Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-2011-03-08Approved at the April 26, 2011 Planning and Development Board Meeting Special Planning & Development Board Meeting Minutes March 8, 2011 Board Members Attending: John Schroeder, Chair; Govind Acharya (left c. 7:30 p.m.); Robert Boothroyd; David Kay; Jane Marcham; Tessa Rudan Board Members Absent: John Snyder Staff Attending: JoAnn Cornish, Director of Planning and Development; Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Development (left c. 7:00 p.m.); Megan Gilbert, Planner, Department of Planning and Development Others Attending: Ellen McCollister, Third Ward Alderperson; Mary Tomlan, former Third Ward Alderperson Chair Schroeder called the meeting to order at 6:03 p.m. 1. Agenda Review There were no changes to the agenda. 2. Comments and Recommendation to Common Council on the Following: A. The Proposed “Collegetown Area Form Districts.” B. The Proposed “Collegetown Overlay Zone Height Incentive District (COZ-HI).” C. The Proposed “Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone.” D. The Proposed “Ordinance Amending the Municipal Code of the City of Ithaca to Add Chapter 160, Entitled ‘Design Review.’ ” Planning Board members discussed, in succession, each of these four interrelated initiatives, which are all intended – collectively – to implement core elements of the 2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines as endorsed by Common Council in August 2009. Observations, concerns and proposed corrections and amendments regarding these four initiatives as expressed by Planning Board members during the discussion were noted, and the principal points were then collected into the following comments and recommendation. 1 Approved at the April 26, 2011 Planning and Development Board Meeting Acharya left the meeting prior to the vote below. Adopted Planning Board Comments and Recommendation Regarding the Proposed Collegetown Area Form Districts, the Proposed Collegetown Overlay Zone Height Incentive District (COZ-HI), the Proposed Amendments to the Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone (CPOZ), and the Proposed New Design Review Ordinance: On a motion by Kay, seconded by Boothroyd: At a special meeting on March 8, 2011, the Planning and Development Board discussed the four proposals listed above. Board members agreed to convey the following comments and concerns: A. Collegetown Area Form Districts 1. As stated in the “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines,” one of the key goals of the proposed zoning is to concentrate urban density in the core of Collegetown while protecting the character of surrounding residential neighborhoods. The Collegetown Area Form Districts proposal is consistent with this approach, and the form-based code is an appropriate tool for implementing this vision. 2. When the City recently rezoned other areas throughout the City to R-3aa, R- 2b or R-2c to protect neighborhood character, the Collegetown area was deliberately excluded from this rezoning because preparation of the Collegetown Area Form Districts was already underway. The Board believes that the proposed Collegetown Area Form Districts will achieve the same goals in appropriate peripheral Collegetown neighborhoods. 3. The City’s existing off-street parking ordinance currently prohibits parking areas within 5’ of a side or rear property line within residential zoning districts. The Board recommends that this distance be increased within the proposed Traditional Residential districts, given the tremendous pressure to pave over yards throughout the Collegetown area and given that 5’ is too narrow to support the growth of canopy trees that could provide desirable screening and shade. 4. In the proposed VR-2 district, the street-level story uses were expanded to include office and commercial uses. The Board recommends that the glazing requirements for the street-level story in the VR-2 district be increased to allow a higher percentage of glazing for these permitted street-level office and commercial uses (while keeping the glazing requirements for a residential street-level story the same). 5. Due to the large amount of land required for “Motel” uses, the Board recommends that “Motel” be removed as an allowable use in the proposed MU district. “Hotel” uses should continue to be allowed as both street-level and upper story uses. 2 Approved at the April 26, 2011 Planning and Development Board Meeting 6. The “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines” recommended further study and possible protection of historic resources in Collegetown. The “Collegetown Historic Resources Worthy of Detailed Research” report, dated June 14, 2009 and prepared by Mary Tomlan and John Schroeder, identified the most important Collegetown historic resources. The proposed zoning would increase the development envelope on some of these sites, which could provide an incentive for the demolition of, or undesirable modifications to, historic resources of value to the community. Historic designation or other protection will be considered in the next few months, and this would mitigate potential impacts of the proposed zoning changes on these historic resources. Parts II and III of the Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF) should be updated to include this information. 7. The FEAF states that there will be no impact on land, or on noise and odors. The Board recommends that the FEAF be amended to indicate that while there is no impact on land or noise and odors by the adoption of the zoning, future construction under the proposed zoning could have an impact. Future development proposals will be subject to their own environmental reviews and will be no less protective of the environment. B. Collegetown Overlay Zone Height Incentive District 1. The Board discussed the provision that only one story of Class A office space or non-tax-exempt research and development space needs to be provided in order to qualify for the additional building height. While no consensus was reached, some Board members thought that Common Council should consider requiring two stories of Class A office space or non-tax-exempt research and development space to qualify for the incentive. C. Amendments to the Collegetown Parking Overlay Zone 1. The Board noted that the proposed amendments show true innovation in the City’s approach to parking and transportation. The establishment of a dedicated fund for transportation improvements is the first such commitment to implement improvements identified in a plan within the specific area of the City covered by that plan. 2. The Board discussed the proposed reduction in the residential parking requirement to one space for every three resident occupants in the proposed VR-4, VR-5, and MU districts. This change will necessitate on-going monitoring to verify that the requirement has been appropriately set, which will in turn require a commitment of funding and/or staff time. D. New Design Review Ordinance 1. The proposed binding design review is another new tool that the Board would like to see eventually extended to other areas of the City. 2. A consultant will be preparing design standards for Collegetown within the next few months. The language of the proposed ordinance, and potentially 3 Approved at the April 26, 2011 Planning and Development Board Meeting the composition of the Planning Board, will need to be reviewed once the consultant’s work has been completed. In general, the Board noted that it is unlikely that any of the proposals will be perfect, and that they will all need attention, monitoring and potential revision over time. However, Board members noted that these interrelated proposals set forth positive new ideas and are a major step forward for the City. The Planning Board feels these proposals truly reflect the vision for Collegetown described in the “2009 Collegetown Urban Plan & Conceptual Design Guidelines,” and therefore recommends adoption, with the revisions suggested above, of all four proposals. In Favor: Boothroyd, Kay, Marcham, Rudan, Schroeder Absent: Acharya, Snyder The above comments and recommendation were distributed to the Mayor and Common Council in a memo from the Planning and Development Board dated March 14, 2011. 3. Adjournment On a motion by Boothroyd, seconded by Marcham, and unanimously approved, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. 4