Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1984-08-28 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 28, 1984: PRESENT: S. Blumenthal , ,R, Moran,, .M. Sampson, H. Gerkin, I_ Kramni:ck.., R. Romanowski , S. Jackson ALSO: Appellants, Appellants' Representatives, Members of the Press 1 . Call to Order: Chairman Kramnick called the meeting to order at 7130 ,p.m. 2. Zoning Appeals: See Minutes attached. 3. Approval of Minutes: , Gerkin, seconded by Moran, moved to approve July 1984 minutes. Vote 7-0, unanimous. 4. Privilege of the Floor; Anna Steinkraus of the Ithaca Farmers. Market Board appeared to present a letter to the Planning and Development Board expressing their interest in work.ing with the City in securing and developing a permanent site for the Ithaca Farmers Market. The Market has grown considerably since its beginning, and in order to flourish, they need a site having the following characteristics: 1 ) attractive location, near other shopping areas and easily accessible, 2) a roofed, open-sided structure, in a parklike setting; it should accommodate 100 vendors and could be used for other activities when market is not in operation, 3) a paved parking area for approximately 800 cars over a 4-hour period, 4) a long-term contract giving the Market security as tenants and specifying the rights and responsibilities of both parties. Ms. Steinkraus stated that the West End site would best meet their needs. Mr. Gerkin asked if the Market had any funds to possib.ly purchase a permanent site. Ms. Steinkraus stated they are not a profit organization; their membership fees are very low. They employ a.secretary, a manager, and parking assistants and they do some advertising. They are consider .ing ways to generate funds in order to purchase land. They intend to explore the possibility of securing federal monies: Discussion followed regarding the parking problem at the West End site. Shoppers have parked illegally in private lots and have been ticketed by City police. Ithaca Farmers Market would not rule out other loca- tions for their sales; they are open-minded regarding location. Mr. Jackson suggested that a member of the Planning and Development Board attend the monthly meetings of the Ithaca Farmers Market Board to explore issues and to get a sense of their ideas regarding different sites for the Market. -2- Director Van Cort stated that the Planning Department has worked with Ithaca Farmers Market since its inception and he feels itis an ex- tremely important and valuable asset to the City. He hopes both parties will cooperate fully to resolve the problems they are facing. It was decided that this topic would be discussed further during the course of the meeting under Committee Reports. At that time, it was agreed that Steven Jackson would attend the Ithaca Farmers Market Board meetings as liaison from the Planning and Development Board. A motion to that effect, made by Jackson and seconded by. Gerkin, was PASSED unanimously, 7-0. 5. Chairman's Report: Chairman Kramnick asked if the Board members wanted the Planning and Development Department to prepare a report for the next meeting detailing the 'errors ' made in the zoning pro- posals for Valentine Place. Director Van Cort stated that the errors occurred as different proposals were drafted, in committee and at Council meetings, describing the proposed area for rezoning, without giving the City staff a chance to review or comment on motions originating on the floor and acted upon immediately. , It was not until after the fact that staff could examine the proposals in detail , and discovered the errors. Director Van Cort briefly explained the zoning change procedures: when a request is made to rezone an area, the Planning and Development Department passes on to the .Building Depart- ment for their review a description of the area to be changed. Such requests generally originate in the Planning and Development Depart- ment but if they do originate in the Building Department, then the boundary description is sent to the Planning and Development Depart-. ment for an accuracy check. It is .important that the two independent departments most involved with zoning have a chance to review the boundary descriptions. During this procedure the request is also reviewed by various boards and committees so that in an orderly fashion, over a. period of time, the area to be rezoned is clearly defined and the impacts of new area regulations proposed are more readily understood. The process was not followed regarding Valentine Place, which resulted in errors being made. After much discussion, the Board pressed for a written history of the. steps which were taken regarding rezoning Valentine Place. Chairman Kramnick said that a detailed report would help 'clear the air' by showing how the mistakes occurred; it would also help avoid unnecessary delay and confusion in future rezoning. proposals (the unintentional results of the fragmented process in this case) by. underscoring the importance of coordinated review procedures. Mr-. Van Cort stated he did not want to be put in the position of speaking for other committees or departments or of defending the Planning and Development Department when no defense was warranted; he suggested that a Committee of the Board might write a report clarifying the situation. Mr. Jackson recommended that a Committee of the Board -3- interview individuals involved in this issue and write a report stating the facts. Ultimately, an ad hoc Committee was designated' which .in- eluded Messrs. Kramnick, Jackson, and Moran. They will conduct inter- views and prepare the report. 