Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1983-12-27 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MINU'T'ES December 27,. 1983 PRESENT: Chair P. Rogers, B. Romanowski, M. Sampson, B. Gerkin, R. Holdsworth, R. Moran. ALSO: H. Sieverding, Appellants, Appellants' representatives, other interested parties, press. 1. Call to order: Chair Rogers called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. 2. Privilege of the Floor: None. 3. New Business: Collegetown/Parking Garage Presentation by David Taube, Architect. Sieverding introduced Taube, reminding the Board of two deadlines regarding the project: (1) LURA, the lead agency, has requested Board comments/opinions by January 9, the Design Review deadline outlined in the Option Agreement with the developer, Mack Travis; and (2) the February 29 deadline for the UDAG application. Taube presented the schematic plans for the Collegetown Project. His .firm has designed a 106-room hotel, with a 256 parking garage. He explained that the design difficulties due to the site and topographical considerations were: views from the hotel, entry to the hotel and parking garage, retail needs along Dryden Road to connect with other retail locations, access connections with the PAC, protection-of views .from-Cascadilla Hall, steeply sloping site, entrance of public and hotel parking usage, egress from the, parking garage, street improvements along Dryden Road and Eddy Street and handicapped access. Travis will own and manage the garage, but 122 spaces will be for public' use. There will be more than adequate parking according to City zoning which requires 1.2 spaces per room, which would then be 127 spaces. Plans are for' 134 hotel spaces. There will be 4 handicapped spaces in the public area, and 4 handicapped spaces in the hotel area. Board Discussion : Board members expressed concern re- garding changes on Dryden Road.— It was noted that presently the street is narrow and visibility is poor. Moran noted that the Fane building,. is going to make it impassible to .widen the street and permit a better turning radius. The-garage/hotel project would additionally increase traffic on that street. Sampson questioned why an Eddy Street exit was rejected since both entrance and exit from the parking garage are planned in the same location on Dryden Road. Taube explained the de- sign consideration to draw the focal point to Dryden Road was a con- sideration as well as the grade level requirements of the ramps and the length ofdriveway required from Eddy Street. Sampson questioned what percentage of guests would be using parking spaces. The projected figure is 6070. A decision to open the hotel area to public parking, at a higher rate, would actually mean the hotel would subsidize public parking. The d ecsion has not been made, however. Planning and Development Board Minutes, December 27, 1983 page 2• Travis would have to negotiate a rate and maintenance agreement with the City. The City would not receive any part of the parking fees directly, but would get UDAG. paybaclvs. Holdsworth questioned why there was no direct connection from the hotel to the retail plaza. He noted that the design plan made no handicapped access connection to the plaza or the the PAC. He wondered about the extent of handicapped accessibility to the hotel rooms, and within the garage. There was discussion of the curbing required by the State Code in front of elevator entrances. It was noted that this often made handicapped accessibility to elevators impossible if not handled correctly. General Board comments indicated that they would not recommend City involvement in this project if the parking garage did not connect directly to the PAC. 'It was explained by Sieverding and Taube that Cornell's design for the PAC has been accomplished two years ago. When Travis began his design plans, it was his intention to design the hotel/garage project so that a direct connection could be made to the PAC without compromising major design considerations of either project. Discussion has been ongoing with Cornell, but to date there seems to be no agreement as to how this could be accomplish- ed since the Cornell architect wants all entry to the PAC to occur from the logia in the main lobby. According to the present situation, it would be necessary to go from the parking garage through the hotel to Dryden Road, and from there to College Avenue and the main PAC entrance. Sampson wondered if President Rhodes of Cornell was aware of this. Romanowski suggested that the Board ought to bring this out publicly. sIoldsworth commented that a great deal of Federal money would be used in this project which should have some weight in bringing the two projects together. Romanowski expressed hope that future negotiations would continue until a link could be brought back into both designs. Sieverding maintained that Cornell needs to first recognize that the parking garage is necessary to the PAC and they they would make it a more important consideration to connect the PAU witn the garage. He saiu tient Cornell was becoming more aware of their responsibility to increase the 4 parking inventory, and has hired Travers to study traffic and parking in the total campus area. Holdsworth questioned whether the hotel/ garage project would proceed and be successful if Cornell did not construct the PAC. Sieverding said that studies made indicate that there is a need for hotel/garage even without the PAC. Gerkin asked about signage on the property. Taube indicated that $15,000 has been budgeted for the hotel. Retail signage would be privately budgeted. The Board response to the IURA was not put in the form of a resolution. The Board decided it would not make a recommendation to the IURA in favor of the project unless there was a direct access to the PAC from the garage. It was suggested that handicapped access to the retailre be considered in any future design changes., as well as widen Dryden Road . 