LEED Sustainability Audit Report for the CIty of Ithaca, New York, July 8, 2013, prepared by Agora Group, NRDC, Criterion Planners

8/13/2019 LEED Sustainability Audit Report for the CIty of Ithaca, New York, July 8, 2013, prepared by Agora Group, NRDC, Criterion Planners

1/277

LEED-ND Sustainability Audit of Ithaca NY

PreparedfortheCity of IthacaJuly2013

by the Agora Groupwith theNatural Resources Defense Council and Criterion Planners


2/277

LEED-ND Sustainability Audit of Ithaca NYJuly 2013

Prepared for the

City of Ithaca, NY, Planning Division

by the

Agora Group

Natural Resources Defense CouncilCriterion Planners


3/277

Table of ContentsIntroducon...............................................................................................

Using LEED-ND As A Sustainability Audit Tool...........................................

Methodology..............................................................................................

Analycal Tools...........................................................................................

Aordable Housing.....................................................................................

A Note About GIS.........................................................................................

Analysis by Comprehensive Plan Element..................................................

A. LEED-ND Community Audit Checklist.................................................

B. Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements.................................................

C. LEED-ND Credit Sets Organized by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elem

D. Combined Checklists...........................................................................

E. Zoning Code Checklist..........................................................................

F. Site Plan Review Ordinance Checklist.................................................

G. Stormwater and ESC Regulaons Checklist.........................................

H. Southwest Area Design Guidelines Checklist......................................

I. Subdivision Regulaons Checklist........................................................

J. Transportaon Checklist......................................................................

K. Energy Acon Plan Checklist...............................................................

L. Environmental Quality Review Checklist............................................

M. Land Preservaon Ordinance Checklist..............................................

N. Capital Improvement Program...........................................................

O. King County, WA, CIP Priorizaon Criteria.......................................

P. GFOA Recommended Best Pracce for Integrang Sustainability in C

Vision...................................................................................................

Economic Vitality....................................................................................

Community Livability..............................................................................

Mobility and Transportaon...................................................................

Sustainability and Natural Resources.......................................................

Public Investment....................................................................................

Conclusion..................................................................................................

Further Reading and Resources...................................................................

References.......................................................................................................

Appendices......................................................................................................


4/277

1

IntroductionSustainability is the organizing principle and fundamental foundaon that Ithaca is using in

revising its Comprehensive Plan. To ensure that the Plan revision incorporates state-of-the-art

sustainability pracces, the Agora Group was hired to compare City policies and regulaons to

LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) Rang System standards, and determine the

green adequacy of City measures. This report includes the results of our study, idenes

strengths and weaknesses of exisng policies and regulaons, and provides recommendaons

for the Comprehensive Plan update in order to achieve greater environmental sustainability.

Using LEED-ND As A Sustainability Audit ToolThe LEED for Neighborhood Development Rang System was devel-

oped primarily for new development projects interested in obtain-

ing a green stamp of approval. The rang system contains a set of

measurable standards that score the degree to which a proposed

development is environmentally superior by considering the devel-

opments locaon and access, its internal paern and design, and

its use of green technology and building techniques. However, the

tool is much more than that. It is also a checklist capable of arc-

ulang and quanfying what sustainability at a community scale

looks like. Thus, not only can LEED-ND be used to cerfy develop-

ment projects, communies can use it to align their plans and land

development regulaons with sustainability best pracces.

MethodologyCriterion Planners created the LEED-ND Community Audit Checklist by co

Rang System into a checklist of sustainability metrics (as shown in Appe

Ithacas Planning Division asked the Agora Group, the Natural Resources

Criterion Planners to audit the following crical land development policie

Zoning Code

Site Plan Review Ordinance

Stormwater Management Regulaons including the Beer Site Design

DECs Stormwater Regulaons Southwest Area Design Guidelines

Subdivision Regulaons

Transportaon Planning documents including the Dra Transportao

vard Plan, the Bike Plan, and the Collegetown Urban Plan

Capital Improvement Plan

Energy Acon Plan

Environmental Quality Review

Landmarks Preservaon Ordinance

Each document was audited with the ndings summarized in individual t

solidates these ndings and provides recommendaons for revising the C

Plan as well as the policy and regulatory documents that were reviewed.


5/277

A Note About GISPerforming a GIS analysis to respond to the geographic-based LEED-ND C

Checklist items was beyond the scope of work; however, the Citys GIS da

to determine if informaon is available to support such analysis in the fu

that sucient data exists for the City to measure the following items:

Use mix and distances between uses

Sidewalk network

On-street parking

Bike network length Intersecon density

Block length

The remaining geographic-based items require parcel-level measuremen

jobs, their rao to one another, and their walking distance to key desna

borhood gardens, farmers markets, bike networks, transit stops, vehicle

spaces, recreaon facilies, and schools. According to sta, the City does

el counts of dwelling units or jobs, making the measurement of accessibi

space, transit or other amenies per dwelling unit or worker infeasible at

An alternave measurement would be the distance from each residena

parcel centroid to the desnaons, with the result expressed as percent oable distances rather than percent of people.

Either way, compleon of the measurements will provide a fuller, more d

of household and business-level condions, parcularly decient areas w

acons.

Affordable HousingAordable housing is a signicant issue in Tompkins County and the City of Ithaca is facing a

growing need for an aordable housing supply, especially for families with median incomesor less. In spite of this, within the documents we reviewed, there was almost no menon of

the aordable housing issue. Housing aordability and social equity are crical neighborhood

components embedded in LEED-ND and, more importantly, are key to sustainability. Since

reviewing aordable housing policy was beyond the scope of work, we did not provide further

analysis on this topic; however, the inclusion of policies and incenves for aordable housing in

the Comprehensive Plan is absolutely crical.

Analytical ToolsAs part of our nal analysis we created several tables to organize our ndings for use by the City

of Ithaca in the Comprehensive Plan revision process. These tables summarize our ndings in a

more graphic format as well as provide more specic policy and regulaon recommendaons.

The analysis by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements (Appendix B) idenes key strengths

and weaknesses in the policy and regulatory documents reviewed, outlining where and how

they can be addressed in the Comprehensive Plan update.

LEED-ND Credit Sets Organized by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements (Appendix C) clas -

sies LEED-ND credit sets and synergies by Comprehensive Plan elements. It also provides a

visual for how the LEED-ND credits are cross-referenced between elements.

The Community Audit Checklist Combined (Appendix D) is a compilaon of each audit for

the policy and regulatory documents reviewed. The Combined Checklist table denotes

where each policy or regulaon meets or falls short of LEED-ND metrics. Green cells iden-

fy a policy or code provision that meets the rang systems standards, while yellow cells

denote paral achievement of LEED-ND thresholds, and red cells signify a substanal de -

ciency. The individual checklist for each reviewed document appears in Appendices E

through M.


6/277

3

Analysis by Comprehensive Plan ElementOur ndings are presented following the format of the Comprehensive Plan outline, so that our

recommendaons can be easily incorporated into the revised plan. Following each secon nar-

rave is a bulleted summary of strategies providing main points at a glance. Implemenng these

strategies will ensure the theme of sustainability is fully integrated throughout the Comprehen-

sive Plan and a sustainable future for Ithaca is realized.

Of the many recommendaons in this report, the consultant team strongly suggests focusing on

four priories:

Focus development near exisng infrastructure, amenies, and transit.

Establish land-use density minimums.

Remove minimum o-street parking requirements.

Provide incenves for LEED cercaon of privately owned buildings.

Vision

The principles of LEED-ND can be used to help cra a holisc framework of sustainability goals

for the Citys Comprehensive Plan. The exisng built environment and Ithacas long-standing

commitment to livability provide an excellent foundaon for craing a sustainable vision for the

future. However, the incremental adopon of policies over me has inhibited a more integrated

focus on core sustainability elements. We recommend adopng a policy statement in the Com-prehensive Plan that supports the clustering of growth around exisng infrastructure, increasing

density where appropriate, and enhancing the pedestrian environment to demonstrate your

commitment to sustainable development.

