HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1970-10-28 Planning Board Proceedings
City of Ithaca
Regular Meeting October 28, 1970 7:40 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairman Putney, Vice Chairman Doney, Messrs. Korf, Reps, Schmidt, Conley
(arrived late).
ALSO: Acting Director Meigs; Planning Tech. Lawrence; Building Commissioner Jones;
G. Keller, M. Keller, M. Daniels, G. Laidlaw, M. Bond, R. Hemming, H. Samuel,
P. Morseman, W. Kirby, M. Kirby, A. Heald, K. Heald, J. Raden, Mr. & Mrs. W.
Ewald, R. Josephes; and D. Stewart, P. Walsh and P. Crissey representing press
and radio.
ABSENT; R. Burns.
MINUTES of the last Regular meeting of the Board, September 23, 1970, were approved as
;:blished.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS: None.
COMMUNICATIONS:
a. Letter from Mrs. Harold S. Mitchell, 1722 Slaterville Rd. , Ithaca--Acting
Director Meigs read to the Board a letter received from Mrs. Mitchell, expressing interest
in the future of downtown Ithaca, to which was attached a brochure describing the Central
Business District of Eugene, Oregon, the design of which was contributed to by Hugh S.
Mitchell, a former Ithacan. Mr. Korf MOVED, "the Board direct Mr. Meigs to acknowledge
receipt of the letter, and refer the brochure to General Plan and Capital Improvements
Committee." Seconded by Mr. Schmidt. CARRIED.
b. N.Y.S.D.O.T. Project Information Report 1 Relocation of Rte. 13 (Second Discus-
sion, Oct. 9, 1970)--Mr. Meigs read a letter from County Planning Director Liguori informing
him of a sec` _d general discussion on the relocation of Rte. 13, scheduled for Friday,
Oct. 9 in the County Planning Office, at which Mr. Meigs was asked to express his views
on the project. Representatives of the Cortland Area were expected to indicate their
attitudes also. Mr. Meigs reported that he attended the meeting.
c. Transfer of Planning Department to County--Mr. Meigs informed the Board that
Common Council, at its Oct. 21 meeting, passed a motion: "to ask the Planning Board to
express its feeling about the Board's future role." A brief discussion followed; it was
decided that in the absence of a specific propesal from Common Council, the Board should
not offer recommendation. Mr. Schmidt MOVED, "the Planning Board meet with Common Council
for the purpose of discussing the possible transfer of the Planning Department to the
County, and overall functions of Planning Board as it pertains to the City." Seconded by
Mr. Conley. Unanimously CARRIED.
d. LWV WAter Resources Stuff Report--Mr. Meigs distributed copies of the Tompkins
County Water Supply - Problem and Opportunity--a study by the League of Women Voters
Resources Committee of the Water Supply Problem facing Tompkins County in 1970.
e. Cornell-Mitchell Sts. zoning--Dr. Maurice Bond, 607 Mitchell St. , read to the
Board a statement prepared by the subject area property owners requesting a zoning change
to restore R-1 status (now R-2) to the area, and asked the Planning Board to recommend
same to Common Council who will receive their petition through Councilman Allan Feldt.
The residents of the area fear depreciation of property values and lowering of standards
in the neighborhood, and are concerned about the definition of !°family" in the proposed
new Zoning Ordinance which has been submitted to Council for approval.
Mr. Doney MOVED, "the request be referred to Codes & Ordinances Committee of the
Board for study, and recommendation back to the Board at its November 24th meeting."
Seconded by Mr. Conley. CARRIED.
The Codes & Ordinances Committee agreed to meet at 4:30 p.m. on Wednesday, November 4,
1970 for discussion of the matter, and invited Dr. Bond and -any other interested residents
of the area, to attend the meeting.
