HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1978-05-23 MINUTES
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
23 May 1978, Common Council Chambers, 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairperson S. Stein, R. Bordoni, C. Cleveland, M. Crowley, D.
Fuller, R. Moran
ALSO: H. M .Van Cort, K. Rowe, T. Bronsnick, K. Jupiter, F. Moon, M.
Pichel, J. Cottrell, T. Hoard, R. Baer, N. Fuller, E. Holman,
C. Guttman, S. Wood, C. Blanton, Members of the Press and Others.
1. The 'Chairperson called the meeting to order. He said he was pleased- to
be serving as the Board's new chairperson, and welcomed Mr. Cleveland to the
Board as a new member.
2. Mr. Bordoni MOVED to approve the minutes of the 24 April meeting. Mr.
Fuller seconded. Minutes approved.
3. Special order of business: None.
4. Chairperson's report: None.
5. Zoning cases: Mr. Stein explained that the Planning and Development
Board's main concern in zoning cases is with the planning issues rather than
legal issues; legal decisions are made by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Appeal 1172: Rehearing of request for Area Variances to permit
addition to 330 W. State St. , in a B-2 distXi;ct, which would further
encroach into required side yard. Premise :is nonconforming .in
coverage, both side yards and rear yard, and on-site parking.
Mr. Van Cort explained that this case had previously been approved by both
this: Board and the Board of Zoning Appeals.: The appellant's neighbor .had
asked the Boards to reconsider, since the variance as granted gave the appel-
lant permission to build up to the property line, which would block the
neighbor's air conditioners. Mr. Bordoni MOVED to recommend to the Board
of Zoning Appeals that the appeal again be granted with the stipulation that
the addition be built up to the property line. Ms. Crowley seconded. CARRIED
unanimously.
Appeal 1204: Area variances to permit construction of offices and meeting
hall with:,defici.ent side yard::and off street parking at 622 W. State St. ,
in a B-4 zone.
Mr. Van Cort explained that the building under consideration was the Labor
Temple. Mr. Stanley Wood, appellant, said he would like to demolish the
P & D Minutes 23 May 1978 Page 2
structure and build a new meeting hall and offices. Staff recommendation was
in favor of the appellant; it was felt that the proposed structure would be
improved. The building now covers the entire lot; the proposed building would
allow for side yards on both sides, and for offstreet parking which does not
now exist. There would be six:;offices in the building, -occupied by various
unions.
Mr. Moran MOVED to recommend approval. Mr. Cleveland seconded. CARRIED
unanimously.
Appeal 1205: Interpretation or area variance to permit addition
of 12 dwelling units to existing premises at 126 Westbourne La. , in
an R-U zone. Property has inadequate frontage continuing into Cayuga
Heights. Interpretation requested to determine `whether combined
frontage satisfies city requirement.
Mr. Van Cort noted that there was a legal question involving frontage in two
adjoining municipalities. There is adequate frontage on a legal street, and
staff felt that this problem required legal interpretation. Mr. Hoard reported
that other than frontage deficiency within the city limits, the property was
in conformance.. Mr. Pichel, attorney for the appellant, showed on City Map
J-21 that the city line goes through the center of the property. He quoted
from Section 30.25, Col. 7 of the Zoning Ordinance, noting that there was
no requirement in the ordinance that the frontage be entirely within the
city, and that in fact they have 600 feet of frontage where 125 is the require-
ment. However, only 102 feet of their frontage is within the city line. The
attorney reported that the owner has improved the existing building considerably
since he purchased it, and that the building is in all respects>>conforming
and has a certificate of occupancy. The proposed building will be constructed
entirely within city limits. It will be a separate, new structure,
Mr. Sordoni MOVED to refer this matter to the-City Attorney. Mr. Moran seconded.
Mr. Van Cort reported that the City Attorney cannot interpret the zoning or-
dinance, and that this must be done by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Bordoni
then amended his motion, to refer the issue to the Board of Zoning Appeals
for legal interpretation without a recommendation. Mr. Moran accepted the
amendment.
The attorney asked for a variance. He felt the appellant's only other choice
was to request annexation of the entire property by either the City or the
Village, Mr. Fuller said he was concerned that the owner might then build on
both sides of his property, thereby intensifying usage to an unacceptable
level. Mr. Hoard again confirmed that the property was conforming in all
other respects, The attorney stated that the property is completely surrounded
by fraternity houses and other multiple dwellings. The vote was called, with
results as follows:
Aye: Bordoni, Fuller, Crowley, Moran
Nay: Cleveland, Stein
P & D Minutes 23 May 1978 Page 3
Mr. Cleveland then MOVED to recommend approval of the variance. Mr. Moran
seconded. Mr. Van Cort noted that the staff recommends in favor, and that
staff also felt that any public right-of-way should be considered a proper
street for purposes of determining frontage. CARRIED unanimously.
