HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1988-05-24 Approved 6/28/88 - unanimously.
Planning and Development Board
Meeting - May 24, 1988
Present: M. Sampson, J. Daley, A. Yale, S . Killeen, Chair S .
Blumenthal . Director of Planning and Development, H.
M. Van Cort, City Planner, J. Meigs . CAC Chair B.
Darlington, Appellants, Other Interested Parties,
Press .
1 . Call to Order: 7 : 35 p.m.
2 . Privilege of the Floor: Paul Sayvetz, 201 Elm Street,
addressed the Board. He asked if the Board could use their
influence to encourage Council and the Planning Department
to create new residential areas in the City on land which
has been set aside for industrial use. He mentioned the
large industrial zoning areas which are totally undeveloped
(Southwest Park and Elmira Rd. area) where residential
housing could be located; zoning, of course, would need to
be changed. The areas set aside for industrial parks may
not be the best use of the land. Director Van Cort
responded that the City is looking at Southwest Park as a
possible housing site - alienation, if it comes to pass,
will facilitate housing sites in this ,area. There is strong
support for a new neighborhood at this location rather than
for industrial use. Regarding the DoT site, the City has
long considered this site (and the waterfront site where the
Farmers ' Market wishes to locate) as a major land resource.
The problem is that DoT is not easily moved; it is expensive
and the City does not have the legal authority to demand
their relocation. Recent events (proposals for the IFM
site/ County baling site, etc . ) will certainly influence
future use of these areas .
3 . Zoning Appeals : Appeal 1847 - for an Accessory Apartment
Permit at 109 Oxford Pl . Appellant Bickley Townsend was
present and explained the request. She and her husband,
Steven B. Caldwell, propose to convert a 450 sq. ft. in the
basement of their home to an accessory apartment on the
lower level of their home. Their motivation is due to a
change in their life-cycle stage; two of their children are
grown and currently are attending college. They wish to add
the apartment to ensure someone' s presence in the property
since Ms . Townsend and her husband are often out of town on
business trips . The apartment income would allow them to
maintain the property and improve the premises as needed;
the additional income would also help with the education
expenses of their children. The apartment would occupy an
area that is already finished space; there would be no
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 2
addition to the house and it would be an extremely
unobtrusive entrance; there is a 25 ' side yard that can
accommodate an additional off-street parking space if
needed. They wish to comply not only with the ' letter' but
the 'spirit' of the Ordinance.
Mr. Meigs asked about the entrance treatment. Ms .
Townsend replied that there is presently a tri-fold garage
door. One of these would become the entrance door to the
apartment (with a small entryway) and the remaining two
doors would open the opposite way and become a garden shed.
Ms . Blumenthal questioned the parking situation. Ms .
Townsend explained that there is sufficient space to provide
off-street parking. She also indicated that they would give
first preference to a tenant who does not have an
automobile and thus ameliorate the parking/traffic problem
in the neighborhood.
Mr. Harry Stinson, 115 Irving Place, presented a
petition signed by eleven neighbors in opposition to the
accessory apartment at 109 Oxford Pl . He and other
residents are very concerned about the character of the
neighborhood - a unique and fragile area. Granting
approval here would set a precedent for future requests .
Betsy Darlington, Chair - Conservation Advisory
Council, and John Crowley, 96 Ithaca Rd. , spoke in favor of
the request. They cited that this approach was a good way
to preserve the neighborhood since the permit requires
owner-occupancy of the premises; it is a renewable 3-year
license; upon sale of the property the new owner must
reapply. Michael LoPinto (builder) spoke favorably saying
that in today' s economy the accessory apartment approach
was (in many instances) vital for purely economic reasons .
J. Daley, seconded by M. Sampson, moved to recommend
approval to the BZA, of the accessory apartment as requested
in appeal 1847 . Vote: 4-0-0 . Carried.
J. Daley, seconded by A. Yale, moved to approve the
recommendations of the Codes and Administration Committee
regarding Zoning Appeals 1843-51 as stated in the memo of
Jon Meigs dated May 20, 1988 (copy attached) .
4 . Preliminary Subdivision: 428 Elm Street/LoPinto. Mr.
Michael LoPinto, Jr. was present. He explained his
subdivision request to subdivide the parcel into three
building lots . His motivation in purchasing the property
was to obtain a vacant lot in the City to construct a one
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 3
family residence. He has no immediate plans to build on the
second lot created. The house at 428 Elm St. (now vacant)
is being restored by Mr. LoPinto; he intends to sell it when
restoration is complete.
