HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1973-08-28 -PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
City of Ithaca
Regular Meeting August 2$, 1973 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chm. Doney, Mrs. Benson, Messrs. Austin, Clynes, Schickel and Stein.
ALSO: Director Van Cort, Mayor Conley, Bldg. Comm. Jones, Aldermen Slattery,
Spano, Meyer, and Jones; Mrs. Franz Varak and daughters, Mr. Theron Johnson,
Mrs. Marguerite Benson, and members of the press and radio.
ABSENT: Vice Chm. Shaw.
The public hearing on the Theron Johnson request for subdivision was called to
order at 7:40 P.M. Director Van Cort briefly described the land to be subdivided
which is located at 511 Turner P1. and is to be sold to Mr. Franz Varak at 307 Hill-
view P1. Mr. Johnson testified that he was selling the property to Mr. Varak who needs
additional parking space for his home, because of the lack of on-street parking in
the area. Alderwoman Jones asked whether many trees would have to be removed in order
to provide the parking spaces. Mrs. Varak answered that she also was anxious to screen
her property from Morse Chain and that she would remove only as many trees as were
absolutely necessary. After a brief discussion Mrs. Benson MOVED and Mr. Austin
seconded, "Planning Board grants final approval to the requested subdivision." CARRIED
unanimously. M,r. Johnson was informed that there were certain documents that he would '
have to file with the County Clerk, and if he had any questions he could get in touch
with the Planning Director.
The public hearing closed and the Regular meeting of the Board was called to
order.
.M 'UTES: Mrs. Benson MOVED and Mr. Austin seconded, "the minutes of the previous
meeting, July 24, 1973, be approved as published." CARRIED unanimously.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Chairman Doney asked if there were any persons who wished to speak on subjects
pertinent to planning and Mrs. Marguerite Benson asked to be heard on her zoning
appeal. It was therefore decided to move zoning cases to the beginning f the agenda.
DZ13. Appeal• 1025: Director Van Cort gave a brief summary of BZA Appeal 1025 which
was a request for a variance to Sec. 7, Col. 2 of the zoning ordinance. The appellant,
Mrs. Marguerite Benson, bought the property under the assumption that it was in a R-2
zone (as shown for that area on the uncorrected zoning maps). She said that she could
not afford to keep the house without renting two rooms for profit. She also said in
her application that she lives in the house and would insist that anyone living there
would have to conduct himself in an orderly fashion. Chm. Doney asked when she had
bought the property. Mrs. Benson answered that she bought it in June of 1973, and
Commissioner Jones said that the zoning had been changed about two years ago from
R-2 to R-1. Chm. Doney noted that the size of the property (50' x 130' or 6500 S.F. )
was not large enough to permit the renting of rooms for profit, even if it had been in
a R-2 district. Director Van Cort pointed out that this was a case of hardship.
Mayor Conley said that it was his feeling that it was not the Planning Board's role to
rule on hardship, which was the role of the Board of Zoning Appeals, and that the
Board would rule on planning issues. He also pointed out that the residents of that
area had worked very hard to get the zoning changed to R-1. Mr. Austin noted that
there were numerous precedents in that area for renting for profit. The applicant
pointed out that she had been misled by the city zoning map. Commissioner Jones pointed
out that he tries always to update maps before giving them to the public. Mr. Doney
noted that the proposed zoning also has this area as a R-1 district and that variances
run with the land so that if the applicant sold the property, a future owner might
exercise less control over the type of tenant. The applicant noted that she had
ample off-street parking. After further discussion, Pdr. Clynes MOVED, and Mr. Austin
seconded, 9°the tlanning Board recommend for approval of the variance." CARRIED.
VOTE: 4 Ayes, Messrs. Doney and Stein voting Nay.
BZA Appeal 1020: Director Van Cort gave a summary of the appeal as follows:
This was an appeal for an exception to the sign regulations of the zoning ordinance by
Willard C. Schmidt, M.D. Dr. Schmidt asked for permission to erect a free-standing
sign in front of his office at 308 N. Cayuga Street opposite from DeWitt Park. In
his appeal. the doctor gave reason why the sign cannot be affixed to the building and
the appeal noted that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission has given unanimous
approval. A drawing of the sign was attached to the appeal. After brief discussion
Mr. Stein MOVED, and Mrs. Benson seconded, "th, Planning Board recommends approval of
an exception for appeal #1020." CARRIED unanimously.