Appeal 1206: Area Variances to permit addition to premises at 417-19
W. Seneca Street, in a B-2 zone. Addition would connect existing
buildings which have nonconforming side and rear yards, would exceed
permitted coverage, and further encroach on required rear yard.
Mr. Van Cort explained that this question was first raised in 1976, but
that the present request is for a smaller building. The proposed building
would totally cover the rear yard. In 1976 the Planning and Development
Board and the Board of Zoning Appeals both recommended in favor of the
variance, but the appellant was unable to build at the time. Mr. Bordoni
asked whether there might be some fire hazard involved in this addition.
Appellant's contractor replied that the building would be constructed of
masonry.
Mr. Bordoni MOVED to recommend approval. Mr. Moran seconded. CARRIED
unanimously.
Appeal 1207 was delayed until the arrival of the appellant.
Appeal 1208: Use and area variances to permit conversion of premises
on 110 Columbia Street into six-family owner-.occupied dwelling.
Existing structure is deficient in front and rear yard setbacks, and
exceeds. permitted height. Proposed occupancy exceeds permitted.
Mr. Van Cort explained that this is the conversion of the Columbia Street
School into a six-family dwelling. The occupants would be cooperative
owners of the property. He noted that the building is unique and must be
adaptively reused for something other than a school. He said the staff recom-
mends very strongly in favor of the project. Mr. Richard Baer, a neighbor
at 214 South Hill Terrace said he had spoken with the builder at a neighbor-
hood meeting and felt the project would be an asset to the neighborhood. He
said he was concerned that there might not be sufficient parking for the
building, but noted that the builder had already responded to this concern
by adding three parking spaces to the original eight. He said he was also
concerned with the condition of Turner Place, and said there should be better
access to Turner in the winter. He noted that the project has strong neigh-
borhood support. Ms. Nancy Fyller of 316 Turner Place submitted a petition
from the neighbors as follows.
May 1978
1978
GZe,, .the, undersigned neighbors approve of the proposed renovations to
and change in the use of the "Old South Hill School" by Sawtooth. Builders:
Mr. & Mrs. Dino Marinos, 202 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
Connie Elson, 403 Turner Pl. , Ithaca
Shirley Smedley-Theiss, 205 S, Hill Terrace, Ithaca
P & D Minutes 23 May 1978 Page 4
Dorothy Scheisler, 306 Turner Pl. , Ithaca
Richard G. Bangs, 210 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
Cora R. Bangs., 210 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
William B. Norton, 207 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
Marilyn B. Norton, 207 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
Joseph W. Russo, 311 Turner P1. , Ithaca
Nancy M. Fuller, 316 Turner Pl. , Ithaca
Richard A. Baer, Jr. , 214 So. Hill Terrace, Ithaca
We, the undersigned neighbors disapprove of the proposed renovations to
and change in use of the "Old South Hill School" by Sawtooth Builders.
No Signatures.
Mr. Francis Moon said he hoped the granting of the variance would allow
the city to buy adjoining property for use as a park. He s&id he was in
favor of the plan, and reminded the builder that the property has been
declared a City Landmark and could not be altered externally without
approval of the ILPC. He was also concerned about maintaining public
access to the property through a side park. The builder said they planned
to maintain the access from the property across to Pleasant Street, and
that they are planning to restore the building facade to its original
condition, but would be adding storm windows to save energy. The attorney
for the builder said they needed a variance with respect to height of
building, rear yard setback and front yard. He said the side park had
been offered for purchase to the City of Ithaca, and that Council has
authorized the Mayor to purchase the park with the stipulation that the
variance was granted and supported.
Mr. Moran MOVED to recommend approval. Mr. Cleveland seconded. CARRIED
unani%6tis ly.
Mr. Stein remarked that it was unusual for a request for variance to be
so strongly supported by- the neighborhood.
Appeal 1209: Request for interpretation of Sec. 30.25, Col. 7
(Required Frontage) of the Zoning Ordinance. The Building Commis-
sioner requests a determination as to whether lot frontage wholly
or partly':on non-city-owned rights-of-way satisfies this require-
ment. Many situations exist where the requirement can be met only
if such frontage can be counted.
Mr. Hoard noted that houses on private streets are not considered to have
street frontage. He said there was also a problem with properties in the
City of Ithaca whose frontage is in the Town of Ithaca. He said there were
approximately 100 properties which fit into one of these categories, and .felt
it was not fair to treet thein differently from other properties in the city
with respect to requiring variances for lack of frontage. Mr. Fuller was con-
cerned that the property owners might use placement of property in two muni-
• i i
P & D_-Minutes_: 23 May 1978 Page 5
palities to increase occupancy to an undesirable level, and said he would
rather deal with these cases as they come up. Mr. Van Cort felt the or-
dinance should be made more specific, so that variances were not required
in these cases, if all other requirements were met by the property. Mr.
Stein said he would like to have at the next meeting a recommendation from
the staff for a proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance to be passed
along to Common Council. Mr. Van Cort said snow removal problems on pri-
vate streets had been brought to his attention this year, and that there
has been a=•suggestion- that the city assume ownership of these streets.
6. Communications:
Mr. Van Cort read the following letter:
2 3..May
Ms. LeGrace Benson
314 East Buffalo St.
Ithaca, New York 14850
Dear Ms. Benson:
It is with mixed feelings that we write this letter to you, on the occasion
of your resignation from the Chair of this Board. We regret that you have
found it necessary to leave, but on a positive note, we wish to express our
gratitude for your contributions to Ithaca's planning efforts, and to con-
gratulate you on your important new responsibilities'.
Your five years of service on this Board, including two years in the Chair,
have seen several major undertakings in which the role of planning has been
important or crucial. While the logical and well-informed viewpoint you
brought to all discussion with the Board and its staff was always appreciated,
it was on issues which will affect the quality of life over the long range,
particularly for socially � and economically disadvantaged residents, that
your sense of justice and proportion led the Board to take enlightened posi-
tions. For example, we feel that your guidance on community development
matters and zoning ordinance revision, and your advocacy of downtown revitali-
zation through a pedestrian shopping mall and a central health facility,
should rank high on your list of satisfying accomplishments. The staff has
benefited from your support on many issues, including your interest in improv-
ing the Department's ability to do its job, your knowledge of governmental
processes and intergovernmental relations was invaluable. In this regard,
we should note in passing that the County Board of Representatives, and County
Planning Board have lost a superior member, who ably represented: the.'.City .._
its planning arm while acting in the best interests of the County as she
saw them
We feel confident that the same qualities and abilities which informed your
public responsibilities. in Ithaca will not only help you succeed in your
P & D Minutes 23 May 1978 Page 6
challenging new position with the State University, but will in all likeli-
hood lead you to further achievement in public service. We wish you health
and success in all your endeavors.
Sincerely,
H. Matthys Van Cort
Director of Planning and Development
Mr. Fuller MOVED that the letter be endorsed by the Planning and Development
Board. Mr. Moran Seconded. CARRIED unanimously.
At this time the appellant concerned with appeal 1207 arrived, and the case
was brought before the Board.
Appeal 1207: Area variances to permit enlarging a single-family
house at 132 Esty St. , encroaching on required front and side
yards.
The appellant explained that he had recently married and that he needed the
extra room to expand a small bedroom. Mr. Van Cort asked whether the neigh-
bors had voiced any objections.'_: The appellant replied that they had not.
Mr. Van Cort noted that the staff recommended approval. Ms. Crowley MOVED
to recommend approval. Mr. Bordoni seconded. CARRIED unanimously.
7. Committee Reports: None.
8. Old Business.
a. UFAIR Subdivision: report. Mr. Van Cort reported that the staff and
Mr 'i.Sten_ have 'been meeting regularly with UFAIR representatives, and that they
are all learning to work within SEAR regulations and County regulations. He
said staff had requested UFAIR do a draft environmental impact statement.
He said staff was concerned that such procedures may eventually take a great
deal of staff time, Appellants are concerned that this may be a very compli-
cated process. Mr. Van Cort reported that, in fact, the Environmental Assess-
ment consists of an eight-page short answer questionaire to be backed up by
some narrative. He said, however, that if a final environmental-impact_.
statement is requested, it could take up to several months to complete. The
draft EIS is between these two in depth and length of time necessary for
preparation. The draft EIS has been requested because the parcel in question
. is the largest single parcel of undeveloped land in the city. He said staff
is concerned with flooding in this area, and felt that the propos-Ed parking lot
would be under water from time to time. This water will drain into the flood
relief channel, possibly carrying salt and heated water into the channel,
which may affect the channel. Runoff problems are exacerbated by the massive
paying proposed. In addition, there may be traffic and internal circulation
prob,16msi and up to 2,000 additional cars using Meadow Street. Mr. Van Cort
noted that the UFAIR representatives have done a good deal of work trying to
clear up traffic problems.. He felt, however, that the UFAIR land must be
i
P -& D -Mi:nutes..:. .23 May 1978 Page 7
reviewed as a single site being developed, and not as individual parcels.
