主页My WebLink关于2016-06-22 PAB Final Minutes6/22/16 1 PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD 2 Wednesday, June 22, 2016 3 SCOTT HEYMAN CONFERENCE ROOM 4 125 East Court Street 5 6 FINAL MEETING MINUTES 7 Members Attending: 8 Name Representation Martha Robertson P Planning Committee Monika Roth E Agriculture Kathy Schlather P Human Services Rob Steuteville A Built Environment Design Andy Zepp A Land Pres/Public Land Mgmt Dooley Kiefer A Associate Member Others Present Katie Borgella P Deputy Commissioner Megan McDonald P Senior Planner Ed Marx P Commissioner of Planning Pam Pariso P Planning Admin. Asst. 10 Guest: Megan McDonald, Senior Planner, Tompkins County Planning Department. 11 12 Call to Order & Changes to the Agenda – Chair David Kay called the meeting to order at 9:06 AM. No 13 changes to the Agenda. 14 15 Approval of Minutes from May 25, 2016 – No changes proposed. Martha Armstrong made a motion to 16 accept. Fernando de Aragon seconded. All were in favor. Minutes from the last meeting were unanimously 17 approved. Final minutes will be available on the Planning Department website: www.tompkins-18 co.org/planning/ under Advisory Boards. 19 20 Introductions – None. 21 22 Presentation: Green Energy Incentives, Report & Discussion 23 Tompkins County Planning Commissioner Ed Marx presented the results of the TCPD/TCAD-funded study 24 which engaged Taitem Engineering to develop detailed information on Return on Investment (ROI) for 25 energy efficiency and/or renewable energy measures to better understand cost constraints facing developers 26 and how to motivate developers to construct highly energy-efficient buildings. The study examines ways to 27 incentivize energy efficient construction, which typically costs more, without complicating an already-28 complex IDA abatement process even further. The study focuses on measures required to be taken to achieve 29 Architecture 2030’s goal of a 70 percent reduction in fossil fuel energy use, as compared to a typical existing 30 building of the same type. That equates to a target of 40 percent better than the new NYS code. 31 32 Case studies were conducted on five local properties: two office buildings, two multi-family mixed-use and 33 one hotel. High-efficiency boilers, water heaters and lighting are currently being incorporated into the 34 building designs, but there is much more to be done to achieve the much higher building efficiency 35 envisioned by Architecture 2030. Two local examples that have achieved net-zero are HOLT Architects’ 36 office and EcoVillage’s TREE multifamily/mixed use building. 37 38 Name Representation Martha Armstrong P Economic Development Todd Bittner P Natural Environment Joe Bowes P Housing Sue Cosentini E Business Fernando de Aragón P Transportation John Gutenberger A Education Dave Herrick A Facilities/Infrastructure Ruth Hopkins P At-Large Rod Howe E Historical/Cultural Resources David Kay P Local Planning (urban) Darby Kiley P Local Planning (non-urban) Gay Nicholson E At-Large Tax abatements and other incentives could entice developers to achieve higher levels of energy efficiency. 39 The report outlines several nationally recognized ways to meet the energy efficiency standards envisioned in 40 the study. All require third party analysis and confirmation, which would help reduce any needed follow-up 41 and study by TCAD staff. Incentives would not be based on actual constructed building performance, but on 42 modeling done using pre-construction plans and checklists. 43 44 These potential green energy incentives were discussed with developers in a feedback session, and it was 45 mostly positive. The drawbacks, according to the developers, include having to capitalize the extra cost of 46 the improvements given the fact that energy efficiency measures may not be recognized by banks as 47 enhancing the building value; and concern about an abatement program that ended abruptly without some 48 tapering off. Also, developers and landlords often don’t pay utilities, so passing on lower utility costs isn’t 49 necessarily a priority for them. 50 51 A member asked about feedback from other municipalities on tax incentives. Ed said it hasn’t gotten that far 52 yet. Ed said they hope to get a portfolio of highly-efficient buildings to serve as an example for future 53 development. Because of this study, developers’ general concerns are known, and they can be addressed up 54 front. The county hopes to get developers and banks to “buy in” for the long term, and not just consider 55 short-term ROI. It’s a carrot approach rather than a stick approach. 