210 Hancock Construction Update, 4/2017

23 04 2017

There is so much going on at INHS’s 210 Hancock site, this might be the record for most photos in a single construction update. Let’s go counterclockwise from the southwest corner, since that’s the order these photos were taken.

With the apartment building string, Section “A”‘s Blueskin has been mostly bricked over with Redland Heritage Brick. Some Blueskin remains exposed in areas that will be faced with Alpolic exterior metal panels. Fingers crossed that the mustard yellow shown in the elevations looks less jarring in person. It looks like an additional layer of thermal insulation was installed above the windows to go between the Blueskin and the metal panels (mostly dark grey, a few yellow…technically they’re called Alpolic Charcoal and EYL Yellow. the armchair architect in me really wants to harp on the yellow metal panels. I remember a Noah Demarest quote about yellow being a really hard exterior color to pull off. Why not a red or an orange-brown?). The roof is finished and interior fixtures and flooring are being installed.

Then we get to the first string of three for-sale townhouses, which will have addresses for the 200 Block of Hancock (apart from 202, I’m forgetting the exact numbers). They look nothing like the elevations submitted for IURA review, and that is not a bad thing. INHS is using Certainteed clapboard siding on the exterior. The one on the west (left) is “Autumn Red”, and the one on the east (right) is “Mountain Cedar”, both of which were used on the Stone Quarry project. The shades of brown and grey are so similar it’s hard to tell what the middle one is, maybe “Hearthstone”. It looks like a mixture of sizes as well, maybe 4″ on the left and middle, and 7″ Mountain Cedar on the right. The trim pieces are Certainteed vinyl and vary slightly in color, neutral whitish or tannish shades like “Sandstone Beige”, “Natural Clay” and “Desert Tan”.

Circling around to the 400 Block of Lake Avenue highlights a construction contrast between the for-sale units and the five for-rent units further north. The for-sale units are wood-frame, plywood Huber ZIP sheathing, and exterior finishes. The for-rent units are wood-frame, standard plywood sheets, Tyvek Housewrap, and exterior finishes. The difference between the two is really a matter of preference – both are effective water-resistive barriers if installed properly. ZIP panels tend to be easier to install (lower labor cost), but more expensive as a product.

The Certainteed colors on the rentals are “Spruce”, “Sable Brown”, a split-level “Autumn Red/Hearthstone”, “Flagstone” and another “Autumn Red”. Some of these will be 4″ clapboard, others 7″ shingles – all Certainteed, all to give the impression of individual units so they play well with their older, detached neighbors. The Spruce Green unit looks a little odd with that big blank wall above the porch, and in the renders and elevation it appears to be bigger than the final product.

Apartment sections “C” and “D” are still being framed, and “B” has been fully skinned and fitted out with windows. “B” will be faced with will use Carolina Ceramics Teakwood Brick and Morin blue-grey corrugated steel with pearl, EYL yellow and charcoal Alpolic metal panels, “C” will use Redland Whitehall Brick (white brick) as well as Alpolic panels, and “D” will use the same Heritage Red brick as “A” but, with some corrugated steel on the stairwell. “C” and “D” also have a first-floor covered parking garage. The garage will be face in Barnes and Cone Masonry, but the city’s November 2015 filing makes reference to a product that doesn’t appear in their brochures.

The apartment will be ready by August 1st, and the for-sale units will be on the market by the fall. Lecesse Construction is the general contractor.


Actions

Information

2 responses

24 04 2017
CornellPhD

This seems like a pretty a high-quality project; the difference between the materials, or problems with them, don’t seem too apparent in the photos, at least. It’s a shame private developers can’t build so well in Ithaca, given they ought to have less limited budgets than the INHS.

Are there (still?) plans for retail in that corner space?

24 04 2017
B. C.

One of the the spaces will be a daycare for low-to-moderate income (LMI) families, run by TCAction. Technically, that was what permitted INHS to file for a PILOT agreement with the IDA. The daycare should host 30 children and create 9 living-wage certified jobs, if I have my offhand facts correct.

There is a second commercial space that seems to be marketed towards non-profit office tenants, but I haven’t heard anything about an occupant being secured yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: