Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1976-09-28 rbANNING AT,TD OEVELOPMESTT BOARD MINUTES - CITY OF ITHACA Regular Meeting, September 28, 1976 Present, Chairperson LeG. Benson, R. Yildreth, D. Fuller, N. Meyer, R. Moran, S. Stein Also: J. 1".eigs, Planners T. Hoard, Bldg. Cmsr. e mayor E. J. Conley, R. J. McDougall , Consultant, R. Williams, Planner, B. Townsend, Planner, and the following citizens: B. Banardi, H. H. Benson, C. Bentkowski, R. Berg, E. J. Beukenk amp, ^N. C. Bona, P. Carlson, G. Carruth, S. J. Catalfano, D. Cornelius, R. Danielson, Tt. Ehrenberg, H. S. Engst, E. F. Fessend.en, T. Fine, R. M. Garcia, R. L. Gasteiger, D. Gersh, B. Griffith, J. Griffith, M. Hagerty, R. V. Hemming, M. E. Hislop, F. F. Hoard, L. Bunt,. Rev. R. Johnson, 0. Jones, Jr. , M. Keller, B. Kinner, R. Kinner, A. W. Lazcano;, J. Leeming, N. Leeming, D. TAT. Lippitt, H. R. Lorenzen, C. 11. "filler, E. Mulholland, R. 0"1:1galley, J. Palmer, S. Pane, J. J. Perko, S. Pines, M. Pottle, T. Pratt, C. Quenette, A. Rabinowitz, D. L. Rhoads, A. D. Rumsey, K. G. Rumsey, ?aT. Schickel, Jr. , N. Schuler, N. Shore, H. G. Smith, J. B. Smith, T1. A. Smith, FT. T. Stinson,, J. Stinson, D. H. Taube , C. S. Thompson, N.T. E. VanOrder, r1. L. 'Williams, M. E. Woods, R. R. Tall, K. Zelkind Since this meeting was jointly sponsored by the Planning and Development Board and the Bryant Park. Civic Association, in Belle Sherman School Audi- torium, Mrs. Hoard;. Chairperson of the Association, welcomed Bryant Park neighbors, and `Ts. Benson thanked PTrs. Hoard for helping to secure the space for the meeting. She then introduced. the Planning and Development Board and opened the meeting. Approval of the last month' s meeting was MOVED by P?r. Stein, seconded by Ms. Heyer. There were no objections and the minutes were approved as read. ' Ms. Benson reported that the Health Service Alliance is moving along, and that they had hired a consultant. She then introduced Mayor Conley, who encouraged the neighborhood people to take this opportunity to work with the Planning Board in its efforts to bring about change in neighbor-hoods through working with civic organiza- . tions representing the wishes of the neighborhood. He also encouraged them to work with their Alderpersons. He said the people in the neighbor- hoods should be directing this kind of action, and that Council is sensi- tive to their needs. TL was then noted that the County. Planning Office had set up a meeting to held October 6 at 3000 on the subject of Historic Preservation Planning 2 _ Activities. "fir. Meigs also mentioned that the City's Shade Tree Advisory Committee was inventorying and proposing improvements to the status of shade trees in the City. The Committee is most concerned with East State Street, and Seneca and Buffalo Streets east of Aurora Street at this time. Fifty to seventy trees were planted last year, mostly on the southside. Ms. Benson introduced the director `of the City's Department of. Planning. and Development, H. Matthys Van Cort. He ex ressed pleasure at seeing so many of the Bryant Park neighbors at the meeting. He proceeded to inform them of the work of the Planning and Development Department, noting it' served the Planning and Development Board and also provided staff for Common Council, the Community Development Agency/Urban Renewal Agency, the Capital` Improvements .RevieT,.7 Committee, the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission„ Commons Advisory Board, Shade Tree Committee, Inlet Park, Transit Committee, and the Area Beautification Council. The department is responsible for ' work on the Zoning Ordinance. It-makes recommendations to the Board of Zoning Appeals, advises Common Council on drafting and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. The Board . rules on subdivisions, which is not too imaortant to the Belle. Sherman area because most of it is already developed. , The Department has also worked on drafting of the pfood Control Ordinance, Sign Ordinance and the Capital Budget. It advises Common` Council on sale or purchase of land by the City. It does studies, as directed by . .the Board, such as the Southwest Study, Analysis of 7,1unicipalization of Service Delivery (in reference to possibility of municipalizing electric power distribution for the City) , a Study of Ithaca as a University Town, Planning for Routes 96 and 13, and work on the bus system. It is also responsible for a $h million grant for improving .the bus system. The City is about to buy new louses. The Department is also - workinc, on `administration of the CDA block grant, which covers improvements to the Southside Com6munity Center, and, the work on OIAC which is about to be undertaken. The Department has also been working, with the Ithaca Housing Authority on the Section Q rent subsidy grogram, and. the Urban Renew:--.l Task Force on establishing a ilei hborhood Housing Service using Comm pity Development Funds to aid_ low-income homeowners in rehabilitating their buildings. The staff i,�iorked on planning the Commons and is still involved with the Commons, providing staff to the Commons Advisory Board and design help for Commons merchants and building owners. The Department is also xa?orking on improvement of Elmira Road, which will be converted into a 5-lard r6ad.. A Study of Colle etown was undertaken last year. -It is hoped. th.,a . the City will have more funds for Collegetown improvements. They have also been involved in various arks projects including the development of 'Cass Park A Bikeways St dy was recently completed and . the City is hoping to install part of the Bikeway in the summer of 1977. stork is also being done with the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Comarrission .. on historic preservation throughout the City. In the summer of 19.76 the first phase of the Collegetown improvement project was completed, very close to the Belle Sherman neighborhood. Several years ago Belle .Sherman was rezoned from R-2 to R-1. The community has now petitioned to change , zoning on East State Street from R-2 to -1. The Department ' also worked .on the Strawberry Patch Recreation Lands to 'create a park for that area _ 3 _ he Department is also working onthe Ithaca School System reorganization, zoning and housing. They are working on the parking problem caused in part by the proximity of Cornell, on State Street parking, and on dealing with the truck traffic on Mitchell Street and Ithaca Road. They are also working on apartment maintenance and a new apartment ordinance. He noted that the Planning and 'development Board is not responsible for dealing with problems of on-street parking,- this comes within -..the purviet� of the Board of Public T,i?orks. Yls. Benson then asked 'dor discussion and questions from the Bryant Park neighbors. Mr. J. Leeming asked Mr. Stein if the Planning and Development Board was the committee to which the Board of Public Works referred questions of improvement of pedestrian safety, to which Mr. Stein replied that they referred such questions to their traffic engineering committee. Mr. Leeming then asked if Mr. Stein was on the Board of Public Works to which Mr. Stein replied that he was . ' _ T±s. Benson noted that there is always one member of the Planning and Development Board on the Board of Public Works. . Reverend Dr. Robert Johnson asked if money coming into the Southside will be used for nex,,i housing or repair. mr. Van Cort replied that most of. t. e money will 'be used to rehabilitate existing structures. However, the federal programs for new construction have been bogged down in t=lashington and so very few new subsidized housing projects have been built across the ^-untry. At this point, it does not appear that Ithaca will be getting y new housing through government funding. Mr. H. Stinson asked what improvements were planned for :Route 13. Mr. Van Cort replied that the road was to be widened to five lanes from meadow Street to the bridge at the City lir_?it, since at this point the road is operating way over capacity. Increasing the road to five lanes will make it less dangerous. Presently businesses on the road are having problems with flooding and dust. Improvements to the road would also deal with these problems.. The City also plans to improve the commercial area which provides over 50% o- soles tax revenues in the City. Proposed improvements would serve business on the road and would probably increase the number of businesses. Improvements to signage and landscaping are also planned. Mr. Stinson then asked, regarding the Bikeways project, were any of the Planning. Board members cyclists. r.r. Van Cort renlied. that while Board members were not cycl:_sts, the Department had consulted many cyclists and that several of' the staff me:..,71rs were cyclists. Ms. A. Rabinowitz, an Fast State Street resident, complained that Fast State Street was a truck route. She is concerned with interstate truck traffic on Fast State which brings down property values, increases need for 'repairs, and increases noise and other heavy-traffic-related problems. There is also no place to par's on. Fast State. Ms. Benson, noted that, the. jurisdiction of the Board stops at the City linea "'fir. Stein said he lives on Fast State Street, and that truck traffic is one of the dost serious 4 ?problems of that neighborhood. He said the responsibility for making a change rests with the State , and that the City has very little control. Trucks save a few dollars by coming through Ithaca, since it is a shorter route even though there are better highways available. He advised neighbors to contact the State and let them know there is concern. The State should be encouraged to ryo a study to see