Conservation Advisory Council has recommended negative
declaration for this subdivision. In addition, Mr. Meigs
completed a determination of non-significance for the
project for the following reasons : ( 1 ) the action is
unlisted under City and State environmental review
regulations; (2 ) the intended eventual use of the parcels to
be created is permitted under the zoning for the area; ( 3)
the proposed use would most likely result in development
which would blend well with what currently exists in this
area.
J. Daley moved to accept the negative declaration of
the environmental review; seconded by M. Sampson. Vote:
4-0-0 . Carried.
Mr. Yale stated that he would encourage keeping the two
vacant lots together as one parcel. At such time when Mr.
LoPinto desires to develop or subdivide that lot further,
the Planning Board would have another opportunity to review
the situation. Mr. LoPinto expressed ambivalence at this
proposal; he has no immediate plans to build a second house,
however, to have the parcel ready to build on if he so
chooses is very desirable (and would eliminate the need for
further paperwork at a later date) . Ms . Blumenthal said she
has no objection to subdividing into three parcels; Mr.
Daley concurred. Ms . Darlington expressed the fact that
since this parcel is entirely lawn (as opposed to the
natural state that exists in the other West Hill
Subdivisions being considered) , she believes subdividing
into 3 parcels is appropriate. Mr. Van Cort mentioned to
the Board that this represents three conforming lots; no
neighborhood impact has been pointed out; he sees no legal
reason for denial of Mr. LoPinto' s request for three lots .
J. Daley moved to grant Preliminary Approval of the
LoPinto Subdivision at 428 Elm Street into three parcels .
Seconded by M. Sampson. Vote: 3-yes, 1-no. Motion failed
(Board consists of 7 members; 3 are absent; vote, therefore,
would have to be 4 in favor for passage. )
Mr. Killeen entered the meeting at a later time and
made a motion to reconsider the subdivision request;
seconded by A. Yale. Vote: 5-0-0 . After further brief
discussion, J. Daley moved, seconded by S . Killeen, to grant
Preliminary Subdivision Approval of three parcels as
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 4
requested. Vote: 4-yes, 1-no (Yale) . Motion carried.
5. Grossman' s Lumber - Appeal #1838 : Robert Cook, Grossman's
representative, of Braintree, Mass . , was present to discuss
proposed landscaping and the color scheme for the proposed
storage shed. Mr. Cook stated that it was not feasible to
add dense plantings on the Rt. 13 side of the property
because their fence is on the property line and the foliage
would be in the State right-of-way (State may not allow
planting in this area because of maintenance problems,
etc. ) . In other cities the corporation has used chain-link
fencing with vertical inserts of redwood or a vinyl
material, giving 70-80% visual screening, and this is their
proposal for Grossman's property. The fence height would be
8 ft. On the Third Street side they propose to remove some
of the asphalt and plant the swale area with grass and
shrubbery. The Board referred to the memo dated May 23,
1988 from Jon Meigs in which Dr. Bassuk, Horticulturist at
Cornell. University, and Monica Cripsin, Cooperative
Extension Agriculture Program Agent, both STAC members,
suggest certain trees for the area which would be acceptable
alternatives to the varieties proposed by Grossman's, which
STAC has found to be undesirable for planting in Ithaca.
Mr. Van Cort mentioned that the Zoning Ordinance requires
that lumber yards be screened; he feels screening is
important here since this is a major entrance to the City
and when entering the City it is among the first commercial
establishments visible on that side of the road. He
suggests that the fence be 'broken' by plantings every 50
feet to releive the effect of 600 feet of solid, dark-
colored fence. Mr. Cook agreed to investigate whether the
State would allow plantings in the Rt. 13 right of way.
After extensive discussion, the following was agreed
upon: an 8 ' fence with vertical redwood inserts to be
installed on the Rt. 13 side, broken up approximately every
50 ' with an indentation to allow room for tree and shurb
planting; Mr. Cook to seek information and possible approval
from the State regarding planting on the State right of way;
a green area to be added to the Third Street side up to the
parking lot; and an additional landscaped area installed
beyond the parking area entry, which would be made possible
by removing some of the existing paving. (Mr. Cook will
coordinate planting in this area with the City. ) The new
shed will be painted in a neutral color; the striping on the
front entrance of the store would be retained since this is
Grossman's identification and logo, but Mr. Cook thought
that other portions of existing structures that are now
striped might also be repainted in a neutral color. Mr.
