HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1976-04-27 BOARD OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT'"MINUTES ;- CITY OF ITHACA
Regular Meeting, April 27, 1976, 7: 30p,m..
PRESENT: Chairperson Benson, his. Meyer, Messrs. Fuller and
Stein
ALSO PRESENT: Dir. of Pl. & Dev. H. M. Van-Cort, Dep. Bldg. Commr.
E. Jones, Planner J.` Meigs, Consultant D. Farley,
County Planner F. ,Liguori; Associate Planner H.
Mis'sarian; .Citizens R. W. Andree,',.H. Hunt Bradley,
Jr. , and Lars R.. Kallstrom, Sr. ,Plnr. J. Benedict .
ABSENT: Messrs. Moran, Saggese and Hildreth
The; Chairperson called the meeting to order and asked for approval
of the minutes of the meeting ,of March 23. The minutes were approved
as read.
CHAIRPERSON°S REPORT
Ms. Benson noted. that the Executive Committee had met on West State
Street developments
Regarding health services, she noted that the Cornell Senate would`
like to. have input in current negotiations.
She called upon Mr. Liguori to speak on county transportation pro
gresso : He stated that there `is presently a plan to consolidate
the transportation agencies into a transportation commissionwhich
would be composed of representatives from each. municipality The
City of Ithaca, would have more weight on the (bmmission than one ' . .
vote. State transportation expertise, would,also be requested- The .
commission would have authority to appoint a,` planning group to reach
professionals, special interest groups, planners. It would make
reports to a policy group. The commission would be. given total
responsibility for transportation, planning including railroads,
waterways, etc. . Pro grams. su as these' see:m :to be fairly well,
accepted by government. One drawback , is that it is difficult to
determine representation The plan will be presentedto the
County's Planning and Public Works Committee and the Board. of Reps.
The Chairperson requested that the members of the 'Planning and
Development Board think about having meetings in neighborhood'
areas, rather than in City Hall, and asked members to think about
their . roles.. as liaisons with various neighborhood `associations, -
noting that work with the associations could begin ,in the fall.
2 -
ZONING
Because of the members of the publi waiting to speak, the zoning
cases were moved forward on the agenda.. ,
(a) Appeal 1113 by Robert W. Andree for Area Variance to allow
a .building within four feet of front property line in I=l zone
instead of required .20-foot setbackl
Mr. Andree has a fuel business near the Cornell boathouse, at
the foot of Third Street, in Ithaca He would like to build a
storage shed to cut down on vandalism. Presently the
zoning regulations require a 20-foo setback in I-1 zones. The
building proposed by Mr. Andree wou d be very close to the line,
approximately three feet. The property is approximately 100 X
600 feet, running parallel to the railroad tracks. The Planning
: Department suggested a building set back at least ten feet
from the lot line would be more acc ptable. Mr. Andree
stated his intention of constructinj an aluminum building with
no windows, heat or electricity, to be used solely for the
purpose of storage. He noted that ne had already cleared out
considerable sumac and brush to imp ove the looks of the
property, and that there were no of er dooryards or even mail-
boxes on the block. Mr. Van Cort s ggested that a `comprehensive
site plan could utilize the space better. Ms. Benson expressed
concern about neighboring roads and traffic patterns and the
building's effect on them. Mr.. And ee replied that the only
traffic consisted of light trucks aid students using the boat-
house. Mr. Van Cort asked about po er lines which run near building
on that..property and which come clo a to existing tanks. Mr. An-
dree replied that he had conferred qith a representative of the
Fire Department, who was unconcerne.1 with the proximity of the
lines to buildings and tanks. Ms. qeyer noted " that it is important
for the City to support economic deLrelopment, and that if this
was important to the healthy contin ation of Mr. Andree's busi-
ness, ';the City should take that into consideration.
Mr. Stein MOVED that. the Planning and Development Board support
the variance as proposed, .especially since it does not affect
planning matters. Ms. Meyer seconded. Motion CARRIED unanimously. '
(b) Appeal 1114, by Lawrence G. Th yer as Agent of Veda M. Thayer
for Area Variance to allow an addi ion, connecting two buildings
on one property in a B-2 zone, to le built without the required
rear-yard setback of 18 feet.
This addition would connect Thayer Appliance with -Carpet Bazaar
by a single storey addition. It would mean building completely
across the back lot of the property. The plan has been approved
by the Fire Chief. The variance is for 60% coverage instead of
the 50% allowed, as well as a variance on the setback requirement.
The Planning staff recommended approval.
3 -
Ms. Meyer MOVED that approval be recommended to the Board of
Zoning Appeals. Mr. Stein seconded. Motion CARRIED unanimously:
(c) Appeal 1115 by H. Hunt Bradley, Jr. , and Lars R.� Kallstrom,
Sr. for Area Variance to allow reconversion of space, currently in
nonconforming use under variance, from commercial to residential
in a B-2 zone.
The undersized lot in question was established before the present
zoning ordinance, and there is noon site parking, The present
owners of the property now have two rental units in the building
and would like to construct a third, replacing a ground-floor -:
business. They feel that residential use is more suitable than,
commercial for that space.