whethor trucks are coming to serve Ithaca, or just passing through. �-Is. Rabinowitz said that many years ago neighbors had done through that process, 'including a 24-hour truck watch, and had not achieved anything. nos. D. M 'ller asked who had removed Parking on East State Street. Mr. Stein answered that the City Traffic Engineer has the right to decide to make changes in traffic and parking on a. trial basis. ?after 90 days they eigher become permanent or are rescindersa by the Board of Public G,Tor s. They can thus become permanent without the action of Common Council. At the last meeting of the Board of Public L°,Torks, the traffic engineer an� Mr. Dingman suggested that the removal of parking on State become permailent. mr. Stein and Mr. Ewanicki requestec! a hearing for neighborhood peotle. The hearing will be held on October 13 at the BPT,,7 sleeting. lqs. IT. Shore asked what benefit is derived from, the removal or parking. Mr.1 Stein replied that it would move traffic more quickly and safely through the City. Tor, E. F3eukenkam�.i said he was concerned o,ii.th truck traffic in an agea in which small children play. ?_r. R. Hemming protested that 31 petition signers should not be overruled by one employee of the City. Fr. Stein saiCl the Board could recommend against mal,!.inr the change nermanent, and the staff could male it permanent anyway. Pis. Heyer added that the Board of Public T,7orks has the prerogative to male rules which become law. She said they have more Mower over more of the budget than any of her department in the City. This is written into the City charter. She sqggested that if neighbors were concerned, they investigate the problem 4nd decide how they want the City to operate. Tis. Benson then introduced recently appointed Building Commissioner "Fom Hoard to the Board and citizens. One neighbor noted that it did not seem very much money was being spent in the Belle Sherman neighborhood. r?r. Van Cort stated that as far as capital projects were concerned, there was nothing presently being done in that a.rea_ _ Comxacn Council has put a great deal of money into areas involving commercial neo which is the economic cre of the City, and these expenditures are in fact investment in tYe City' s future. mr. N. Schickel expressed his concern with through traffic going through State Street. He felt this hind of traffic should not go through the City or through its residential neighborhoods . He asked if the Planning Board could do anything about htis. I11r. ! Van Cort said that with older cities road planning was not very efficient, especially when topography and the degree of original development are considered. Pis. Benson informed 1-jr. Schickel that there are some specific_ traffic problems under study, such as Routes 96 and 13 . She noted that routes currently proposed by the State would do serious damage to certain neighborhoods. Mr. Ehrenberg J A suggested that the Planning Board .find out what possible options are open. Pis. Benson stated that this kind of concern is much more effective when the citizens of a neighborhood show up at meetings to support their own concerns . The Board does not have legal backing to make the changes needed, but would be pleased to make recommendations Pis. P. Carlson asked in reference to the proposed apartment licensing system, whether it would apply to group homes and other kinds of living arrangements. Mr. Van Cort replied that the Apartment ordinance is now in committee of Council, and that it would cover all dwelling units where the owner does not live on the premises. It would require regular yearly inspections, and issuance of a. permit or certificate. The ordinance is in the C & o Committee of Common Council. Mr. Hemming stated that there was concern .in the neighborhood with 104 Pearl Street which is being used for student housing, against zoning regulations. He stated the students had moved out of the building but were back again and asked what could be done. Thr. Van Cort stated that nonconforming use runs with lend and not with ownership, and that if a nonconforming use is discontinued for more than 12 months then the owner . cannot reinstate the use without a variance from the BZA. Kr. Hemming asked how he could get enforcement of truck regulations on Mitchell Street. Mr. Stein recommended dealing with the police. Regarding the apartment licen- _ng ordinance, I1r. B. Jones asked if building owners would be charged for rtification and asked whether this kind of inspection was really necessary. 