HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1979-08-06 MINUTES
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD
August 6, 1979 (Postponed meeting of July 31 , 1979)
PRESENT: Chairperson Stuart Stein, Ray Bordoni , Susan Cummings, Richard
Moran, John MacInnes
ALSO
PRESENT! T. Hoard, Mrs, Meyer, Mrs. Stinard, Mr. Avramis, Mrs. Avramis,
Dirk Galbraith, Jon Meigs
I . The meeting was called to order at 4:40 p,m, by Chairman Stein, The
regular monthly meeting of the Board was postponed from July 31 to
August 6, due to lack of quorum, Mr. Stein welcomed John MacInnes, the
newly appointed member of the Board, who is the representative from the
Board of Public Works, replacing Clarence Cleveland,
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Subdivision of property at 214-216 Cascadilla Park, in
an R-la zone, into two lots conforming with existing
zoning regulations.
Mr. Stein noted that the subdivision was reviewed at the previous meeting
and given preliminary approval , and that it has been duly advertised for
final consideration at today's meeting, He then opened the Public Hearing
and called for comment concerning the proposed subdivision, either for or
against. There were no persons present to speak for or against the sub
division other than Mrs. Meyer, the applicant approval of the subdivision,
Mrs. Meyer explained the circumstances around the proposal , which concerns
property owned by aaarnd her husband on Cascadilla Park Road. The property
consists of approximately 25000 square feet.originally in '5 separate tax
parcels. The Meyer's bought this property after a building which was on one
of the other parcels was demolished, leaving only their present residence on
one parcel . They now intend to sell a portion of the entire property, and
wish to divide it into two parcels, each of approximately 12000+ square feet,
whibh is in excess of the minimum required size for parcels in the R-la zone
in which the land is located. They propose to sell one parcel and to retain
the other for their continuing use. She stated that the property had all
municipal services including access on a public street. There were no questions,
and Mr. Stein closed the Public Hearing on MOTION by Mr. Bordoni ,. SECONDED by
Mr. Moran, Mr. Stein then noted that the action on final approval is scheduled
on the agenda for a later consideration under Old Business, and asked whether
it was the Board's pleasure to take action on it now. Mr, Bordoni , SECONDED
by Mr. Moran, MOVED to give final approval to the subdivision of this property
at 214-216 Cascadilla Park Road. Staff recommendation is to approve. There
was no discussion and the vote was taken, resulting in unanimous approval of
the subdivision,
3, Special Order of Business: Mr. Stein noted that there was no minutes of the
previous meeting to approve due to changes in department personnel and the
inability to prepare the minutes,for this meeting,
P & D Board Minutes
August 6, 1979 Page 2
41 Chairperson's Report Mr.. Stein reintroduced Mr. MacInnes, the new Board
member. He noted that Barbara Davis has resigned and that this resignation
leaves the Board still one member short; to his knowledge there has not been
any action taken by the Mayor to fill the vacancy resulting, He noted that
at the next meeting there would be a very important piece of business coming
up, specifically the department budget for 1960, He stated that a meeting
of the entire Board would take place in the near future to discuss budget
policy and budget items. Mr, Stein then asked Mr. Meigs to report on staff
changes. Mr. Meigs informed the Board that with the resignation of Rosalind
Williams, the CD staff is one person short, and that a replacement is being
sought for her. He noted that Ms. Williams' position was a Civil Service
position, and that the current remaining CD staff member is an employee of
the CD Agency, Katherine Evans. The Community Development activity has been
supported in terms of staff by a Work/Study person for most of the past year
or more, and that person has also completed her degree and will be leaving
soon for other employment, so he requested the Board's understanding with
respect to the problems in providing the required information on matters
of interest. He stated that staff would be appreciative of Board member's
relaying any concerns on CD matters or others which might be due to the
shorthandedness of staff,
5. ZONING APPEALS
APPEAL 1267: Appeal for Special Permit to allow a telephone survey
business (Ithaca Interviewing Service) as a home
occupation at 907 N. Cayuga St, in an R-2b zone,
The Appellant described the proposed use of the property as a home occupation,
and noted that she lived in an area where there are several other home-type
businesses. She indicated that she felt that due to the low level nature of
the business, with few visits by clients, it would be quite appropriate to the
area and would not cause significant traffic noise or non-.residential type
activity in the area. She explained the type of business, which involves inter
views for marketing studies for national companies, much of which is done on the
telephone, and only occasionally involves visits by clients or interviewees, She
noted that it is possible that she would employ other persons on a part.-time basis,
but that these employees would probably be working from their residences, The
property in question is a single-family home, and only a small portion of one
room would be devoted to the necessary records and work space, She noted also
that the property is located on a relatively busy street North Cayuga Street
and that it is near a gas station and some other preexisting businesses,
Appellant stated that the traffic which. might be generated by this business would
not, in her opinion, exceed that which might be expected in relation to a regular
single-.family dwelling.