Mr. Fuller MOVED that the Planning and Development Board recom
ment approval of the appeal. Ms. Meyer seconded. Motion CARRIED
unanimously.
SPECIAL ORDER. OF BUSINESS:
Presentation by Frank Liguori,. Tompkins County Planning Commissioner,
of the Selective Communities Plan for the County. Mr. Liguori
stated that the Selective Communities Plan described alternative
settlement plans for best utilization of environmental resources,
community facilities, housing, human resources, land use and the.
economy of the county. He stressed the importance of commitment
on the part of the involved municipalities The' County has just
completed a survey of land use .and its historical implications.
They have come up with three alternative settlement patterns.
Mr. Liguori feels that there are only a few remaining years until.
government is ,no' longer- able to influence growth patterns. The
population of the County is expected to grow by 20,000 by the year
2,000. There is currently a population of 83,000 At the county
level there should not be any attempt made to increase or decrease
growth rate. That is up to individual municipalities. Mr.Liguori then then displayed four maps demonstrating possible settlement
patterns. They were color coded to indicate urban ,areas,. less
intense urban areas, suburban and rural 'areas, and lands held by
municipalities or 'institutions. He noted that a' .sprawl pattern
is developing around Ithaca. There is a strip pattern around
Route 79 , 96 near the hospital, 96B near Ithaca College. The
County expects further sprawl, leapfrogging, and strip development.
There is not much that can be done without a definite program to
change this. Sprawl threatens agricultural lands. Public trans-
portation is not expected to keep up with it. It is possible to
confine strip development and sprawl along major corridors.
Provision of public waterand sewers can be a problem. Certain
4 T
incentives, such as smaller lot sizlI requirements, would encourage
growth in particular areas. Disincentives would discourage
development in other, more rural ar' as* Towns such as Newfield,
Freeville, Dryden, Groton and Trumatisburg could absorb more
people. They already possess many of the public services neces-
sary for growth. Sixty percent of ew growth could be accommodated
in the Ithaca area without seriousl affecting the character egg
of the area. Controlled developmen would mean more practical
utilization of land. More people could walk to schools, and in
cases of good utilization, schools Decome centers of community
life. With good planning, it would also be possible to walk to
shopping areas. This coupled with Detter commuter bus transporta-
tion would lessen dependency on cars. Each local government can
choose its pattern of development for itself. Mr. Liguori solicited
reaction and endorsement of the Planning and Development Board and
said he was hopeful that the Board ould recommend the endorsement
of Common Council.
He went on to say, in response to a question from the floor, that
there are State Agricultural Distri is which the State authorizes
farmers to establish. There are fi a in Tompkins County. The
local governments are restrained fr m passing any zoning ordinances
which would interfere with farming in these districts, e.g. the
local governments cannot force water or sewer development on these
districts and cannot assess land at higher-than-farm-land value.
The farmers cannot subdivide or sell farms for eight years after
establishment of these districts without paying a penalty.
Mr. Liguori stated that re-allocation of taxable resources will
also be considered for the Countyplan.
mr. Van Cort asked how the County planned to control growth in the
absence of zoning, to which Mr. Liguori replied that the Health
Department can control lot sizes with respect to the availability
of water and sewerage. Mr. Stein noted that the City facilities
are used by the County, and that there was no incentive for other
communities to build facilities, such as parks and subsidized
housing, for use by others within t!he County.
T4s. Benson thanked Mr. Liguori for his presentation, and referred
the matter to Executive Committee for its recommendation to Council,
and instructed the Committee to make such recommendation at the
next Planning and Development Board meeting.
Ms. Meyer requested the addition of an item to the agenda. She
then MOVED that the Planning and Development Board recommend to
the Finance Committee that it back the Drop-in Center, presently
located in the YMCA. The Center noeds $1,400 to aay open an extra
day. Funds are available from revenue sharing, and some are left
over from Open House. Mr. Fuller seconded. It was agreed that
5 -
supporting the Drop-in Center was in the interest of planning and
development and of the Center City of Ithaca: The motion CARRIED
unanimously. (A description of Drop-in Center services and
statistics for 1975 are in the Board of Planning and Development
files.
C014MITTEE REPORTS.:
(a) Codes and Ordinances: Recommendation on proposed change to
Zoning Ordinance
Codes and Ordinance Committee met on minimum lot size requirement
in an R-3 zone and recommended the following resolution:
RESOLVED that the following changes. be made.-
1.
ade:1. To Sec. 30. 25 of the Zoning Ordinance, in the
text definitions of District Regulations Chart
column headings, add to the definition of
Column 6: "The minimum lot size specified in this .
column for each use district shall be employed
only to determine whether a parcel of land
constitutes a usable lot as of right in accord-
ance with all other provisions of this Chapter.
All other .area requirements specified in this
column shall be employed to determine the portion
of total lot area, or the minimum lot size,
required .for specific uses."
2. To Sec. 30.25, District Regulations Chart, Col. 6,
make the following revisions, adding the word (s)
underlined.