11r. Van Cort replied that this would provide inspection every year, but that Council has to decide whether the program should pay for itself through fees. He estimated inspection would cost around $10 per hyear. Rev. R. Johnson asked if there will be a zoning change in the Southside neighborhood if the Coop Food Store continues to buy the land adjoining it for expansion. Mr. Van Cort replied that he was ai�,Tare of the problem and t1l t it iAll be taken into consideration in the upcoming zoning study. also J. Palmer asked if five lanes on Route 13 funneling into 2 lanes after the bridge would not create traffic problems. . F,lr. Van Fort explained that traffic volume was considerably lower by the time it reached the bridge. Yvls. Palmer then read the following portion of an amendment to the Zoni:Wg Ordinance enacted by the Toc.,rn Board on the llth of Play, 197© ARTICLE III , Section 4 , Paragraph 1 and ARTICLE'. IV, Section 11, Paragraph 1, and ARTICLE V, Section 13, Paragraph 1 are amended to read as follows2 7'l. One Family Dwellings. In addition to a single - family, such dwelling may be occupied by not more than two boarders, roomers , lodgers or other occupants. " .ARTICLE III , Section 4, ARTICLE IV, Section 11, and ARTICLE V, Section 18 , are each amended by adding to each of them a new section , to be known as Section 2a as follows, "2a. A two-family dwelling shall be occupied by not -more than two families, except that the following occupancies may also be permitted-, (1) If each of the two dwelling units in a two-family house is occupieby a family, then each, such unit may also be occupied by not more Ian one boarder, roomer, lodger or other occupant, (2) If one of such two units is occupied solely by a family, then the other unit may be occupied by not more than two boarders, roomers, lodgers or other occupants; (3) if neither of such 'units is occupied by *a family, then the totalmhumber of such occupants in such two-family dwelling shall be no more than three. " She noted that the Town had decided that one unrelated person and up to two boarders constitute a family for a single family dwelling. She .felt that property owners were being penalized and that the Board should take steps to change the definition of family to profit owner occupants and not landlords. 11r. Hemming said he was confused as to the meaning of cooperative housing, which is permitted in an R-2 zone. He asked how this fit in with rulings. on =unrelated persons, 12s. .PIeyer replied that when the Zoning Or inance was put into effect, there was not much public response to open meetings. She said that the zoning ordinance can be changed but that here must be places in the city for multiple dwellings. Mr. Hemming ask.d if cooperative housing was moved from R-3 to Rs2 , and suggested that it not be considered permissible in R-2 zones. Mr. Van Cort answered that sororities and fraternities had long been permitted in R-2 zones. It was felt that it would still be permitted in R-2 zones. PIs Benson pointed out that this would be a topic of concern at upcoming zoning ordinance meetings. She then 'moved to -zonincy cases. Ap-peal 9-1-76° Request for Area Variance for Ithaca Savings , 390 N. Tioga Ste , in a, B-.1 zone. Appellant T,sishes- to erect two free-standing sign structures at the northeast and southwest corners, of their building, on Tioga and Buffalo Streets, respectively. The structures would extend to within inches of the property line 'and wo ld be within the required 5' setback. Appeal was originally Presented in December '75 and tabled for further reconsideration by Appellant. The- signs are of allowable size, but fall within the required setback, and only one :gree-standing sign is allowel where Appellant is requesting two. This is both a zoning and a signage matter, and the staff found it difficult .to make a recommendation. Mr. an Cort noted that a Variance is not a right, and that the Board should examine the whole of the matter, not just the point on which the variance as requested. He felt the scale and character of the logo should be in ke ping with the desired character of downtown, and didn't think the proposel signs were. It was noted that the previous submission had drawn a prote t from Citizens' Savings Bank, urging that the limitations of the Sign Ordinance be adhered to. Mr. Noran MOVED to recommend denial to the BZA on the basis of the fact that the signs are nonconforming in terms of both signage and zoning. Mr. Hildreth seconded. In the ensuing discussion, Ms. Meyer noted that the 7 - >mmons Design Advisory Team is trying to establish a set of criteria for signs, in regard to their effect on the Commons environment. She explained that one of the proposed signs would interfere with the view of the courthouse fromthe corner of Buffalo and Tioga Streets, and that the courthouse deserves as much exposure to view as possible. She also .felt that the symbol chosen by the Appellant was incongruent with the archi- tecture of their building. A vote was called and. the motion CARRIED unanimously. Mr. tIeigs noted that the Appellants should be encouraged to meet signage requirements without appeal, within the limits of the existing code, and