4. Zoning Appeals: See attached. Planning and Development Board Minutes, December 27, 1983 page 3. 5. Approval of Minutes: Holdsworth, seconded by Gerkin, moved.to approve the November 29, 1983 minutes as written. Motion carried unanimously. i 6. Gommnications: None. 7. Chairman's report: Chair Rogers gave his verbal resignation from the ! Board, expressing his pleasure in serving the City. 8. Committee Reports: None. 9. Director's Report:. None. 10. Staff Reports None. 11. Old Business: : a. Collegetown Zoning: Sieverding reported that the Charter and Ordinance Conmittee will be developing the precise language for the zoning change resolution. It is expected that this will be completed within one month. b. Interim Collegetown Zoning: It was suggested if any Board member had con- cerns regarding Collegetown design, to express then individually to the IURA by January 9, 1984. Sampson inquired about the impact of parking in Collegetown during construction He indicated that approximately 100 spaces now available would temporarily be unusable. What congestion problems -are anticipated, and what would be done to ease them? Sieverding stated that an Environmental Impact Study would be prepared to address these problems, and a plan implemented to reduce the impact of construction as much as possible. 12. Miscellaneous: The status of the Jobs Bill was questioned. There is nothing to report at. this time, since HUD delayed the deadline by 30 days. Community Development staff has advertised for new applications since last month's meeting. 13. Adjournment: Motion by Holdsworth, seconded by Romanowski, to adjourn. Meeting adjourned at 10:45 PM. HMVC:aph I i Planning and .Development Board ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 SIGN APPEAL 1-1 -84: Appeal of Doctors Yale, McKeen, Stewart and Baldwin for a Sign Variance to permit erection. of a ten square foot sign at the property line at 821 Cliff St. in an R3a district where signs are limited to a mizimum of five square feet and .must be set back at least ten feet from the property line. Stan Zausmer, Business Manager, appeared in the appellants' behalf. APPELLANT COMMENT: Purpose of the sign in place and size was to create a safer recognition .of the business from its particular location on the street. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. BOARD QUESTIONS: Questions were raised as to whether the sign would be illuminated,. what the signage was at present, and why the sign would have to be larger than permitted by zoning. Sampson questioned the identification value. of name rather than number being the most important identification feature of a sign. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL. Traffic safety would be greatly enhanced, and there would be no adverse impact on the neighborhood. MOTION: Holdsworth, seconded by Moran, recommended APPROVAL, with the stipulation that the numbers on the sign be made larger in_ ,compar- ison to the logo and name than is indicated on the submitted design. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1535 Appeal of J. Augustine, Jr. for .Area Variances for off- street parking, lot size, lot width, and side yard to permit convey- sion of an existing business into an efficiency apartment in the - - - -- .apartmenf house at 317 S-.—Ca yuga 'St. in an Ria- district in which -the proposed use is permitted; however, appellant must obtain variances for the listed deficiencies before a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy can be issued for the conversion. John Augustine, Jr. , appellant, appeared on behalf of this appeal . APPELLANT COMMENT: The business, a beauty salon, is no longer in operation. The building would now be solely residential , and would have an effect of decreasing parking demand. The appellant is also willing to remove an exterior stairway which is no longer in use to allow off-street parking (one space) . PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Planning and Development Board ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 page 2. BOARD QUESTIONS: Would residential parking be aided by the new conditions? It appears that the additional off-street space to be provided would not increase the deficiency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL. MOTION: Sampson, seconded by Moran, recommended APPROVAL with the condition of the extra off-street parking space provision. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1536: Appeal of Alternatives Federal Credit Union for Area Variance for off-street parking and rear yard set back to permit extension of the first floor office use to the second and third floors at 301 W. State St. , in a B2a district in which offices are a permitted use. A previous appeal was denied on November 7, 1983; appellant is returing with new information. Jeff Coleman, Board member of the Alternatives Union, appeared in the appellants' behalf. APPELLANT COMMENT: At, the November 7, 1983 meeting, the BZA neither denied nor approved the variance. The need to extend office space in the building is due to expansion of the business. The appellants are now promising four (4) parking spaces on the site of the building as well as a lease for six (6) additional spaces at 301 W. Green Street, owned by the Knights.;of Columbus. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. BOARD QUESTIONS: Holdsworth questioned what would happen after the year's lease expired. He cited a recent previous appeal that was denied because of parking deficiencies. (Planned . Parenthood) . The issue then revolved around "neighborhood 'c6n-c- s'Isince the variance was protested by the neighborhood. Since there was no one at this meeting to express neighborhood concern against the variance, he felt it was consistent to approve this variance. - Gerkin suggested-that the lease at least contain an option of renewal after the first year. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL. The parking conditions suggested in the previous have been met. MOTION_: Moran, seconded by Gerkin, recommended APPROVAL, with the stipulation that the lease with the Knights of Columbus be rewritten to contain an option of future renewal . After discussion, Romanowski moved, seconded by Holdsworth to amend the original motion to include the six additional parking spaces as a condition of the Variance. The amended motion PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. - Planning and Development Board ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 page 3. APPEAL 1.537 Appeal of W. S.� Downing _IIl for an Area Variance - -- - - front yard setback) to permit conversion of the single-family house at 607 E. Seneca St. to. a two-family dwelling. The property is in a R2a district in which the proposed use is permitted. W. S. Downing III , appellant, appeared on behalf of this appeal . APPELLANT COMMENT: Mr. Downing '. reminded the Board that most--of­-'-- -the the properties in the area are two units-or more and most have- the same setback deficiency. The planned conversion of the garage would not substantially alter the present appearance of the site. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. BOARD QUESTIONS loldsw_orth expressed_ a _concern_for _a--balan-c-e withi-n_-` neighborhoods in terms of the effect of long-term transition from a basically one-family. neighborhood to Lone that is _predominantly multiple-unit dwellings. He questioned whether the Board was concerning itself with the significance of such a balance. Mr. Downing was also asked if he expected this project to be reviewed by the ILP.C, and he indicated that he would be willing to cooperate in any way with that Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL subject to review by ILPC. MOTION: Holdsworth, seconded by Sampson, recommended APPROVAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1538 .. Appeal of Dr. .Larry Wallace for Area Variances for off-street parking, lot size, lot coverage, and setbacks for front , side, and rear yards to permit the use of the first floor of the multiple dwelling at 329-31 N. Geneva St', for an optometry office in an Ria district where the proposed- use is -permitted. Dr. Larry Wallace .appeared on behalf of the appeal . APPELLANT COMMENT: Dr. Wallace has made a purchase offer on this property contingent upon the approval of these Area Variances. The building is now a two-family unit, each unit housing five unrelated adults. Dr. Wallace intends to convert the property into an optometry office. He also intends to make extensive renovations inside and outside. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. BOARD QUESTIONS: Rogers commented that the parking deficiency would increase from 6 to 14 in. the property conversion from residence to professional office. Mr. Flannery, the present owner, was in the audience and was questioned by the Board Planning and Development Board ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 page 4. concerning a zoning appeal that was made approximately _a year ago.. A request to change the use of the property from residential to an accounting office was denied due to parking deficiencies. Holdsworth suggested that the figures used to indicate square footage of office space may be over- estimated, in which .case the parking deficiency number may also be larger than necessary. He suggested to Dr. Wallace that he investigate the system used by the City BZA to arrive at the number of parking deficiencies. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL. The main planning consideration was the intensity of occupancy and use, and thus the parking required. MOTION: Sampson, �Q(_a(an_dedi by Gerkin, moved to recommend DENIAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. STAFF AND BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS: (1) Prove to the BZA that the office would have available parking within 500 feet , and (2) Provide a more accurate square footage of useable space in the property. APPEAL 1539: Appeal of Ithaca Friends Meeting for an Area Variance for rear yard setback to permit the conversion of the single-family dwelling at 227 Willard Way to a church or meeting place. APPEAL WAS WITHDRAWN because it was discovered that the appellants did not have ownership of the property, and , therefore no standing for appeal APPEAL 1540:. WITHDRAWN prior to the meeting . SIGN APPEAL 1-2-84: WITHDRAWN prior to the meeting. APPEAL 1541 : Appeal of N. Plataniotis for Area Variance for rear yard setbacks to permit extension of restaurant used into the rear building (now a two-bay garage) at 315-17 College Ave. (Cosmopolitan Restaurant) . The property is in a B2b district where the existing and .proposed uses are permitted. Gus Lambrou, owner of the property, presented the appeal . APPELLANT COMMENT: The kitchen of the new restaurant will be located in the former garage, a cinderblock stucture. Fire safety has been considered in the renovation plans. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. Planning and `Development ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 page 5. BOARD QUESTIONS: Discussion centered around physical construction of the building and fire safety. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL-. due to the fire hazards in a high densitypopulation area, and the lack of adequate separation of this building and other buildings . MOTION: Moran, seconded by Gerkin, moved to recommend APPROVAL with the expectation that are fire regulations would be subject to the Fire Commissioner's approval . PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1542: Appeal of D. Schoepfhel for a Use Variance to permit use of the property at 622 Cascadilla St. for an automobile rental agency. The property is in a 132a district where automotive-related businesses are not permitted. Mel . Bartell represented the appellaatin appeal . He will be the general manager of the businesses,. APPELLANT COMMENT-_ Bartell explained the plans for a new building on the now vacant site and parking spaces for 25-40 cars. PUBLIC COMMENT: Bruce Cook of Forest City Real Estate stated that the property had been for sale for over five years, BOARD QUESTIONS: Discussion centered around two main po.ints: whether the egress to the .property could not be changed from the plans f"rom Cascadilla Street to Route 13 or Hancock St. , and the definition of an automotive-related business. It would be unlikely that the State of New York would allow for an egress change due to regulations along Route 13, and would not likely allow access on their adjacent property on Hancock Street.. Holdsworth noted that Purity Ice Cream, across the street , has access to both Route 13 and Cascadilla St. The Board was con- cerned with granting a variance which could be grandfathered and allow a business such as a used car lot use of the same property. Mr. Bartell assured the Board that through leasing stipulations with Budget-Rent-A-Car that all cars cannot be older than 18 months or have over 50,000 miles. Rogers asked what considerations had been made concerning landscaping and creating an attractive buffer between the business and adjoining housing. Bartell said that they had considered erecting a stockade fence. The Board indicated that they would prefer a shrubbery buffer. Gerkin asked what kind of signage was planned, and Bartell stated that it would be an illuminated. sign on the Route 13 side of the building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: DENIAL because auto-related use is not allowed in a 132a zone. The business would have egress on a residential street, and is directly adjoining a residential area. Planning and Development Board ZONING APPEALS December 27, 1983 page 6. MOTION: Holdsworth, seconded by Romanowski , moved to recommend APPROVAL with the condition that the variance be made specific to car rental use and for no more than 40 cars. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. S , s PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ZONING APPEALS December 27 , 1983 ,-'SIGN APPEAL 1-1-84 : Appeal of Doctors Yale, .McKeen. Stewart , and Baldwin for a sign variance to permit erection of a ten square foot sign at the property line at 821 'Cliff St . , in an, R-3a dis- trict. where signs .are limited to a maximum of five square feet and. must be set back at least ten feet from the property line. APPEAL 1535 : Appeal of J. Augustine, Jr , for Area Variances for off-street parking, lot size, lot width, and side yard to permit conversion of an existing beauty salon to . an efficiency apartment in the. six= DL&00I0G AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD ZONING APPEALS December 37 , 1883 page 2 . -------- SIGN _3IG0 APPEAL 1-2-84 : Appeal of A. Smith for u Sign Variance to permit erection of u free-standing sign that. is both larger than permitted and which is closer to the front property lines than ' permitted , and to permit retention of the existing signs on the 000veoi0000 store at 200-204 W. Seneca St . (Short Stop) . The ' property is in an 8-3u district in which the proposed signs are not permitted . AppollunL had a variance for the existing Short Stop signs ; however the variance expired in 1979 . APPEAL I541 : Appeal of N. Plataointis for Area l/uziuoco for rear yard setbacks to permit extension of restaurant uoco into the rear buildiog(unw a two-buy garage) at 315-17 College A . (Coomn- poIitau Restaurant ) . The property is in a B-2b district where the existing and proposed uses are permitted . /r APPEAL 1542 : Appeal of D. Snboepfbel for a Use Variance to per- mit use of the property at 633 CascudiIlu 3t . for an automobile rental agency . The property is in u 8-2a district where automo- tive related businesses are not permitted . ^ ' ' ,