6. Subdivision - 404 Elm St. : Robert J. Hines, Esq. appeared on behalf of the Hartmans who wish to divide their large lot into two in order to convey half of the parcel to a, daughter and son-in-law to erect a house on the vacant portion. Staff recommendation is for preliminary approval . Moran, seconded by Jackson, moved to APPROVE. Vote 7-0, , unanimous. Final approval will be considered at the September meeting. Subdivision 515 W. Clinton St.,:_ Ithaca Housing Authority wishes to purchase a portion of an adjacent rear lot for play space for South- view Apartments. The parcel created will be combined with the South- view parcel . Staff recommends preliminary approval . Final approval will be considered .at the September meeting. Sampson, seconded. by Gerkin, moved to APPROVE. Vote 770, unanimous. 7. Committee Reports: Economic Development and Transportation Committee Chairman Jackson asked if everyone had received the memo regarding disposition of City-owned properties. Since three Board members had not received the memo, it was decided to postpone discussion on. this issue until the September Board meeting. Route 96 was also discussed by the Economic Development and Transportation Committee when they met on August 21 , 1984. They reviewed possible alternatives to the State's plan; the purpose being to give Common Council additional choices to solving the problems presented there. A motion was made by Jackson urging the Planning staff to work with interested citizens who are trying ,to develop an alternative proposal to the .State plan; to make the pro- posal as solid and reasonable as possible including being able to provide some cost estimates. Mr. Van Cort reported that he phoned. the State requesting a cost breakdown for the proposed project. DOT suggested the City request a cost breakdown in writing at which time their consultant would prepare the figures. The DOT reported that they have made progress extending the consultant agreement for this project (the monies allocated having been ex- hausted) . The project is still alive in spite of some members of. DOT who wished to abandon it. Mr. Gerkin said the Committee would like to incorporate some alternative ideas from local individuals in order ,to bring them into the developing plans. Director Van Cort stated he was unaware of any active group advocating a 'best plan' at the present time. He thought the Committee was discussing con- ceptually a bridge to connect either or both Route 96 and 89; recon- struction of necessary bridges over the Barge Canal; and the con- struction of a Fulton/Meadow one-way pair as an alternative. Mr. Van Cort stated he would send a letter to DOT requesting cost estimates. Mr. Jackson withdrew his motion for the present. 8. New Business: A memo from Jon Meigs regarding notification to zoning appellants informing them of new Planning and Development -4- Board review practice was briefly discussed. Mr. Meigs requested the Board to individually edit the notification and return it to him. He would then incorporate their suggestions in a final draft. Chairman Kramnick suggested that the notice be reduced to one page. Mr. Sampson suggested moving the last sentence on page 2 to the end of the previous paragraph ending with "let us know if you have any questions or sugges- tions concerningthis new procedure". Mr. Kramnick .questioned the need of along explanation because most .individuals are unaware of the Board's previous policy anyway. A much shorter notification might suffice. It was decided that each member would send their comments back to Mr. Meigs as he requested and the Board could review a'final draft at their September meeting. 9. New Business: A resolution of support and/or recommendation to Common Council for support of state funding assistance to regional planning agencies was discussed. Jackson, seconded by Moran, moved the resolution and further requested Director Van Cort to compose and mail a letter in the Board's name to Governor Cuomo, Senator Riford, Assemblyman,MacNeil , and- to STERPDB Director Augenstern in support of state funding .assistance. Vote 7-0 unanimous. WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca participates in the Southern Tier East Regional Planning Development Board from which it receives a variety of services, and WHEREAS, the Southern Tier East Regional Planning Development Board and other regional agencies through New York.. State_ provide, _ a number of benefits to statewide programs through the pro- visions of local technical assistance, participation in the State Intergovernmental Review System, and the ,State Data System programs, among others, and WHEREAS, counties and.federal agencies are called upon to provide funding support for such activities of statewide benefit, and WHEREAS, it is desirable that the State of New York provide a level of funding support for regional planning agencies to allow for the continuation of such statewide activities, without increases in county funding of such agencies, and WHEREAS, during the 1983-84 Legislative Session, Senate Bills S-6795 and S-7025 and Assembly Bills A-8130 and A-8260 endeavored to provide such support, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and Development Board of the City of Ithaca hereby indicates its support for the provisions of the State funding support for established regional planning and economic development agencies, as specified in the bill introduced in the 1983-84 Legislative Session, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of .this resolution be transmitted to the Governor of. the State of New York urging his inclusion of such funding in his annual budget for 1985, and to the State Senators and Assemblymen representing this City urging their support for such funding. -5- 10. Old Business: Chairman Kramnick stated that at the July mid-month meeting it was suggested that the Board think about projects for the Planning and Development Board to undertake. Romanowski said he thought everyone was undecided regarding preparation of a Master Plan or a long-range planning study, but he .believes there are a number of 'hot issues' pending which would merit Board scrutiny