Council passes new noise ordinance

Local News

Discussion

PLEASE NOTE: There is a 150 word maximum for comments. All comments greater than 150 words in length will be deleted in their entirety.

ALSO NOTE: Derisive name-calling of an individual or group will result in the entire comment being deleted. This includes the terms "stupid" and "idiot" and similar references.

Welcome to our new online comments feature. Before you can join the discussion, you must first register with Disqus and verify your email address.

Once you do, your comments will post after they have been reviewed by a moderator.

We welcome your thoughts and your opinions, including unpopular ones. We ask only that you keep the conversation civil and clean.

Not all comments are deemed printable. Some are disqualified, at the newspaper’s discretion, for a number of reasons. Here are some typical practices to avoid in trying to get your comment printed:

There is a 150 word maximum for comments. All comments greater than 150 words in length will be deleted in their entirety.

Don’t state as a fact something that is unsubstantiated or that our editors wouldn't know to be true.

Don’t presume someone’s guilt in a case when it hasn't been established by a court.

Don’t assail or impugn an identifiable individual or group. If you have that kind of criticism, sign your name and submit it as a Letter to the Editor. (There is some leeway on this in connection with public officials, but it is not unconditional.)

Don’t use profanity. This includes the term “tea bagger.”

Don’t be incendiary or tasteless. Those qualities are subjective, of course, and our editors will be the arbiters.

Do not identify yourself in the main content area of the article content form. Only by enforcing this rule can the moderators prevent unscrupulous commenters from falsely identifying themselves as someone they are not.

Don't type in all caps. It is considered the Internet equivalent of shouting.

In sports articles, do not criticize officiating.

Remember, moderators are not allowed to edit any article comments. If an article comment fails any of the above criteria, the entire comment will be deleted.

We monitor comments Monday - Friday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Saturday and Sunday, 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. Approval of comments outside these times may be delayed.

comments powered by Disqus

March 6, 2008

Lawmakers table plan to change definition of functional family

By JOE LoTEMPLIO The Press Republican Thu Mar 06, 2008, 11:00 PM EST

PLATTSBURGH -- City councilors approved a tougher noise ordinance, but held off on changing the definition of a functional family.

The council had been considering changing the number of non-blood-related people allowed to live in a unit from four to three as a way of reducing the number of college students and college housing units in the Center City.

The suggestion sprang from a commission made up of college representatives, neighbors and city officials.

For decades, the Center City has been plagued by noise and vandalism committed by students living on Brinkerhoff and Court streets and the surrounding area.

While there was support among Center City neighbors to reduce the number of non-related people living together, there was concern among city councilors and Mayor Donald Kasprzak that such a change could affect a proposed student housing development at the former St. John's property on Broad Street.

United Group of Companies is proposing a 400-unit complex that would feature four students per unit.

At a public hearing on the issue before Thursday night's meeting, the sentiment on the proposed functional-family change was mixed.

Susan Levaque, a resident of Brinkerhoff Street, said changing the number of non-related people allowed to live together would protect the neighborhood.

"We are trying to keep our neighborhood under control and not have it all converted to student housing," Levaque said.

She noted that the United project at St. John's could be addressed by zoning changes that would allow the four-student units.

Suzanne Irwin, also a Brinkerhoff Street resident, was against the functional family change because existing four-student units would be grandfathered in.

"I'm against it because it won't change a thing," she said.

"It won't take the students off my street."

Jamie Thomas, a student living on Broad Street, said the change would just make rents go up for college students.

Nancy Woodward of Court Street said she supported the change.

"I am stunned by how quickly our neighborhood has changed," she said.

"It seems that every time a house is sold it is converted to student housing."

Councilor James Calnon (I-Ward 4) said the proposed law does a good job of defining what constitutes a functional family more clearly than the existing law.

But he suggested they leave the number of non-related people living together at four instead of changing it to three.

"I think we need a more comprehensive approach to this and we need a total city response," Calnon said.

Councilors agreed to amend the proposed law to leave the number of non-relateds living together at four.

But they decided to table the proposal as amended at the behest of Timothy Carpenter (D-Ward 1) to study it further.

"I'd like another week to digest this," Carpenter said.

While councilors held off on making a decision on the functional-family question, they approved a new noise ordinance.

Marjorie Mapstone of Brinkerhoff Street told councilors at a public hearing before the meeting that when she has guests stay overnight, they are often awakened at 2 or 3 a.m. by loud people.

"I have to apologize to my guests who are rudely awakened," Mapstone said.

"This has been a major problem since 1970."

The measure was unanimously approved. Michael Kelly (D-Ward 2) was absent.

"I am happy that we are toughening this up and making it a better law," Chris Jackson (D-Ward 6) said.

E-mail Joe LoTemplio at

jlotemplio@pressrepublican.com