District Col. 6 Revision
R-2 add: 3. 5,000 sq. ft. minimum
B-3 delete: NONE
add: No minimum lot size
B-4 add: 3,000 sq. ft. minimum
B-5 add: 3.000' sq. ft. minimum
I-1 add: 5,000 sq. ft. minimum '
F-1 add: 3 ,000 sq. ft. minimum
12-1 add: 3,000 sq. ft. minimum
P-1 add: 3, 000 sq. ft. minimum
14H-1 add: 2. Mobile home lot:
5,000 sq. ft. minimum
6
Mr. Stein. MOVED approval . and refer al to Council for action.
Ms. Meyer seconded. The motion wa CARRIED unanimously.
Next, Mr. Stein reported on zoningon East State Street from
Ithaca Road out to the City linea If zoning regulations are
changed to R-1, from R-2, approximitein
tely 12 properties would be
non-conforming. Many of the propeties do not conform to R-1 lot
size' and width requirements. Mr. turned the report over to
. Mr. Meigs for further study.
(b) Executive and liaison committe : West State Street - a study
proposal. ,
Ms. Benedict then reported on the Manning and Development Depart-
ment's West State Street Study. S e stated that West State Street
is a good place for providing neigPborhood services. and that some
auto-related uses, are- changing or leaving as a result .of diminished
traffic caused by construction of he Commons. She said a motion
would be appropriate which would c11 on the Department's.
staff to undertake a study of the rea. Mr. Stein asked whether
this study would take staff time f om the Southwest area.. Mr.
Van Cort replied that it would hav some impact on it, but he
felt the department could handle b th, given a little more time.
The outline on the southwest study, will be distributed . at the
next Planning and 'Development Boar meeting. Work on the West
State Street area will affect the HS area by renewing problems
of business impingement in residential areas. Reference to Task
Force and neighborhood groups shou d be worked into the study, so
as to make them part of the plana Decision on the West State
Street study was put off until the next Planning and Development
Board meeting when the Board could see the Southwest Study.
OLD BUSINESS:
Bikeways development: presentation of proposal for first phase to
connect Stewart and Cass Parks.
The Bikeways study was referred to committee for recommendations
to bring to the Board at its nexteeting. Ms. Benedict explained
that Phase I of the bikeways plan was prepared by graduate students
in Landscape Architecture. The City is going to apply for BOR
funds, but does not yet know how much money is required. The
plan stresses recreational, rather than commutational biking. It
was suggested that the City apply for State highway .funds. Ms.
Meyer MOVED that the Board direct the Planning and Development
Departmentto go ahead with the Bikeways work. Mr. Stein Seconded.
CARRIED unanimously.
7 -
NEW BUSINESS
Item 9 (a) was removed from the agenda (Proposal for five-year loan
of sculpture to City.
The following resolution regarding proposed State legislation for
site plan review was considered by the Board.
WHEREAS legislation (S.7228/A. 9185) has been proposed to
the Legislature of the State of New York which
would permit city, town and village legislative
bodies to authorize their respective planning
boards to review and approve, approve with
modifications, or disapprove site plans and to
approve the establishment of certain uses (i.e. ,
special permit uses and conditional permit uses,
etc. ) , and
WHEREAS the proposed legislation would greatly strengthen
the role of local planning boards in reviewing
various development proposals, and would give a
much-needed option to local government for improve-
ment of the quality and efficiency of review of
planning matters, and of the resultant development,
and,
WHEREAS this need has increasingly been felt in the City
of Ithaca,
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Planning and Development
of the City of Ithaca wholeheartedly approves of
the intent of the proposed legislation, urges pas-
sage of such enabling legislation by the Legislature
of the State of New York, and its signing into law
by the Governor, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board urges the Common Coun-
cil of the City of Ithaca to add its support to
such legislation and to make such support known to
its sponsors, State Senator Warder and Assemblyman
D. W. Cook; to Governor Hugh L. Carey; to State
Senator W. T. Smith; to Assemblyman Lee; to
chairpersons of the appropriate legislative commit-
tees; and to such other State officials as may be
concerned.
Adoption of the resolution was MOVED by Mr. Fuller and seconded
by Ms. Meyer. Motion CARRIED unanimously ,
8 -
Elmira Road; Proposed changes to s 'gn ordinance.
Dick Farley gave part of a report on his work in changes to the sign
ordinance in strip and highway commercial areas. The first step,
he noted, was to establish different signage zones. The staff is
recommending the tighter of two options. He presented the Board with
a printed report on signage and asked them to read it carefully and
decide whether to send both optionsfl to Council and recommend one,
or to send only one. Mr. Stein questioned whether the Board should
try to write specifics into legislation or develop a design review
process. Mr. Fuller suggested a clearly written rulebook. Mr. Stein
felt the Board should consider design review. Mr. Meigs suggested
that there might be room for both pOssibilities. Because of time
restrictions, Mr. Farley was unable to deliver his complete report
and will do so at another meeting.
Mr. Fuller moved adjournment, and the meeting ended at 10:40 PLM.
f
Respectfully submitted,
Matthys Van Cort
irector, Planning & Development
5. 20.76
i
{