P & D Board Minutes
August 6, 1979 Page 3
Mr. Bordoni stated that he was familiar with the area, since he lives nearby,
and that he was of the opinion that the parking and other traffic associated
with the business would be very minimal . He felt that the location was ideal
for this type of activity. Mr. Meigs indicated that the staff recommendation
is to approve the appeal , since the activity would in all likelyhood, be very
light. Ms. Cummings, SECOND by Mr. Bordoni , MOVED that the Board recommend
approval of the appeal ; unanimously approved.
APPEAL 1268: Appeal for Interpretation or Area Variance to relieve
applicants of rear-yard requirement for new commercial
and discotheque building at 406-10 College Ave. , in a
B-2b zone, which has been built to within 2 2 feet of
the rear property line.
In response to Mr. Stein' s observation that this Appeal had previously been
heard by the Board, and that the Board had made a recommendation to approve it,
Building Commissioner Hoard reviewed the circumstances around the resubmission
of the Appeal . He stated that the building previously on the site had burned
in 1977 and the remains have been declared unsafe by the Building Department,
The Zoning Ordinance permits rebuilding of a damaged structure to the extent
that it previously existed. In November, 1978 owners of the property requested
and were denied approval to construct a discotheque, stores, and a movie theater
on the property. At the end of November 1978, it was determined that the building
could be rebuilt for use as a discotheque if the rear fire exits .were provided
as necessary and that the building would not be enlarged by the reconstruction.
In January 1979, a permit was issued for rebuilding of the roof of the structure.,
in April 1979, a permit .was issued to permit rebuilding of the walls of the
structure. At that time, no enlargement of the structure was approved, including
the second story which owners wished to construct. The previous building had
been a nonconforming structure, whose total square footage would permit a capacity
of 133 occupants; the balcony area proposed for the current design would allow
a total of 234 occupants, and this fact caused Mr. Hoard to deny a permit for the
reconstruction. He said that the current appeal was to permit the construction
of the building including balcony areas and a second story, the Board of Zoning
Appeals has interpreted the balcony itself as a second story, thus effectively
making the proposed building 3 stories. In response to a question from Mr, 'Stein,
Mr, Hoard stated that the proposed building was supposed to be the same size as
the building which burned, but that the total volume is probably considerably
greater; he indicated that applicants were not given permission to build a larger
structure than the original , Attorney Dirk Galbraith, lawyer for the owners, then
described the proposed structure and explained that the application is a request
for variances for work which has already been completed, He stated that necessary
access to the building has been obtained, referring to the necessary fire exits
and service access at the rear of the building. He stated that appellants would
like to have approval for use of the full second story for stores and offices,
which would constitute day time use of the site. Mr. Galbraith stated that the
building is approximately the same height as the previous building, but that
it now includes a full , useable second floor, He said that at this point there
is some question of hardship on an economic basis, since the owners have a heavy
-:P: & D Board Minutes
(august 6, 1979 Page 4
M1
investment in the structure that currently exists, and need the income that
'could be derived from use of the second floor. He stated further that they
balcony which is proposed in the discotheque portion of the building at the
ground level would be less than one-third of the area of the ground floor,
which he interprets as being less than a full floor according to City Codes '
and Ordinances, and which should thus be acceptable without a variance. Mr. '
Meigs then read a letter from the Cornell University Real Estate Department,
requesting protection of their property rights as abutter to the side and
rear of the property. In the course of further discussion on the actual appeal
being made at this time, Mr. Hoard stated that the approval being sought is-for the, .
balcony and the second floor as proposed by the owners. Mr. Bordoni noted that thO)
process seems a little backwards, since they are asking if they can build a second '
floor, when actually they have already done it. He also questioned whether the
City Fire Chief had approved the plans with respect to fire safety. Further
discussion focused on the steps and methods used by applicants to the present_.
Appellant then stated that the balcony which he proposed to build would have
7, feet clearance above the first floor, and 72 feet f„ ie `balcony floor to
the ceiling. Mr. Stein noted that the use is not the iso, . Sfere, but the question
concerns the balcony and the use of the second story. There was further d'i`scussion
by Board members, appellant and staff members concerning fire safety and occupancy
r�Wl"A
a building, and further discussion of the variance which was being requested.
ordoni 'stated that he felt that the development represents a consider b e
improvement to the College Town area, both in terms of economic activity a
replacement of a damaged structure. He MOVED that the appeal be recommended
approval by the Board. His motion was SECONDED by Mr. Moran._ Ms. Cu:,mings
stated that she felt that City Ordinances and Regulations -
were b_h4 Touted by the owners, since they had already built a second story
without a permit. Appellant stated that he did not build the building taller
than it was before; the previous structure had a false front above the ground
level , giving the street facade the impression of being a two story building.