BZAAwppeal 1024: This was an appeal for an exception to the parking and sq. ft.
requirements of the zoning ordinance. The appellant, Chas. L. Wilson, recently had a
fire in his property at 1002 N. Aurora Street which damaged less than 50 percent of
the structure. At the time of the fire there were 4 dwelling units in the building
while the city's records only noted 2. In order for the property owner to rebuild the
4 units in a R-3 zone, he needs the abovementioned exception. Board members noted
most of the properties in the Fall Creek Area have lots smaller than are required by
the ordinance. This discrepancy leads to problems repeatedly when owners try to make
changes in their buildings. It was noted that while the zoning ordinance is being
rewritten efforts should be made to correct these problems. After further discussion,
Mr. Austin MOVED and Mr. Stein seconded, "the Planning Board recommend the appeal be
denied on the grounds that the property was illegal to begin with." Motion CARRIED
with 3 Ayes, 2 Nays.
'SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
Chm. Doney took the opportunity to bring to the Board's attention the housing
shortage for Cornell students. There was a discussion as to whether there would be
any relaxation of the Zoning Ordinance during this temporary period of acute housing
shortage. It was noted that the shortage was expected to abate within 6 months.
There was some question as to how serious the effect of students spreading to so-
called family areas was. Mr. Austin felt the effect was not very bade however, most
of the other members of the Board felt that it did have a negative effect on those
residential areas.
COMIRiNICATIONS:
A letter from Attorney Jas. Clynes of Treman and Clynes re. Mancini request, as
follows-
2
"Gentlemen:
I am attorney for Robert and Earland Mancini, d/b/a Mancini Realty. They own
certain real estate located on Old Brindley Street. On their behald under date of
February 23, 1 communicated a letter to the Board of Public Works and respectfully
requested that the Board designate Temporary Route 89 as a City street so that house
numbers could be assigned and building permits issued for that area.
Now, some six months later, all we have experienced as taxpayers in the City of
Ithaca is a referral of our request from one Committee to another and back and forth.
between the Planning Board and the Board of Public Works.
Our request is simple: we would like Route 89 designated as a City street so. that
we could hopefully develop the area that we own and pay taxes on. I think it is very '
unfair for any public official to be quoted in the newsprint without us being present
to the fact that the taxpayer has already been paid for his property.
I think we are entitled to an answer. I think we are entitled to the designation,.
To show our good faith, I will hereby state that regardless of the zoning in the area
any and all projects that are planned will be brought back to the Board of Public
Works for their approval. In that way the City can regulate the development of the
area.
As I told the Board of Public Works when I first appeared before them, please
disregard the plan as shown on the plans that I gave the Board for the sole purpose of
describing the area. In the meantime, the Boards have forgotten this statement and
considered that we were planning to develop the area as shown on those plans. We are
not.
May we plaase hear from you?
Very truly yours,
James J. Clynes, Jr."
'ZONING CASES: (See above.)
OLD BUSINESS:
a. 14ancini request - Director Van Cort began by giving a brief history of the
Mancini request. He noted that the Board of Public Works on May 17, 1973 referred
the request by Attorney Clynes for designation of Park Road/Temporary Route 79 as a
public street. The Planning Board, following the recommendation of its Community
Facilities and Services Committee, had taken no action on the request, referring it
back to the Board of Public Works and noting that there might be involved legal con-
siderations in the matter which seem to call for review by the City Attorney. lir.
Van Cort noted that the Board of Public Works at its July 31st meeting referred the
matter back to the Manning Board for a definite recommendation. Mr. Van Cort also
noted that in addition to the referral from the Board of Public Works the Board had
received a communication from Mancini's attorney, Jas. J. Clynes (see above)_. In
response to the referral and letter Mr. Van Cort told Board members that he. ,had tried
to provide them with further background information in the event that they wanted to
dispose of the matter at their meeting without referring it back to committee. In
order to do this he had discussed the case both with the City Attorney and with a
representative of the State Department of Transportation. Mr. Van Cort read to the
3
Board the memo to him from David Gersh, regarding Mancini's request (See Official File
on Mancini. Case) which stated in brief that right of access to the road will be
determined by the road's classification and that further research is necessary. Atty.
