HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1991-08-27 AMENDED & APPROVED 12/19/91
Planning and Development Board
MINUTES
August 27, 1991
PRESENT: S. Adams, R. Berg, S. Blumenthal (Chair) ,
T. Cookingham, C. Feuer, J. Schroeder, A. Yale. Staff:
Director H. M. Van Cort, L. Tsang. Also, applicants,
media and members of the public.
1. Meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Privilege of the Floor: No one appeared.
3. Elmira Road Sidewalks. Blumenthal explained briefly the
history of the proposed project for construction of
sidewalks on Elmira Road. The major consideration was for
safety of pedestrians and handicapped accessibility along
the road.
Peter Weed, landscape architect who was hired to design a
scheme for the project, presented his proposal and design
drawings. The project would extend from Norstar Bank
(northeastern side of Elmira Road) to the city-town line.
The project has been under consideration by the Board of
Public Works since 1988. Mr. Weed noted well-worn trails,
and consistent and steady use by pedestrians (approximately
4-6 per hour) along the roadway which he believed to be
locally generated by local businesses and restaurants.
The proposed four foot wide concrete sidewalks would be
constructed with a crushed stone strip between the curb and
sidewalk. The average distance of the sidewalk from the
road is 3-5 feet from the curb; if sidewalks were further
back, drainage swales would have to be reconstructed for
storm water drainage and this would be much more expensive.
Approximate total project cost is $290,000. Blumenthal
opened the floor for public comment.
Dick Flaville, Bob Romanowski, Reuben Weiner, Betsy
Darlington, Brenda Kuhn, Neil Golder, William Zikakis, Henry
Vaughan, Pat Vaughan, Barbara Blanchard, Harlan McEwen, Sim
Fryson, and LeMoyne Farrell appeared to speak before the
Board. The following comments were received.
The vast majority of employees in Elmira Road businesses
drive to work. Economically this couldn't be a worse time.
Sidewalks would give pedestrians a false sense of safety,
especially those handicapped. The cost is tremendous, and
need has not been demonstrated. Impractical--too many curb
cuts. Maintenance of city-owned property by private
property owners. There were arguments that Elmira Road is
an automotive destination. It' s not a street, it' s a
highway (miracle mile) , with heavy traffic. Alderperson
Planning and Development Board -2-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
Blanchard spoke of an urban renewal plan in the 1960s
whereby downtown automotive-related businesses were to be
relocated to a more remote destination. It was argued that
it would be dangerous 'to encourage more pedestrian traffic,
that Elmira Road traffic accident reports from DoT show rear
end collisions and pile ups as the major cause of accidents.
Those in favor maintained that if there was a comfortable
place to walk, more people would do it. Elmira Road should
be viewed as a city street. The Salvation Army, Buttermilk
Falls mini-mall and fast food restaurants were identified as
businesses that encourage pedestrians. It was noted that
the City bus does not solve all peoples problems and needs.
There was discussion that a repayment program could be set
up whereby property owners would be able to pay over a 10
year period at below market rate interest. Van Cort stated
that a capital project could be established for the project
and the money for the additional design work and survey
could be borrowed.
Schroeder felt that it should be the City' s goal to have
sidewalks on every city street. It was generally felt by
the Board that the idea of installing sidewalks on Elmira
Road is a good one that would encourage foot travel in that
area. However, some Board members had doubts about the
design presented by Peter Weed* .
The
next phase of the project would entail an aerial survey and
map at a cost of $18,500, and design fees of $8, 000 which
includes construction drawings with specifications.
Feuer suggested amendments to the December, 1990 Planning
Board resolution that express the Board' s support of a delay
in implementation of the project to construct sidewalks
along both sides of the road for a period of one year.
After one year the project would be reconsidered and, in the
interim, consideration will be given to an expansion of
handicapped-accessible public transportation service to
Elmira Road as an addition or alternative to the provision
of sidewalks.
The Board generally agreed public transportation should be
underlined as a short-term goal. It was agreed that the
resolution be rewritten and considered at the next regular
meeting in September. Cookingham, seconded by Adams, moved
to table, carried unanimously 7-0.
Planning and Development Board -3-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
4. Subdivisions
A. 227 Wood Street/Hoyt, Dietz
A public hearing was held, and no one appeared to speak.
Cookingham, seconded by Blumenthal, moved for final
subdivision approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Submission of a final subdivision plat meeting the
standards specified in City Subdivision Regulations, and
2. Submission of documentation of the legal combination of
the minor parcel created with the adjoining property,
Assessment Parcel 105-5-30.
The motion was carried unanimously (7-0) .