Daley suggested recommending approval of the building but to
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 5
reserve judgment on the final details . Mr. Cook will send
additional information (photos, etc . ) of the proposed fence
and landscaping for the Board' s review.
J. Daley moved to recommend to the Building Department
granting of the necessary permits for construction of the
shed and agreement in principal as stated above to the
landscaping design as described; certificate of occupancy
will be contingent upon Board approval of the final
landscape design. Seconded by M. Sampson. Vote: 4-0-0 .
Passed.
6. Ithaca Farmers ' Market: Mr. Daley referred to the
resolutions prepared by the Economic Development and
Transportation Committee regarding the Public Works
Materials Storage Yard (beyond the sewer plant on Third
Street Extension) , site and the Farmers ' Market's use of the
site as its preferred new location. The following
Resolution was read by Mr. Daley:
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca recognizes the issue of
solid waste management as one of importance to all
residents of Tompkins County, and
WHEREAS, the City is committed to actively sharing in
the County' s efforts to reduce the volume of waste
material to be landfilled, and
WHEREAS, the City has supported and continues to
support the specific planned measures to reduce the
volume of such materials , including the siting of a
central processing/baling facility within the City
limits, and
WHEREAS, several sites within the City have been
identified and offered as available for this use, and
WHEREAS, the Department of Public Works site at Third
Street currently listed among the alternatives, has
significant potential for development and use for
waterfront activities and functions, and as such is a
valuable resource,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and
Development Board considers a central processing/baling
station to be an inappropriate use of the site, and
recommends against locating such a facility there, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board does
wholeheartedly endorse the commitment of the City to
locate the central processing/baling station at one of
the other sites within its boundaries .
Motion made by J. Daley, seconded by M. Sampson, to
approve above Resolution. Vote: 4-0-0 . Carried.
Anna Steinkraus, Chair of the Farmers ' Market
Board, was present. She presented a proposed site plan for
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 6
the Market and explained the proposal . A tentative
timetable for development of the DPW site for temporary or
permanent use by the Market was also distributed. The site
was unanimously approved by the Farmers ' Market Board for a
temporary location. Approval of the site for a permanent
location is also being sought by the Board. This is the
first site that has received such overwhelming approval .
The CAC has recommended a negative declaration
regarding this site and comments that the Market would open
up heretofore unrealized recreational opportunities . J.
Daley moved to recommend to Council a negative declaration
on the EAF for a one-year revocable license for the IFM.
Seconded by A. Yale. Vote: 4-0-0 . Carried.
The following Resolution was presented:
WHEREAS, the U. S . Department of Interior National Park
Service has granted the Ithaca Farmers ' Market a brief
extension of time to use the site at Cayuga Inlet
Island, and
WHEREAS, said extension expires on June 25, 1988, at
which time the Market will be required to vacate the
site, and
WHEREAS, the Farmers ' Market and City officials have
been working to locate an alternative site within the
City from which the Market can operate after June 25,
and
WHEREAS, the staging area for the waste water treatment
plant at third Street has been identified as an
appropriate site, and
WHEREAS, efforts to prepare the site must begin as soon
as possible to ready it for use following the Markets '
removal from Inlet Island,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning and
Development Board does recommend to Common Council the
granting of a revocable license to the Farmers ' Market
for use of the former staging area at Third Street, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board recommends that
such license include the following conditions : 1 . The
Department of Public Works be directed to complete any
work it may be conducting at the site by June 10, 1988 .
2 . The Market be assisted by the City in grading the
site to a usable level, and if such City assistance is
not possible, the site be made available to the Market
to carry out this work on its own without charge, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that an evaluation of the
Market's use of this site during the 1988 season be
conducted jointly by the Department of Planning and
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 7
Development, the Planning and Development Board, the
Department of Public Works, and the Ithaca Farmers '
Market.
J. Daley moved approval and forwarding of the above
Resolution- (granting a one year revocable license to the
Ithaca Farmers ' Market at the Third St. location) to the
Planning and Development Committee of Council. Vote: 4-0-0.
Carried.
