Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1984-01-24 r MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD January 24, 1984 7:30 PM - Council Chambers PRESENT: Chair Kramnick, R. Moran, S. Blumenthal, S. Jackson, B Romanowski, M. Sampson. ALSO: H.. M. Van Cort, Appellants, Press, Other interested parties. 1. Call to order: Chairman Kramnick called.the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. 2. Approval of Minutes: Sampson, seconded by Jackson moved to APPROVE the.Decenber 27, 1983 minutes. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Privilege of the Floor: None. 4. Communications: None. i 5 Chairman's Report: None. 6. Committee Reports: None. i 7. Director's Report: Director Van Cort briefly summarized the responsibilities of the Planning and Development Board and the i Department as based on State Law and the City Administrative Code. Van Cort reported that staff was in the process of re- viewing the:goals and projects of the Planning and Development Department for 1984, and would report in the near future to the Board. He noted that the Department is always on the look- out for grants, at present reflecting .an amount close to $1M/year. Sampson added his suggestion that the Board use "common sense", . especially in regard to zoning cases. 8. Staff Reports: None. i 9. ZONING APPEALS: 8:30 PM (see attached). i 10. Old Business- Collegetown Re-zoning: Director Van Cort spoke to the Board concerning recent history of zoning in.Collegetown. Several years ago Collegetown was badly in need of renovation and new development. Parking was then an issue, especially in regard to need additional housing for students. Common Council removed parking requirements then in effect to encourage additional housing. . However, the effect was that requirements were lessened as demand increased. The City and Cornell University contracted the services of Travers Associates to conduct a parking and traffic study in Collegetown which was completed in Novenber 1982. The present re-zoning proposal is to correct present parking pressure, and to provide adequate parking in the future, accommodat- ing planned development of the PAC and hotel. The intent of the zoning change is to ease the problem of "dumping" the parking demand in private neighborhoods surrounding Collegetown. i i i Minutes Planning & Development Board January 24, 1983 page 2. Romanowski added the possibility of consideration of a parking permit system that would be aimed at preventing "commuter parking" in the Collegetown area. Such a system would be enforced in part by resident permit holders who would report violations. Van Cort then outlined the steps to be taken in getting the Zoning Ordinance changed. Common Council can act on its own initiative; the Planning and Development Board can made recommendations to the Cormn Council. Common Council drafts changes to be made and then calls a Public Hearing. The Council can vote on the change as soon as the Public Hearing is complete. - It is expected that the Council will act on the re-zoning in March 1984.. By this time the Urban Design Study by Stirling and Wilford may be available to the City. Re-zoning will also include height requirements. At present the height of buildings in Collegetown are restricted to 70' in a B-2b zone. The new zoning will raise this requirement to 80' . The approximate height of the PAC and the hotel/garage will not exceed that of Sheldon Court or Cascadilla Hall. It will also allow a.gradation of density over a series of blocks. 11. New Business: Van Cort asked Chairman Kramnick to consider committee structure and appointments at his convenience. 12. Miscellaneous: None. 13. Adjournment: Romanowski, seconded by Sampson, moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:15 PM. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. aph Planning and Development ZONING APPEALS January 24, 1984 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. NO APPELLANT REPRESENTATION. MOTION: Based on discussion at the Board meeting of December 27, 1983, Sampson, seconded by Moran, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1541: Appeal of N. Plataniotis for Area Variance for rear yard setbacks to permit extension of restaurant use into the rear building (now a two-bay garage) at 315-317 OOLLEGE AV. (Cosmopolitan Restaurant). NO APPELLANT REPRESENTATION. APPEAL NOT DISCUSSED. Board moved to recommend APPROVAL at December 27, 1983 meeting. APPEAL 1543: Appeal of J. VanGorder for Area Variance to permit a two- story addition to the front of the single-family house at 107 GRANDVIEW AV. (replacing the front porch). The property is in an R-2a distric w ere the existing use is permitted. APPELLANT COMMENT: Mr. J. VanGorder stated that he planned the addition to increase living area, and that the front was the best site to fit with the existing fllor plan. BOARD DISCUSSION: The addition would produce no significant change in the property, and would increase the amenity of the existing house. No objections. MOTION: Moran, seconded by Sampson moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1544: Appeal of Parsons of William Downing Associates, architects, for Area Variances to permit construction of a new multiple dwelling with six apartments