that it should be possible to do so without significantly affecting the building's strong architectural statement. Appeal 1131- Request for Area Variance for addition to residence At 10 ' Lodge Tlay, in an R-2 zone. Property is undersize and lacks one required sideyard, addition of a single-story, architecturally compatible wing between present single-family house and carport to provide space needed by the family would exceed lot coverage allowable. Mr. Taube , the architect who designed the addition, presented drawings of the proposed addition and explained that the proposed addition would be in keeping with the architecture of both the house and the neighborhood. Hs. Bans on asked if this bind of expansion would allow future rental to —Fudent groups. Mr. 'Taube responded that it would not. The staff commended that because of relatively minor continuing nonconformities, minimal exceeding of permitted lot coverage, the extenuating circum- stance of no building on adjacent property near the .undersize yard, the compatible design of the addition and its minimal visual impact on the neighborhood, and the fact that the building would be retained for single family use, that the Board recommend approval. alis. *Meyer MOVPD the recommendation 'of approval and Mr. Fuller seconded. There was no further discussion. A vote was called and the motion CARRIED unanimously. Appeal 1132Request for Interpretation and Area Variance for Lums of Ithaca, 374 Elmira Road, in a B-5 zone. Appellant wishes to enclose present open- air dining area in front and right side ;, and request an Interpretation that this would not be an extension or enlargersent of a nonconforming (hy reason of t c setback) structure. Failing that, they request a Variance to allow the enclosure. s1r. Meigs read. a memo from the City Engineer, dated 28 September 1976 recommending against approval. Luras is one of the closest buildings to Elmira Road as it presently stands° enclosing the patio would increase ' side friction, ' which would in turn increase possibility of accidents, and hamper traffic movements as was the case with Nardi' s at the Meadow Street intersection. *fir. r"eigs noted that the enclosed patio would be approximately five feet fromthe property line. The property does have adequate parking, and there is adequate space for expansion without a variance on the other side of the building, which appellants do not seen have considered. I-1r. Gersh, attorney for the owners of Lums, introduced e $ - himself, Pyr. O'Malley and ?`fir. Quenette, nd asked why the building permit was iwithdrawn. He noted that this was nonconforming structure, but not a nonconforming use. Mr. Meigs noted that the intent of the Ordinance _ section referred to by Mr. Gersh was to apply to nonconforming structures. Mr. Gersh argued that they were merely planning to enclose an already existing porch, which would have a brick facade and textured sidings he did not feel this constituted. expansion or enlargement. He noted that there is nothing in the Zoning Ordinance about side friction. Ms'. Benson explained that the Planning and Development Board does not make recommenda- .tions on legal issues, but recommends onplanning and long-range planning . issues. fir. Gersh stated that he and hi clients had appeared at the request of members of the Planning s aff. Building Commissioner Hoard explained that to the best of his knowle ge the building permit had neither been issued nor denied, but was pending Action of the BZA, which was holding up its approval because of the zoning problem. The building is being altered. Mr. lMeigs remarked that lie had advised the Appellants to appear before- the Planning Board to exercise their rights as citizens and business people. Mr. Stein explained to the Appellants that the Planning staff has nothing to do with rescinding of a building permit. 1,5r. Meigs noted that from the property line, the setback requirement is 101 . The edge of the patio is approximately 5 from the property line the resulting situation might be undesirable from the customers ' standpoint. �Mr. Van Cort further explained that this is 8-10 feet from the curb, which is very close to a moving lane of traffic. There would be little visual clearance for traffic leaving the restau ant' s parking lot, and the exit clearance is too close to the right-of-way. Because the patio is low, there is no obstruction at the moment. Ms. Benson remarked that a glass enclosure, such as the one propose ! by the Appellants , is not always easy to see through, depending on how of er light hits it. Mr. O'Malley replied that financial pressures and the approaching end of the construction season made it imperative to have the de ision as soon as possible, and that .hey felt use of the patio -foundati n was desirable economically. ',.Is. s Beyer MOVE0 that the Board recommend approval for