HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1979-01-30 MINUTES
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
January 30, 1979
Dated: February 2, 1979
PRESENT: Ray Bordoni, Sue Cummings, Clarence Cleveland,
Rich Moran, Mary Crowley, Stuart Stein
ALSO: John McGee, Pat Carlson, Jon Meigs, Nancy Meyer ,
Elva Holman, Stan Goldberg, Chris Anagnost
1 . The meeting was called to order at 7 :30 P.M.
2. Mr. Bordoni MOVED to approve the Minutes of the December
19th meeting. Ms. Crowley seconded. Motion carried.
Chairman Stein welcomed one new Board Member, Susan
Cummings.
3. NONE
4. Chairman Stein stated that he would discuss matters of
concern at the end of the meeting under Item 10 : Board
Administrative Organization .
5. ZONING CASES :
APPEAL 1248 : Area variance to permit addition of 2 bed-
rooms to the four apartment multiple dwelling at
111 Dryden Road in a B-2 district . The property
does not have the required frontage on a
public right-of-way.
Mr. Anagnost , representing Christopher George
Corporation, explained what changes were proposed
for the interior of the structure. Mr. Meigs
gave the background for the appeal . The home
was built before zoning was enacted. No increase
in occupancy will take place. Adequate parking
is available on the property. The purpose of the
interior alterations is to give privacy to the
present occupants. No change in the number
of units will take place.
Staff recommendation is to approve based on no significant effect
on the neighborhood or on planning objectives.
Mr. Moran MOVED to recommend approval of Appeal 12480 Mr. Cleveland
SECONDED. Motion CARRIED.
APPEAL 1249: Area variance to permit construc-
tion of a two-story building at 312-314 N.
Aurora Street and 315 N. Tioga Street in a B-1
district . Previous appeals on this project were
denied; appellants are requesting reconsidera-
tion of their proposal based on the provision
Planning and Dev. Board Minutes
Meeting Held January 30, 1979
Dated: February 2 , 1979 Page 2.
of some additional off-street parking , though
some deficiency would remain.
Mr. Meigs explained the general background. A
memo was received from the Building Commissioner
outlining the BZA' s action and stressing the
difficulties of trying to deal with the general
question of off-street parking requirements in
a B-1 zone when it may make sense to adjust
those requirements in the light of available
public parking space downtown. Mr. Hoard 's
memo further indicated that the BZA requested
the matter be referred to the Planning and De-
velopment Board for review and .possible recom-
mendations to the Charter and Ordinance Commit-
tee and Common Council . Mr. Meigs went on to
say that a decision to grant the variance could
not be reached at the BZA on any one of the pro-
posed plans for construction. The BZA' s main
concern was for parking.
Chairman Stein stated that previous appeals to this Board had been
approved.
Mr. Goldberg, partner in the ownership of the property, in question ,
said that in light of the emphasis on parking , the proposal which
would give the most parking is A2. He further explained that a lease
was negotiated with Mr. Merle Patterson for additional parking spaces
(10) . Proposal A2 will then have 19 parking spaces. This is still
well below the required 48 spaces.
Patricia Carlson, of 407 North Aurora Street , spoke in favor of
the proposed use of the site. However, she was concerned for the
type of building which would be constructed. The Bl zone was
intended to make the transition from business to residential a
smooth one. Her concern was for the proposed construction to fit
the general appearance of the transition zone . Ms. Carlson also
expressed concern for demolishing a structure that was in a Feder-
ally designated historic districts This action would weaken the
landmark designation.
Nancy Meyer spoke in favor of the development of the property at
312-314 North Aurora and 315 N. Tioga Street, even with the realiza-
tion that parking will be a problem, as growth and development of
Ithaca is more important .
Mr. Cleveland MOVED to recommend approval of Proposal A2. Mr .
Bordoni SECONDED . The demolition of the green house was of concern
to some Board Members. Because of this concern , the Planning and
Development Board chose to vote as follows :
Planning and Dev. Board Minutes
Meeting Held January 30, 1979
Dated: February 2 , 1979 Page 3 .
A straw vote was taken to see if the main motion might be amended
to recommend that BZA consider approving scheme A2 without re-
quiring demolition of 315 N. Tioga; this vote split , 3 for , 2
against and 1 abstaining.
A vote was then taken on the main motion, which Passed unanimously.
SIGN APPEAL 2-1-79 : Sign Variance to place
a second sign on the property at 740C
Cascadilla Street in an I-1 District . The
second sign would be on the side of the build-
ing facing Meadow Street (Route 13) ; the Sign
Ordinance permits signs only on the front of
the buildings in this district .