Gersh also suggested that Atty. Clynes be given an opportunity to provide the city
with whatever legal authority he has to support his request for access. Finally, Mr.
Van Cort gave to Board members copies of a memo from him listing 5 reasons for the
department's recommendation against giving access (see Official File on Mancini case)-.
Lengthy discussion of the issues followed. Mr. Clynes told Director Van Cort
that it was his feeling that the Board of Public Works wanted the Planning Board to
make a recommendation of the land use proposed for the Mancini property. Mr. Van Cort
responded that the letter from Attorney Clynes specifically asked the Board to ignore
the land use described on the plan and that Superintendent Dingman had told him that
the Board of Public Works wanted a recommendation on the issue of access, not on
land use.
Mr. Stein noted that there seemed to be distinct legal and planning problems
which could be discussed separately and that he felt it would be unwise for the Board
to consider the legal issues. He felt that use of the Park Road for access to abut-
ting properties would not be in k:..eping with the intent of the city's Master Plan.
Mr. Stein also asked whether the land in question could be taken by the city and used
as part of the land to be exchanged for the proposed highway improvements.
Although most board members felt that the legal questions were outside of their
,jurisdiction legal questions often carne up during the discussion. Mr. Au= tin felt
that the most important question to be resolved was whether Mancini had been paid in
the past for his loss of access when the flood channel was built. After further dis-
cussion of land use considerations and the question of access to the park, Mr. Stein
MOVED, and Mr. Schickel seconded a motion which was amended as it appears below.
MOVED, "the Planning Board recommends against giving access to Park Road/Temporary
Route 89 for the following reasons:
1. Park Road is intended to beused only for access to the park, not a public.
thoroughfare, according to the Board of Public Works records at the time of its
planning (1967), and the sense of the Inlet Park Committee meeting minutes during
development of park plans.
2. Park Road/Temporary Route 89 is at present on a temporary alignment which
will change with construction of proposed Routes 96 and 89. After that time Park
Road is to be used only for access to the parks.
3. Planning Board feels that any development which will have an adverse effect
on parks served by Park Road should be discouraged, but that property owners have the
r -,ht to develop their land according to the zoning ordinance and other laws and
regulations .which control development in the city."
After discussion the Board voted on the motion which passed with 4 Ayes and 1 Nay
(J. Clynes, BPW representative) . In addition to referring this motion to the Board
of Public Works the Planning Board requested that the following communication also
be sent to the Board of Public Works:
"The Planning Board herewith gives you its recommendation on the planning con-
siderations involved in Mr. Mancini's request for access. The Board did not attempt
to take into consideration legal questions in its recommendation but attache- for
4
for yoiir._information a prelim;nary resDnx�se�n- -j.ssue of_- access from_David-Gersh
to the Plat�rxin�_1�ermiit
The Board feels that further light might be shed on this request i-f. .a determina-
tion could be made as to whether Mancini has been compensated by the State for taking
of his access. If Mancini was compensated, it is the feeling of the Board that the
city has no obligation to provide access.
b. Request for final approval of the Theron Johnson subdivision - _Turner &
Hillview Places (see above. )
c. Progress report on the State Street mall: Director Van Cort reported
briefly on the progress to date on the State Street mall. The design work on the mall
is near the end of preliminary design. Rough cost estimates will be available in the
very near future, and work is continuing on financing and administration. In general
the mall project is proceeding satisfactorily and on schedule.
d. Progress report on the Southside study: Director Van Cort gave all Board
members a copy of the department's recommendation to the Common Council Revenue Sharing
Committee regarding both allocation for the city in general and for the Southside.
He explained that the department had been asked by the Committee to make general reco-
mmendations on a city-vide basis for revenue sharing funds. He noted that the
recomm:,ndations were generally based on the city's Community Renewal Program recom-
mendations. The department recommended that highest priority be given to the South-
side. The Planning Director also noted that he had made a recommendation that if the
Revenue Sharing Committee was going to allocate most of the funds to ca : _tal projects
that improvements to the Elmira Road and the State Street mall should be given high
priority consideration. However, he noted that a further analysis of all the city's
capital projects would be necessary if Revenue Sharing funds were to be used in this
manner.