7 . West Hill Master Plan: Chair Blumenthal proposed an
introductory discussion regarding a Master Plan for West
Hill. Several recent subdivision requests have been
received for this neighborhood: Garcia, Sunrise
Terrace/Ciaschi, and LoPinto (McPherson may be added in the
near future) . A map was prepared to illustrate the various
locations . Mr. Garcia and Mr. Ciaschi are currently
preparing environmental impact statements for their
proposals . The West Hill Civic Assn. has requested that the
City and Town work cooperatively in preparing a Master Plan
for West Hill. Several issues are involved including street
layout and open space/park areas . Mr. Meigs reviewed each
subdivision request and explained the road plan adopted by
the Planning Board in 1954, revised in 1968 . Director Van
Cort stated that under State subdivision law, the City is
allowed to require developers to set aside a certain
percentage of their subdivision for open space - that
requirement is repeated in our local subdivision law. This
requirement has been mentioned to the developers and each
have indicated that they would not be adverse to giving up a
portion of the land for recreational neighborhood use.
George Frantz, Westwood Knoll, asked if the City had cluster
development in present zoning regulations; this type of
development would add to the effect of any public green
area. Mr. Van Cort stated that there are no cluster
provisions in the Ordinance at this time; there may be a
recommendation forthcoming for cluster development - much
depends on that which the neighborhood desires . Lani Peck
of the West Hill Civic Association stated that green space
is a priority. She stated that the residents are almost
overwhelmed by the suddenness of these many requests . An ad
hoc committee is being formed to work with the City and the
Town to identify and inventory appropriate use for
available space. She said that the addition of 100 new
households will have a great effect on the traffic funneling
into the Octopus; wildlife should be protected and not lost
to the neighborhood; open space and green space is native to
the area and should be preserved. At a recent meeting of
the West Hill Civic Association, the following Resolution
was passed:
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 8
WHEREAS, West Hill is the City of Ithaca' s last housing
frontier, and
WHEREAS, the demand for land in the City and the
neighboring Towns on West Hill is increasing at an
unprecedented rate, and
WHEREAS, the proposed development will, in the
aggregate, place untoward pressure on the available
infrastructure, and
WHEREAS, there is no current comprehensive plan for
approving or disapproving development proposals,
BE IT RESOLVED that the West Hill Civic Association
shall request the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca,
and Tompkins County to immediately undertake a jointly
sponsored Master Plan for the future development of
West Hill, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the West Hill Civic
Association shall assist the City of Ithaca in a formal
inventory of the undeveloped open spaces within the
First District of the First Ward and the subsequent
designation of areas which shall be preserved as park
land, recreational spaces, and wilderness areas .
Mr. Yale commented that the City needs to move quickly
or the opportunity may be lost to affect projects that are
about to commence. He is in favor of joint planning between
the City and Town but feels the City should expedite the
planning process . Mr. Daley feels the identification and
size of recreational space should be researched and labeled
so that clear directions can be given to developers;
mechanisms for setting green space aside, such as payment
in lieu of exactions of land, need to be researched. Mr.
Van Cort stated that the technical work can be accomplished
within a reasonable time but the review by Boards,
Committees, and other bodies in order to seek approval is
very time consuming. Council must determine how much time
they wish to invest. For example, a cluster development
ordinance could be enacted relatively quickly. This would
give developers an option of saving undeveloped land while
reducing infrastructure costs, which would also reduce
maintenance costs to the City. At present, the Ordinance
requires the City to provide certain items; this could be
changed to require the developer to bear more of the
infrastructure costs . This topic is referred to the
Neighborhoods, Housing and Facilities Committee - options
for review are:
Should Planning Staff modify the present street plan or
postpone other projects to complete a more thorough Master
Plan? Should the City work with the Town and what would
that entail? Is there an interest on West Hill for cluster
housing? J. Daley suggested that the Planning Department
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 9
prepare an estimate of the amount of staff time required to
accomplish a West Hill Master Plan - and what items on the
Work Program might be eliminated in order of priority to
allow time for this project. Director Van Cort stated he
would attempt to have this information before the next
Committee meeting.
8. Proposed South Hill Recreation Trail : George R. Frantz,
Asst. Town Planner for the Town of Ithaca addressed the
Board. The Town of Ithaca is applying for a grant through
the New York State Environmental Quality Bond Act program.