C014MITTEE REPORTS:
a. Codes & Ordinances Con ittee--Chairman Schmidt presented the following zoning
cases:
1) Request for Special Permit to Sec. 8-D of the Zoning Ordinance, at 405-7 College
Avenue (BZA Case 889). The request was reviewed in accordance with Sec. 12-C. Section
8-D of the ordinance states that
"No permit shall be granted by the Board of Appeals except for a specific use desig-
nated, as requiring a special permit, and can only be granted for property in a use
district where such special permit use is designated but not in a more restricted
district."
Section 8A2 lists districts allowing sign size increase by Special Permit as B-4, I-1, I-2
and I-3 only.
The Committee recommended return to BZA with no action, since under the ordinance, no
permit can lawfully be granted. It is further noted that it appears Appellant is in
reality applying for permission for about 185 s.f. of sign, since one element is a pro-
jecting, double-sided sign.
Mr. Schmidt MOVED, "the Board return the case to Board of Zoning Appeals as recom-
mended by Committee." Seconded by Mr. Conley. Unanimously CARRIED.
2) Appeal for interpretation of Sec. 7, Col. 8 of the Ordinance, which requires 40' street
line frontage for building lots (BZA Case 899).
The Committee interprets this section of the ordinance as meaning that any building
lot in a B-4 district must have at least forty feet of frontage on a public street, and
that that forty feet must belong to the property involved; impermanent arrangements for
use of adjacent property for frontage, whether by lease or by obtaining rights-of-way, do
not satisfy this requirement.
The Committee therefore recommended that Case #899 be returned to BZA, with the
above interpretation of Sec. 7, Col. 8 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Committee recognizes that in this area of the city, and possibly in other areas, -
certain undeveloped properties have no street frontage, and feels that the Department of
Public Works should investigate the problems of development and provision of access and
service to these properties.
2
Mr. Schmidt MOVED, "the Board accept the recommendation of the Committee and return
the same to the Board of Zoning Appeals." Seconded by Mr. Conley. CARRIED. Opposed by
J. Reps.
3) Request for Variance under Sec. 7, Col. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance, for property at
227 Linden Ave. , in an R-3 zone (BZA Case #900).
This request, for commercial use of an existing structure in a residential zone, is
in direct contravention of the provisions of Sections 7 and 10 of the ordinance. The
Committee feels that commercial use would not be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the ordinance, and that it would be injurious to the neighborhood (ref. Sec.
12-B 4c). It is felt that Linden Ave. is too narrow for the amount of traffic likely to
be connected with this use, which would also not be in compliance with the intent of the
General Plan.
The building, site of former :nonconforming uses, has not been used by the most recent
use, a, laundry, for well over a year. Sec. 10-E of the ordinance specifies that a non-
conforming use may not be resumed after it has been discontinued for twelve months or
more. It is felt that this provision should apply to any nonconforming use, not only the
use discontinued.
The existing structure is in violation of lot coverage and yard requirements of the
ordinance, Sec. 7 Cols. 11 through 16.
The property in question has been the subject of previous appeals (BZA cases 793, 798,
804; May, June and Aug. 1968) for conversion to a multiple dwelling, which the Planning
Board rac!ommended for approval. It was reported that this project fell through due to
financial problems.
The Committee therefore recommends, "that the Planning Board recommends disapproval
of the Request for Variance, BZA case #900, since it does not satisfy the requirements of
Sections 7, 10 and 12 of the City Zoning Ordinance." Mr. Schmidt MOVED, "the Board
accept the recommendation of the Committee and return to Board of Zoning Appeals."
Seconded by Mr. Conley. CARRIED. Mr. Korf abstained from voting.
OLD BUSINESS:
a. No. 9 Fire Station--As a result of a resolution passed at the September 2 meeting
of Common Council, Planning Board was requested to re-examine the matter regarding dis-
position of No. 9 Fire Station and report thereon to the Council within 60 days, if
possible. Planning Board, at its September 23rd meeting, requested Acting Director Meigs
to summarize the original report to Council dated September 26, 1968 for the Board to
examine at its October 28th meeting. Mr. Meigs read the original report of September 26,
1968 to the Board and a brief discussion was held after which Mr. Schmidt MOVED, "It is
the considered opinion of the Planning Board that the following recommendation be made
for the Council's examination:
1. that the parcel of land, on which the old #9 Fire Station is located, be retained
by the City,
2. that the existing building be demolished.