Given the amount of material that was distributed, it was decided that the
recommendations should be referred to the Community Facilities and Services Committee
and that the Planning Director should try to set up a time for the meeting.
e. Appointment of 2 re-oresentatives of the Board as members of the Ca ital
Improvements Review Committee: Chairman Doney appointed Mr. Austin to the Committee
and said that he would make the second appointment within a week or so.
w�
NEW BUSINESS:
a. Proposed sale of city-owned roY>.ert.r: At their August 8 meeting of the Board
of Public Works recommended that tho P Pe„ ent revior a• =cc•mnendation by
the Board of Public Works -i;i).at a pa,rec.:. cit; lying :n.c- -_. of and adjacent
to property of Alice Whiting of 312 Spenk,:er E :.. =:t be declared surplus land having
no public purpose. It was further recomn.t<..,ed Gfiat the Planning Board investigate the
feasibility of trading a small parcel of city land serving the Whiting property at
312 Spencer Rd. for a small parcel of Whiting land which lies in the Elmira Road. Mr.
Van Cort told the Board that he had visited the site and saw no reason why the land
should not be sold and exchanged as recommended. After a brief discussion, Mr. Clynes
MOVED and Mr. Stein seconded, "the Planning Board recommend to the Common Council and
the Board of Public Works disposal and exchange of this land as described." At this
point Mr. Austin asked whether the department had up-to-date tax maps, and Mr. Van Cort
reported that they do not. Mr. Stein said that he thought perhaps Common Council
5
would approve purchase of these maps for the department by special action, but Mr.
Doney asked the Director to check the cost and see whether it could be taken out of
this year's budget.
b. Golf Course: Alderman Meyer :asked if the Planning Board would consider
giving approval to the golf course signs prepared by the Planning Department despite
the fact that the item was not on the agenda. Director Van Cort explained that the
design of the signs was completed but that the railroad had asked the department to
send pictures of the grade crossing so that they coulddetermine whether the sign
could safely be placed on their property without obstructing the view of crossing. for
either the trains' engineers or operators of motor vehicles. After a brief' discussio;
Mr. Stein MOVED, and Mrs. ,Benson seconded, "approval be given to the design of the
golf course signs." CARRIED unanimously.
c. A Proposal for a Primary Health Care Center to Serve the Eastern Half C
Tompkins County: Director Van Cort gave the Board a brief history of the proposal
He said that Pis. Bonnie Hora.rd, health planner for Tompkins County,. had asked him to
investigate the possibility of locating a primary health care center in the City of
Ithaca and to make recommendations on a location within the city. As a result the
Planning Department undertook the investigation and came up with the following.
findings: Ithaca was ideally suited for such facility becasue of its centrality re-
garding both transportation routes through the city and public transit in the city as
well as concentrations of user populations, particularly of elderly and young people
who have the greatest health needs. In addition the large number of jobs in the city
and proximity to the hospital, which is necessary for referrals, as well as other
support services, make the City of Ithaca the recommended location.
The department found that there were several locations in the city that were
hell-suited for such facility. Population concentrations, transportation considera-
tions, and centrality and visibility led the department to recommend that a location
be found either in the Southside or in the GIAC building. They decided that a South-
side location would be the best location although GIAC site is also acceptable.
Board members asked Director Van Cort a number of questions about the proposal.
Mr. Austin asked whether such facility would conflict with existing private health
clinics, and Van Cort assured that it would not, also noting that this was a paying
clinic which had to be fully self-supporting. He also said Ms. Howard would be able
to answer further questions about the health center. The Board decided that its
Executive Committee should review the report and make recommendations, and asked that
Ms. Howard be invited to meet with them. He also recommended that the report be re-
ferred to the Planning and Development Committee of Common Council.
14ISCELLANEOUS:
Chairman Doney asked Director Van Cort whether arrangements had been made for
someone other than him to take minutes of the meetings. Director Van Cort reported
that as yet no arrangements had been made. He asked whether the department secretary
would be willing to take the minutes on a compensatory time or a paid basis, and the
Planning Director said that he believed that she did not want to take meeting minutes
after hours. Zhm. Doney said that this too should be taken up by the Executive Com"
mittee.
ADJOURNMENT: 10:40 P.M.
Respctfullyrsubmi ted,
iz
H. Matthys Van Cort
9.12.73 6 Planning Director