Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 2020-08-20 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING COMMITTEE THURSDAY, AUGUST 20, 2020 at 4:00 P.M. PLEASE NOTE: The Town of Ithaca Planning Committee meeting will be held electronically via Zoom video conference. Members of the public may call in on a cell phone or landline at (929) 436- 2866 and enter the Meeting ID: 980 8958 2114, or may view the meeting by computer on Zoom at https://zoom.us/. Once on Zoom, click “Join A Meeting” and enter the Meeting ID: 980 8958 2114 . AGENDA 1. Persons to be heard. 2. Committee announcements and concerns. 3. Consider approval of July meeting minutes. 4. Consider request to amend the Ecovillage Planned Development Zone to allow for a permanent camping area. 5. Discuss establishing provisions in the Town Code to allow food trucks. 6. Additional preliminary discussion items: placement and setbacks for swimming pools fencing material requirements 7. Staff updates and reports. 8. Discuss next meeting date and upcoming agenda items. A quorum of the Ithaca Town Board may be present, however, no official Board business will be conducted. TOWN OF ITHACA 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, N.Y. 14850 TOWN CLERK 273-1721 PUBLIC WORKS 273-1656 PARKS 273-8035 ENGINEERING 273-1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273-1783 FAX (607) 273-1704 Town of Ithaca Planning Committee Thursday, August 20, 2020 (via Zoom Conferencing) Committee members: Rich DePaolo, Chair; Bill Goodman, Pat Leary Board/Staff members present: Sue Ritter; Marty Moseley Others: Nathan Scott, Director, Thrive Ithaca EcoVillage Education Center 1. Persons to be heard: None. 2. Committee announcements and concerns: None reported. 3. Consider approval of July meeting minutes. July minutes: Rich moved; Bill seconded. Approved with two minor corrections. 4. Consider request to amend the EcoVillage Planning Development Zone to allow for permanent camping area: Rich asked Nathan Scott, Director of Thrive Ithaca EcoVillage Education Center, to start the discussion by introducing the proposal. Mr. Scott explained that EcoVillage has a chronic shortage of housing for participants/students of programs/workshops, as well as for general visitors and guests of EcoVillage residents. The problem is especially acute now with the coronavirus given that all common spaces and shared housing facilities have been shut down. The camping area is intended to help with the housing need and to accommodate people in a safe and comfortable way. Mr. Scott described the various proposed amenities/facilities that would be included. He indicated that they are hoping to get the project underway this fall and to host visitors starting in May 2021. Rich asked if the tents would be available to people not affiliated with EcoVillage, such as during college graduation weekend. Mr. Scott answered yes, but that Thrive participants would have priority and that any revenue generated from renting camp sites would be directed to supporting Thrive’s educational mission. Rich asked what the reaction from EcoVillage residents has been on the proposal. Mr. Scott described his outreach efforts to the various EcoVillage committees and entities. He indicated that support was very strong, but not universal. A common issue was the accommodations for parking Bill explained that he would recuse himself from any voting on the proposal. He indicated that he does not have a direct conflict, and is not in any way connected financially with the program, but because of his overall involvement with EcoVillage he feels that it would be best to recuse himself. He explained the EcoVillage governing structure, approval process, and opportunities for residents input on the proposal. Sue explained the need to amend the EcoVillage PDZ to allow this new use. She read language from the La Tourelle PDZ that allows the Firelight Camps and stated that this would be a good starting point. Bill added that for zoning purposes, EcoVillage is split up into three different subzones that include residential, agriculture, and open space. The camping area is proposed for the designated residential area. Bill questioned whether it would be appropriate to have the use in the residential area or whether a new subzone would be needed. The committee asked Sue to draft language for consideration. She asked for feedback on the number of tent sites to allow in the PDZ. Twelve are initially proposed with a possible addition of 6 in the future. 5. Discuss establishing provisions in the Town Code to allow food trucks: The committee reviewed the list of possible food truck related regulatory provisions prepared by Marty, for consideration in a new local law. Marty responded to questions and explained that town inspections would largely pertain to fire safety, not health standards, which is handled by the Health Department. The requirement for an operating permit would allow a food truck to operate in the town, per requirements of the fire code, while the additional zoning permit would pertain to the property on which the food truck will operate. The committee discussed the idea of limiting the number of days that a food truck could operate on a particular property. After discussion, members decided not to impose a limitation, citing examples in the City of Ithaca of established food truck sites that do not appear to pose a problem, as well as the unlikelihood that competition with restaurants in the town would be problematic. Also cited were benefit of having food trucks at certain locations, such as large construction sites, and the needlessness of requiring them to move after a certain number of days. The committee discussed the idea of requiring a certain number of parking spaces and that they be only off-street locations. Marty explained that requiring a certain number of spaces is typical in other municipalities regulations concerning food trucks. Rich suggested addressing the safety and adequacy of parking through criteria in the zoning permit, so it can be addressed on a case by case basis. The committee decided to allow both off- and on-street parking. The committee felt comfortable allowing food trucks to operate on vacant lots and not be restricted to non-vacant lots. The committee also discussed the permit duration period, concluding that it should conform with whatever is reasonable for the seasonal demand in food truck businesses. The committee thought something around six to eight months, to allow for warmer weather months plus fall seasonal activities/holiday demands. They thought that it would be easiest to have an established time period for all operating permits and to let the operator decide how to utilize it. Discussion of zoning permits, and whether one would be required each time the truck left and returned to a site, led to further discussion on locational issues. This included how many zoning permits a single entity would be allowed and could a location have more than one food truck? In addition, members expressed concern with food trucks operating in zoning districts that don’t normally permit this type of use and the possibility of this leading to food stands on private residential properties. Marty explained how parking provisions (i.e. requiring four off-street spaces) could control the use on residential properties and driveways, and limit where food trucks could go. Rich questioned whether geographical limitations on the number of zoning permits were needed to control concentrations of food trucks in certain locations. Marty responded that specifying by zone would be problematic given the location of the college/university in residential zones. The committee expressed interest in exploring a strategy using an overlay zone to identify where in the town food trucks could operate. The committee asked staff to prepare a map so this strategy could be better assessed. Rich thought that parking provisions, as a control mechanism, might warrant further consideration if food trucks are allowed town-wide, but less so if they are limited to certain areas of the town. The committee will discuss the topic further at the next meeting. 6. Staff Report & Updates: Swimming pool setbacks: The committee asked staff to draft language that would revise regulations so that swimming pools (above and below ground) would not be allowed in front yards. Marty explained that swimming pools are categorized as accessory structures, not accessory buildings and that by clarifying the definition and classifying pools as accessory buildings could provide the means of limiting where pools can be placed on a property. Fencing material: The committee suggested that the Codes and Ordinance Committee should address the fencing material issue. Benchmarking Law: Sue asked the committee is they would be willing to review and consider a Benchmarking Law. This is a law that would require certain private entities to measure, track and submit (to the town) their energy usage data. The purpose is to gain a better understanding of energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions and would be a precursor to possible regulations addressing greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings. Renaming preserves on Culver Road: Sue reported that Planning staff is recommending renaming the preserves along Culver Road, to Culver Road Preserves and using their current names as subarea names that would appear on signage and detailed maps of the preserve. Because the preserves were acquired individually over the years, they each have their own name. However, the preserves are contiguous and of a similar nature, and the individual names do not seem warranted anymore. The committee expressed support for the renaming recommendation. Next meeting: Thursday, September 17th. Topics: Continue ---EcoVillage PDZ amendment; Food trucks; swimming pools/fencing.