HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-P&DB-1995-03-28 c, cis
Approved 4/25/95
Planning and Development Board
MINUTES
March 28, 1995
Present: Susan Blumenthal, Vice Chair;Sarah Adams;Anne Clavel;David Kay(arrived late);
Carolyn Peterson(arrived late);John Schroeder. Staff: H.Matthys Van Cort;K.Ross;
applicants;other interested parties.
1. Privilege of the Floor
Doria Higgins commended the Planning Board for its March 21 comments on the DEIS,
but wanted to clarify one statement on page 14(second paragraph,under item 4,
Southwest Park Substitute Parkland). She stated it is a misleading because it says,"The
City has been considering the alienation of the 62-acre Southwest Park."; the choice of the
word"considering"gives the impression that the City has not yet decided to alienate or
take any steps to do so. She suggested changing the sentence to the following and
notifying Clough Harbour of the clarification to avoid any misunderstanding: "The City
has been working to implement its decision to alienate,i.e.remove from park status
Southwest Park for over a decade."
Higgins also wanted to alert the Board to the fact that the City may have some
weaknesses in the procedures by which mitigating measures are enforced, and this
information should be part of the fmal evaluation for the Wal-Mart proposal.
Tim Allen wanted to clarify a comment that was made by a newscaster,who said that Stop
Wal-Mart would sue if the decision was not in their favor. Allen stated that he had made a
statement to the press regarding Stop Wal-Mart's concern that the process be done
properly, and that statement was misinterpreted.
John Schroeder stated that when he wrote the word"considering"he meant in no way to
contradict the statement that Common Council had decided to alienate. He stated he had
no problem with clarifying it to state what is a fact and that basically Higgins' language is
accurate. He suggested adding Higgins' comment to the agenda to discuss later.
2. Preliminary Site Plan Review/Environmental Review/Public Hearing
A. Pete's Market and Liquor Stores Relocation/805 W.Buffalo St.
Van Cort stated that staff and Board members of the Committee met with Mark Zaharis
and his architect to go over the exterior materials that will be used on the building.
Samples of colors and materials were provided by the applicant. Van Cort stated that the
site plan was revised in accordance with the suggestions of the City Traffic Engineer and
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 2
that staff recommends approval. Clavel moved and Schroeder seconded the following
resolutions for a negative declaration and preliminary and final site plan approval.
WHEREAS,a site development plan for the relocation of Pete's and Pete's Wine&Liquor
has been submitted for review and approval by this Board, and
WHEREAS,the proposed development is a Type I action according to the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance because the anticipated traffic may be over 500
in any 8-hour period per day, and the full EAF parts 1,2 and 3 were completed, and
WHEREAS,the preliminary site development plan was reviewed by the Planning Dept.,
the Fire Dept.,the Building Dept, and the Engineering Divisions of the Department of
Public Works,and
WHEREAS,this Board,the Lead Agency for environmental review of all Site
Development Plan Review applications,has reviewed the application materials and
additional supporting documents,including comments from the Conservation Advisory
Council on the environmental review of the subject proposal,and
WHEREAS,the involved agency,NYSDOT,has reviewed and commented on the
proposed site plan, and
WHEREAS, although the review process has identified, as noted in the EAF parts 2 and 3,
potentially large impacts on air quality,transportation and visual resources,in
consideration of the project's specific characteristics and mitigating measures included in
the proposal,these impacts will not be significant, now, therefore be it
RESOLVED,that this Board determine that the proposed project will result in no
significant impact on the environment,and that a Negative Declaration for purposes of
Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed according to the requirements
contained in Part 617.
Carried unanimously.
WHEREAS,a site development plan for the relocation of Pete's and Pete's Wine&Liquor
has been submitted for review and approval by this Board, and
WHEREAS,an environmental review and the public hearing of the proposal have been
completed, and
WHEREAS,the preliminary site development plan was reviewed by the Planning Dept.,
the Fire Dept.,the Building Dept. and the Engineering Divisions of the Department of
Public Works,and
C:Ke11y\Thy s\PlanbrdN3-28mtg.doc
r
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 3
WHEREAS,recommended modifications have been incorporated in the site plan with
revisions dated 3-15-95, and
WHEREAS,the Codes and Administration Committee has determined,at its 3-22-95
meeting, that the criteria of site plan approval are satisfied,now, therefore be it
RESOLVED,that Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval is granted with the condition
that the final selection of building material colors and proposed planter be reviewed and
approved by the Codes and Administration Committee.