56 57 It was suggested that a formal evaluation and review process be undertaken to determine what incentives will 58 change behavior. Ed believes we need to move forward quickly to achieve the county’s goals. It was noted 59 that without big incentives, most builders won’t go out of their way to build to high efficiency standards. The 60 final report is still being written. 61 62 Housing Needs Assessment: 63 Planning Department Senior Planner Megan McDonald gave a report on the preliminary findings of the 64 recent Tompkins County Housing Needs Assessment. The assessment is looking at a time horizon of the next 65 decade. There has been a lot of disagreement on the current local housing situation, and census data alone 66 don’t give a good picture of the local situation. There’s a need for fresh data on housing so that the County 67 can project and plan better for the needs of the future. The Planning Department is using a quantitative model 68 to calculate and project the needs, using data from various sources. The Danter Company is the consulting 69 firm gathering these data. Their recent online survey anticipated maybe 500-1,000 responses, but had some 70 4,500 participants. This huge response indicates how hot of an issue housing is in the community. 71 72 Employment in Tompkins County is growing, so we are seeing increasing in-commuting, as well as the need 73 for additional housing. Right now, based on employment, there’s a deficit of more than 7,000 housing units 74 which accurately reflects the number of in-commuters. There is a significant need for new housing units 75 now. With projected employment expected to increase, the outlook for the next ten years is that this deficit 76 will continue to grow. There will continue to be a significant need for housing just to keep up with Tompkins 77 County’s growth, even if we weren’t trying to capture in-commuters or respond to the projected increasing 78 student population. 79 80 Student housing needs have a significant impact on housing deficits, and since enrollments are expected to 81 increase, off-campus apartments -- especially student-purposed housing -- will be in increased demand. 82 There will be a huge need for new construction of student-purposed housing in the next 10 years. Cornell is 83 conducting a housing study as well, for both on- and off-campus needs. 84 85 Senior housing is another huge need. This is not just because the local aging population is growing, but also 86 due to the fact that Ithaca is now considered a highly-desirable retirement destination community. There is an 87 unmet demand, and this will increase as the population ages. Retirees desire one-floor living and a 88 “walkable” neighborhood. 89 90 Affordability continues to be a major issue, as most homes start at over $200,000. Demand for condos also 91 seems to be rising. Once the needs assessment is complete, the county will next develop a housing strategy to 92 meet demands for all these population segments, and this committee will be asked for their input. Public 93 input will also be solicited. 94 95 It was brought up that data are needed to show the relationships between supply and demand for all these 96 population segments before it’s presented to the public. People see lots of new construction and think enough 97 is being done, but it’s not enough. The water/sewer infrastructure study done several years ago showed that 98 there is sufficient existing capacity to support expected growth in the surrounding municipalities, primarily in 99 the Development Focus Areas. Ed said he hopes to map the strategy to align the demand with the physical 100 locations suitable for future housing growth based on local plans. Ed said the consequences of inaction will 101 be more traffic congestion and more rural sprawl which will hurt the environment. This group, the Planning 102 Advisory Board, will be one of the groups consulted for strategies in the next year. All agreed that this a 103 major Tompkins County planning issue. 104 105 Commissioner’s Report – Ed Marx reported on: 1) The next stage of the microgrid feasibility grant process. 106 Applications are due in October. The County is considering getting a third party to manage the process, since 107 the County will eventually be a customer. 2) The airport is applying for a NYS improvement grant. It 108 proposes green terminal renovation and a new business/industrial park with access road and infrastructure at 109 Warren and Cherry roads, with the DOT as the proposed first tenant. 3) South Hill recreation way extension 110 has some landowners contesting it due to NYSEG landownership legalities. 111 112 Announcements – None. 113 114 Adjournment – Kathy Schlather moved for adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 10:29 AM. 115 116 Respectfully submitted, 117 118 Pamela Pariso 119 Administrative Assistant 120 Tompkins County Planning Department 121 122 Approved on August 24, 2016 123