Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Minutes 2020-09-17 Town of Ithaca Planning Committee Thursday,September 17,2020(via Zoom Conferencing) Committee members: Rich DePaolo, Chair; Bill Goodman, Pat Leary Board/Staff members present: Rod Howe, Supervisor(present through committee announcements); Susan Ritter; Marty Moseley Others: None 1. Persons to be heard: None. 2.Committee announcements and concerns: Rod Howe provided a brief update on a meeting he and Sue Ritter had with Bryan McCracken, City of Ithaca Historic Preservation Planner. He reported that Bryan agreed to review the City Code Chapter 73 that establishes and describes the duties, number of members, etc., of the Landmark Preservation Commission. Bryan will determine the amendments needed to have one commission covering both the town and city. The City's Landmark Preservation Law would also need amending and would require the town's adoption of it. It was thought that a jointly formed commission should work on that, assuming the city and town decide to move forward. Rod stated that this was just small steps for now, but if it is decided to move forward, he would look to have the effort tied up by the end of 2021. 3.Consider approval of August meeting minutes. August minutes: Bill moved; Rich seconded. Approved with a minor clarification. 4. Continue discussion of request to amend the EcoVillage Planning Development Zone to allow for permanent camping area: The committee reviewed new language for the PDZ, drafted by staff and reviewed by Susan Brock, that would permit camping facilities at EcoVillage. The language was modelled on the La Tourelle PDZ for Firelight Camps. Susan Brock concurred with Bill Goodman's suggestion that a new"area" be designated for the camping facility use. Currently the PDZ identifies four areas: Natural Area, Agricultural Area, Residential Area and Commercial Area and the proposed "Camping Area"would be the fifth. The committee requested that the maximum number of allowed deck platforms and interim personal tent camping sites be clarified in the PDZ language by adding "not to exceed 18 total sites". Concerns were expressed for the open-ended provision to allow"Other facilities...." and a recommendation was made to add "subject to site plan approval." The proposed amended language, agreed to by the committee, is as follows: (a) Permanent deck platforms for tent use,and personal tent camping sites not on platforms, not to exceed 18 total sites; (b) A related multi-purpose structure, allowed as a tent, yurt, or pavilion, used for a welcome center, office, classroom, and/or gathering space; (c) Bathroom, shower facilities, fire circle, kitchen and cooking facilities; (d) Other facilities related to the seasonal camping activities authorized above, subject to site plan approval. The committee recommended that the language eventually be forwarded to Susan Brock and the Town Board, but not until there is more certainty that the campground project can move ahead, which is currently contingent on funding and EcoVillage approval. 5.Continue discussion of establishing provisions in the Town Code to allow food trucks: The discussion began with review of a map showing a proposal of where food truck operations might be allowed, via a possible overlay zone. The committee requested the map at the September meeting as a means of exploring the idea of permitting food trucks only in designated parts of town. Sue explained that the map provided only a sampling of locations, as a means to generate discussion, and was not intended to be comprehensive. It included a farm, museum, hospital, apartments, places of worship, university/college campus, winery, Inlet Valley, EcoVillage, etc. The committee discussed the benefits and drawbacks of allowing food trucks in only targeted areas, and members went back and forth on the idea. Limiting food truck operations to certain areas would reduce potential impacts and conflicts, but the resulting prohibition elsewhere could be unnecessarily restrictive and stifle opportunities for special events and low-key/compatible settings. The committee recognized the growing popularity of food trucks.There were differing opinions on whether food trucks might see opportunities to locate in residential neighborhoods, if allowed throughout the town. Some felt that they would seek higher traffic areas instead, but Louie's food truck on the CU north campus was used as an example for how a high pedestrian traffic location could also serve as a draw. Marty Mosely proposed the idea of making food trucks accessory to certain specified uses. This would offer an alternative means of excluding areas that could be problematic. The use types could include places of assembly(i.e. educational), multi-family, etc. This strategy would mean that food trucks would not be allowed on an unimproved lot, since they would need to be accessory to a principal use. The committee supported the idea and suggested that Marty come back with more developed language. Sue pointed out that this could potentially be restrictive for special events and suggested having a provision for these occasions. Marty asked the committee if they wanted to limit the number of food truck on a parcel. The committee thought that one per parcel would be the norm and that the market would be the ultimate determinant. They questioned whether they should fend off a food truck alley scenario. Rich suggested maybe limiting it to one for a regular permit, but for an event to allow more. Bill didn't think multiple trucks on a lot would happen often and was comfortable not establishing a limit as long as the parking was available. Pat suggested seeing how it works and adding language later if there are problems. Marty reiterated his earlier proposal, which suggested requiring four additional parking spaces, in addition to what is required to safely situate the food truck on the lot. He reported that between 2-5 parking spaces are needed depending on the food truck size and their equipment needs. The committee was comfortable with the recommendation and asked Marty to draft language for next time. 6. Discuss placement and setback for swimming pools: As requested at the September meeting, Marty Mosely prepared language for committee consideration regarding the siting of swimming pools on a lot. He reminded members that Town Code currently has no setback requirements for swimming pools. Members asked about the proposal for a 15-foot setback from any side yard and how that would work with pool fencing. After briefly discussing the proposal, the committee agreed to the language as proposed by staff, as follows: Adding a section specifically for swimming pools, under the "Yard regulations" section: H. Swimming pools: (1) shall not be placed in the front yard (2) shall not be located less than fifteen (15)feet from any side yard or rear yard property line, measured from the edge of the pool. The committee requested that the language be submitted to Susan Brock for her review. Assuming no major changes, they requested it be forwarded subsequently to the Town Board. 7.Staff Report&Updates: - Chamber of Commerce building is up for sale. The PDZ language is very specific to the current use, so it is likely that a new owner will need/request an amendment to the PDZ. - Route 96B sidewalk is almost complete. Next meeting: Committee changed the date from October 15tn to Thursday, October 22nd. Bill had a conflict with the 15tn Topics: Continue work on food truck legislation and tentatively an introduction to benchmarking.