HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1984-05-29 Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 29, 1984 - 7 : 30 p.m.
Common Council Chambers :
PRESENT: Chairman I . Kramnick, M. Sampson, S . Blumenthal,
H. Gerkin,. S . Jackson, R. Romanowski
ALSO: Appellants, Appellants ' representatives, Press ,
Other interested parties
1. Call to Order: Chairman Kramnick called the meeting to order
at 7 :35 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes: Jackson requested two corrections to
April 1984 Minutes. In item 5-b) , the name of 'Blumenthal '
should replace the name 'Cummings ' . He also wished to have
the preliminary vote under item 7 - Family Medicine Sub-
division added to the Minutes. This raised a procedural
question as to whether only final votes should be recorded.
It was decided that the final vote as recorded was correct.
Romanowski, seconded by Sampson, MOVED to approve Minutes.
Vote: 5-yea, 1-nay (Jackson) - CARRIED.
3 . Committee Reports: Valentine-Quarry FEIS
Codes and Administration/Neighborhoods, Housing and Facilities
Committees report regarding Valentine Place-Quarry FEIS was
presented by Blumenthal. She reported that she and Chairman
Kramnick met with Director Van Cort and two members of the
neighborhood. Residents presented arguments for retaining , '
R-3 zoning on Valentine Place and State Street if the Valentine
Associates parcel was rezoned R-3 . After discussion, the
committee representatives agreed to recommend to Council the
limiting of development on the parcel to 30 occupants. The
Committee recommended that the development would be most
desirable in a cluster configuration because of reduced environ-
mental impact; They endeavored to take into account the
feelings of the neighborhood residents. This would allow
development to occur in one or two structures, or row housing,
but to restrict occupancy to 30 people. Also, they recommended
that the rest of the parcel be rezoned R-lb as other committees
have recommended.
Sampson asked if Ithacare was included in rezoning. He
said Ithacare has decided to add a health care facility to the
property which is permitted under R-3 but not permitted under
R-1, R-2 or P-1. Director Van Cort said Ithacare is not in-
cluded.
Jackson said Valentine Place raises four issues:
1) preserving neighborhood (a fragile mix) ;
2) prospect of building more housing;
3) prospect of economic development and jobs in the construction
industry;
4) preserving environment of creek area.
-2-
Question of how much new housing is needed remains to be
studied and proven. New Jobs in construction could be created
by improving existing stock instead of new building. Preservation
of creek area is very important and he would be inclined to re-
ject any new construction. Neighborhood which is a mix of .students
and single family owners could sustain some additional single
family houses and density but not an overwhelming amount. He
would be in favor of an R-3 contract zoning approach in which a
'no-build' area would be designated; group or concentrate the
housing, and alloW no more than 24 beds in the housing develop-
ment based on theYA single family homes that could be put in
under the FEIS in an R-1 zoning. Jackson would like to amend
Committee ' s proposal to strike the number of 30 and replace it
with 24 (occupants) .
Blumenthal moved, seconded by Kramnick, that the .Committees '
recommendation be approved. After discussion, Jackson moved to
amend recommendation to indicate 24 occupants instead of 30.
Seconded by Gerkin. Discussion followed regarding the reasons
for lowering number. Reasons listed were the feeling of the
neighborhood regarding density and the limit as mentioned in the
FEIS (8 single family homes with 3 members each) . This seemed
to be the maximum number that would keep neighborhood unchanged
as to the character and quality. Motion as amended would read:
Valentine Place neighborhood would be rezoned to R-lb and that
the development area be zoned R�''with a contract restriction ` 4
to no more than 24 inhabitant Vote: 3-yea, 3-nay (Blumenthal,
Sampson, Kramnick) . Original recommendation was then voted on:
Valentine Place rezoned to R-lb, development area rezoned to
R-3 , contract restriction to 30 inhabitants. 3-yea, 3-nay
(.Jackson, Romanowski, Gerkin) . Alternative motion was made by
Gerkin to rezone entire area R-lb. No second. As result of
split decision, NO RECOMMENDATION was made to Common Council.
4 . Staff Reports:
a) Helen Jones reported that City and Town staff have been talk-
ing about possible cooperative development of recreational areas.
Town is working on a comprehensive recreation and open-space plan.