Carried unanimously.
B. Drop-In Children's Center/506 First St.
The design had not changed from what the Board saw last year,and the only issues the
Board had discussed were providing a little more buffering between the existing
residences,putting a planting strip in between the parking lot and the adjacent property
line and the wooden fence to the west and the south of the property,which the Board
requested be 6 feet high. After some discussion regarding the 6-foot fence,it was decided
the applicant would put up the higher fence(6-foot) along the southeast and the lower
fence(3-foot)along the northwest side. The site plan will be revised accordingly, and a
note will be put on the drawing to that effect. There was also some discussion about the
leasing of parking issue. Van Cort said that this issue was dealt with by the Building
Department. The Board suggested that the applicant submit colors once they have made
their choices and then Codes Committee would review the facade colors. Schroeder
moved and Adams seconded the following resolutions for a negative declaration and
preliminary and final site plan approval.
WHEREAS,the site development plan for the construction of a 4357 sf day care facility at
506 First Street was submitted for review and approval by this Board, and
WHEREAS,the proposed development is an Unlisted Action according to the City
Environmental Quality Review Ordinance,and
WHEREAS,an environmental review of the proposal has been conducted according to
procedures prescribed in CEQR, including the completion of the full EAF parts 1 and 2,
and review by the Conservation Advisory Council,and
WHEREAS,no major environmental impact was identified in the review process, now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED,that the Board of Planning and Development does hereby issue a negative
declaration of the proposal's impact on the environment.
C:Kelly■Thys\Planbrd\3-28mtg.doc
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 4
Carried unanimously.
WHEREAS, a new 4387 sf day care facility is proposed to be developed at 506 First Street
where currently the Water and Sewer Division of DPW uses as a storage area, and
WHEREAS,parking will be provided on a rented property on Adams Street, and
WHEREAS,the proposed development had been reviewed by the Codes and
Administration Committee at its November and December meetings in 1994, and reports
had been made to the Board, and
WHEREAS,an environmental review of the proposal has been completed according to the
City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance,and
WHEREAS,site plan revisions were made according to recommendations from the
Department of Public Works,the Building Department, the Fire Department, and the
Codes and Administration Committee,and
WHEREAS,the revised site plan,received by the Planning Department on 3-14-95,was
reviewed by the Codes and Administration Committee at its 3-22-95 meeting,where it
was determined that the plan adequately satisfy all criteria of site plan approval, now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED,that Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval be granted.
Carried unanimously.
3. Modification of Approved Site Plans
A. 720 S. Meadow Street/Colbert
One item still under discussion is the 10-foot easement which has to do with getting an
agreement with the adjacent property. The other substantive issues had to do with
pushing the whole building north five feet to get it further away from the drainage and also
increasing the planting islands in the parking area. There was some concern about what
was going to happen with the elevation on"Building A"and how that was going to
change or interrelate. A condition of approval is that the applicants come back to Codes
with the elevation.on`Building A"once they know who the tenants are and what their
needs are going to be. The only thing that should be added is the easement(March 9
letter). Clavel moved and Schroeder seconded the following resolution.
WHEREAS, a site development plan for the approximately 3.18 acres interior parcel
(behind Garage de France) at 720 South Meadow Street was approved with conditions on
8-23-94, and
C:Ke11y\Thys\Planbrd■-28mtg.doc
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 5
WHEREAS,a modified site plan(including a revised architectural design) has been
submitted for review and approval, and
WHEREAS,the proposed modifications are made necessary by the project's changed
program, and the architectural character of the structure in the proposed modified plan is
similar to the approved design, and
WHEREAS,the proposed modification would in fact mean only a phased implementation
of the already approved site plan,now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, that the modified site plan(received March 20, 1995, subject to the
previously stated conditions and those set forth in a letter from Jagat Sharma received
March 10, 1995)be approved,with the following additional conditions:
1. a revised drawing with accurately drawn lay-out and revised planting plan is to be
submitted for review and approval by the Department of Planning and
Development;
2. the elevation design of"building A"is to be re-evaluated by the Codes and
Administration Committee before the issuance of the Building Permit for its
construction.
Carried Unanimously.
4. Zoning Appeals Reports
Approval of the following report was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Clavel,passed
unanimously.
