Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1988-10-25 Planning Board Minutes -8- 12/20/88 Mr. Killeen advised the Board that the CAC's proposals for conservation overlay zones and for land use controls in the watershed were on the committee's agenda and would likely be referred to this Board for comment. He is also working on an evaluation of all city-owned land, with the intent of better managing it as a resource. 10. Approval of Minutes - Killeen, seconded by Daley, MOVED approval of the October 98 minutes as distributed. Passed unanimously. There was no further business; meeting adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. O-P&DBd-Minutes.D20 �a MINUTES OF THEPLANNINGAND DEVELOPMENT BOARDMEETING October 25, 1988 (Notes on Meeting) TO: File FROM: H. M. Van Cort 4X/ RE: Planning Board Meeting 10/25/88 DATE: November 2, 1988 In attendance were Blumenthal , Killeen, Cookingham, Yale, Daley, Sampson, and Jackson. Also attending were Director Van Cort and Applicant James Borra. Borra Subdivision The meeting opened with a brief discussion of Deer Creek, a subdivision of Mr. James Borra's. Mr. Borra was in attendance. He asked Board Members whether there were any questions regarding his request for subdivision. It appeared that there had been some problem with distribution of information regarding the subdivision and a second copy was mailed to the Superintendent of Public Works, City Engineer and the Fire Department. Discussion followed. Van Cort noted that the West Hill Master Plan was now underway, and that it may have an impact on subdivision approvals on West Hill . The question of exactions was raised. It was noted that the subdividers would be required to pay for all infrastructure, and that they could be required to donate up to 10% of the land or an equivalent cash payment for open space. Borra said that soil analysis would be performed. Van Cort noted that after issuance of a negative declaration, the application would, in all likelihood be deemed complete and therefore the board would have 45 days within which to approve or disapprove the application. Zoning Appeals Cookingham recommended that no appeals be reviewed by the Board. Daley suggested that Appeal # 1875 (Driscoll house on the corner of Quarry and Buffalo Street) should be reviewed by the Board because it involves destructive alteration of a significant historic building. Killeen felt that no comment should be made at this time. Daley moved that the Board make no comment on the variance but reserve the right to approve the landscape design at a later date because of the impact this property will have on the neighborhood image and Minutes of Planning and Development Board 2 October 25, 1988 character. Motion died for lack of a second. Cookingham moved and Sampson seconded that no comment be made on any of the Appeals. Motion passed (6-1- Killeen No) . Site Plan Review The Board discussed the need for staff to carry out Site Plan Review. It was noted that the Mayor had put an Environmental Review Officer in the Building Department, but had not recommended staffing the Planning Department for the upcoming Site Plan Review function. Blumenthal noted that the Planning Department and the Planning Board could not perform Site Plan Review without an additional staff member devoted exclusively to that function. The following Resolution resulted and passed unanimously: Whereas, the Planning and Development Board has submitted a Draft Site Plan Review Ordinance to the Common Council for their consideration and, Whereas, it appears that Common Council may enact a local Site Plan Review Ordinance and, Whereas, in 1987 over 70 building permits would have undergone Site Plan Review with 40 of those being deemed significant and time consuming activity for the board and staff, Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the Board hereby declares that it cannot perform Site Plan Review if Council does not authorize a full time landscape architect and Environmental Planner for that function. A Board Member asked whether the proposed staff member could perform additional services for the Conservation Advisory Council . Van Cort said that there was enough work in Site Plan Review to occupy a staff member full-time. It might be possible in future years if the pace of work decreased to expand that person's responsibility to cover other activities. It was noted that fees could cover the expense of the staff member. The Board wanted to know how the latest draft of the Site Plan Review Ordinance dealt with fees. Route 96 Van Cort explained that the City had received several copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Route 96. He asked Board Members how many additional copies they wished him to order for their perusal . Daley suggested that the Board should not spend a great deal of time on Route 96 since it would be decided at the Common Council meeting on essentially political and philosophical grounds, and that the Board would be wasting its time if it did extensive review of the Minutes of Planning and Development Board 3 October 25, 1988 matter. Yale argued that Board debate could inform the decision. Yale also noted that Meadow Street would be at a worse level of service in the year 2010 than it is today. Jackson felt the Board should take a position on the highway. A question was raised as to whether an FEIS includes a project selection report (Van Cort investigated this matter after the Planning and Development Board Meeting and is advised by DOT that the project selection process is independent of the writing of the FEIS. Project selection may precede (and DOT wishes it to precede publication of the FEIS) . The Board directed Van Cort to order additional copies (Van Cort ordered the copies and they were received on November 2, 1988. The Board has been informed of their availability. ) It was noted that Betsy Darlington was leading a tour along the Route 96 Right-of-Way. West Hill Master Plan Andy Yale reported to the Board on progress on the West Hill Master Plan. Killeen asked whether preparation of the Environmental Review for the Master Plan was included in the contract with