the variance. Mr. Moran seconded. Mr. T,Ieigs asked whether the motion was intended to . address the Interpretation question, and fir. Stein suggested that was not ?necessary, since recommending approval o . the Variance,-would cover a BZA inte ,preta.tion that the enclosure was an extension, and address the main question. File motion stood as made. . -s.1-14eyer said she felt planning concerns were complex and that Board members must use their personal judgment in a case such as this. She stressed the importance of supporting the businesses along Elmira Road. She rooted however. that glass windows can be very r Elective and irritating to drivers at night. Mr. Van. Cort asked tha ,Appellants if they would remove present offensive signs, were the Varian:!e approved, and if they planned to erect new signs. They replied that Uiey would remove the existing . signs and would not be putting others in their places. A. Vote was called and the motion CARRIFD unanimousll. Appeal 1133 Request for an Area Variance for 208 East Buffalo Street (former N.Y. Telephone office) in a B-1 zone. Appellant wishes to extend the rear of the second floor to the limits of . the existing first floor. The building essentially lacks front, side and rear yards, and covers virtually all the main _ :parcels work has begun. This case has similarity to 9 - #1132 in respect to the extension/enlargement of a nonconforming structure. «jjpellant wishes to construct an additional 575 square feet of office space. The property is undersize, almost totally lacking yards, and. greatly exceeds allowable coverage. rets. Meyer noted that the addition might be very obstructive to the adjoining space belonging to the Unitarian Church. The present first-floor business is a photo-copy store, which has been determined to be a retail business. It was noted that this type of business would be allowable in a B-2 zones but was not allowable in B-1. Mr. STein asked what could be more logical than to have a business service such as a copying center in an R-1 zone , when the Planning and Development Board is trying to keep offices downtown instead of encouraging them to move into residential areas. rlr. Fuller expressed his distress with businesses which start out in non-conformance, and then want to compound their nonconformity. ?fir. Van Cort said he would recommend granting a variance for use and area for the property, even though it does not fit into any of the categories of allowable usage. Mr. Meigs recommended that the Board suggest denial of the area variance as not being in accordance with long-range planning and not in character with the district. Iie recommended suggesting to the BZA a retroactive approval of use variance because photocopying is a useful service to surrounding businesses and government agencies. Ms. 1.1teyer 1I0VED to deny the area variance and accept a retroactive use variance. 1,1r. Stein seconded. There was no discussion, so a vote was called results were as follows.- Aye - ollows.Aye : N. Meyer, S. Stein Nay: D. Fuller Abstain: R. Moran, R. Hildreth, LeC. Benson ,tion failed. Ids. �3eyer then MOVED that the Board recommend the Area Variance be denied. This was unanimously CARRIED. Mr. Fuller MOVED that the question of _ retroactive use variance be placed before the BZA. Ms. PA?eyer seconded, and stated that she felt that as a service-oriented business, the photo-copy business was important to the si,7.rrounding sbusiness community. A vote was called results were as follows ; Aye : D. Fuller, R. Hildreth, ,R. "loran Nay N. Meyer, S Stein .. CARR.T '3). Mr. Stein then TICVED recommendationto the BZA that they approve &-.reL�_dactive variance. The vote was as follows Aye ° S. Stein, N. Heyer Nay: R. Hildreth, D. Fuller Abstain: R. Moran Mr. Van Cort reminded the Board that this business has been forced to relocate twice, once by Urban Renewal, and then by the opening of mite Court, and that the service is essential to downtown businesses. He strongly recommended approval of the variance. Hs. Benson said that she would send a letter detailing some of the extenuat- ing circumstances surrounding the use variance to the BZA, if there was no objection fromthe Board. There was none. 10 Ms. Benson read a letter to the Board fr m the Fall Creek Civic' Association dated September 20, petitioning the Boar - to recommend changing the Fall Creek .area:' s zoning to R-1, with modific tions made to allow-for the denser, small-lot development existing ii the area. Ms. Benson stated that the request will be handled in a ma ner similar to that of the recent E. State St. area, . perhaps being made part of a city-wide study - Fall Creek Civic Association Vice Ch&irmui David Cornelius then spoke on the problems of Fall Creek, a major one Deing that of rental properties.. accommodating a larger population than he area can comfortably support and