The funds will be used to develop a pedestrian and bicycle
recreation trail along the roadbed of the former Delaware
Lackawanna and Western Railroad from the vicinity of Aurora
and Hudson Streets eastward to Burns Road. The proposed
trail is part of a system which the City, Town and State
Parks are cooperating on, which will give South Hill
residents of the city and town a recreational link to Cass
Park and to Buttermilk Falls and Allan H. Treman State
Parks, and ultimately to Taughannock. The trail will
provide recreation opportunities for bicyclists, walkers,
and joggers . In addition it will provide safe access to
open space areas within the City and Town as well as to the
downtown for a growing residential population on South Hill.
The Town is seeking City support in this effort. Cost of
this portion of the trail system is estimated to be
$82, 000; City share would be $2, 375 which contribution could
be made through "in kind" funding.
The Board discussed a number of concerns, among them:
use of the trail by joggers and possible problems which use
by motorized vehicles might cause; increased use of the
trail bringing more people into the watershed area; parking
problems caused by individuals driving to the area to use
the trail; public awareness of the proposed project; fencing
or other barriers along the trail at appropriate locations
to prevent people from venturing into the watershed area.
Mr. Daley said that he favors the trail because it would
form a natural buffer which would facilitate cluster
development ideas that are being discussed by the Six Mile
Creek Committee. Betsy Darlington said there were pros and
cons regarding the project for this fragile area, but felt
it would not be nearly as heavily impacted as some other
nearby projects . S. Killeen moved, seconded by J. Daley,
the following Resolution:
RESOLVED, that the Ithaca City Planning Board hereby
supports the application by the Town of Ithaca for
matching funds from the State of New York through the
Environmental Quality Bond Act, for the development of
a proposed pedestrian and bicycle way to extend from
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 10
Aurora Street within the City to Burns Road within the
Town, with a spur trail to serve Ithaca College and
the intersection of Hudson Street and Coddington Road.
Vote: 5-0-0 . Carried.
J. Daley moved, seconded by S. Killeen, a request that
the Town of Ithaca consult with the Six Mile Creek
Committee (and other bodies) regarding potential problems
and solutions associated with development of the trail.
Vote: 5-0-0 . Passed.
9 . Subdivision Update: Mr. Meigs gave a brief report on the
pending subdivision requests - those previously discussed by
the Board are still in the development stage and are not
ready at this time for Final determination.
125-27 Cherry Street/Wallace: This is a small lot
(between Triangle Steel and Wallace Steel) , which is to be
divided between the two. The subdivision application has
not yet been submitted. A demolition permit has been issued
for destruction of the house, which is to be burned for fire
training. It was suggested that (if not already done so)
the Fire Department should complete an EAF for the project.
So moved by J. Daley, seconded by S. Killeen. Vote: 5-0-0 .
10 . Residential Parking: Mr. Daley presented to the Board a
proposal regarding alternate side of the street parking. He
suggests moving the effective hours of alternate side of the
street parking to daytime hours; suggested hours are 10 : 00
a.m. to 2 : 00 p.m. Pros include: Doubles resident parking
at night, halves commuter parking during the day, ease of
implementation, discourages long-term "garaging" , allows for
residential parking during the day. Cons : Less efficient
use of some DPW equipment, less efficient snow-removal,
continues to discourage long term "garaging" , still allows
some commuter parking. He has canvassed the DPW,
neighborhood groups, and Council Members, and has received
no negative comments . The Board supports the plan in
concept. J. Daley moved to recommend to the Planning and
Development Committee study of the proposal and its adoption
in the near future. Seconded by M. Sampson. Vote: 5-0-0.
Carried.
11 . Shade Tree Advisory Committee: In a memo dated April 25,
1988, STAC indicated it would be most desirable to have a
staff member with landscape credentials on city staff to
perform professional review and consultation on landscaping
and related matters involving municipal or private projects .
In addition, they strongly advise that the city incorporate
into appropriate regulations a requirement for certification
of landscaping and site planning of major projects by a
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 11
Landscape Architect. They are requesting comments from the
Board. Regarding the latter recommendation, Mr. Daley
expressed the problem of finding capable individuals who
meet the criteria willing to serve in this capacity.
Director Van Cort mentioned that the City has no requirement
for building construction to use the services of an
Architect. How, then, can the City require a landscape plan
to be certified by a Landscape Architect? Mr. Meigs said
that in fact, it is required that an architect or engineer
certify most building plans; and that, in STAC discussion of
the guidelines, reference was made to other NY communities
with similar requirements for landscaping/site planning;
further, STAC members who are familiar with the profession
expressed no concern about consultant availability. Ms .
