Yes. Yeah. And I mean these are big goals based on just the number of housing units, but the city builds a huge amount of of housing. We build vast vast majority of it and we have I mean we need more but we've done very well increasing our housing supply. Can I be really picky about this report? Yes. Is there any way that you can pull data for the last five years?

Um yes. Uh it takes some time because it's not in a database. We and I we have done that. Remember I used to give a planning board report. Yeah. I used to do that for five ten years in fact. Um yeah it can be done. Yeah. Yeah. I think it'd be nice to see because I think we're in like over 3,000 units in the last five years. Oh yeah. We're at 2,500 right now. Well that's not I mean built. Oh yeah. Built. Yes. Yes. We actually can do that. Yeah. Yeah. cuz like the 6,500 doesn't I think built we only have 500 in the last year right

well that yeah this is meant to show the pipeline but I think we are working on a housing dashboard that will show over you know we'd have to pick a time to start but five we've been talking three to five years we just want to make sure the data is um accurate to show how many units have I think you had one that was five years Yeah, I did. We don't have a rent data, do we? To go along with that to see if rents are dropping in general supply, right? It doesn't feel like we don't have the ability. We have, you know, we know what the fair market rents are, but we don't know what the actual rents are of people's

properties that they do not now. You know, we could look into something like that too, but Thank you. That'll be interesting to look at. Thanks, Sam. And yeah, did you want to say anything else about it? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, it's just trying to also just get the information out about what we are doing and make it as transparent as possible. Let you guys also really see the impact of what you're Okay, great. Looks like there's nothing further. Can I have a motion to adjurnn? Lebette moves and Jenny seconds.