B. 361 Floral Avenue/Benson
Environmental assessment has determined that the property to
be subdivided contains wetlands which have been delineated
by Ichthyological Associates, Inc. [in accordance with the
1989 Federal Manual. ] Mr. Benson agreed to give adequate
assurance that all wetland areas will be protected from
development. This would involve the reservation of the two
southern-most lots and following applicable regulations with
regard to any action that could affect the remaining wetland
areas.
Regarding the issue of storm drainage from the culvert under
Floral Avenue at the center of Mr. Benson' s frontage, it is
the City's position that the City is not responsible or
liable for any effect that this drainage might have on
abutting private property.
Staff recommended a negative declaration and preliminary
subdivision approval. Mr. Benson mentioned a deed
restriction which stipulates that, in accordance with the
applicable laws regarding crossing a wetland, a permit must
be obtained by potential builders on the lots. Mr. Benson
was requested to submit the legal instruments needed to
protect the wetlands one week before the next Codes
Committee meeting. There was a brief discussion regarding
building along the inlet, and in the 100-year floodplain,
which requires City SEQR review.
Schroeder, seconded by Cookingham, moved the resolution for
a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance.
WHEREAS, application has been made for subdivision of
property at 361 Floral Avenue, also known as Assessment
Parcel 100-1-11 into five (5) parcels for sale and
development, and
Planning and Development Board -4-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
WHEREAS, appropriate environmental review has been conducted
including the preparation of the Short Environmental
Assessment Form (SERF) and the Long Environmental Assessment
Form (LEAF) , and
WHEREAS, it appears that the proposed action is an
"unlisted" action under the State Environmental Quality
Review Act (SEQR) , including the Part 617 regulations
thereunder, and is a "Type I" action under the City
Environmental Quality Review Act, and
WHEREAS, assessment of the potential environmental impacts
of subdivision has determined that portions of the site are
wetlands, and these areas have been surveyed and delineated
by Ichthyological Associates, Inc. , and
WHEREAS, applicant has given verbal indication that
restrictions will be placed on the parcels created that will
insure that the wetland portions will be protected from
development, and that development will be limited to single-
family residences on those parcels that do not include
significant wetland areas, and
WHEREAS, such restrictions provide sufficient assurance that
the important environmental characteristics and the
character of the neighborhood will be preserved,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Planning
and Development hereby does adopt as its own the findings
and conclusions more fully set forth on the Short
Environmental Assessment Form and the Long Environmental
Assessment Form dated April 10, 1991, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Planning and
Development hereby does determine that the proposed action
at issue will have a significant effect on the environment,
however, the environmental effects of the proposed
subdivision will be mitigated by restrictions set forth in
the conditional approval of the subdivision, and that
further environmental review is unnecessary under the
circumstances, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall constitute
notice of this negative declaration and the City Clerk be
hereby directed to file a copy of the same, together with
the attachment, in the City Clerk's office and forward the
same to any other parties as required by law.
Passed unanimously.
Planning and Development Board -5-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
Schroeder moved, seconded by Cookingham, the following
resolution for preliminary subdivision approval.
WHEREAS, application has been made for subdivision of
property at 361 Floral Avenue, also known as Assessment
Parcel 100-1-1, into five (5) parcels, and
WHEREAS, assessment of the potential environmental impacts
of subdivision determined that portions of the site are
wetland, and
WHEREAS, applicant has given verbal indication that
restrictions will be placed on the parcels created that will
insure that the wetland portions will be protected from
development, and that development will be limited to single-
family residences on those parcels that do not include
significant wetland areas, and
WHEREAS, such restrictions provide sufficient assurance that
the important environmental characteristics and the
character of the neighborhood will be preserved, and
WHEREAS, the Board of Planning and Development has given the
proposed project a negative declaration subject to written
documentation of mitigating measures and development
restrictions,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that conditional approval of
subject subdivision is given, subject to receipt of written
documents, satisfactory to the City as to form and content,
incorporating such restrictions.
Passed unanimously.
5. Site Development Plan Review and Public Hearing
A. GIAC Neighborhood Pool and Park. Tsang described the
project proposed for the corner of W. Court and N. Albany
Sts. The pool does not meet with the City zoning ordinance
for setback requirements, which has been a subject for
discussion among various City agencies. A public hearing
was held and no one appeared. Feuer, seconded by Schroeder,
moved for preliminary and final approval. Motion was
carried unanimously.
6. Zoninq Appeals. Van Cort entered into the record a petition
signed by eight neighbors to 309 E. Lincoln St. opposing
appeal 2056 claiming that there has never been a barbershop
at that property, nor is there a need for one. There was
Planning and Development Board -6-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
some discussion concerning this appeal as well as appeals
2059, 2060 and 2061, and the Board revised the memorandum
containing the recommendations of the Codes and
Administration Committee as follows:
Review of subject appeals has determined that Nos. 2054,
2055, 2057, 2058, and 2062 do not involve issues of citywide
or long range planning concern, and are forwarded for BZA
action.