In addion, we strongly recommend amending land development policies and regulaons to

fully implement the Comprehensive Plan. So oen communies invest in their comprehensive

plans but fail to fully implement them because of contradictory land development policies and

regulaons.

Summary of Strategies:

Adopt a policy statement in the Comprehensive Plan comming the

future.

Require consistency between the Comprehensive Plan and land deve

regulaons.

Economic Vitality

A smart growth approach to planning and development, which concentr

walkable, well-designed areas, will directly advance the Citys economic

shown that the density and mix-used development standards requisite to

erate up to ten mes greater tax revenue per acre than convenonal dev

upfront infrastructure costs, and reduce public service delivery costs. In

borhoods will connue to aract employees to improve workforce devel

districts with walkable streets and mixed uses will provide greater long-te

than convenonal sprawl. Convenonal development, on the other hand

pendent and characterized by less ecient use of land with homes, scho

separated. This type of development is associated with less economic st

(Smart Growth America, 2013).

We have noted several strengths and weaknesses with regards to the city

ment strategy. Current zoning provides for a reasonable mix of housing a

subject to site standards that protect established neighborhood qualies

allows for a mix of lower and higher density and, to a limited degree, a m

the downtown and adjacent neighborhoods. However, we recommend m

sies of 7 dwelling units/acre and 0.5 FAR and density incenves in strate

as including a zoning category specically for mixed-use. Without this, th

of growth and development paerns that cost more to build and operate

smart growth development strategies may save an average of one-third o

ture costs due to reduced amount of infrastructure needed and the corr

(Smart Growth America, 2013). In addion, denser neighborhoods with h


7/277

connecvity are more likely to save the City money on service costs. For example, having a

more connected road network increases the number of households that can be served by a re

staon.

The Community Investment Incenve Program (CIIP) provides tax abatement for projects that

increase property values in the Density District. This is a great way to encourage development

downtown. However, policies for fostering compact development, street connecvity, hous-

ing-type diversity, priority growth areas, and transit-served, walkable uses are lacking through-

out the Zoning Code.

The Southwest Area is a single-use, auto-oriented commercial district that drains City resources

and detracts from the beauty and walkability of the community. The SW Area Design Plan reaf-

rms the auto-orientaon and pedestrian unfriendliness by allowing surface parking lots in the

front of buildings. To further improve pedestrian access to businesses and reduce development

costs, provide incenves for acve ground uses, such as cafs or retail shops, for buildings and

set maximum lot coverage for surface parking. The City should apply the Collegetown Urban

Plan requirements for building entries and clear facades city-wide.

Summary of Strategies

Remove regulatory barriers for mixed-use, compact, and walkable neighborhoods to save on

upfront infrastructure costs, and ongoing maintenance and services.

Update parking requirements:

Eliminate required o-street parking rate minimums.

Apply a maximum acreage to o-street surface parking areas.

O-street parking should be located at the side or rear of buildings; Shielding from

view is not sucient.

Limit the number of garage and service bay driveways that cross sidewalks.

Implement minimum land-use densies of 7 dwelling units/acre and 0.5 FAR.

Amend Zoning Code to create a mixed-use zone.

4 Priorities for a Sustainable Future in Ith

Locaon:Focus development near exisng infrastructure,

transit.

Design:Establish density minimums.

Design:Remove minimum parking requirements.

Buildings:Provide incenves for the adopon of LEED sta

municipal buildings.


8/277

5

Community Livability

Community livability, as dened in the Comprehensive Plan outline, will include informaon

about the Citys neighborhoods, historic preservaon, public health, and quality of life. In think -

ing about neighborhoods, an inventory of locaons in the City that meet the LEED-ND prerequi-

sites for smart locaon could help idenfy benecial development areas for future low-impact

growth and idenfy opportunity sites for catalyc projects. The City should encourage new

development or redevelopment near exisng infrastructure, amenies, and transit. The City can

use the LEED-ND locaon standards to evaluate proposed developments and oer incenves for

developers to achieve LEED-ND standards. The tax benet incenves provided for historic pres -

ervaon and adapve building reuse provide an excellent example of how the City can encour-age the use of exisng structures.

While we recognize that the City of Ithaca is a small, relavely urban area and most new devel-

opment is considered inll, there are some large tracts of land, parcularly in the Southwest

Area, that have potenal for development. Thus, we believe a policy that encourages inll

would be benecial. We also recommend providing incenves for browneld redevelopment.

By encouraging the reuse of environmentally contaminated land, development pressures else-

where are reduced.

Incorporang LEED-ND design standards are important steps to improvin

to amenies will posively impact physical acvity among residents. Phy

biking is supported by providing bike routes and parking, something the

dional comments on biking are provided in the next secon). In order t

health and physical acvity are a priority, we recommend improving the

LEED-NDs connecvity and intersecon density standards, and ensure th

are within an easy walk to recreaon and green space.

SummaryofStrategies

Dene priority growth and redevelopment areas near exisng infrast

transit.

Set goals in the Comprehensive Plan to improve livability, public heal

quality of life.


9/277

Mobility and Transportation

The City has the opportunity to adopt stronger transportaon and mobility goals in both the

Comprehensive Plan and other transportaonrelated plans. The City is priorizing mul-modal

transportaon planning, including a crical transit partnership with TCAT. For a small system,

TCAT provides beer than average service. However, Ithacas integrated transportaon system

could be more comprehensive. Specically, policymaking would benet from beer informaon

regarding pedestrian and bicycle network connecons to dwelling and job locaons. In addi -

on, the Comprehensive Plan would benet from data that includes Transportaon Analysis

Zone-level breakdowns of trips rates, mode shares, and trip lengths. The Collegetown Urban

Plan has beer transportaon content and its 10 sustainable transportaon system elementscan be used to inform city-wide policies.

Addressing minimum densies will help to ensure beer transit ridership. In addion to this,

missing sidewalks and lack of a community-scale travel network is a barrier to beer connecon

of modes. We recommend working with TCAT to deliver more frequent service to the big box

retail in the Southwest Area.

In general, there are some bicycle friendly condions in the community. Notably, the citys

retail and non-retail bike parking spaces meet or exceed ND requirements. We recommend

strengthening the Comprehensive Plan and Bike Parking Standard even further by including

policies in the plan for shower facilies in buildings and more secure bike storage.

Motor vehicle parking has assumed a great level of importance among th

nity planning because of the dominance of auto travel. For example, the

Review Ordinance includes reviewing site plans to migate the negave e

implies that parking should be protected, and we nd that parking is oe

pense of sustainability. O-street parking rate minimums should be repea

dates have acknowledged the need for managing parking in ways that fo

A long-term shi toward more mul-modal travel must include parking a

agement measure. Include incenves to reduce o-street surface parkin

them away from streetscapes. Provide parking space set-asides for carpo

SummaryofStrategies

Parking:

Repeal parking minimums.

Provide incenves to reduce o-street parking footprint.

Include parking space set-asides for carpool or shared-vehicle

Increase land-use densies to create higher potenal transit ridership

Obtain GIS data on dwelling and job locaons in relaon to bike and

Improve street network:

Decrease block lengths.

Increase sidewalk widths and require sidewalks on both sides Implement bike boulevard plan.

Ensure households are within walking distance of recreaon a


10/277

7

Sustainability and Natural Resources

Ithaca seeks to incorporate a sustainability framework into the Comprehensive Plan to realize a

sustainable future. This is laudable, but many of the necessary policies and regulaons are cur-

rently not in place to support this goal. In order to ensure that development projects preserve

natural resources and reduce negave impacts to the community and the environment, we rec-

ommend that the Comprehensive Plan provide clear guidance on how to achieve environmental

protecon. The City currently has a very strong recycling program providing adequate pick-up as

well as a Zoning Code that allows for gardens and greenhouses in all zones. In addion, Ithacas

Energy Acon Plan encourages renewable energy generaon, which can be rearmed in the

Comprehensive Plan.

