HomeMy WebLinkAboutMin-11-14-12
1
CODES AND ORDINANCES COMMITTEE
MEETING MINUTES
November 14, 2012
MEMBERS PRESENT: Bill Goodman, Pat Leary, Eric Levine, Eva Hoffmann, Bill King
ABSENT: Fred Wilcox
OTHERS PRESENT: Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Bruce
Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Dan Tasman, Asst. Director of Planning; Chris Balestra, Planner
Chair Bill Goodman called the meeting to order at 6:35pm.
Agenda Item No. 1 - Member Comments/Concerns:
Bill G. informed the Committee about ‘cluster subdivision regulations’ regarding proposed changes or
quick fixes to the ordinance. Cluster subdivision will be put on the December 19th COC agenda.
Agenda Item No. 2 – Draft Minutes from the September 19th and October 17th Meetings:
Approval of September 19, 2012 meeting: Eric moved and Eva seconded the motion to approve the
minutes; there were no changes, all in favor.
Approval of October 17, 2012 meeting: Pat moved and Eric seconded the motion to approve the minutes
as amended, all in favor of the changes.
Agenda Item No. 3 – Continued Discussion of Town Code Section 270-233, Roofing Permit
Requirements: Bill G. went through the memo that was in the COC packet regarding Section 270-233
with the existing law to A and B. There were two alternatives to the existing B - Alternative #1 regarding
roof work and Alternative #2 for other building work.
Discussion followed regarding both Alternative #1 and #2. Proposed changes:
Add “or would” to both Alternatives
Add “prospective violation” language from Susan B
Add “or other element of a structure”
Change Code Enforcement Officer to Director of Code Enforcement
COC thought the language in Alternative #2 was broader and possibly could combine the two
Alternatives; specifically mention roofs in Alternative #2.
Following a long discussion, final language shall read: “No permit to build shall be issued except
pursuant to written order of the Board of Appeals, where the proposed construction, alteration, or use
would be in violation of any provision of this chapter or would occur on a parcel on which a violation
of any provision of this chapter exists. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this subsection shall not
prohibit the issuance of a permit to repair or replace a roof or other element of a structure that needs
such repair or replacement in order to maintain the structure’s integrity, in the determination of the
Director of Code Enforcement, even if there is an existing violation of this chapter on the parcel.”
Eric moved and Bill K. seconded the motion to recommend the changes to the Town Board, all in favor.
Agenda Item No. 4 – Continued Discussion of Revisions to Town Code Chapter 221, Sign Law:
Town Draft Law, “Purpose”, “Prohibited”, and “Exempt” Sections: Bill G. referred to the one page
suggested wording changes from staff regarding the Sign Law ‘Prohibited’ and ‘Exempt’ lists. Bill G.
2
also updated the Committee regarding the draft Banner change going to the December Town Board
meeting.
Proposed changes on Page 1, §221-2 Purpose:
Delete “and street graphics” in first line under Purpose and add “life, health, property and…” after
‘welfare’
A. Delete “to safeguard the life, health, property, and general welfare” and add “number, size,”
after ‘controlling the’
B. Delete “adjacent land uses” and add “the surrounding built and natural environments” after
‘with’
C. Delete entire line
D. Delete everything after the word “distractions”
G. Add “including scenic views” after ‘appearance’
Discussion and Proposed changes on Page 2, §221-3 Interpretation:
A. Chris stated that “A” was a combination of the original A and B, and if we chose to make the
Sign Law part of the Zoning Code, then we would need to re-word this. Committee discussed the
advantages of putting the Sign Law into the Zoning Code, but no decision was made on “A.”
Committee will re-visit next time.
Discussion and Proposed changes on Page 2, §221-4 Prohibited signs:
Add “and displays” after ‘signs’ in the title and the first line.
B. Add “and all electronic message centers (animated and non-animated)” after ‘animated signs’
Change the word “rotating to “moving”
Move everything after the word ‘messages’ into a new “C”
C. Move “electronic message centers” to “B” and instead say “Graphics that physically or visually
impair vehicular or pedestrian traffic by design, color, lighting, or placement.”
D. Portable signs - Need to define, re-visit in regulated section
E. Delete “Attention-getting devices, such as…” and start the sentence with ‘Pennants’
Delete “flags, except government flags” after ‘valances’
Delete everything after the word ‘devices’ and replace with “shall not be part of an exterior or
window sign or used for advertising or attracting attention when not part of a sign”
G. Replace “roof signs” with the wording from the existing law to read “Signs placed, wholly or in
part, on, over or above any roof”
H. Add “or official public information sign” after ‘device’
Committee will pick up on Page 2, §221-4 Prohibited signs “I” at the next COC meeting.
Agenda Item No. 5 – Discussion of Chart titled “Sprinkler Law Comparisons for COC (WDG
11/1/2012)”: Bill G. relayed the information he and Bruce obtained from researching other
municipalities’ Sprinkler Laws and distributed a chart of the research to the Committee for their review.
He noted that the Town of Ithaca was the first to establish a Sprinkler Law in the State (in 1988), and a
year after it was passed, a couple of places in Westchester County passed a strikingly similar law that
included a long list of every building that would require sprinklers.
3
The overall result of the chart and research showed that 16 other municipalities adopted similar variations
of the Town’s Sprinkler Law, with some muni’s creating long lists of buildings that their law would apply
to, other muni’s basing their lists on the State Code classifications and requirements, and still others
exempting buildings under a certain size. Bill G. will continue to look for more examples.
The Committee focused on the Ithaca College request that the law exempt everything in the State
Building Code’s “U” and “S” occupancy categories. The COC went through every item under the “U”
category and determined that the types of buildings listed were already exempt in the Town’s law (except
“bathhouses”). The Committee then moved on to the “S” category. Bruce warned members that this
would be a much bigger discussion, as the “S” category was broken down into S-1 and S-2, etc., and was
regulated based on the types of contents of the listed structures and the size. The COC decided to leave
the full discussion of occupancy category “S” for the next COC meeting.
Agenda Item No. 6 – Other Business: None.
Agenda Item No. 7 - Next meeting date and agenda:
Next meeting has been scheduled for December 19, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. and the agenda will include:
• Discussion of Proposed Modifications to the Town’s Cluster Subdivision provisions
• Continued Discussion of the Town Sprinkler Law – “S” Occupancy category
• Continued Review of Draft Sign Law – start at §221-4 (I)
Meeting adjourned at 8:35 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Sandy Polce
Administrative Staff