Mr . Meigs gave the background for the appeal.
Mr. McGee wishes to put a sign on the side of
his building facing Route 13 . With the addi-
tion of this sign , his business signage will
still be under the maximum allowed for signage.
Staff recommendation is to deny, as the sign ordinance does not
make any provision for signs on the side of a building that does
not have street frontage . In addition , the signage on the
Cascadilla Street frontage , which is the business ' street
address, should be adequate ; customers turning the wrong way
on Cascadilla, which has a street sign, should have no trouble
backtracking through the Meadow Street intersection, which is
controlled by a traffic light . Mr. Bordoni felt that in terms
of planning issues , the sign was not out of place.
Mr. Bordoni MOVED to recommend approving the variance. Ms.
Crowley SECONDED. Motion CARRIED.
6. A resolution from the Charter and Ordinance Committee of Common Council
was presented for the Board's information,
WHEREAS, the Common Council recognizes the need to review off-street
parking requirements for the various business districts that
are stipulated in the present zoning ordinance and,
WHEREAScurrent parking regulations indicate the difficulty of creating
on-premises parking in some of the business areas, and
WHEREAS, the replacement and optimum development of existing buildings
in the business districts necessitates the provision of
additional off-street parking, now
Planning and Dev. Board Minutes -
Meeting Held January 30, 1979
Dated: February 2, 1979 Page 4,
TBEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the changing business situation in the
City of Ithaca and the availability of off-street parking in
public lots and ramp garages suggests that capital support
be extended to permit new construction in districts where public
parking and public transportation facilities exist, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Building Department and the Department
of Planning and Development are instructed to present recommendations
concerning parking in the business district to the Charter and
Ordinance Committee of Common Council, no later than March 1, 1979,
Committee member, Elva Holman stated that the resolution, as presented,
did not exactly convey the sense of the committee, in that some wording
appeared to have been added.
Nancy Meyer explained that the committee felt that while the parking
problem is being resolved that support should be given toward development
of new businesses in the downtown area.
Charter and Ordinance Committee members present said that they were
not in favor of a new parking garage until the need was present.
Mr. Van Cort expressed his view of the parking situation over the past
6 months, Demand has developed both in the downtown area and the
Collegetown area for growth. The City should do all that it can to
encourage investment by the private sector, The City has spent over
$6 million in about 6 years which has given the City two new parking
garages, the Commons, and the Peripheral Streets Improvements, A little
less than $1 million will be paid back by the private owners in the Commons
tax benefit district, All the work has been seen as a joint effort by
the .private and public sectors in hope of stimulating increased development
by the private sector. He went on to say that the City has run out of
things to do in the old Urban Renewal plan and it's time to take stock of
the situation and see what should happen in the next 10 or 15 years in
the downtown area. The demand for centrally-located space has grown
and the private sector wants to invest in the downtown area, Property
north of the business area zone boundary on Court Street has been under
a_great deal of pressure for changed zoning, as it lies just outside
the commercial district. The Planning and Development Board and staff
have consistently maintained that the residential district should remain
residential and the commercial district should maintain its boundaries,
Now the city is in a situation where there is a desire to increase the
intensity of development in the commercial area. Mr. Van Cort went on to
say that the parking requirement of the zoning ordinance is not unreasonable.
If the City chooses to allow development to occur without requiring parking,
Planning and Dev, Board Minutes
Meeting held January 30, 1979
Dated: February 2, 1979 Page J,
then the City is going to have to face providing more public parking. With
granting the two variances to parking requirements currently sought for this
area, a need for 100 additional parking spaces will develop,
Strong demand makes incentive zoning possible, Incentive zoning allows
the developer to go beyond the zoning ordinance limits in exchange
for the developer doing something that the city wants,
A decision on zoning should be made soon; the longer the city waits, the
possibility increases that the developers will more on and find another
location, possibly outside the city,
Mr. Van Cort suggested that information be gathered about the present
situation and formulate a strategy so that any change in zoning which might
be made be an outgrowth of the strategy that is developed.
The strategy developed for the downtown should also be considered for
applicability in Collegetown,
Common Council will have to make some definite decision about both commercial
areas, soon,
Chairman Stein further explained that what these decisions will mean is that
someone is going to have to pay for the extra parking, One possibility
is a benefit assessment district where the developer pay, or, maybe,
a broader district where a larger group of property owners pay,_ With
the pressure for increased development being felt now, there may
not be time to test the possible solutions to the problems. Another
aspect to consider is the changing neighborhood particularly to the
North of Court Street,
Mrs. Meyer explained that the resolution should state that the Charter and
Ordinance Committee of Common Council would like the Planning and Development
Department to present recommendations concerning parking in the business
district to the appropriate committee so that recommendations may be made
to Common Council before March 1, 1979.
Chairman Stein suggest that the following resolution be presented for a vote:
RESOLVED, that the Planning and Development Department prepare
recommendations concerning parking in the business district and
present them to the CHARTER. AND ORDINANCE OOMMITIEE,
Mr, Bordoni MOVED that the resolution be adopted by the Planning and
Development Board, Ms, Crowley Seconded,
Planning and Dev, Board Minutes
Meeting held January 30, 1979
Dated, February 2, 1979 Page 6.
Mr. Van Cort stated that the staff could make recommendations how to
change the zoning ordinance on the assumption that adequate parking
exists in the ramps and that if there is not, that the city would
provide it. Changes recommended will not be a part of the overall
strategy but will be directed at one block and the problems of that
block with specific reference to design and parking and nothing else;
Mr. Sordoni suggested that if that is what it takes to get construction
going, lets proceed.
Motion carried.
7 None,
8. Old Business:
a, City Graphics
Mr, Van Cort suggested that a committee meeting was necessary, to
be scheduled at the earliest convenient time,
9, New Business:
a, OEDP
STERPDB notified the Department that there was a possibility that the
City could receive Economic Development Administration funds, The EDA is
a division of the U. S, Dept. of Commerce and i;, ,,: responsible for adminis-
tering:; the public works program, to which the City applied for funds
for Elmira Road, but wase; turned down, We can apply again and have a
better chance of receiving funds because the unemployment rate has gone
up, among other factors, A necessary prerequisite for applying is to
prepare an OEDP (Overall Economic Development Program), The OEDP will
have to be approved by Council preferably with a recommendation from -this Board
as well as the OEDP Committee, which is almost identical to the Community
Advisory Committee along with two additional members in order to provide
a wide range of representation, Mr, Van Cort asked that Michael`Bottge
explain the details.
Mr. Bottge explained that specific project proposals will be made in the
OEDP, He further explained that Alderman Meyer expressed her concern for
the City's fiscal capabilities which should be taken into consideration
in the OEDP, The program will focus on Ithaca's areas for expansion
and development as well as other issues, Mr, VanCort mentioned that the
unemployment rate was the main determining factor for eligibility as the
EDA funds- were directed'towards providing employment, preferably in the
industrial sector, Paul Mazzarella, consultant to the City to help in
Planning and Development Board Minutes
Meeting held January 30, 1979
Dated; Feb. 2, 1979 Page 7,
the preparation of the OEDP, stated that the OEDP documents the
condition of the local economy and how it has changed over time,
identifies goals and strategies for the city to pursue in retaining jobs
in the area, and identifies specific projects that the City would like to
apply for funds to implement,
Mr. Bottge asked that the Board consider the OEDP at its February meeting
so that a recomnendation can be passed on to Council,
b. Discussed under Item 6,
10, Miscellaneous
a, Board Administrative Organization
Chairman Stein expressed his desire to make some changes in the
organization of the Board, He went on to say that many times the Board
spends a lot of time reviewing zoning cases, which are important, but
little time is left do discuss matters of planning, One alternative
is to have additional meetings each month, One meeting would cover zoning
cases and the other would cover planning issues, Chairman Stein felt that
this could be undesirable, The other alternative is to develop a stronger
committee system within the Board. The committees would refer recommendations
to the Board,
Mr. 11bran felt that committee meetings would be better than having two
regular meetings a month,
Chairman Stein said that if the committee system did not work then we'll
change it,
b, Chairman Stein suggested that a resolution should be made to thank
Dave Fuller and Rexford Hildreth for serving on the Board.
Mr, Bordoni MOVED that Dave and Rex be thanked for participating on the Board,
Ms, CLmxmings seconded, Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm.
12/10/79
P,ANNI'NG AND.DEVELOPMENT BOARD
'COMMITTEES
NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING: Mary Crowley, Chairman; Ray Bordoni ,
Sue Cummings
CODES AND ORDINANCES: John MacInnes, Chairman; Rich Moran,
Stu Stein
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Ray B.ordoni , Chairman;
SOCIAL AND CULTRUAL DEVELOPMENT: Rich Moran, Chairman; Mary Crowley,
Sue Cummings
URBAN DESIGN AND PRESERVATION: Sue Cummings, Chairman; Stu Stein
GENERAL PLAN: Rich Moran, Mary Crowley