at 205 EDDY STREET AND 106 O0OK STREET. The property is in an R-3a district in which the proposed use is permitted; appellant must obtain variance for existing deficiencies (there are two existing buildings on the property which will remain) before a building permit and a certificate of occupany can be issued. Planning and Development ZONING APPEALS January 24, 1984 page 2. APPELLANT COMMENT: Mr. Stephen Parsons, DeWitt Building, summarized the reasons for his appeal and presented drawings to the audience which illustrated his plan for constructing a third building (two-story, six-apartment. dwelling) on the lots. Parking would not be deficient since construction calls for an addition of five off-street spaces, bringing the total for the combined three dwellings to ten off-street spaces. The Variance is asked only for the existing single-family dwelling on Cook Street which front, side, and rear yard deficiencies cannot be changed by the construction. Mr. Parsons stated that the size and exterior of the new building would be in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. PUBLIC COMMENT: John Novarr, 202 Eddy Street, felt that the two lots combined did not mean that there was an "extra" lot on which to build, and an additional building would have the effect of "squeezing" all three buildings onto the existing space. He objected to the maximum use of multi-family guidelines. Novarr would not object to a scaled down project: no more than 17 bedrooms combined. Kathy Hanna, 210 Eddy Street, specifically objected to more multi-family dwellings in the neighborhood. She would like to see the neighborhood keep a better balance of single-family dwellings. Tom Hanna, 210 Eddy Street, representative of the Easthill Civic Association, expressed the concerns of the Association, regarding 'open space". The necessary addition of off-street parking would have the effect of a parking lot for the rear yard areas. BOARD COMMENT: Sampson questioned whether in the future what would now be considered a single parcel could be divided into three parcels. Would concerns change if the two combined lots were sold as three separate parcels? Does this conversion come under subdivision ordinances? Also would the requirements change if this new building were constructed on an empty lot? Romanowski was troubled first by the maximum density allowable usage, and, secondly, by future sale of the .property. Kramnick expressed concern about the "open space" issue and .the loss of s sense of balance with a third structure on the combined lots. STAFF .RECOMMENDATION: Staff opinion was reluctantly for DENIAL. The design of the new building was compatible with the existing buildings, and the architect had probably given the best solution to the design problem as addressed. However, the density of the project was stretched to the maximum and would have too great an impact on the neighborhood. MOTION: Sampson, seconded by Jackson, moved to recommend DENIAL. After further discussion concerning the density and scope of the project, the motion PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. u' Planning and Development ZONING APPEALS January 24, 1984 page 3. APPEAL 1545: Appeal of Bowman for Area Variances to permit the approval and issuing of a Certificate of Occupancy for the two- family house at 204 WILLARD WAY. The property is in an R-2a district in which use as a two-family dwelling is permitted. APPELLANT COMMENT: Mr. Bowman stated that the Variances are necessary because of setback deficiencies on two sides, and the house cannot be moved. BOARD DISCUSSION: Romanowski noted that the Board had received a letter of support from S. J. Ostro. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL; deficiencies minor. MOTION: Moran, seconded by Romanowski, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. APPEAL 1546: Appeal of J. Augustine, Jr. for Area Variances to permit conversion of the existing four-unit apartment house at 319-25 S. 'CAYUGA ST. to an eight-unit apartment house. The property is in an R-3a district in which the proposed use is permitted. APPELLANT COMMENT: Mr. Augustine stated that the deficiencies were in back and side yard setbacks and lot size requirements. His intention is to create eight efficiency apartments, and . that would actually decrease the density of the apartment house. BOARD DISCUSSION: Sampson wanted to know if Augustine had begun the construction yet. Augustine indicated he had. He also stated that the bank was more.receptive to the idea of conversion to efficiency apartments than 2 bedroom units. He estimated that he would charge $330/month rent. The Board asked what the size would. be, and. Augustine indicated they would be approximately 450 sq. ft. for one person. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL, with the recommendation that the-porches be restored, the dormer retained, and restoration of the clapboard siding. Augustine said that the porches would be restored, but that he was planning on installing U.S. Steel siding to insure a R-25 factor to allow electric heat. MOTION: Moran, seconded by Romanowski, moved to recommend APPROVAL. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.. -------------- ------------- -------------- -------------------------