We also idened several areas of environmental stewardship that should be addressed in

order to create a more sustainable framework. There are currently no incenves for street tree

planng, nor are there best pracces for achieving a higher degree of environmental impact

avoidance during the land development process. Providing guidelines for street tree planng is

an easy and inexpensive way to improve sidewalk shading, walkability, and aesthecs. In addi-

on, while it is stated that development-related environmental impacts are migated, there are

no standards in place for doing so. For example, the City should consider requiring development

projects to protect signicant trees and environmental resources from damage from construc -

on or future land uses as much as possible. The EQR forms require migaon of impacts for

listed acons, but provide no further guidance on best pracces. The EQR Ordinance should

provide guidance on best pracces. The introductory statement of the EQR states that impacts

are migated within an economically appropriate context. While this is a praccal require-

ment, we recommend clarifying that migaon pracces should be both environmentally and

economically appropriate. Lastly, a new steep slope ordinance is under development and we

encourage the City to incorporate the ND metrics for the protecon of slopes.

We also recommend more rigorous energy standards. The Energy Acon

to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below 2001 levels by 2016, a

way to meeng this goal. Include this goal in the Comprehensive Plan alo

on strategies for reducing community-wide reliance on the electrical tra

example, reward projects that construct or retrot buildings using high-p

eciency standards, such as LEED or other green building rang systems

egies with exisng building codes to ensure that exisng standards do no

of sustainable building pracces. In addion, enhance the building energ

or expedited perming incenves to exceed the standards. Encourage dComprehensive Plan as a means of reaching energy eciency goals.

With regards to stormwater management, the City has made an eort to

ter burden in high-density areas or redevelopment projects. While these

able, the City could go further by explicitly requiring the implementaon

transpiraon, and/or the reuse of rainwater.

SummaryofStrategies

Reward projects that construct or retrot buildings using high-perfor

cy standards.

Provide incenves for street tree planng.

Include best pracces for environmental impact migaon during co Include compact, mixed-use development as a means to help achieve

sion reducon goals.

Encourage district heang systems.

Require stormwater management plans that do not penalize compact

but that emulate natural hydrologic condions and use inltraon, ev

other best management pracces.


11/277

Public Investment

Creang guidelines for future major public investments will help create synergy with the Citys

goals to promote business development, aordable housing, and sustainability. The current

capital improvement program (CIP) project selecon criteria should be consolidated, their rela-

onship to sustainability claried, and an objecve selecon process established, e.g. quaned

scoring of criteria. The current CIP process does acknowledge sustainability and energy ecien-

cy. However, it isolates these elements instead of integrang them with other investment crite-

ria. Addional recommendaons for improving the CIP can be found in Appendices N through P.

SummaryofStrategies

Consolidate CIP project selecon criteria; clarify the relaonship between the CIP and sus-

tainability goals; and establish a clear, objecve, and quanable system for scoring candi -

date projects.


12/277

9

ConclusionIthaca is well posioned to set forth on a path toward sustainability. By incorporang the rec-

ommendaons in this report into the Comprehensive Plan, the City will have a blueprint for

acon.

We believe the recommendaons provided in this report, together with the analyses and guide-

lines in the tables, will provide the tools for Ithaca to become an exemplar of sustainability. Yet,

we again re-iterate that an excellent starng point is to implement the four priories: 1) Focus

development near already exisng infrastructure with easy access to amenies and transit; 2)

Establish land-use density minimums; 3) Remove minimum o-street parking requirements;

and, 4) Provide incenves for LEED cercaon of privately owned buildings. These importantelements are simple steps that yield worthwhile posive benets.

We urge the City to connue to use the LEED-ND Community Audit Checklist. We found that

both the LEED-ND Rang System and the Community Audit Checklist have enormous ulity,

versality, and exibility and can be easily adapted for a multude of evaluaon tasks. It takes

a few minutes to idenfy the checklist items relevant to a given subject, proposal, policy and/

or regulatory issue, and then a few more minutes to understand the sustainability metrics. We

hope you will nd value in the Community Audit Checklist going forward.

Further Reading and ResourcesUSGBCs Technical Manual for Sustainable Neighborhoodsincludes sever

communies that have undergone sustainability audits or have used LEED

their comprehensive plans. For example, Bellingham, WA adopted a zon

development to an urban core and uses LEED-ND to measure the long-te

proposed master plan. Branford, CT encourages sustainable neighborhoo

hensive plan through tax and regulatory incenves, and uses LEED-ND fo

ability standards. The manual provides detailed informaon on how the

update their land use codes and plans (USGBC, 2013).

In addion, we suggest providing incenves for developers to aim to reacronmental standards. Some examples of these types of strategies includ

Bonus zoning

Tax increment nancing

Property tax credits or abatements

Fee reducons or waivers

Direct nancial assistance or grants

Technical assistance

Educaonal incenves i.e. local government can provide guides or res

developers about sustainable neighborhood development

Markeng incenves such as press or public recognion for sustainabects

For more informaon on each of these strategies, we recommend the se

ernment Guide to LEED for Neighborhood Development entled The cas

describes how local governments can use each of these approaches (USG


13/277

ReferencesA Cizens Guide for Neighborhood Development. 2011. NaturalResources

DefenseCouncilandRaimi+Associates .

A Local Government Guide to LEED for Neighborhood Development. 2012. US

GreenBuildingCouncil.

Byerly, Meg. 2013. Technical Guidance Manual for Sustainable Neighborhoods.

USGreenBuildingCouncilandPaceLawSchool.

Criterion Planners. 2012. Local Planners Catalog of LEED-ND Measures. USGreenBuildingCouncil.

Fulton, William et al. 2013. Building Beer Budgets. SmartGrowthAmerica.


14/277

11

Appendix A. LEED-ND Community Audit Checklist

LEED-ND Components Checklist Applicable ND Metric

1. Planning Process

1.1 Public involvement

1 Are incenves oered for beyond-code outreach to groups aect-ed by development projects, e.g. develop-sponsored pre-design

meengs, design charrees?

Y/N

2. Land-Use

2.1 Urban growth limit

2

Is community development geographically limited to a plannedwater/wastewater service area or similar urban growth control

mechanism?

Y/N

2.2 Priority growth areas

a. Redevelopment 3 Is priority given to, or incenves oered for, redevelopment ofbrownelds or other special designaon areas, e.g. enterprise

zones?

Y/N

b. Development Is priority given to, or incenves oered for, development of thefollowing site types:

4 -Inll? 75% of surrounding land preintersecons/sq mi w/i 1/2-

5 -High connecvity? (intersecon density) 200 intersecons/sq mi (exe

6 -Adjacent and connected? (conguous development) 25% adjacent to previous desecons/sq mi w/i 1/2-mi, a

7 -Transit-served? 50% of HH/non-res w/i 1/4-weekday, 40 trips/weekend

weekday trips, 400 weeken

8 -Walkable diverse uses? 30% of HH/non-res w/i 1/4-

Diverse uses include food reretail, commercial services,

facilies.


15/277

2.3 Density

a. Transit corridor minimums 9 Are minimum densies required within 1/4-1/2 mi of high-frequency transit service? If so, at what DU/acre and FAR?

12 DU/ac, 0.8 FAR at 40/60+

density calc method)

b. Other locaon minimums 10 What are minimum densies in all or other parts of the communi-ty? If so, at what DU/acre and FAR?

7 DU/ac and 0.5 FAR

c. Incenves/bonuses 11 Are incenves/bonuses oered for increasing densies above min-imums? If so, at what levels of DU/ac and FAR, or comparable

mechanisms such as increased height allowance?

Up to 63 DU/ac and 3.0 FAR

2.4 Mixed-uses

a. Authorized/encouraged 12 Does zoning enable mixed-uses? Are incenves oered for mixed-uses?

Diverse uses include food re

retail, commercial services,

facilies.

a. Spaal extent 13 Where are mixed-uses located geographically in the community?Are they concentrated or dispersed?

4 diverse uses w/i 1/4-mi of

diverse uses)

b. Clustering 14 If diverse uses are clustered in certain areas, what are averagewalk distances between them?

600-800 (300-400 walk

2.5 Large retail uses

a. Transit-served 15 Are large retail uses required to have superior transit service? Arethere minimum headways for stops serving such uses?

Total retail of 150k sq , inc

use, requires 76/50 wkday/

1/2-mi



16/277

13


2.6 Housing

a. Structure types 16 What range of dwelling structure types exist and how many unitsper type? Can the Simpson Diversity Index be applied to subareas

of the community?

The Simpson Diversity Index

ability that any two random

will be of a dierent type. T

um, and small types of deta

unit bldgs, live/work space,

17 Are incenves oered for increasing diversity of structure types? Y/N

18 Are accessory dwelling units allowed? Y/N

b. Pricing What percent of rental units in the community are priced at:

19 -60% of AMI 5% (exemplary: 30%)

20 -80% of AMI 10% (exemplary: 50%)

What percent of for-sale units in the community are priced at:

21 -100% of AMI 5%

22 -120% of AMI 8%

23 Are incenves oered for creang aordable housing? Y/N

c. Co-located type & price diversity 24 Are incenves oered for co-locang diverse structure types andaordable units?

Y/N

2.7 Jobs/housing balance

25 What is the community-wide jobs/housing rao? 1:0.75, 1:1.25 preferred

26 What are subarea raos? Minimum 1:0.5, 1:1 preferre

27

Are incenves oered to strengthen raos?

Ch kli t A li bl ND M t i


17/277


2.8 Food producon & sales

a. Garden/greenhouse locaons 28 Are gardens and greenhouses permied in any yard area in anyland-use zone?

Y/N

b. Neighborhood gardens Are neighborhood gardens permied/regulated, including:

29 -Minimum growing space 60 sq /DU @ 35 DU/ac, upDU/ac (see exemplary scale

30 -

Minimum equipment

Pedestrian and solar accessraised beds, and secure spa

31 -Ownership & mgmt requirements Owned and managed by propants

32 What percent of HH are within 1/2-mi walk of neighborhood gar-dens?

Proximity for most resident

c. Farmers markets 33 Are farmers markets permied/regulated? Y/N

34

What are farmers market operaonal characteriscs?

Open once weekly, 5 month150 miles

35 What percent of HH are within 1/2-mi walk of a farmers market? Proximity for most resident

36 What percent of employees are within 1/2-mi walk of a farmersmarket?

Proximity for at least 30% p

d. Community-supported agriculture 37 Are incenves oered for developer purchase of CSA shares? 80% of DUs receive shares adropped within 1/2 mi of pr

100%)

LEED ND C t Checklist Applicable ND Metric


18/277

15


2.9 Energy facilies

a. Renewable energy generaon 38 Are renewable energy generaon plants permied in the localcode?

Y/N

39 What percent of total community electrical & thermal energy areprovided by renewables?

5% of total costs (exemplar

40 Are incenves oered for increasing the share of energy met by

renewables?

Y/N i.e. tax credits, grants, s

b. District heang & cooling 41 Are DHC systems present in the community? Are they permied inthe local code?

Y/N

42 What percent of the community's total annual thermal energy de-mand is met by DHC?

80% of bldg sq in service a

43 Are incenves oered for new/expanded DHC systems? Y/N

3. Transportaon

3.1 Pedestrian network

a. Sidewalks

44

What percent of streets currently have sidewalks on both sides?

90%

45 Is new development required to have sidewalks on both sides of100% of new streets?

100%

46 What are minimum sidewalk widths? 8 retail/mixed-use blocks;

47 Are incenves oered for shading sidewalks? 40% of sidewalk length, tree(exemplary: 60%)

48

Are at-

grade vehicle crossings of sidewalks limited?

At grade crossings account fthe length of sidewalks

LEED ND Components Checklist Applicable ND Metric


19/277


3.2 Bicycle network & storage

a. Bike network 49 What is the total length of the local bike network? (in-street lanes,o-street paths, 25 mph or slower streets)

Minimum 5 mi

50 What percent of HH are within 1/4-mi of the bike network? Proximity for at least 50% p

51 What percent of employees are within 1/4-mi of the bike network?Proximity for at least 50% p

52 Does the network connect to schools? Major employment centers?

Diverse uses?

Y/N

b. Bike parking/storage 53 Are bike spaces required for dwelling units? At what rates? 1 space/person for 30% of owhichever is greater, for mu

more DUs

54 Are bike spaces required for retail uses? At what rates? 1 space per worker for 10% space/5000 sq

55 Are bike spaces required for non-residenal uses other than retail?At what rates?

1 space per worker for 10%

space/10,000 sq

56

Are showers for bicyclists required at non-residenal uses?

1 shower/100

-150 employe

57 What are bike parking/storage design standards? Locked, signage, lighng, witrances, protected from dam

3.3 Transit service

58 What percent of HH are within 1/4 mi walk of transit stops? 50%

59 What percent of employees are within 1/4 mi walk of transitstops?

50%

60 How many local transit stops meet ND minimum service levels? 60 weekday trips, 40 weeke

61

What are minimum transit stop s helter standards?

Covered, parally enclosed,info

LEED ND Components Checklist Applicable ND Metric


20/277

17


3.4 Street network

62 What is the street network intersecon density? (community andsubareas)

90 intersecons/sq mi

63 What are average block lengths? maximum 600-800

64 Are incenves oered for increased intersecon density/shorterblock length in new developments?

Y/N

65 Are through-connecons required for new cul-de-sacs? Y/N

66 Are incenves oered for planng street trees? 60% of both sides (exempla

3.5 Motor vehicles

a. Trac speed 67 What speed limits apply to residenal streets? 20 mph for 70% of streets (e

68 What speed limits apply to non-residenal and mixed-use streets? 25 mph for 70% of streets (

b. Motor vehicle parking

69

What percent of streets have on-

street parking on both sides?

70%

70 Are o-street surface parking lots required to be on the side orrear of buildings?

Y/N

71 Is there a maximum amount of project development area that canbe devoted to o-street surface parking?

20% of total imperviousness

72 Is there a maximum acreage for individual o-street surface park-ing lots?

2 acres

73

Can o-

street parking spaces in mulfamily and non-

res bldgs beunbundled for separate selling or renng?

90% of DUs or non-

res oor



21/277


3.6 Transportaon demand management

74 Are TDM programs required for major developments? How muchauto trip reducon is typically sought?

20% of weekday peak perio

75 Are major project developers oering public transit pass subsidies?Y/N

76 Are major project developers providing private developer-sponsored shule service?

Y/N

77 Are vehicle sharing programs in operaon? Y/N

78 What percent of HH are within 1/4-mi walk of shared vehicle loca-ons?

50%

79 What percent of employees are within 1/4-mi walk of shared vehi-cle locaons?

50%

4. Resource Protecon

4.1 Wildlife habitat

a. Imperiled species 80 Are federal/state/NatureServe species present or likely in the com-munity?

Y/N

81 If so, are species protected by a Habitat Conservaon Plan orequivalent?

Follow state and federal HC

create a management plan w

82 Is idened habitat protected from development disturbance inperpetuity?

For example: conservaon e

opment threats, or protect

the project boundary from f

83 Are incenves oered for habitat restoraon? For ongoing man-agement?

Restore an area equivalent t

footprint (exemplary: 20%) t

communies, water bodies

84 Are nave species encouraged or required? Work with a qualied biolog

that restored areas will havesemblages.



22/277

19

4.2 Water resources

a. Wetlands & water bodies 85 Are wetlands or water bodies present in the community? Y/N

86 If so, are wetlands/water bodies protected beyond minimum fed-eral and state requirements?

Avoid development on bue

lands or within 100' of wate

87

Are incenves oered for wetlands/water bodies conservaon/restoraon?

