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