Blumenthal said that when Site Plan Review is passed to
Council, the Board will be recommending that a staff person
be hired with credentials for environmental and site plan
review. After brief discussion, the Board concurred with
the STAC recommendations . Mr. Yale commented that the
Commission seemed concerned with the quality of schematics
presented; perhaps criteria could be drafted (by STAC or
others ) for landscaping requirements . STAC will continue to
perform only a limited type of review since they feel
strongly that such review should be handled by qualified
staff . Ms . Blumenthal wished to express thanks to STAC for
their review of the Grossman' s project which was most
helpful to the Planning Board in their decisions .
12 . Site Plan Review: Discussion was held regarding the third
draft. Previous suggestions included Site Plan Review to be
adopted only if conditioned upon approval of additional
staff to handle the workload and that Site Plan Review be
handled by a separate review board. So moved by J. Daley,
seconded by M. Sampson. Discussion: Director Van Cort
estimates that there would be twelve or more active cases
under review during any month. Given the amount of time
needed to handle these projects, the question remains :
would the city receive the results desired by this
regulation? Mr. Daley feels the process is unwieldy; too
much work for so little result. Vote on the above motion:
5-0-0 . Carried.
S. Killeen suggested that a cover memo to Council
should state that the Board's work on Site Plan Review was
undertaken as a result of a great deal of public concern
which occurred last fall; it is now up to Council to decide
how best to utilize the proposed ordinance and how it
responds to the public response/concerns .
A document was distributed from Dr. Nina Bassuk, Chair,
Planning & Development Board Minutes
May 24, 1988 (continued) : 12
STAC, entitled " Landscaping Guidelines" ; Mr. Meigs said
that this might be incorporated into the zoning Ordinance or
a separate free-standing Landscaping Ordinance. This was
referred to the Codes and Administration Committee for
further review.
12 . Chairman' s Report: Cornell ' s Campus Planning Guideline has
been completed. The Guideline will be presented to the
Board of Trustees very shortly. Ms . Blumenthal would like
to meet with Cornell officials at a special meeting in June
to discuss their planning ideas .
Ms . Blumenthal also reported that regarding the
Ronsvalle legal case, after conferring with the City
Attorney, she has decided to proceed with an appeal . Motion
above was made and passed unanimously, endorsing her
decision.
13. BPW Report: Mr. Daley reported that a plan has been
decided upon regarding the Collegetown Assessment District.
Properties will be assessed on the basis of square footage
of buildings with a credit of 500 sq. ft. of building for
each parking space they provide within the district
(including off-site parking within the district) .
Sale of city property on Floral Av. to INNS: Referred
back to Council since BPW has no use for the property at
present.
BPW has directed clean-up of Southwest Park, and minimizing
damage to existing mature trees and undisturbed areas .
14 . Approval of Minutes : Correction to the April 26, 1988
Minutes - page 2 - Ronsvalle Subdivision discussion: add to
the list of participants (Ronsvalle, A. Egner, D. Dubow,
Esq. ) Jim Parkes . Minutes approved.
15 . Adjournment - 11 : 45 p.m.
5/26/88
b:MayMinut.mc
�pF IT..
OF
RAIE0
CITY OF ITHACA
108 EAST GREEN STREET
ITHACA, NEW YORK 141350
ITHACA LANDMARKS TELEPHONE: 272-1713
PRESERVATION COMMISSION CODE 607
MEMORANDUM
TO: Board of Zoning Appeals
FROM: Board of Planning and Developmen ,
RE: Appeals 1843-51
DATE: May 26, 1988
At its meeting 24 May, this Board heard comment in support of and in.
opposition to Appeal 1847, for an Accessory Apartment Permit at
109 Oxford Place. The Board concluded that the proposal satisfies the
requirements for accessory apartments and that the use would be in
keeping with existing uses of property in the area. It was also
determined that the owners propose to convert panels of the existing
original vertical tri-fold garage door to serve as an entry door for
the apartment and access to a utility room; thus, unless that approach
should change, there is no need for design review. On a vote, the
Board voted 4 - 0 to recommend approval .
Regarding the remaining appeals, the Board voted 4 - 0 to pass on to
Board of Zoning Appeals the attached committe report as written, with
no further comment.
cc: B. Townsend
0-hd-mml 84351 .jm
"An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program