Mr. Stein said he had been to some of the meetings, and that it was a dif-
ficult situation which was being handled very reasonably by all concerned
parties. He noted that the director of planning and development has the
right and responsibility to make decisions on this case, and that suggestions
and recommendations from the Board would be welcomed. Mr. Van Cort said he
might`.-bring the issue back to the Board for a final ruling. R. Stein
said UFAIR was concerned that any excessive delay might cause them to lose
prospective buyers. Mr. Bordoni noted that the property has stood unused
for many years now, and that he did not feel the city should rush into approval
without checking environmental effects thoroughly. Mr. Fuller expressed his
support for what has been accomplished so far by the director.
8, b, City Graphics System: This item was postponed. In its place, Mr.
Van Cort distributed copies of the department's recent publication, "Sur-
roundings: Ithaca,New York. A Manual for Peripheral Streets Improvements."
Mr. Bordoni suggested that this be widely distributed. Mr. Van Cort said
he would distribute the publication to every member of an official city
board and to owners and merchants along the peripheral streets. At the time
of distribution he would offer the owners and merchants the department's
help in renovating their building facades.
9. New business: Landmarks designation review: Markles Flats and Strand
Theater.
Mr. Van Cort read the following letter concerning Markles Flats:
11 May 1978
Mayor Edward J. Conley
Members of Common Council
City of Ithaca
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
At its 8 May'meeting;.'f 6110ing-an dvert ,sec public hear- :rag this-Coreiaiiission
formally voted to designate the former Ithaca Gas Works Retort Building
(also known as Markles Flats Junior High School or Alternate Program J.H.S.) ,
at 328-336 W'. Court Street, as a City Landmark. The Commission's decision
cited the structure'''s age, architectural character and the part it played in
Ithaca's development as significant factors, stressing that its original
utilitarian use is no bar to recognizing its importance in these terms.
This designation is forwarded to you in accordance with the provisions of
the Landmarks Ordinance, which call for Council action to ratify or disapprove
within ninety days.
Please note that the designation applies only to the 212-storey building at
the corner of Court and Plain, and not to any of the adjoining lower structures.
P & D Minutes 23 May 1978 Page 8
If you wish any further information, please let me know.
Very truly yours,
Jonathan C. Meigs
Secretary
He noted that the Board had 90 days to make a recommendation and suggested
that this case be postponed for the next meeting. Mr. Stein said the Strand
has already been designated to the National Register of Historic Places, and
felt it deserved landmark status, mostly for its cultural contribution. He
read the following communication from Council.
WHEREAS, a recommendation from the Planning Development Board is
required by the Landmarks Preservation Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Common Council does request
a recommendation from the City of Ithaca Board of Planning
and Development concerning landmark designation for the Strand
Theatre, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Planning and Development is
requested to provide such recommendation during the month of
May 1978 so that the action may be taken on this matter at the
June meeting of the Common Council.
Mr. Fuller MOVED to recommend to Common Council that the Strand be designated
as a local historic landmark. Mr. Bordoni seconded. CARRIED unanimously.
Mr. Stein said he would like to change the schedule of Planning and Develop
ment Board meetings so that they would take place on the last Tuesday before
each month's BZA meeting, which is usually the fast Tuesday of each month
except when a month starts on Tuesday, in wihch case it would be held on the
last Tuesday.
Mr. Van Cort then noted that the department is working on a proposal to the
Department of Engergy under which an energy survey of the city would be done.
Under the city's sponsorship, by a group from Cornell. Mr. Rowe, of the Plan-
ning Department said that the'..proposed :energy -inventory-would list all uses
of energy in the city. He said this would require the participation of NYSEG,
and would require passage by Common Council. He said it would involve setting
up a community organization process to handle recommendation procedures. Mr.
Van Cort added that Ithaca is one of fifteen cities which would be studied
under this program, and the study would determine ways in which energy could
be better used and conserved in the city. Mr. Van Cort said the department
would be inovlved in working on the proposal.
At 9:40 the meeting was adjourned on a motion.