The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMN-PDB-1993-03-23 l-Ef N��it E U Planning and Development Board MINUTES March 23, 1993 PRESENT: S . Adams, S. Blumenthal (Chair) , D. Kay, P. Mackesey, D. Rusoff, J. Schroeder. Staff : Director H. M. Van Cort, L. Tsang. Also, applicants . 1. Meeting was called to order at 7 :40 p.m. 2 . Privilege of the Floor: No one appeared. 3 . Preliminary Subdivision Approval A. 812 E. State St./Ching Po Van Cort explained, for Board members unfamiliar with this application, that if a proposed subdivision meets all the applicable zoning requirements, the Board has no legal grounds to deny it . He discussed a similar subdivision in which the Board. denied subdivision approval, was sued under Article 78, and lost the case. Although the City appealed, the ruling was upheld. He advised that the Board take this into consideration in their deliberations . This subdivision is before the Board again because the applicant failed to file their plat with the County Clerk's office within the prescribed time. Mr. Daniel Hirtler represented the applicant . Schroeder asked that revisions to Part 3 of the LEAF be incorporated into the file. He also referred to the conditions set in the preliminary approval granted 12/19/91 and said that any approval should carry those same conditions . Rusoff moved a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance. Adams seconded, and the motion passed 5-1 (Schroeder opposed) . Mackesey, seconded by Rusoff, moved preliminary subdivision approval incorporating a copy of the front elevation sketch of the proposed new Blair St . duplex (dated September, 1991) and the architect's site plan of the subdivided lots (dated September 25, 1991) . Parking will be t restricted to two back-to-back parking spaces at 812 —Bliair- :i�,� �l and to two back-to-back parking spaces on the newly created parcel . Schroeder discussed his opposition to granting approval of the proposed subdivision. There was some discussion concerning the validity and enforcement of deed restrictions . Vote on motion for preliminary subdivision approval with all the same conditions as incorporated in the approval of 12/19/91 was 5-1-0 (Schroeder opposed) , and the motion was carried. There was further discussion regarding cumulative environmental effects. Van Cort explained to the Board that environmental determinations are based on measuring what impact a project will have on the existing environment . Planning and Development Board -2- Minutes of March 23, 1993 With a large project, the effects are more measurable, and greater mitigating measures can be taken. 4 . Floral Ave/Benson. Mr. Benson's proposal is to modify the course of a storm water drainage swale which runs across his property to allow development of a one-family dwelling on lot 4 of the subdivision that was granted in December, 1992 . There was discussion about continuing to prohibit development of lot 5, and Mr. Benson suggested possible donation of that land to a land trust or conservacy. Van Cort said that the City attorney's advice was to prohibit development on lot 5 permanently in legally enforceable terms . Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance moved by Schroeder, seconded by Rusoff, carried unanimously. The following resolution for preliminary approval of modification of subdivision was moved by Schroeder, seconded by Rusoff, and unanimously passed. WHEREAS William Benson has received Final Approval of subdivision of his property at 361 Floral Avenue on condition that development of the southernmost two lots (identified as numbers 4 and 5 on the plat) would be subject to review and approval by this Board, and WHEREAS Mr. Benson has requested Board approval of a proposal to do site work that would create a small basin or inlet on lots 4 and 5 preparatory to building a residence on lot 4, and WHEREAS the Corps of Engineers indicates that those portions of the property which exhibit some wetland characteristics are not subject to Corps review or regulation, and WHEREAS Mr. Benson has contacted the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, the U.S. Soil Conservation Service, and the City's Conservation Advisory Council for advice and clearance with regard to the areas of concern of these agencies and has indicated his willingness to proceed in accordance with such advice and applicable guidelines, and WHEREAS review of the proposal, in concept, by City engineering staff indicated no apparent matters of concern in city engineering terms as long as applicable procedures are followed, and WHEREAS Mr. Benson has stated intent not to develop lot 5 beyond the extent necessary to excavate the proposed basin and direct surface drainage to it from the culvert on lot 3, be it Planning