Trowbridge. Van Cort noted that it was not, and the Board directed that Van Cort investigate the possibility of adding environmental review to the contract at this time through an action of Budget and Administration. (Van Cort subsequently discussed this matter with Trowbridge; the consensus in that discussion was that it would be more appropriate to wait until the schematic plan has been prepared, at which time a scoping session could be held which would be used to narrow down the scope of the required environmental review. ) Blumenthal reported that she had met with Susan Cummings regarding division of work between the Planning Board and the Planning and Development Committee of Council . The conclusion of that meeting was that the Board would review the non-residential zoning changes in the emergency planning priorities and the Committee would handle the residential areas. Departmental Budget Van Cort described the cuts the Mayor made in the Budget Request. Cookingham recommended that the Board take a strong position regarding the need for increases over the Mayor's recommendation. In response to a question by Jackson, Van Cort explained that even if the Community Development (CD) program is terminated at the end of 1989 there will be -ongoing responsibilities to monitor CD activities on a long term basis and that these will require staff time. In addition, the Civil Service staff will have to attempt to provide services in the CD target area to fill the gap left by the termination of the CD program. Daley moved and Sampson seconded the attached Resolution which was approved (6-1 , Cookingham No) . Cookingham explained that he Minutes of Planning and Development Board 4 October 25, 1988 felt the Board should make a strong statement regarding the need for additional staff, but that the Resolution, as worded, might be counter- productive. In answer to a request by Killeen, Van Cort noted that the Community Development has provided approximately 80% of the INHS budgets over the years. Cookingha.m suggested that perhaps the City would have more success with Community Development applications if they switched to single purpose economic development. Cornell University Chair Blumenthal asked whether the Board Members had reviewed Cornell 's planning guidelines. She discussed the need for another meeting with Cornell . Killeen suggested that the Board should take a position on the guidelines. Blumenthal said that she would try to set up a meeting with Cornell in mid-December. County Review of Building Permits and Subdivision Requests Van Cort explained the suggestion by Tompkins County that review of subdivision and building permits by the County and in the City of Ithaca and other local jurisdictions be modified, concentrating on larger developments whether or not they were required under J 239-L and M. Less significant projects would not be reviewed. There were questions regarding this proposal . The Board felt it needed more time before it could make a recommendation. (Van Cort subsequently investigated this matter and wrote a memorandum to the Board Members regarding this question. ) Approval of Minutes Minutes of 9/13/88: The Minutes of 9/13/88 were corrected to indicate that S. Killeen had been excused from the meeting. Motion was made by Daley, seconded by Sampson, to approve the minutes as amended. Vote: 7-0-0; carried. Minutes of 9/27/88: It was moved by Daley, seconded by Sampson, to approve the minutes of 9/27/1988. Vote: unanimous. Adjournment of Meeting Meeting adjourned at 11 :30 pm. Respectfully submitted, AWX4,,�> HMVC:eh H. Matthys Van Cort 0-hd-MinP&D.Thys Director t D R A F T Planning and Development Board October 25, 1988 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Council appears likely to enact a local site plan review ordinance in the near future which will require staffing by the Department of Planning and Development, and, WHEREAS, the other land use controls such as the local environmental review ordinance have been enacted by the City of Ithaca in the past several years, and, WHEREAS, the pace of permit requests have also increased, and, WHEREAS, the Council appears likely to enact a local site plan review ordinance in the near future which will require staffing by the Department of Planning and Development, and, WHEREAS, these regulatory activities put new demands on the professional and support staff in the Department of Planning and Development, and, WHEREAS, the Common Council with the concurrence of the Planning and Development Board has designated certain activities of emergency priorities for the Planning and Development staff and has established a far longer supplementary list of extremely high priorities, and, WHEREAS, the Common Council and the Planning and Development Board have undertaken the first of a multi-phase strategic plan which should be followed up with other sectoral strategic studies, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning and Development Board finds that the mayoral budget for 1989 proposed for the Planning and Development Department will not enable the department to carry out the responsibilities with which it has been charged, and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board finds that, in particular, the site plan review ordinance will create a great deal more work for the Planning and Development staff which will necessitate the hiring of at least one additional full time staff member and that the cumulative additional { Planning and Development Board Resolution 2 burden on the secretarial staff will require the hiring of an additional part time Senior Stenographer. Both of these were requested in the budget and are essential for the proper operation of the department and the accomplishment of the goals specified by the Council for 1988 and 1989. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board urges the Mayor and Common Council to reinstate other cuts made in the departmental request, especially for the continuation of the strategic planning activities for the City. These services are to be funded by a request for $60,000 in 1989. Passed Unanimously 0-hd-ResoP&D.Thys