Restore area equivalent to 1prints (exemplary: 20%)

b. Floodplains 88 Are oodplains present in the community? Y/N

89 If so, are oo dplains protected beyond minimum federal/state re-quirements?

Y/N

90 Are incenves oered for avoidance of oodplains or increased

resiliency?

Y/N

4.3 Soils

a. Agricultural soils 91 Are ag soils present in the community? Prime/unique/state signic

92 Are ag soils protected by TDR programs, migaon acreage pro-grams, or similar mechanisms?

Y/N

93 Are ag soils developable if the immediate vicinity is already com-

mied to urbanizaon?

Inll and transit-served site

LEED ND Components pp



23/277

o po e s

5. Public Facilies & Services

5.1 Civic & recreaon spaces

99 What percent of HH are within 1/4-mi walk of a civic space, e.g.plaza?

90%

100 What percent of employees are within 1/4-mi walk of a civic

space?

90%

101 What percent of HH are within 1/2-mi walk of a public outdoor orindoor recreaon facility?

90%

102 What percent of employees are within 1/2-mi walk of a recreaonfacility?

90%

103 What are civic/recreaon space minimum sizes? Civic, 1/6 acre 1:4 proporo

aon, 1 acre outdoors or 25

b. Steep slopes 94 Are steep slopes present in the community, and if so, what mini-mum slope percent is dened locally as steep?

15%

95 Are steep slopes protected from development? No disturbance of slopes > 1slopes

96 Are incenves oered for steep slope restoraon? Restore 100% of slopes >4040% of slopes 15-20%

c. Browneld soil remediaon97

Are contaminated browneld soils present in the community? Y/N

98 Is remediaon required before development? Are incenvesoered for superior remediaon?

Y/N



24/277

21

p

5.2 School campuses

a. Land area 104 Is new school campus acreage capped by school type? Elementary 5 acres, middle school 15 acres

b. Access 105 What percent of HH are within 1/2-1 mi walk of elem/middle/high 50% of DU within 1/2-1 mi w

106 What percent of each school's 1/2-1-mi walk routes are ND-compliant?

Sidewalks both sides, bike n

controls

107 What percent of ped routes on school campuses are ND- 100% no crossing bus zones

c. Joint use 108 Are incenves oered for joint use of school facilies?

5.3 Infrastructure content & eciency

a. Recycled content 109 Do local government procurement policies and public works stand-ards require recycled content in purchased equipment/materials/

supplies?

50% of total mass (exempla

materials include roadways

stormwater sewers and pip

b. Energy eciency 110 Do local government procurement policies and public works stand-ards require superior energy eciency in purchased equipment?

Energy use 15% below least

lighng, water pumps, ulit

(exemplary: 30%)

5.4 Solid waste management

Are the following programs o perated/publicized and available to

all res and non-res customers:

111 -General recycling? Y/N

112 -Hazardous materials collecon? Y/N

113 -

Centralized composng?

Y/N



25/277

114 -Sidewalk recycling receptacles? Receptacles on every block shorter

115 -Construcon waste management? 50% of volume

6. Site Development

6.1 Site disturbance & preservaon

a. Erosion & sedimentaon control

116

Are ESC plans required? Are their BMPs equivalent to Washington

State or EPA BMPs?

Local requirements are cons

State programs

117 Are incenves oered to leave undeveloped land undisturbed? (orlimit new development to previous development footprint)

Y/N

b. Construcon impact zones 118 Are CIZs delineated to limit on-site disturbance during construc-on?

CIZ limited to 40 beyond b

beyond walkways, 15 feet b

feet beyond permeable surf

c. Tree protecon 119 Are trees on development sites surveyed for condion, heritage/champion status, invasiveness?

Y/N condion evaluated by

species idened, threat fro

120 Are idened signicant trees protected from development dis-turbance?

Y/N



26/277

23

6.2 Climac design

a. Solar orientaon 121 Are incenves oered for solar orientaon of new blocks andbuildings?

75% of blocks or bldg oor a

b. Heat island reducon 122 Are incenves oered for shading sidewalks with street trees orover-hanging structures? Are incenves oered for high-

reectance materials, open grid paving, tree shading, over-hanging

structure shading, or vegetated roofs?

50% of non-roof surfaces, 7

vegetated roofs, or a combi

6.3 Water resources

a. Rainwater management 123 Do regulaons require, or are incenves oered for, inltraon,evapotranspiraon, or reuse of rainwater on new development

sites? If so, at what rates?

Use BMPs recommended by

es. Mgmt by 80th-95th pe

(exemplary: 97th percenle

b. Landscape irrigaon eciency 124 Do regulaons require, or are incenves oered for, reducon inwater use for landscape irrigaon? If so, at what rates?

50% reducon from baselin

c. Wastewater reuse 125 Is wastewater allowed to be separated or treated and reused on-site? If so, at what rate?

25-50% of annual volume (e

6.4 Exterior lighng

126 Do regulaons require, or are incenves oered for, light polluonreducon?

50% of lights have moon d

50% when no acvity, autom

vary light by light density zo


27/277



28/277

25

7.2 Visitability & universal design

a. Residenal buildings 137 How much of total residenal construcon complies with ICC/ANSIA117.1/Type C or ND specs for 4+ unit bldgs?

20% of DUs (exemplary: 40%

b. Circulaon routes 138 How much of the community outdoor routes of travel within pro-jects, and public rights-of-way, complies with ADA /ABA? Do regu-

laons or incenves achieve more in the future?

100% compliance

7.3 Green performance

a. Green cercaon

139

How many buildings are LEED or otherwise green cered?

140 What building types, what programs, what levels? incenves for LEED standardand renovaon

141 Is green building cercaon required or incented? One bldg or 10% of sq (ex

b. Energy eciency 142 Is new construcon/major renovaon required/incented toachieve energy savings beyond code minimums?

10% beyond code (exempla

c. Water eciency 143 Is new construcon/major renovaon required/incented to

achieve water savings beyond code minimums?

20% above baseline (exemp

7.4 Reuse & historic preservaon

a. Reuse 144 Are incenves oered for building reuse? 50% of whole bldg or 20% oND specs (exemplary: 75% a

b. Historic preservaon 145 Are historic-designated buildings present in the community? Y/N

146 If so, are such buildings protected by local or state/federal require-ments for rehabilitaon or reuse?

Y/N

147 Are incenves oered for historic building rehabilitaon? Y/N

Appendix B. Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements


29/277

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements Major ND Findings/Implicaons forComp Plan Update

Current Policies/RegulaonsStrengths Weaknesses

I. VisionND can be used to help cra a holisc

framework of sustainability goals, poli-

cies, and measures.

The exisng built environment provides an excellent

foundaon for future growth. Many of the policies

and regulaons that guide growth and development

are consistent with the sustainability metrics arcu-

lated in LEED-ND.

The development of single issue policies a

an integrated and comprehensive implem

vision. The Comprehensive Plan update pr

to align policies and regulaons with visio

ture.

II. Economic VitalityND densies and mixed uses may gen-

erate as much as10 mes more tax rev-

enue per acre than convenonal devel-

opment and reducesupfront infrastruc-

ture and public service delivery costs.

ND-style livable neighborhoods are part

of aracng and retaining a desired

workforce.

The Zoning Code provides a reasonablemix of densi-

es, and, to a limited degree, a mix of uses in much

of the downtown and adjacent neighborhoods.

Without minimum densies in strategic lo

ves beyond the downtown Density Distri

use zonein appropriate locaons,the City

growth and redevelopment paerns that c

operate. Policies fostering compact develo

ity, mixed-uses, and housing diversity are

Commerical districts with walkable

streets and mixed uses will provide

greater long-term economic vitality

than highway, auto orcommerical-only

corridors. Walkable streets and mixed

uses will also provide long-term eco-

nomic vitality for the waterfront area.

The Collegetown Plan requires frequent building

entries and clear facades -policies that should be

applied city-wide. The SW Area Design Guidelines

recommend street trees and wide sidewalks. Recre-

aonal and cultural faciles are allowed by right in

the waterfront zones. When public walkways are

provided by private land owners, stepback require-

ments are waived.

Without seng a maximum lot coverage f

there is no incenve to reduce the size of

amount of impervious surface. Currently,

must be shielded from view but regulaon

parking should be located beyond prohibi

rear setbacks. Without requiring parking a

buildings, surface parking could be placed

thus reducing walkability. The current Zon

cessivesetback and building entries that f

posed to sidewalks or public space. While

areas exist, they could be increased to enc

walkways or natural areas.

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan ElementsMajor ND Findings/Implicaons for

Current Policies/Regulaons


30/277

27

The SW Area, dened by its single land-

use, auto-orientaon, drains City re-

sources and detracts from the beauty

and walkability of the community.

The SW Area Plan recommends a high level of public

transit service in commercial areas. In addion,

sidewalks on both sides of the street are recom-

mended along with bike lanes.

The streetscapes are pedestrian unfriendly

work of short, walkable block lengths. The

armed by allowing o-street parking in t

III.Community LivabilityAn inventory of ND locaon-eligible par-

cels couldhelp idenfy benecial devel-

opment areas for ND-style future

growth. Policy making would benet

from benchmarking dwelling locaons,

unit counts, types, and aordability rel-

ave to ND criteria.

The Community Investment Incenve Program di-

rects growth to specic locaons by providing tax

abatement for projects that increases property val-

ue in the Density District.

With the excepon of the Density District,

growth to specic locaons. Without prio

or redevelopment in locaons where ther

ture, high levels of walkability, bus service

commerical developmentmayconnue al

corridors rather than in walkable districts.

priority given for the redevelopment of bro

Adapve building reuse and historic

preservaon are encouraged through

the Landmarks Preservaon Ordinance.

The Landmarks Preservaon Ordinance works eec-

vely to protect and enhance the historical and cul-

tural history of the City andtax abatement incen-ves are providedfor preservaon. The tax benets

for the reuse of historic structures provides an addi-

onal incenve for protecng and adapng historic

properes

This is not a weakness, rather it is an oppo

should rearm the importance of historic

health and vitality of the city.

Incorporang ND-style design and ac-

cess to amenies will posively impact

phyisical acvity among cizens.

Physical acvity through biking is supported by the

Proposed Bike Blvd/Neighborhood Greenways Plan.

The requirement of bike spaces for retail and com-

mercial uses also encourages biking.

Physical acviy through walking is imped

ciencies: long block lengths and narrow si

dwelling unit counts at the parcel level wi

that can determine if a majority of househ

walking distance to recreaonal or civic sp

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan ElementsComp Plan Update Strengths Weaknesses

II. Economic Vitality

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan ElementsMajor ND Findings/Implicaons for

Current Policies/Regulaons


31/277

IV.Mobility and TransportaonThe City is priorizing mul-modal

transportaon planning on several lev-

els, including a crical partnership with

TCAT.

For a small system, TCAT provides beer than aver-

age service.

Minimum land-use densies are needed in

create minimum ridership levels and prote

it. Work with TCAT to deliver a high level o

tail, as arculated in the SW Area Plan.

Generally, pedestrian and bike-friendly

condions prevail in older nieghbor-

hoods. Policy making would benet

from beer informaon on the pedes-

trian and bike network relaonships to

dwellings and job locaons.

The City's bike parking rates meet ND standards. Policies and regulaons are needed specif

should be covered and secured. In addio

facilies are necessary to encourage more

and from work.

The community benets from a relave-

ly dense, well-connected street network

for trac circulaon; most neighbor-

hoods score favorably on the ND scale

of street connecvity.

Extensive measures are in place to accomplish safe,

convenient, and ecient motor vehicle travel.

In some cases, trac speeds are higher th

to State requirements; but no addional m

in place to migate speed with trac calm

destrian-intense areas like school zones.

Motor vehicle parking has assumed an

inordinate posion among the elements

of community planning because of the

dominance of auto travel. A long-term

shi toward more mul-modal travel

must include parking as a demand-side

management measure.

Recent policy and regulatory updates have acknowl-

edged the need for managing parking in ways that

foster mul-modal travel.

No measures require or incent the reduc

parking footprints, or their placement awa

nor do any measures spluate a parking se

shared use vehicles.

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan ElementsComp Plan Update Strengths Weaknesses


32/277

Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements Major ND Findings/Implicaons forC Pl U d t

Current Policies/Regulaonsh k


33/277

pComp Plan Update Strengths Weaknesses

VII.Public InvestmentCurrent capital improvement program

project selecon criteria should be con-

solidated, relaonship to sustainability

claried, and objecve seleconprocess

established, e.g. quaned scoring of

criteria.

The current CIP process does acknowledge sustaina-

bility and energy eciency.

Current CIP criteria isolate sustainability as

instead of integrang it as a dimension of

across the life-cycle of a capital investmen

Appendix C. LEED-ND Credit Sets Organized by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements


34/277

31

LEED-ND Prerequisites & Credits

LEED-ND Credit Sets Organized by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements

Community Livability

Mobility & Trans-

portaon

Sustainability

Public Invest-

mentENeighborhoods &

HousingHealth & Wellness

Environmental

Stewardship &

PTNA

Climate Change

& Energy

Water Re-

sources

SMART LOCATION & LINKAGE

p Smart Locaon

p Imperiled Species Conservaon

p Wetland and Water Body Conservaon

p Agricultural Land Conservaon

p Floodplain Avoidance

c Preferred Locaons

c Brownelds Remediaon

c Access to Quality Transit

c Bicycle Facilies

c Housing and Jobs Proximity

c Steep Slope Protecon

c Site Design for Habitat or Water Conservaon

c Restoraon of Habitat or Water Bodies

c Long-Term Conservaon Management of Habitat/

Water

NEIGHBORHOOD PATTERN & DESIGN

p Walkable Streets

p Compact Development

p Connected & Open Community

c Walkable Streets

c Compact Development

c Mixed-Use Neighborhoods

c Housing Types & Aordability

c Reduced Parking Footprint

c Connected & Open Community

c Transit Facilies

c Transportaon Demand Management

LEED-ND Credit Sets Organized by Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Elements

Community Livability Sustainability


35/277

LEED-ND Prerequisites & Credits Mobility & Trans-

portaon

Public Invest-

mentENeighborhoods &

HousingHealth & Wellness

Environmental

Stewardship &

PTNA

Climate Change

& Energy

Water Re-

sources

c Access to Civic & Public Space

c Access to Recreaon Facilies

c Visitability & Universal Design

c Community Outreach & Involvement

c Local Food Producon

c Tree-Lined & Shaded Streets

c Neighborhood Schools

GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE & BUILDINGS

p Cered Green Building

p Minimum Building Energy Eciency

p Indoor Water Use Reducon

p Construcon Acvity Polluon Prevenon

c Cered Green Buildings

c Building Energy Eciency

c Indoor Water Use Reducon

c Outdoor Water Use Reducon

c Building Reuse

c Historic Resource Preservaon & Adapve Reuse

c Minimized Site Disturbance

c Rainwater Management

c Heat Island Reducon

c Solar Orientaon

c Renewable Energy Producon

c District Heang & Cooling

c Infrastructure Energy Eciency

c Wastewater Management

c Recycled & Reused Infrastructure

c Solid Waste Management

c Light Polluon Reducon

Appendix D. Combined Checklists

C l C dCh kli t L d


36/277

33

Color Code

AMI: Area Median Income

ANSI: American Naonal Standards Ins

tute

BMP: best management pracces

CC&R: covenants, condions, and re

stricons

CIZ: construcon impact zone

CSA:

community-

supported agriculture

DBH: diameter at base height

DHC: district heang and cooling

DU: dwelling unit

DU/AC: dwelling unit per acre

EPA: Environmental Protecon Agency

ESC: erosion and sedimentaon control

FAR: oor area rao

ICC: Internaonal Construcon Code

HCP: habitat conservaon plan

HH: household

NAICS: North American Industry Classica

on System

ND: LEED for Neighborhood Develop

ment rang system

SDI: Simpson Diversity Index

STDS: standards

TDM: transportaon demand manage

ment

TDR: transfer of development rights

Checklist Legend

Measure does not address or completely fails to meet

ND standard

Measure is not fully aligned with or parally meets ND

standard

Measure is aligned with or exceeds ND standard

LEE D Bi

Colleg

SiteP

De

Enviro

Storm


37/277

1. Planning Process

1.1 Public involvement

1 Are incenves oered forbeyond-code outreach to

groups aected by devel-

opment projects, e.g. de-

velop-sponsored pre-

design meengs, design

charrees?

Y/N

2. Land-Use

2.1 Urban growth limit

2

Is community developmentgeographically limited to a

planned water/wastewater

service area or similar ur-

ban growth control mecha-

nism?

Y/N

2.2 Priority growth areas

a. Redevelopment 3 Is priority given to, or in-cenves oered for, rede-

velopment of brownelds

or other special designaon

areas, e.g. enterprise

zones?

Y/N

ED-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

DraTransportaonPlan

(undated)

ikeBlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

getownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

PlanReviewOrdinance(+

etailedBikeParkingStds)

SubdivisionRegulaons

onmentalQualityReview

mwaterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance


38/277

LEE DrBik

College

SitePl

Det

Environ

Stormw


39/277

ED-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

raTransportaonPlan

(undated)

keBlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

etownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

lanReviewOrdinance(+

tailedBikeParkingStds)


nmentalQualityReview

waterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

8 -Walkable diverse uses? 30% of HH/non-res w/i 1/4-

mi of 5, w/i 1/2 mi of 7. Di-verse uses include food re-

tail, community serving re-

tail, commercial services,

and civic and community

facilies.

2.3 Density

a. Transit corridor mini-

mums

9 Are minimum densies re-quired within 1/4-1/2 mi of

high-frequency transit ser-

vice? If so, at what DU/acre

and FAR?

12 DU/ac, 0.8 FAR at 40/60+

trips (note unique ND densi-

ty calc method)

b. Other locaon mini-

mums

10 What are minimum densi-es in all or other parts of

the community? If so, at

what DU/acre and FAR?

7 DU/ac and 0.5 FAR

c. Incenves/bonuses 11 Are incenves/bonusesoered for increasing den-

sies above minimums? If

so, at what levels of DU/ac

and FAR, or comparable

mechanisms such as in-

creased height allowance?

Up to 63 DU/ac and 3.0 FAR

LEE DrBik

College

SitePla

Det S

Environ

Stormw


40/277

37

ED-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

raTransportaonPlan

(undated)


BikePlan(Mar1997)

etownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

anReviewOrdinance(+

tailedBikeParkingStds)



waterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

2.4 Mixed-uses

a. Authorized/

encouraged

12

Does zoning enable mixed-

uses? Are incenves

oered for mixed-uses?

Diverse uses include food

retail, community serving

retail, commercial services,

and civic and community

facilies.

a. Spaal extent 13 Where are mixed-uses lo-cated geographically in the

community? Are they con-

centrated or dispersed?

4 diverse uses w/i 1/4-mi of

50% of HH (exemplary: 30

diverse uses)

Mixed uses are concentrat-

ed in CBD, West State

Street corridor, West End,

and Collegetown. Most of

the commercial and busi-

ness uses are located on

the edges of residenal.

b. Clustering 14 If diverse uses are clus-tered in certain areas, what

are average walk distances

between them?

600-800 (300-400 walk

from cluster center)

Unavailable

2.5 Large retail uses

a. Transit-served 15 Are large retail uses re-quired to have superior

transit service? Are there

minimum headways for

stops serving such uses?

Total retail of 150k sq ,

including 75k single retail

use, requires 76/50 wkday/

wkend-day trips w/i 1/4-1/2

-mi

LEE DraBik

College

SitePla

Deta S

Environ

Stormw


41/277

ED-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

aTransportaonPlan

(undated)


BikePlan(Mar1997)

etownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

anReviewOrdinance(+

ailedBikeParkingStds)



waterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

2.6 Housing

a. Structure types

16

What range of dwellingstructure types exist and

how many units per type?

Can the Simpson Diversity

Index be applied to subare-

as of the community?

The Simpson Diversity Index(SDI) calculates the proba-

bility that any two randomly

selected dwelling units will

be of a dierent type. Types

include large, medium, and

small types of detached res,

duplexes, mul-unit bldgs,

live/work space, and acces-

sory units. ND uses SDI of

0.5.

Unavailable

17 Are incenves oered forincreasing diversity of

structure types?

Y/N

18 Are accessory dwellingunits allowed?

Y/N

b. Pricing What percent of rentalunits in the community are

priced at:

19 -60% of AMI 5% (exemplary: 30%) Unavailable

20 -80% of AMI 10% (exemplary: 50%) Unavailable


42/277

LEEDDra

Bike

Colleget

SitePla

Deta S

Environm

Stormwa


43/277

D-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

aTransportaonPlan

(undated)

eBlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

townUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

anReviewOrdinance(+

ailedBikeParkingStds)

ubdivisionRegulaons

mentalQualityReview

aterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

2.8 Food producon & salesa. Garden/greenhouse

locaons

28 Are gardens and green-houses permied in any

yard area in any land-use

zone?

Y/N

b. Neighborhood gar-

dens

Are neighborhood gardens

permied/regulated, in-

cluding:

29 -Minimum growingspace

60 sq /DU @ 35 DU/ac, up

to 200 sq /DU @ 7-14 DU/

ac (see exemplary scale)

30 -Minimum equipment Pedestrian and solar access,fencing, water systems,

raised beds, and secure

space for tools.

31 -Ownership & mgmtrequirements

Owned and managed by

project/neighborhood occu-

pants

32 What percent of HH arewithin 1/2-mi walk of

neighborhood gardens?

Proximity for most residents

(50%+) preferred

Unavailable


44/277

LEED CDra

Bike

Collegeto

SitePlan

Detai

Su

Environm

Stormwa


45/277

D-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

eBlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

ownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

nReviewOrdinance(+

iledBikeParkingStds)

ubdivisionRegulaons

mentalQualityReview

aterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

39 What percent of total com-

munity electrical & thermalenergy are provided by re-

newables?

5% of total costs

(exemplary: 27.5%)

Unavailable

40 Are incenves oered forincreasing the share of en-

ergy met by renewables?

Y/N i.e. tax credits, grants,

special ulity rates

b. District heang &

cooling

41 Are DHC systems present inthe community? Are they

permied in the localcode?

Y/N A system operates on the

Cornell campus; other sys-

tem informaon is unavail-able.

42 What percent of the com-munity's total annual ther-

mal energy demand is met

by DHC?

80% of bldg sq in service

area (exemplary: 95%)

Data unavailable, but likely

very low.

43 Are incenves oered fornew/expanded DHC sys-

tems?

Y/N

LEED CDra

Bike

Collegeto

SitePlan

Detail

Su

Environm

Stormwa


46/277

43

D-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

BlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

ownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

nReviewOrdinance(+

iledBikeParkingStds)

ubdivisionRegulaons

mentalQualityReview

aterManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

3. Transportaon

3.1 Pedestrian network

a. Sidewalks 44 What percent of streetscurrently have sidewalks on

both sides?

90% City GIS has data in order to

calculate.

45 Is new development re-quired to have sidewalks on

both sides of 100% of new

streets?

100%

46 What are minimum side-

walk widths?

8 retail/mixed-use blocks;

4 all other blocks

47 Are incenves oered forshading sidewalks?

40% of sidewalk length, tree

shade w/i 10 years

(exemplary: 60%)

48 Are at-grade vehicle cross-ings of sidewalks limited?

At grade crossings account

for no more than 10% of the

length of sidewalks

LEED- A

Co

Dra

Bike

Collegeto

SitePlan

Detail

Sub

Environm

Stormwat


47/277

-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

CommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

BlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

ownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

ledBikeParkingStds)

bdivisionRegulaons

mentalQualityReview

terManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

3.2 Bicycle network & storagea. Bike network 49 What is the total length of

the local bike network? (in-

street lanes, o-street

paths, 25 mph or slower

streets)

Minimum 5 mi City GIS has data; esmat-

ed to be greater than 5

miles.