In the plan, a number of sites have been designated within the
Town, e.g. , West Hill site, Coy Glen area, Lick Brook area, Inlet
Valley area. Town has firmed up plans for the Inlet Valley area.
It is a special natural site which lends itself very well to
development for recreational use. It contains about 25 acres.
Proposal will be taken to the Town Board for approval. They
intend to make application to the New York State Parks for funding.
At the same time, the City has been looking at the parcel
of land on the west side of Cayuga Inlet Island which the city
bought with federal recreation funds, as part of the land pur-
chased for Cass Park. No recreational use was proposed at the
time, nor does a need appear to exist now. Conversely, studies
done for the city indicate that the property would be more valuable
-3-
to the city in revenue-producing uses. This means taking that
land out of recreational use designation and making it available
for private development. City is also discussing the possibility
of taking Southwest Park, which was purchased with State restor-
ation funds, and making it available for private development.
This land is designated for recreation, but it is stony and grass
cultivation is difficult making it unusable at present. West End
property is very much underutilized; only partly used by Farmers
Market. It should be noted that Farmers Market is a valuable
asset to the city. However, such limited use of this parcel by
. the Market (i.e. , for a few hours each week and for a few months
- - -
each year) would suggest that this �,may not be the highest and best
use of the land. -
In order to alienate those parcels, whose use is presently
restricted to recreation, due to the sources of funds used in their
acquisition, the city would have to provide substitute land of
equal recreational value. They have had limited success in look-
ing for substitute land. The floodway property of 30 acres or so
has been considered; there is a slight risk of flooding but area
is not appropriate for most types. of development. It _would be
good for ball fields. To alienate Southwest Park and the West
End, between 57-60 acres would be needed. The Town parcel and the
floodway parcel together would come to almost. 60 acres to meet the
need. A joint effort has several advantages - by combining the
effort, we would have a much stronger application _to State Parks;
it would increase our ability to acquire property and also develop
it. If city can purchase the land and have town develop the site,
that would be viewed favorably by State Parks. Helen Jones said
members of staff from city and town and representatives of State
Parks will meet to review this plan. She believes it will be more
strongly received because of the joint nature of the application.
Gerkin asked how accessible this land would be for recreational
use. Helen said it would be accessible from Route 13 along planned
bikeway and should be easily accessible. Chairman Kramnick suggested
that two Committees of Board be designated to consider this plan;
namely, Economic Development and Transportation and Human and Cul-
tural Resources. They will meet with Helen Jones and report back
to Board concerning a recommendation to Council.
b) CD Application: Glenn Goldwyn, Community Development Adminis-
trator, addressed the Board. The CD application is on a very
accelerated schedule because HUD informed City in mid-April
that application is due in July. Two or three meetings per week
have been held since then with a succession of Committees to discuss
application and requests from various agencies, etc . Glenn said
city has received CD funds since 1975; this year is different from
others in that application is for a single fiscal year rather than
a 3-year cycle. $750, 000 in funding is requested this year. A
significant change this year is the proposed expansion of target
area; that portion of the city which includes the highest per-
centage of low-to-moderate income families, highest percentage of
deteriorated housing and highest percentage of identified
CD needs. Expanded target area was determined through staff
4-
analysis of census information.- Process included extensive in-
volvement with Citizens Advisory Committee. On May 8 , 1984 CAC
held its first public hearing for this application and received
proposals in the amount of $1. 7 million dollars. Committee ranks
proposals without specifying a dollar amount; they serve as rep-
resentatives of a wide variety of constituencies in the city.
Their role is to analYze CD needs of the city and frame recommenda-
tions to the IURA. They were asked to rank requests as having
maximum, moderate o low impact of Ithaca' s CD needs. Six out
lems s
of first seven/ nvo ve housing programs administered by INHS .
Glenn outlined other proposals as listed in handout sheet ex-
plaining briefly their requests and implication for city ' s
needs. IURA reviewed requests and adopted a proposed budget.
Board members asked questions about various items such
as the category of code enforcement; Challenge Industries
handicapped accessibility; GIAC day care room expansion; and
Southside Center. Jackson asked how needs were identified.
Mr. Goldwyn said through proposal application and through
advisory committee themselves. Board discussed the reasons
for accelerated application deadline and when next round would
be held. If there is another round, it will be sometime in
1985, providing funds are still available. Jackson asked if
dollar amounts were staff decision. Goldwyn said amounts were
negotiated through discussions, putting goals together, and
balancing housing needs administered through INHS and other
community needs. Romanowski, seconded by Sampson, moved to
recommend approval to Common Council. A proposed resolution
was distributed. Chairman Kramnick stated that he somewhat
resented having to vote on motion when he received no prior
information relating to this topic. Jackson said he would
abstain from voting on those grounds. Sampson said there
were open, advertised meetings which anyone could .have attended
to apprise themselves of details . Romanowski noted that he had
contacted CD staff for additional information. Board, other
than Sampson and Romanowski, was not aware of their role in
process. Vote: 5-yea, 1-abstension (Jackson) .
5. Accessory Apartments Ordinance: Blumenthal reported that the
Codes and Administration Committee and Carol Chock met to
discuss proposed ordinance. Carol gave brief presentation
at that meeting. Committee decided proposed ordinance was
sound; they had 5 or 6 recommendations for additions to improve
ordinance. Carol Chock stated the idea of the ordinance is to
enable the moderate income home-owner; to be able to convert
his or her home. to contain a small apartment (small in compar-
ison to the rest of the house) . It would provide additional
income, security, and would encourage owner-occupancy of
properties which would counter the trend towards speculation
and absentee landlords. Ordinance would be strict in keying
-5-
permission to owner-occupancy. Ordinance is an attempt to
retain control over increasing number of illegal conversions.
Owner would request a temporary permit, issued for a three-
year period. Information regarding proposed ordinance was
distributed to Board prior to this meeting. Objections raised
were: property values - adding value to homes and raising
tax assessment slightly; increased density in neighborhood;
slight increase in traffic; changing character of neighbor-
hood with increased density (countered by owner-occupancy) ;
possible long-term speculation that might be difficult to
control regarding re-sale. Penalties for violation of ordin-
ance were discussed. City presently has relatively low penalty
for violations; this should be raised to make :it more effective.
This item should not have an effect on proposed ordinance be-
fore the Board. It was decided to address this under New
Business. Carol added that she would work on an information
sheet to be given to home-owners inquiring about possible
apartment addition to their homes. A mechanism to review long-
term effects should be devised, possibly every five years, to
determine effects on neighborhoods. Gerkin asked if conversions
could be limited. Carol said she did not believe there would
be an overwhelming demand in any one neighborhood. Blumenthal ,
seconded by Sampson moved to recommend to Common Council approval
of Accessory Apartment Ordinance as compiled thus far. Vote
5-yea, 1-abstension (Gerkin) . MOTION CARRIED.
6. New Business:
Jackson, seconded by Blumenthal, endorsed the increase of fines
for violation of apartment ordinance. Vote: 6-0 . CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY.
7. Old Business: Tops Subdivision. M. John Sherman, Esq. appeased
on behalf of' Tops Corporation regarding the pending conditional
approval for subdivision. He listed the concerns according to
letter written by Jon Meigs to O'Connor, Sovocool, et al . as;
1) access to present store complex from S . Meadow will remain
as is. (Mr. Sherman said this is agreed to; will. not present
a problem. )
2) Assurance that signage will remain the same; a single free-
standing sign .for the whole and appropriate building signs
for individual tenants. (Mr. Sherman also agreed to signage
requirement.)
3) Assurance that provision for vehicular circulation across
proposed property lines will be retained. (Mr. Sherman said
this was already taken care of and will be made a part of
the Deeds.)
4) Assurance that vehicular access between Tops and Garage de
France will be provided and kept unobstructed. (Mr. Sherman
-6-
said Garage de France has erected a barrier which is
completely out of Tops control. He requested assistance
of City and whoever , has enforcement power to enforce
stipulation.)
5) Action to improve appearance of property through land-
scaping. (Mr. Sherman stated they have tried repeatedly.
to plant area will little success due to damp conditions.
He requested help from Planning Department to suggest
plantings that will survive in the environment found at
the site. )
Director Van Cort stated staff recommended approval originally
for the subdivision and stands by that recommendation now.
Final approval can be conditioned on improvements. Romanowski,
seconded by Sampson, moved to recommend conditional approval.