APPEAL 2056, for Special Permit to allow a barber shop at
309 E. Lincoln, in an R-2b zone. The appellant has
represented, in his application, that the proposed use is
"grandfathered. " The staff has seen no evidence whether
this is either true or false. Residents who live nearby the
subject property have argued that there was no previous such
use at the property. If the use is grandfathered, it would
have no significant impact on the surroundings in terms of
activity or visibility (other than a business sign, which
has already been erected) .
APPEAL 2059, Area Variances for deficient front and side
yard dimensions and percentage of rear yard depth at 302-306
N. Aurora, in a B-1b zone, to permit an addition of
approximately 1,800 square feet to the building. The
Planning Board applauds the efforts of the First Unitarian
Society of Ithaca in restoring and adding on to their
building and remaining downtown.
APPEAL 2060, Area Variances and interpretation to permit
addition, and conversion of, 303-9 Dryden Rd. , in an R-3b
zone, increasing its legal occupancy, brings into question
the intent of Sec. 30.37 (A) ( 1) , dealing with "back-to-back"
parking spaces. It is our belief that this provision was
intended basically to permit the not uncommon practice of
using residential driveways for parking one or more cars.
This would not be possible for the layout supplied.
The lot layout shown does not satisfy the standards of Sec.
30. 37 B-1 for design of lots with street frontage.
The Board feels that this proposal is inappropriate and
recommends denial.
APPEAL 2061, for Area Variance to permit a second duplex
residence on the same lot, at 812 E. State, in an R-2b zone,
raises questions of intent and interpretation of General
Note 1 under the District Regulations. The appeal is based
on a reading of Note 1 which appears to legitimize addition
of a second duplex on the same property. However, this
would make the use of the property multi-family, which would
Planning and Development Board -7-
Minutes of August 27, 1991
require a Use Variance, and this appeal is only for an Area
Variance.
If a single large R-2 parcel may be developed with as many
duplexes as it will hold, then there was no reason for
subdivision of the "Pogo Parcel. " Similarly and more
importantly, existing large tracts of land on West Hill
would not have to go through the subdivision process in
order to be developed.
Therefore, this Board feels very strongly that this appeal
should be denied and requests that the Board of Zoning
Appeals take the preceding concerns into account in
determining the appropriate action on this appeal.
APPEAL 2062, Area Variances to permit office use at 211-15
Fifth St. , in a B-4 zone, appears to involve a parcel that
has been illegally subdivided, which may have aggravated the
amount or extent of nonconformity with district regulations.
APPEAL 2063, for Special Permit for an Accessory Apartment
at 904 E. State, in an R-lb zone, appears to satisfy all
requirements for issuance of a permit.
Moved, seconded, and approved unanimously.
7. Approval of Minutes. Approval of July Minutes were deferred
until the next regular Board meeting.
8. Reports
A. Committees of the Board. No reports.
B. Director. No report.
C. Chair. No report.
D. Board of Public Works. Berg announced the promotion
and appointment of Rick Ferrell as assistant superintendent
for streets & facilities. Approval of installation of stop
signs at Monroe and Lake.
E. Planning and Development Committee. Schroeder reported
on the Committee' s discussions concerning the GIAC pool
zoning waiver, and use of water funds to purchase land for
protection of the Six Mile Creek watershed.
9. Miscellaneous. Brief discussion of Elmira Road sidewalk
resolution. Resignation of Andy Yale from the Planning
Board.
Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
epj-PDBoard/August.min
waM -- ---
--- ---------- --- ---- - -- ---
-
wA
ev-
Au7-1
dA-
o
'0000l�,
r..
•
. C
r
-
i CXRD
C,�vi
e
August 27 , 1991
City Planning Board,
Ithaca, N. Y.
Re: Sidewalks , Elmira Rd.
My mother, in her older years, made her home in Florida.
. I went down every year for a visit.
Her home was not far from a business area very similar to
our' Elmira Road District. Many times I would walk this route.
Not many of the owners provided sidewalks; not infrequently_
were areas where you walked thru weeds belt high. This was a well
populated, well established area, not in the poorer section of
town. The side streets often had inadequate street lighting,and
deep open ditches,-no curbing.
Our Elmira Road consists of much more than automobile
dealerships, -with their courtesy ride into town. nor does
having a city bus route solve all peoples problems and needs.
I have bemoaned our local situation for years, among my
friends. I have thought that a mix of fine stone and clean
sand, on a well prepaired base, would be an economical way
to do it.
Please, let's havesomewalk paths.
Respectfully submitted,
J 4�_Mmyr, , - - _`�_1�
Herbert Hartwig, Jr.
315 S. Albany st. Ithaca