resulting in parking shortage and to erect standards of maintenance. He stated that the residents want to maintain a certain residential character which it. seems unlikely can be done given a continuation of the current rate of conversions, etc., Mr. Dan Rhodes then stated that he felt Group Domes presented a more immediate problem for the neighborhood, ,and that ultimately this and other problems are permitted to develop by the wide-open nature of R-3 zoning. Mr. Stein pointed out that rezoning to R-1 now is not necessarily the long- term solution, but does. have the merit of being a quick response while the final solution is sought,. Ms. Meyer ag+d that extensive study without interim remedial action and good study input, including neighborhood participation, would likely produce a de ision of doubtful acceptability. Ms. Benson emphasized the need for good nd sufficient data on which to base recommendations, and Ms. Ileyer sugg sted Council should appoint a committee as a channel for community input. ter. Van Cort stated that staff had discussed several methods for obtaining this input, and Ms. Benson directed the staff to select the best method to insure the inclu- sion of community concerns. kIrs. Hoard:- reminded the audience that the Fall Creek Civic Association had supported the East State St. rezoning, thus making reciprocal support incumbent on Bryant Park. Mr. Van Cort - • then explained the current status of the zoning study, stating that staff has drafted an outline which it feels will accomplish the end mandated by Council, and has begun to assemble information and personnel for some of the basic analysis - He stated that the comprehensive- ness of the study mandated ,is likely to inean that it will be Parch before it can be prsented to Council, and may be 1 ter if significant issues arise . which must be debated. Ms. Benson referred the matter of finalizing the scope and defining issues to the Committee of the Whole because of its importance, Thr. Van Cort then summarized the process of . the City's School Reorganization Task RForce to date, noting that Ms. [r'1i1 iams had spent a great amount of time with it and other staff members had given input. Because of the lateness of the hour, he 'referred to the main points of the draft Task Force report, and briefly explained its onclusions and recommendations. He pointed out that the staff concurred with the Task Force position that if at all possible, no schools should be closed for several ` .reasons, chiefly because of the negative impacts closings would be likely 11 M y to have on the City and its neighborhoods, and noted that this would be i--ue for the outlying communities also. lie stated that Ms. T4illiams and e staff were assisting the Tash Force in assembling information on joint use of schools, allowing the school programs to continue operating in their neighborhoods while renting excess space in the buildings.; in some cases this might mean that community service agencies could be closer to those they aid, and in other cases perhaps even certain compatible businesses could use the excess space temporarily. Mr. Meigs briefly explained the request for preliminary approval of sub- division of 229-31 Valley Road into two lots, each of which would contain an existing dwelling. The owner has been unable to sell the combined parcel, which if split would create two lots which would not bmeet the zoning requirements. nor. Pleigs noted that the majority of lots in this area, including the recently-rezoned E. State St. and the previously rezoned area between the school and Fairview Heights, are similarly non- conforming. Mr. Stein asked if the Board could legally create nonconforming lots, and arts. Benson referred the application to the Committee of the Whole. The Chair then read a copy of a letter from the Landmarks Commission to the izayor and Council, requesting Council ratification of two city historic districts designated by the Commission at its September meeting. Such action requires Planning and Development Board review and recommendation, which is expected to be formally requested by referral from Council at its October meeting. Mr. Meigs briefly described the proposed districts, on cast Hill and extending the present DeWitt Park district north of Court St. Meyer briefly discussed the problems of, and potentials for solutions to ___e important issue of solid waste. During a brief Board discussion, Ms. Benson noted that Challenge Industries was now collecting and recycling aluminum as well as glass, residents are urged to set both out in the same container for pickup. Because of the late hour, Ms. Meyer agreed to fuller presentation and discussion at a later meeting. There T,7as no further business, and on motion of n°r. Hildreth, seconded by Mr. Moran, the meeting adjourned at 11040. E _ i �II 1 i i i j 1 a A a j { Ji R k i t E