Vote 6-0 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8. Administrative Matters : Committee Memberships. Clarification
of Committee membership was discussed. It was finally agreed
on the following:
Codes & Administration Kramnick, Blumenthal, Sampson
Neighborhoods, Housing
& Facilities Blumenthal, Romanowski, Kramnick
Economic Development . &
Transportation Jackson, Gerkin, Blumenthal
Human & Cultural Resources Sampson, Jackson, Moran
Adjournment at 11:50 p.m.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
ZONING APPEALS MINUTES
May 29, 1984 :
APPEAL #1566 - 226-30 Dyrden Rd. :
Appeal of Cascadilla School for deficient setbacks for one side
yard and the rear yard to permit conversion of the existing
structure at 226-30 Dryden Rd. to a dormitory and school . Property
is in a R-3,a district where proposed used is permitted.
Appellant Comment: The school was represented by George
Patte, Esq. as well as John Kendall, President of the Board
of Trustees for Cascadilla School. This high school has
been in the community for 100 years according to Mr. Kendall .
He has been involved with it since 1946 . He now wishes to
convert adjacent property for a dormitory facility and also
allow him to open a pre-school facility in part of structure
that was added on in 1967. The pre-school would be operated
by his wife, a reading specialist. Dormitory usage is allowed;
he estimates that 6 to 10 individuals will be housed there
Parking issue was mentioned. Cascadilla school has 20 to
24 parking spaces within 500 feet (there are two other pro-
perties in vicinity owned by school) . One end of house could
be converted for a lecture room and auditorium with the en-
trance off Summit St.
Public Comment: Chris Anagnost, realtor, appeared on behalf
of Paul Anderson owner of property at 315 Dryden Rd. Mr.
Anderson owns 7-unit apartment house with low density occu-
pancy. He feels it would be a benefit to the neighborhood
to have Cascadilla School own and operate property with this
type of supervised, monitored dormitory as well as operating
a day care center in keeping with the type of students he
wishes to rent to. He requested Board to grant variance.
Board Discussion: Romanowski asked if neighbor, Mr. Rider,
was informed of proposed useage of property. Mr. Kendall
said Mr. Rider had no objection.
Staff Recommendation: Grant relief sought.
Motion: Jackson, seconded by Sampson, moved to recommend
approval. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEAL #1567 328 W. Seneca St. :
Appeal of E. Glascow for Area Variance for deficient off-street
parking to permit use of 1 unit in the 2-unit house for a home
occupation (hair cutting studio). Property is in a R-3a district
where proposed use is allowed.
-2-
Appellant Comment: Appellant did not appear.
Public Comment: None,
Staff Recommendation: Grant variance subject to:
a) no signage; and
b) operation of use by applicant only,
Board Discussion: Brief discussion followed regarding
parking. It was determined this would not be a problem;
many customers would be neighborhood residents. The
Board then discussed topic of "home occupations" as
outlined in Ordinance. Romanowski read definition from
Ordinance. Home occupation variance is granted for one
type of activity and would be restricted to that activity
if property was sold to another party. Variance would be
granted in. this instance to a home occupation of "hair
cutting studio" only.
Motion: Jackson, seconded by Gerkin, moved to recommend
granting appeal, PASSED UNANIMOUSLY with restriction as
to signage.
APPEAL #1568 - 343 Elmira Rd. : Appeal .of Ithaca Moving and
Storage for a Use Variance to permit extension of the business
use into the rear yard to permit an addition to the rear of the
building at 343 Elmira Rd. The addition and extended use would
extend into the R-2a district between the Elmira Rd. B-5 district
and Spencer Rd. The use is permitted in B-5 and may extend 30
feet into the R-2a use district, but not in the remainder of the
R-2a zoned property.
Appellant Comment: Clair Coolbaugh appeared for U-haul
business. The rental company wishes to expand to include
rental of tools and storage facilities to supplement in-
come. The proposed addition will extend back into resi-
dential section. Use of the property would remain the same.
A roof would extend at the back of the building where approx-
imately six trucks are parked now; mechanics would be moved
to back portion of the building to service vehicles. Rental
office space is presently approximately 12 ' x 30 ' and more
space is desired; a new front would be constructed.
Public Comment: Liz Smith, 516 Spencer Rd. , spoke regarding
her concerns relating to increased traffic. A driveway at
rear of U-haul is used for parking trucks. She questioned
how far building would extend, whether there would be rear
access, foot traffic, van traffic, garage doors , etc. Mr.
Coolbaugh said front of property is in commercial zone.
-3-
Nine
3-Nine foot right-of-way in rear is presently used for
parking but could be used for access if they desired;
it is legally possible. Mr. Mauboussin, a resident
of the area was also present.
Raymond Schlather, 1st Ward Alderman, spoke stating
the key issue here is preserving neighborhood. It is
fragile, has been neglected, if not abused. Nine foot
driveway is useable; trucks parked there make it unsightly.
Mr. Mauboussin's property to the north has been planted
with bushes and fencing has been added to shield his pro-
perty from U-haul. U-haul 's addition would encroach into
neighborhood adding one more step towards destruction of
neighborhood. Why couldn't expansion be made in front;
it would seem there is sufficient room there. Mr. Coolbaugh
responded that corporation believes it is better to build
in the rear of the building. still leaving 50 feet to pro-
perty_line. It would be structurally difficult to add
addition to front. Smith questioned what guaranty does
neighborhood have that property will not be a storage
area. Mr. Coolbaugh stated some outside storage of rental
items is permissible.
Mrs. Pluck, 577 Spencer Rd. , spoke regarding variance.
She asked if increased business would mean more traffic
from Spencer Rd.
Director Van Cort stated that as condition of variance
Board could indicate that right of way to Spencer Rd. not
be allowed.
Board Discussion: Jackson asked about appearance of
structure. Mr. Coolbaugh said it would be block metal
structure and would resemble the Century building on the
Elmira Rd. Jackson asked if trees would be effected.
Coolbaugh said they would not. Concerns regarding right
of way were listed as ingress, egress, as well as storage
on the strip. Mr. Mauboussin also mentioned fumes from
vehicles and gasoline were a problem. At times he had to
cease his garden work to escape odors. Gerkin stated
other businesses with similar problems would request
variances if this variance for encroachment was approved.
Director Van Cort said any encroachment leads to further
requests for encroachment.
Staff Recommendation: Deny.
Motion: Gerkin, seconded by Jackson, recommended denial.
Romanowski said although he sympathizes with business ' s
need to expand, encroachment into neighborhood is a problem
x ,
-4-
now and he feels it will increase. Because of effects on
neighborhood, he will vote to deny. Request denied -
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEAL #1569 - 409 E. Lincoln St. : Appeal of G. Norkus for Area
Variance for deficient lot size, width, and setbacks for front and
side yards to permit a second-story addition over portion of house.
Property is in a R-2b district where use is permitted.
Appellant Comment: G. Norkus appeared and stated existing
one story at back of house would be framed in on second.
story to increase living space in residence.
Public Comment: Donald Grover, 411 E. Lincoln St. , filed
a letter with Board indicating he had reviewed plans of
addition to Mr. Norkus ' house and would not object in any
way. He recommended that Board grant approval for addi-
tion. The communication was signed by Mr. and Mrs. Grover.
Board Discussion: Blumenthal questioned exterior appearance.
Norkus said it would be same as it is now with hopes of
improving siding in a few years.
Staff Recommendation: Grant variance.
Motion: Jackson, seconded by Sampson, moved to grant appeal.
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
APPEAL #1570 .- 981 Cliff St. : Appeal of E. and. D. Austin for Area
Variance for deficient lot size and front yard setback to permit
addition of small apartment within one-family home. R-la district
permits accessory apartment.
Appellant Comment: Ed Austin, owner, appeared. He proposes
to add 400 sq, ft. , 3-room apartment, separate entrance, but
no exterior changes to property. It is an owner-occupied
residence
Public Comment: None.
Board Discussion: Parking space was questioned by Romanowski.
Mr. Austin. stated there are three exterior parking spaces
plus garage. Director Van Cort mentioned the accessory
apartment ordinance which City is considering now. It would
permit such an apartment contingent upon owner-occupancy of
main structure. Would Mr. Austin be opposed to this con-
tingency? Mr. Austin stated he would not be opposed in any
way. He is putting in apartment for protection; he and his
Wife vacation each year in Florida and they are reluctant
to leave the house unoccupied.
-5-
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommendation was split.
Director Van Cort was in favor of approval, contingent
on owner occupancy. Meigs recommended that though
property may be legally of adequate area, due to owner-
ship of land in street right of way, effective area is
only slightly greater than required in zone for one-
family dwelling.
Motion: Romanowski, seconded by Gerkin, moved to grant
appeal with the condition that it be an owner-occupied
residence. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.