HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3276 - 110 Dryden Road - Decision
CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS
Area Variance Findings & Decision
Appeal No.: 3276
Applicant: Mark Fuentes of Airosmith Development on behalf of AT&T
Owner: TTEPA Associates, LLC
Property Location: 110 Dryden Road
Zoning District: MU-2
Applicable Section of City Zoning Code: Section 325-29.8B(1)(h) and Section 325-29.8(C)(1)
Requirement for Which Variance is Requested: Siting Standards for Personal Wireless Service Facilities
and Design Standards for Personal Wireless Service Facilities.
Publication Dates: September 5, 2024 and September 10, 2024.
Meeting Held On: September 10, 2024.
Summary: Appeal of Mark Fuentes of Airosmith Development on behalf of AT&T and property owner
TTEPA Associates, LLC, for an area variance from Section 325-29.8B(1)(h), Siting Standards for Personal
Wireless Service Facilities, and Section 325-29.8C(1), Design Standards for Personal Wireless Service
Facilities, of the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. The applicant proposes to replace nine existing antennas
and install additional equipment to the company’s existing personal wireless service facility (PWSF)
located on the property at 110 Dryden Road. The proposal is considered a modification of the existing
PWSF. The City recently amended Article VA, Telecommunications Facilities and Services, of the Zoning
Ordinance, and the amendment requires all PWSF to be located at least 250’ from adjacent residences. The
existing PWSF at this property is located on top of a residential building. This is an existing deficiency
that will not be exacerbated by this proposal.
110 Dryden Road is located in the MU-2 district in which the proposed PWSF is permitted. However,
Section 325-29.28 requires that an area variance be granted before a building permit is issued.
Public Hearing Held On: September 10, 2024.
Members present:
Michael Cannon
Donna Fleming
Joseph Kirby
Andre Gardiner, Vice-Chair
There were no comments from interested parties regarding this appeal.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Lisa Nicholas, AICP, Director
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -l & -m of New York State General Municipal Law:
Not applicable.
Environmental Review: Type 2
This is a Type 2 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State
Environmental Quality Review Act and is not subject to Environmental Review.
Planning & Development Board Recommendation:
The Board has reviewed this variance and has no comments.
Motion: A motion to grant Appeal #3276, an area variance for 110 Dryden Road, was made by J. Kirby.
Deliberations & Findings:
The Board acknowledged that this is an existing installation and the equipment modifications will not
exacerbate the existing deficiency.
Factors Considered:
1. Whether an undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a
detriment to nearby properties: Yes No
The proposed installation is a modification of an existing personal wireless service facility (PWSF) that has
been located on the rooftop of the property for many years. The new installation will replace existing
equipment, and there is no evidence that this change will produce an undesirable change to neighborhood
character or have a negative impact on nearby properties.
2. Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the
variance: Yes No
The locations of personal wireless service facilities are determined by se rvice coverage requirements.
While there is a limited radius where the PWSF can be located, it is preferred, as stated in the Zoning
Ordinance, to co-locate equipment on existing sites whenever possible to limit any visual impacts.
Furthermore, any alternate location within the limited radius of this property will also be deficient in the
resident setback requirements of the zoning ordinance.
3. Whether the requested variance is substantial: Yes No
The proposed installation will be located on the roof of a residential structure, and a residential setback of
250’ is required by the Zoning Ordinance. While this is a deficiency of 100% of the required setback, this
is a deficiency caused by the location of the existing PWSF site on which the new equipment will be co -
located and will not be exacerbated by the proposal.
4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the
neighborhood: Yes No
The new PWSF equipment will be part of an existing installation on the property. There is no evidence to
indicate that this modification will have an adverse impact on any physical or environmental conditions.
5. Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No
The applicant is proposing to install the new equipment at an existing PWSF location to mitigate visual
clutter, as requested by the City. The residential setback deficiency is an existing deficiency that predates
the City’s adoption of the residential setback requirement.
Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by M. Cannon.
Vote: 5-0-0
Michael Cannon YES
Donna Fleming YES
Joseph Kirby YES
Andre Gardiner YES
David Barken, Chair YES
Determination of the BZA Based on the Above Factors:
The BZA, taking into the five factors for an area variance, finds that the benefit to the applicants outweighs
the detriment to the neighborhood or community. The BZA further finds that the variances from the Zoning
Ordinance, §325-29.8B(1)(h) and §325-29.8(C)(1) is the minimum variance that should be granted in
order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the
community.
___________________________ September 10, 2024
Megan Wilson, Zoning Administrator Date
Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals