HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarcham Hall ResolutionVILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
RESOLUTION ADOPTED ON DECEMBER 5, 2011 FOR APPEAL NO. 2011-5
Motion made by: Anita Watkins
Motion seconded by: Jack Young
WHEREAS:
A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: granting of an
area variance to permit an increase in the lot coverage from the 15% allowed by the
Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Ordinance Section 7: Building Coverage in a
Commercial District to 18.3% at 836 Hanshaw Road, Marcham Hall; and
B. On December 5th, 2011, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of
Appeals held a public hearing regarding such action, and thereafter thoroughly reviewed
and analyzed (i) the materials and information presented by and on behalf of the
applicant(s) in support of this appeal, (ii) all other information and materials rightfully
before the Board, and (iii) all issues raised during the public hearing and/or otherwise
raised in the course of the Board’s deliberations; and
C. On December 5th, 2011, in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State
Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act
(“SEQR), and 6 NYCRR Section 617.5, the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of
Appeals determined that the proposed action is a Type II action, and thus may be
processed without further regard to SEQR; and
D. On December 5th, 2011, in accordance with Section 712-b of the Village Law of the
State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights Article IX§21, the Village of Cayuga
Heights Zoning Board of Appeals, in the course of its deliberations, took into
consideration the benefit to the applicant if the area variance is granted as weighed
against the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or community
by such grant;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals hereby makes the following
findings with respect to the specific criteria for such area variance as set forth in Section
712-b of the Village Law of the State of New York and Village of Cayuga Heights
Article IX§21:
Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or
detriment to nearby properties will be created by granting the area variance.
Finding:
NO, because it si a small addition that will not be visible from the road and the only
neighbor that is directly impacted is in support of the project.
Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method feasible for
the applicant to pursue other than an area variance.
Finding:
NO, because it is already a permitted non-compliant structure and any addition would
require a variance. Adding a 3rd floor is not feasible as it would not be compliant with the
Village’s current Zoning Ordinance.
Whether the requested area variance is substantial.
Finding:
NO, because it is basically filling in an existing concave area (court yard) and not
expanding the overall bounds of the building.
Whether the proposed area variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical
or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
Finding:
NO, because it will have a minimal impact on storm water management and, in fact, it
improves storm water retention by use of a rain garden.
Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created.
Finding:
NO, because the need for the addition is State mandated.
1. It is hereby determined by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of
Appeals that the following variance is GRANTED AND APPROVED (with conditions, if any,
as indicated), it being further determined that such variance is the minimum necessary
and adequate to grant relief and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the
neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community:
Description of Variance:
The granting of an area variance to permit an increase in the lot coverage from the 15%
allowed by the Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Ordinance Section
7: Building Coverage in a Commercial District to 18.3% at 836 Hanshaw Road,
Marcham Hall.
The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:
AYES: Unanimous - Anita Watkins, Alison Shull, Kirk Sigel, Jack Young,
Bob Powers
NAYS: None
The motion was declared to be carried.
STATE OF NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS:
VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS)
I, Angela Podufalski, Deputy Village Clerk of the Village of Cayuga Heights, do
hereby certify that the attached Resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the
Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals at a regular meeting on December
5th, 2011.
_________________________________
Deputy Village Clerk
Village of Cayuga Heights
A copy of said resolution being sent to the applicant and filed with the Village Clerk on
December _____, 2011