50 What percent of HH arewithin 1/4-mi of the bike

network?

Proximity for at least 50%

preferred

Unavailable

51 What percent of employees

are within 1/4-mi of the

bike network?

Proximity for at least 50%

preferred

Unavailable

52 Does the network connectto schools? Major employ-

ment centers? Diverse us-

es?

Y/N Yes

b. Bike parking/storage 53 Are bike spaces requiredfor dwelling units? At what

rates?

1 space/person for 30% of

occupants, or 1 space/DU,

whichever is greater, for

mulfamily bldgs of 4 or

more DUs

LEED- A

Co

Dra

BikeB B

Collegeto

SitePlan

Detaile

Sub

Environm

Stormwat


48/277

45

-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

ommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

BlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

ownUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

edBikeParkingStds)

bdivisionRegulaons

entalQualityReview

terManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

54 Are bike spaces required

for retail uses? At whatrates?


of workforce and 1space/5000 sq

55 Are bike spaces requiredfor non-residenal uses

other than retail? At what

rates?


of workforce and 1

space/10,000 sq

56 Are showers for bicyclistsrequired at non-residenal

uses?

1 shower/100-150 employ-

ees

57

What are bike parking/storage design standards?

Locked, signage, lighng,within 100 of bldg en-

trances, protected from

damage

3.3 Transit service

58 What percent of HH arewithin 1/4 mi walk of trans-

it stops?

50% Unavailable

59 What percent of employeesare within 1/4 mi walk of

transit stops?

50% Unavailable

LEED- A

Co

Dra

BikeB B

Collegetow

SitePlanR

Detaile

Sub

Environme

Stormwat


49/277

-NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

ommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

BlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

wnUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

edBikeParkingStds)

bdivisionRegulaons

entalQualityReview

erManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

60 How many local transit

stops meet ND minimumservice levels?

60 weekday trips, 40 week-

end daily trips

Several routes meet or ex-

ceed ND weekday thresh-olds, but weekends are be-

low thresholds; however

TCATs service is above av-

erage relave to small sys-

tems.

61 What are minimum transitstop shelter standards?

Covered, parally enclosed,

lighng, seang, service info

TCAT info unavailable

3.4 Street network

62 What is the street networkintersecon density?

(community and subareas)

90 intersecons/sq mi Tracks with plang history:

approx. 200-500 intersec-

ons/sq mi in older central

areas, 100 or less in newer

peripheral west, south, east

areas (esmates are exclu-

sive of Cornell's high inter-

secon density). City GIS

has data for precise subar-

ea calculaons

LEED-N A

Co

Dra

BikeB B

Collegetow

SitePlanR

Detaile

Sub

Environme

Stormwate


50/277

47

NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

ommunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

BlvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

wnUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

edBikeParkingStds)

bdivisionRegulaons

entalQualityReview

erManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

64 Are incenves oered for

increased intersecon den-sity/shorter block length in

new developments?

Y/N

65 Are through-conneconsrequired for new cul-de-

sacs?

Y/N

66 Are incenves oered forplanng street trees?

60% of both sides

(exemplary: 90%)

3.5 Motor vehicles

a. Trac speed 67 What speed limits apply toresidenal streets?

20 mph for 70% of streets

(exemplary: 95%)

30 mph

68 What speed limits apply tonon-residenal and mixed-

use streets?

25 mph for 70% of streets

(exemplary: 90%)

30 mph

b. Motor vehicle park-

ing

69 What percent of streetshave on-street parking on

both sides?

70% City GIS has data for calcu-

laon.

LEED-N A

Com

DraT

BikeB B

Collegetow

SitePlanR

Detaile

Subd

Environme

Stormwate


51/277

NDComponents

Checklist

ApplicableNDMetric

mmunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

lvdPlan(Sept2012)

BikePlan(Mar1997)

wnUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

dBikeParkingStds)

divisionRegulaons

entalQualityReview

erManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

70 Are o-street surface park-

ing lots required to be onthe side or rear of build-

ings?

Y/N

71 Is there a maximumamount of project develop-

ment area that can be de-

voted to o-street surface

parking?

20% of total imperviousness

72 Is there a maximum acre-age for individual o-street

surface parking lots?

2 acres

73 Can o-street parking spac-es in mulfamily and non-

res bldgs be unbundled for

separate selling or renng?

90% of DUs or non-res oor

area

3.6 Transportaon demand management

74 Are TDM programs re-quired for major develop-

ments? How much auto trip

reducon is typically

sought?

20% of weekday peak period

LEED-N Ap

Com

DraT

BikeBl Bi

Collegetow

SitePlanR

Detailed

Subd

Environmen

Stormwate


52/277

49

NDComponents

Checklist

pplicableNDMetric

mmunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

lvdPlan(Sept2012)

ikePlan(Mar1997)

wnUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

ReviewOrdinance(+

dBikeParkingStds)

divisionRegulaons

ntalQualityReview

erManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

75 Are major project develop-ers oering public transit

pass subsidies?

Y/N

76 Are major project develop-ers providing private devel-

oper-sponsored shule ser-

vice?

Y/N

77 Are vehicle sharing pro-

grams in operaon?

Y/N Yes

78 What percent of HH arewithin 1/4-mi walk of

shared vehicle locaons?

50% Unavailable

79 What percent of employeesare within 1/4-mi walk of

shared vehicle locaons?

50% Unavailable

LEED-N Ap

Com

DraT

BikeBl

Bi

Collegetow

SitePlanRe

Detailed

Subd

Environmen

Stormwater


53/277

NDComponents

Checklist

pplicableNDMetric

mmunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

vdPlan(Sept2012)

ikePlan(Mar1997)

wnUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

eviewOrdinance(+

dBikeParkingStds)

divisionRegulaons

ntalQualityReview

rManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

4. Resource Protecon

4.1 Wildlife habitata. Imperiled species 80 Are federal/state/

NatureServe species pre-

sent or likely in the com-

munity?

Y/N No

81 If so, are species protectedby a Habitat Conservaon

Plan or equivalent?

Follow state and federal

HCP requirements or work

to create a management

plan with a qualied enty

N/A

82 Is idened habitat pro-

tected from developmentdisturbance in perpetuity?

For example: conservaon

easements, reduce develop-ment threats, or protect

equivalent habitat out of

the project boundary from

future development

83 Are incenves oered forhabitat restoraon? For

ongoing management?

Restore an area equivalent

to 10% of development

footprint (exemplary: 20%)

to predevelopment nave

communies, water bodies

and wetlands.

LEED-N Ap

Com

DraT

BikeBlv

Bik

Collegetown

SitePlanRe

Detailed

Subd

Environmen

Stormwater


54/277

51

NDComponents

Checklist

pplicableNDMetric

mmunityCondions

ZoningOrdinance

TransportaonPlan

(undated)

vdPlan(Sept2012)

kePlan(Mar1997)

nUrbanPlan(Aug

2009)

eviewOrdinance(+

dBikeParkingStds)

divisionRegulaons

ntalQualityReview

rManagementand

ESCRegulaons

nance

84 Are nave species encour-aged or required?

Work with a qualied biolo-

gist or botanist to ensure

that restored areas will have

the nave species assem-

blages.

4.2 Water resources

a. Wetlands & water

bodies

85 Are wetlands or water bod-ies present in the commu-

nity?

Y/N Yes

86 If so, are wetlands/waterbodies protected beyond

minimum federal and state

requirements?

Avoid deve

Documents

LEED Sustainability Audit Report for the CIty of Ithaca, New York, July 8, 2013, prepared by Agora Group, NRDC, Criterion Planners