Mr. Stein. then moved to question, and the vote resulting was as follows:
Mr. Bordoni , Aye; Mr. Moran, Aye; Ms. Cummings, Nay; Mr, MacInnes; Nay, Mr. Stein,
N!ay. Mr. Stein then ruled that the appeal is denied. There was further di cuss on
by Mr, Stein and Mr. Bordoni on the reasons for their votes; Mr, Bordoni -stated
that he felt tha4t<tithe result was a negative one in the sense that it condemns ': ,
P & D Board Minutes
August 6, 1979 Page 5
investment and improvement of the economic activity in the College Town area;
Mr. Stein stated that he felt the matter was more a question of following
the City ordinances and regulations concerning zoning and construction. It
seemed to him that the issue was one of retroactive approval for action taken
in contravention to established procedures.
SIGN APPEAL 8-1-79: Appeal to permit additional sign (reader board)
for U-Haul Agency at 343 Elmira Road, in a B-5 zone.
Total sign area on premises would exceed allowment.
A representative of the U-Haul Agency explained the appeal , noting that the
proposed addition to the existing freestanding sign would increase the total
square footage only marginally over the total amount of area of sign permitted
on the premises. He showed pictures of the existing sign and of the addition
which the company wished to erect. He stated that the reason for the reader
board addition was to provide the public with adequate notice as to the services
provided by U-Haul, preliminary to the erection of an additional large storage
building on the property, He stated that the agency would not erect the additional
building if the sign is not approved, since it is the agency's feeling that
without adequate advertisement, the additional investment will not prove economically
feasible. He felt that the additional 26 square feet of reader board did not
represent a serious excess of signage area. He stated that the entire area of
the freestanding sign with the reader board would be 144 sq.ft. , including 60
sq.ft. of reader board. Mr. Meigs noted that the maximum area permitted for
signage in a B-.S zone is 150 sq.ft. , and that the existing signage on the premises
is 120 sq,ft. , including a 26 sq.ft. wall sign on the building. Thus, the total
square footage which would exist with the reader board would be in access of the
150 sq.ft. permitted by approximately 17%, After further discussion, Ms. Cummings
stated that she felt that the timing of this request is a bit awkward, since
the sign ordinance provides that nonconforming signs, including signs in excess
of the total square footage permitted, must be removed or otherwise conformed by
the end of August. Ms, Cummings, SECONDED by Mr. MacInnes, then MOVED to deny
the appeal since others would have to be conformed, and appellants would have a
total area in excess of the amount permitted. Mr. Hoard noted that even if the
proposed additional building is constructed on the site, 150 sq,feet is the maximum
signage permitted in a B75 zone, and that no additional allowance would result
from the additional frontage represented by such a building. Mr, Stein then called
for a vote on motion, which is a motion in favor of recommending denial . The
vote unanimous in favor of denial .
SIGN APPEAL 8-.2-79; Appeal to permit new sign to replace former Weston's
sign at entry to commercial complex at 744 S, Meadow
St. , in a B75 zone. Total sign area on premises would
exceed allowment.
No representative of appellant appeared to discuss the proposal . Mr, Meigs stated
that it was his understanding that appellant's intended to use the entire 150 sq.
ft. of signage permitted for this property, which is also in a B-.5 zone, on the
building, thus eliminating any possibility that additional signage be erected as
proposed. The request is for a 100 sq,ft, sign to replace the previous Weston's
sign at the Meadow Street entrance, and is intended to indicate to potential
P & D Board Minutes
August 6, 1979 Page 6
customers the location of the entrance and the presence of the K-Mart Store.
On MOTION by Mr. Moran, SECONDED by Mr. Bordoni , it was unanimously recommended
to deny the application.
