Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Notice And Noise Ordinance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges board to align notice radius for site plan mailings with city noise ordinance
Summary
A resident told the Ithaca City Planning and Development Board that the board’s 250-foot certified-mail notice for site-plan applications does not match the city’s 500-foot noise-impacted area under Local Law 240-4 and asked the board to seek Common Council action to align the mailing requirement.
Meg Pritchard, a nearby resident, told the Ithaca City Planning and Development Board on March 25 that the board’s current 250-foot certified-mail notice requirement for site-plan applicants excludes some neighbors who would fall within the city’s 500-foot consideration in the noise ordinance, Local Law 240-4.
Pritchard said she was outside the board’s 250-foot notification zone for a project that gained final approval in December 2022 and asked whether the board intends to amend its application mailing requirement to match the 500-foot radius described in the noise ordinance.
The board chair, Emily Petrino, and staff said the board is still discussing the change and that aligning the site-plan notice with the noise ordinance would require Common Council approval. Petrino said the board’s intent is to ask applicants to use the broader mailing radius where applicable until Common Council acts, and staff later confirmed the board is “still looking into” the change. Planning staff also said approved minutes are posted online and the meeting recordings are available on YouTube for reference.
Why it matters: certified-mail notice is the primary way some abutters learn about proposed development. If notice boundaries differ across city rules — for example, between site-plan notice and the city noise ordinance — residents can be left out of pre-hearing engagement on projects that may affect them.
Board and staff responses: staff and board members acknowledged the discrepancy and said they will pursue alignment through Common Council. Board members also committed to asking applicants to use the broader notice until an official zoning or procedural change is adopted.
What remains unresolved: the board did not adopt an immediate rule change; the transcript shows only discussion and a plan to pursue Common Council approval. Pritchard also noted she could not find approved minutes online for the planning board after September 2024; staff replied that approved minutes and the YouTube video would be posted.
Next steps: Board members said the change would require a Common Council vote. The board indicated it will continue internal discussion and will press applicants to notify the larger area in the interim.
Ending: The matter remains under review by board staff and will require Council action for a formal rule change; residents who want to follow up were told to contact planning staff by email for updates and to consult posted minutes and the meeting recording.