over the next few months because they will have a long-range impact on the City. He listed the following issues: Route 96; use of brick v, asphalt for paving in historic districts; Farmers Market. Mr. Moran suggested a discussion of Ithaca's waterways which affect so many areas of the City. Current topics need immediate attention and time should be. allocated to these matters. Mr. Jackson and Ms. Blumenthal agreed with Mr. Romanowski 's comments. Priorities must be set; perhaps a time limit could be designated for each .topic. At the same time current issues were being addressed, work on the Master Plan could also begin. Chairman Kramnick said issues of the moment are impor- tant but the Board should bear in mind that this is the only body concerned with long-range planning, whereas there are many agencies of the City involved with current topics. Mr. Jackson suggested that Mr. Romanowski 's proposal be implemented for the next month or two and that topics be changed as needed. Director Van Cort said the staff will continue to report regularly to the Board on timely issues. With regard to a Master Plan, the Board must make a firm decision involving support, staff assistance, etc. Mr. Kramnick mentioned setting up agendas for each meeting with the Board taking an active part in determining the monthly agenda. It was suggested that the Board decide at the conclusion of each monthly meeting the topics they would like discussed at the next meeting. This would give everyone a. month's preparation time. Mr. Jackson suggested and it was agreed that the topic for the September Planning and Development Board meeting would be the Ithaca Farmers Market. The purpose of the discussion.would be for an understanding of their operation in- cluding City backing and support. The discussion will be infor- mational only. It was further suggested that staff present a progress report on Route 96 at a later meeting. 11 . Adjournment: 10:25 p.m. /mc 9/11/84 ZONING APPEALS MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING AUGUST 28 , 1984 : Appeal 1582 - 200 E. Buffalo St . : Appellant Comment - Andy Sciarabba a partner in the Tioga- Buffalo Corporation appeared to request use variance to permit the ground story of the building at 200 E . Buffalo to be used for retail and service-type use in a B-lb district . He stated the building , constructed in 1982 , was designed as a professional office building . The various owners are them- selves occupants of the building using 55=to 60% of the office space for their own use . They have been trying for many months to rent the first floor space to other professional people. The problem with the first floor is that it con- tains large windows and the interior is exposed and visible from the street . Most professional people object to this , stating that there is not enough privacy, even though venetian blinds are included in the leasing arrangements . Sciarabba stated they have had retailers interested in the space and the corporation would like to be able to offer the premises to a high-quality type of store such as piano sales , a quality mens ' clothier , etc . They would not allow drug store operations or restaurants or any other business they feel would be incompatible with the professional atmos- phere of the building as it now exists . He claimed the 20% vacancy is creating a. financial hardship for the corporation. Board Discussion : Gerkin asked if the windows on the lower floor could be closed in. Sciarabba claimed that it would be a great expense and would detract from the aesthetics of the building . The Board questioned whether brokerage firms , insurance companies , banks, and the like, had been contacted as possible tenants . Sciarabba said the brokerage firms are not expanding at the present time because of the economy, there is a limitation on bank branches within the city be- cause of a home-based bank (State regulation) , and most of - the insurance firms have their own buildings or have recently remodeled their office space. Discussion followed regarding parking and the lack of it in the area . Sciarabba said every- one in the building is expected to park in the parking ramp about 50 feet away , but the Post Office traffic did present a problem. The Board concluded that they did not want to give blank approval to the use variance unless they knew who the retailer would be and what type of business he/she would be engaged in. Chairman Kramnick asked if perhaps the high cost of the rental space was a factor in the vacancy problem. Sciarabba said the rent was comparable to Ithaca Center . The Board suggested several alternatives : Zoning Appeals Minutes (continued) -2- Aug . 28 , 1984 , P&D Board Meeting : 1) provide curtains and blinds or inserts to the windows (such as in the Security Trust building) to provide privacy ; 2) lower rents as an incentive to prospective tenants ; 3) have some of the partners of the corporation move down- stairs to use the first floor space and rent the upper story office space if that is more desirable to professional tenants . Public Comment : Director Van Cort stated that James Buck of the New York Telephone Company had phoned the Planning and Development Office on Tuesday, August 28, 1984, to state that the phone company had no objection to the request of the Tioga- Buffalo Corporation for a use variance , Motion : Jackson, seconded by Gerkin, moved to DENY the request for a .use variance . VOTE : 7-0 - UNANIMOUS . Appeal 1583 - 502 W. Court St . : Since there were no planning issues involved in the request of L . L. and R. A. Lama for a use and area variance to permit conversion of the existing office space to a third dwelling unit , the Board, passed the request on to. the Board of Zoning Appeals without recommendation or comment , Appellants present were reminded to attend the BZA meeting on September 10 , 1984 to state their 'case , me 8/31/84