This decision was based on foreseeable expansion_ of the fire station in the future due to
the possibility of more intensive development in Collegetown." Seconded by Mr. Korf.
CARRIED.
3
b. Rte. 13 Relocation hearings-®Mr. Meigs reported that he attended the Corridor
Public Hearing held by the N.Y.S.D.O.T. on October 15, 1970 at the Dryden Senior High
School for the purpose of discussing relocation of Rte. 13 to Cortland. Mr. Liguori,
Tompkins County `1=lanning director, represented various local interested groups. The state
will re-examine the material submitted and conduct a Design Public Hearing at some time
in the future.
c. 1) McPherson Subdivision--Mr. Meigs read a letter from McPherson of Ithaca, Inc.
in which Mr. Andrew H. McPherson reported that due to poor weather conditions, coupled
with the scope of their West Hill Subdivision, they found they were approximately one creek
away from completion and submittal of request for final approval. He requested an ex-
tension of time until the November 24th meeting of the Planning Board at which time he will
present plans and sewer profiles for final approval of the Board. In addition, he informed
the Board that his firm had done a great deal of investigation on the matter of underground
electrical service and at this time are anticipating going underground.
The Board recommended an extension of time, as requested, until November 24, 1970 and
consider Mr. McPherson's letter as required written request for final approval at the
November 24th meeting of the Board.
2) Rosten Subdivision--(item not on Agenda) Mr. Meigs read a letter from Rosten
Construction Co. , Inc. in which Mr. Rosten explained that, due to delays involved both
normal and peculiar to the project (proposed subdivision on Floral Ave. dated May 27,
1970), he would like approval from the Planning Board to improve lots 1 through 4. The
Board directed Mr. Meigs to inform Mr. Rosten that if the required documentation is sub-
mitted sufficiently in advance, possible review by committee may be accomplished so that
the Board may act on recommendation at the November 24th meeting.
d. Inlet Park development--Mr. Meigs reported that two Inlet Park Committee meetings
had been held, October 8 and October 19, at which drawings were presented by the con-
sulting engineer to the committee for their comments, and discussion was held regarding
committee's membership and duration. He informed the Board that another meeting will be
held sometime in the near future to discuss the members' reaction to the design and
possibilities which present themselves for changes, such as using the air strip for
parking rather than putting ball fields there. The present committee will continue to
function until the design is approved and will consider the status of the committee at that
time.
e. CRP developments/interviewing-process (Executive & Liaison Committee)--Mr. Meigs
reported that letters had been mailed to consulting firms interested in working on the
CRP Program, as well as previous clients of these firms regarding their work, and that
many replies have been received, of which almost all are interested in working on the
program. Interviews have been set for several consultants, the first one being on
October 29th at 1:00 p.m.
f. Job applications--Mr. Meigs reported that he has received several applications
for part-time work and at least one application for the position of Junior Planner and
requested permission to follow up on the hiring of a junior planner. Mr. Doney MOVED,
t4the Board give approval to Mr. Meigs to hire temporary help as needed and to fill the
position of junior planner." Seconded by Mr. Schmidt. CARRIED. Mr. Conley abstained
from voting.
NEW BUSINESS: None.
4
MISCELLANEOUS: (a, b and c reported under 5a - Codes and Ordinances Committee)
d. November and December meeting dates--Because of the Thanksgiving and Christmas
holidays, the Board substituted dates of Tuesday, November 24th and Monday, December 21st
for the regular meeting dates in those months. So MOVED by Mr. Schmidt, seconded by Mr.
Conley. CARRIED.
e. Item not on Agenda--The East Hill Planning Corporation requested a meeting with
the Planning Board for the purpose of presenting a progress report. The date- of Monday,
November 30, 1970 was selected for the meeting.
MEETING ADJOURNED at 10:00 P.M.
Jonathan C. Meigs
11.4,70 Acting Planning Director
5