Review by this Board has determined that none of subject appeals involve matters of long-
range or area-wide planning concern. They are herewith referred for Board of Zoning
. Appeals action,with the following comment:
Appeal 2255, for Use and Area Variance to allow professional office use at 404 N.
Cayuga Street,in an R-3a zone. This Board has continually been concerned about
allowing this type of use in the R3 zone and strongly considers this to be am improper use
in that zone.
C:Ke11y\Thys\Planbd\3-28mtg.doc
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 6
Appeal 2256, for Special Permit and Area Variances to allow occupancy of 309 S. Corn
St., in an R-2b zone, by Recycle Ithaca's Bicycles. This Board strongly supports the
approval of this permit.
5. Reports
A. Director
Fulton/Meadow Street Study. Van Cort stated that in accordance with direction
from the Planning Committee of Common Council he had organized a charrette on
the issue of Fulton/Meadow Street rezoning. This group had come up with certain
recommendations that he would like to present to the Planning Board and
ultimately to a client group of residents and business owners. The Board
requested a copy of the Fulton/Meadow Street Study and directed that this issue
be made part of a Board agenda for April or May.
B. Chair
Kay informed members of a notice received from Tracy Smith regarding planning
sessions for those who wanted to attend.
C. Board of Public Works
No report.
D. Planning Committee
Schroeder stated that Common Council was going to pass a home rule request
authorizing the Inlet Island alienation at the April meeting. He stated they have
added some parkland at Six Mile Creek Valley in addition to the Ithaca Falls area
and along the Weiner property as substitute parkland. The whole Ithaca Falls
Basin would be substitute parkland.
6. Approval of Minutes
The August 9, 1994 Minutes were amended. Schroeder moved and Clavel seconded the
motion to approve the Minutes with changes.
Carried unanimously.
Schroeder's moved approval of the August 23, 1994 Minutes. Clavel seconded the
motion.
Carried unanimously.
The September 27, 1994 Minutes were amended. Schroeder moved and Adams seconded
the motion to approve the Minutes with changes.
C:Ke11y\T hys\Planbrd\3-28mtg.doc
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 7
Carried unanimously.
The February 8, 1994 Minutes were amended. Schroeder moved and Adams seconded
the motion to approve the Minutes with changes.
Carried unanimously.
The February 15, 1994 Minutes will be on the agenda for approval at next month's
meeting.
7. Miscellaneous
There was some discussion on the following miscellaneous items that were added to the
agenda.
(1) Ms. Higgins' Statement. The Board is willing to accept Ms. Higgins' statement as
true and her change in language to be included in the public record. It was
suggested to put in the Minutes that Common Council has voted its intention to
alienate Southwest Park.
(2) Site Plan Ordinance. It was suggested that the Attorney's Report on Site Plan
Review Revisions be put on the agenda for the next meeting.
(3) Bill Gray's Memo. There was some discussion regarding the memo,but the Board
decided to deal with this when they discuss Southwest Park.
(4) Proposed Move of DSS to Downtown. There was some discussion as to whether
the City was going to build a parking garage. There are several sites in or near the
CBD which are under consideration by the County for a relocated DSS building.
Among those are a site near Dewitt Park and one on the 300 block of West State
Street.
(5) Northside Park Designation. Schroeder stated that he had hoped that the Planning
Committee would endorse the park,but Diann Sams and Pam Mackesey were not
willing to vote on specific boundaries. Van Cort stated that staff has only gotten a
response from the Sciencenter,and that we will forward copies of that response to
all members of the Board.
(6) Attorney for Wal-Mart. There was some discussion as to whether the Board
wanted to spend any of the$10,000 that was allocated for legal services on anyone
except for Scott Chatfield. There was also some discussion regarding getting a
consultation from Arthur Giacalone, an attorney from East Aurora who is in the
process of writing a Findings Statement for a large development application for
building permit. Deputy Director Sieverding will further investigate Mr.
C:Kelly\1hys\Planbrd'3-28mtg.doc
Minutes of March 28, 1995 Meeting 8
Giacalone's proposed fees and services to be rendered. Adams made a motion that
Schroeder go to Committee of the Whole to ask for guidance about the Board
having the authority to spend the$10,000 with its own best judgment. Schroeder
seconded the motion. The Board asked that Sieverding make follow-up calls on
recommendations for Arthur Giacalone.
The vote was 5-0-1,with Clavel abstaining.
(7) Timeframe Schedule. Sieverding will prepare schedule.
C:Ke11y\T hys\Planbrd■3-28mtg.doc