6. Communications, Mr. Meigs read a letter received from Ithaca Neighborhood
Housing Service recommending a provision in the City Code to require a waiting
period between the application for a demolition permit and the issuance or--
the effective date of such a permit. He noted that the Ithaca Landmarks Pre-
servation Commission also supports this proposal , which would give the Land
marks Commission or other interested parties the opportunity to seek to save
a structure by having it moved, or to permit salvage of portions of the structure
which might be recyclable. He stated that a draft resolution had been prepared,
the basic provisions of which would be, in addition to requiring a .ten day
waiting period, that the Building Department would notify the Planning Department
and the Landmarks Commission of application for demolition, so that materials
or the entire building might besalvaged or. saved by interested persons or
organizations. Ms. Cummings stated that the Urban Design Committee of the
Planning Board had also considered this proposal and recommends approval of
some similar provisions. Mr. Bordoni questioned whether such a provision would
negatively affect property owner's rights, including the concern that the
property owner might be liable for injuries to the persons involved in moving
or salvaging the building or its parts. . Ms. Cummings stated that it would not
be the intent of such provisions to permit any person to simply walk onto a
building site and begin to remove portions of a building, but that the owner
and any contractor or building mover involved would be party to negotiations
between the Landmarks Commission, the Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services,
and any other party interested in salvage for permission to enter the premises
for that purpose, Ms. Cummings then recommended that the Board propose amend
ment of the appropriate sections of City Code to provide a 10 day waiting
period after application for a demolition permit, that a demolition permit
notification process be instituted, and that the Building Department be required
to notify the Planning Department and the Landmarks Commission of the application,
D1ra ,Bordoni , `SECONDED BY 19re Moran, SO MOVED, and the recommendation was
_ unanimously approved,
7, Old Business, Item a- action on final approval of a subdivision at 214-16
Cascadilla Park Road, has been taken previously in the meeting. Item b-
City Graphics. Ms, Cummings' committee has reviewed the proposed city
directory system designed by the City Graphics consultant, Carreiro Design.
The committee approves of the proposed design and recommends that the City
approve the directory system, including design and erection, for a total
amount not to exceed $600, This recommendation is to be forwarded to they
Planning and Development Committee and the Budget & Administration Committee
of Common Council for Council consideration and action, There was further
discussion of the proposed design, including explanations of the materials
and the locations of the signs which would be made in accordance with the
design. It .was noted that this was a signage system for City Hall only,
P & D Board Minutes
9ugust 6, 1979 Page 7
and would .not be visible from outside the building, It would promote access by
the public to the various city departments by making it easier for citizens to
locate the agency which they wish to visit. Mr, Moran, SECONDED by Mr, MacInnes,
recommended approval. of the committee report on the City Hall directory system,
and its submission to the two counc tl commlttees. involved, Motion was unanimously
APPROVED'
S. New Business, f1s, Cummings expressed her concern over developments relating
to the use- and physical development of neighborhood parks within the city,
particularly the current situation at the Southside Neighborhood Parke She
reviewed the action that had been taken to date, including meetings between
city officials and representatives of the area, She expressed concern over
problems of noise, difficulties with policng. and other- matters arising from
the provision of certain facilities within the parks.- In particular, at the
Southside Neighborhood Park, the provision of benches, and game,-amat
to the sidewalk appears to provide a location for use who harrass passersby
and create disturbances past thenormal required closing hours of city parks,
thus annoying nearby residents. She questioned whether adequate consideration
was given to the types of difficulties that might arise in relation to park
facilities when park design is considered, Mr, Stein noted that he was aware
that these types of problems did arise and that there are similar concerns in
the areas of Conway and-Wood Ste parks, He is concerned about local neighborhood
opinion concerning the use and improvement of these parks, and feels that a
type of policy with respect to the design process should be established, He
suggested that the matter be referred to the Board's Neighborhood and Development
Committee, Mr, Bordoni stated that the concerns that exist are frequently ex
pressed by older people without children who use the parks, and that the parks
and their physical equipment are usually quite well received by families with
children who use theme Mr, Stein agreed but stated that from his viewpoint
the. issue,:is one of how residents in the immediate vicinity of such parks
can be given a voice in the nature of the development, and in the decision
process on such improvements, balancing the positive against the negative
aspects of such improvements. The matter was then referred to the Neighborhood
Committee,
Approval of Subdivision on Kline Road of property owned by Justin and Shirley
Davidson, Mr, Meigs explained the proposal , which is very similar to the Meyer
subdivision, in that a single large lot is .proposed to be divided into two
lots conforming with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for lot size.
Owners also propose to sell oneportion of the property and retain the other
lot for their own future use. The lot is approximately 25000 sq,ft, in area,
and owners propose to establish certain conditions in the sale and deed agree
merits to ensure that the attractive qualities of the property are retained in
the event that the portion not currently built upon is developed; these
conditions would involve a set back from the side lot line in access of that
required by the Zoning Ordinance,, to provide an assured view from the existing
house to the west, Mr, Bordoni, SECONDED by Mr, Moran, MOVED to give preliminary
P & D Board Minutes
August 6, 1979 Page 8
. approval to the subdivision of the Davidson property, motion unanimously
APPROVED.
There was no further business and the meeting was adjourned.
esp tfully submitted,
Jonath Meigs
lanner