and Development Board -3- Minutes of March 23, 19.93 RESOLVED that this Board herewith gives its necessary consent for the proposed creation of a basin on lots 4 and 5, in accordance with the above and with the schematic diagram accompanying Mr. Benson's letter explaining the proposal in concept received September 30, 1992, such development to be limited to excavation of a small area as shown on the schematic diagram, and use of the excavated material in site preparation for, and construction of, one single-family residence (with accessory apartment) on lot 4; and be it further RESOLVED that this approval is conditioned on applicant filing a revised final subdivision plat annotated to indicate that the portion of the property comprising lot 5 shall not be further developed. 5 . Site Development Plan Reviews - report A. Sciencenter - Since their site plan approval the . Sciencenter has proposed modifications to the landscape plan which will not affect the footprint of the building or traffic circulation and parking. The codes committee recommended that the proposed modifications be approved with the conditions that the number of large and medium-sized trees be approximately the same as in the previously approved plan, and the emergency exits from the fenced-in outdoor exhibit area remain as shown in the previously approved plan. B. Reconstruction Home Deferred at applicant ' s request . 6 . Old Business A. Site Plan Review - revisions to ordinance Discussion focused mainly on the "fast track" review process . Some board members felt that the planning director would be given too much authority in those cases . It was noted that there is a built-in appeals process, and that the Board would be able to review all site plans if deemed necessary. After further discussion, the sense of the board was that the "fast track" proposal is a good one. 7 . Revisions to the M-1 Zone - recommendations to Council The Board recommended adding mixed use projects along with residential, hotel, motel and boatel in the building height column, and reducing the maximum building height for those uses from 70 feet to 35 feet in the M-1 zone. 8 . Zoning Appeals Report The following was approved 6-0 : Appeal 2175 : Use Variance to permit non-owner occupancy of both dwelling units at 708 Mitchell, in an R-lb zone. Although the apartment was created before the accessory apartment regulations were established, this Board feels Planning and Development Board -4- Minutes of March 23, 1993 that an undesirable precedent would be set by permitting what is now a legally conforming use to become legally nonconforming. Further, an objective of the regulations was to help ensure levels of maintenance and supervision that might otherwise lead to lower standards of property maintenance with resultant negative effects on neighborhood appearance and stability. This Board feels that granting the appeal would effectively be zoning by variance. Appeal 2176: Special Permit for Home Occupation (auto repair) at 605 Cascadilla, in an R-2b zone. The proposed use of the majority of the ground floor and street frontage for this activity would certainly conflict with conditions expected of home occupation, as set forth in the definition. The repair shop would be a business, would appear to be the primary use of the property, and would not be in character with the uses and intensity of activity normal in the zone. This block currently experiences heavy nonresidential traffic due to the location of access to a high-traffic business at the west end. Appeal 2178 : Special Permit for Home Occupation at 414 E. Lincoln, in an R-2b zone. In this case, the volume of traffic generated would clearly distinguish the nature of the use as a business, which would not be appropriate in a residential zone. Appeal 2179 :, Area Variance to permit one-story storage structure at 123 W. State, in a CBD-60 zone. The proposal should go far to improving an unsightly condition. It is suggested that. applicant explore the possibilities for making a visual amenity of what might otherwise be at best a long (1141 ) , tall (14' -811 ) and undistinguished blank cinderblock wall . This wall will be quite visible from Green and Geneva Sts . , and a flat surface permitting the painting of a mural or other treatment could offset the area's "back of the lot" character and be a credit to the applicant . 9 . Reports Schroeder reported the Planning Committee has learned that National Parks gave approval, in concept, to the basic Inlet Island land use plan. He said that the appraisal process is under way. 10 . Approval of Minutes Schroeder, seconded by Kay, moved approval of January 26, 1993 and December 15, 1992 Minutes with amendments . Meeting was adjourned at 10 :30 p.m. epj-23Mar93 .min(6-30-93)