HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-04-25 BZA Minutes
Town of Danby Board of Zoning Appeals
Minutes of Hearing and Mee ng
April 25 2023
PRESENT:
Lew Billington
Toby Dean
Betsy Lamb
Earl Hicks (Chair)
ABSENT:
Ted Jones
OTHER ATTENDEES:
Town Planner David West
Recording Secretary Cindy Katz
Zoom Chris Camadella, Katharine Hunter (Town Board Member),
Friede Sander,
In-Person Heather Coffey, Zachary Larkins
This mee ng was conducted in-person as well as over Zoom.
The mee ng convened at 7:00pm.
1. AGENDA REVIEW
There were no addi ons or dele ons to the agenda.
2. MINUTES APPROVAL
MOTION: Approve the minutes from Feb 2023
Moved by Lamb, seconded by Billington
Mary Ann Barr 2021
The Town of Danby
1830 Danby Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
danby.ny.gov
Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda
Tuesday 25 April 2023 at 7:00PM
The mo on passed.
In favor: Billington, Dean, Lamb, Hicks
3.NEW BUSINESS
VAR-2023-02 1914 Danby Rd, Parcel: 14.-1-10.1
Applicant: Zachary Larkins An cipated Ac on: Public Hearing, Review
applica on; consider variance
SEQR: Gran ng or Denying this Area Variance is a Type 2 Ac on requiring
no further review
Applicant Request: Variance from maximum front yard setback, and lot
width buildout to enable more incremental buildout of the parcel star ng
with 2 homes on the exis ng building founda on/slab.
Chair Hicks explained the process to the applicants. He noted that this is a Type II
ac on under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), with no
further review required. He reviewed the request by the applicants, and explained
the five factors used to evaluate requests. Chair Hicks asked the applicants if they
had anything especially relevant to men on regarding the five factors.
Applicant Larkins approached the mic and explained the current set back
requirement is 20 . He explained the land is complex with two concrete pads. He
has spent me on it observing it through all four seasons. He noted there is a
driveway that is buried under grass. He is seeking to just use the footprint of the
slab, possibly removing some of it in order to increase water absorp on in the soil.
The only other viable frontage space they are hoping to develop commercially.
Also present are two other wetlands. The far le (south) of frontage is very below
grade, which his experience in construc on has taught him not to build on.
Planner West shared the map on the large screen and the Applicant pointed out
the wetlands, the low points of the property, and clarified the cardinal direc ons.
Larkins explained the slab had previously been used as a pole-barn.
Chair Hicks explained the property was in the Hamlet Neighborhood Zone. He
read the goals and intent for this zone from the Town's Zoning Code. He pointed
out that this zone is radically different from the other zones in the town most of
which are more rural.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The public hearing was opened.
Chair Hicks asked the public if there were ques ons. Chris Camadella introduced
himself as a neighbor across the street and sought an explana on of the need for
the variance. West explained this request may appear unusual because they are
seeking permission to be set back far from the road, no ng that the intent of the
current zoning for the Hamlet Neighborhood is to create a village feel with houses
lining the road. Planner West added that although the Applicants house would not
help create a "village feel", they have addi onal future hopes of building a cafe/
bakery, small rental homes, and/or other community spaces, and those plans
certainly DO help create the intended feel of a village in that zone. The neighbor
replied that this request makes sense as it does to seek to build on the current
slab. Planner West added that siteplan review will be required in the future should
the Applicants move forward with those commercial ventures.
The applicants greeted the neighbors, who they had not yet met, discussed where
they lived, and the neighbor expressed pleasure at having a coffee shop nearby.
He thought that was a much be er op on than the Dollar general, which was
previously proposed.
Friede Sander, a neighbor whose land juts up against the applicants, spoke in
support for the plans. She asked for clarifica on on what the Danby Hamlet
Neighborhood Zone is. Planner West responded and Chair Hicks added that a
map can be seen on the Danby website and that the applicants property is almost
the last one in the zone. Chair Hicks asked if anyone else wanted to share their
thoughts and Board Member Katharine Hunter expressed her support for the
applicant's ideas. Planner West confirmed that there were no other
correspondences.
The public hearing was closed at 7:22 pm.
Board Ques ons and Discussion
Chair Hicks explained that the 5th member of the BZA was not present and that a
majority is needed from those present in order to approve the variance. He asked
the applicants if they would prefer to pull their applica on to be voted on when
all members are present, when it may be easier to achieve a majority. The
Applicants elected to move forward anyway.
In response to a ques on from Chair Hicks, Planner West clarified that this
variance is indeed needed from the BZA and not the Planning Board.
Chair Hicks expressed excitement about the Applicant's plans but also noted the
need to follow ordinances. He confirmed it is not a corner lot, which is required in
order to have a restaurant, and Planner West clarified that they would be adding a
road to create a corner for a future restaurant [Secretary note: Such is not a part
of the currently requested variance and would be discussed in future
conversa ons.}
Chair Hicks considered the aesthe c and architectural requirements and concerns
in the Zoning Code and wondered if the house would fulfill these requirements.
He commented on the importance of crea ng a “welcoming” feeling.
Billington wondered if houses need to be parallel to the road, and Planner West
answered it does not. David added that the current aesthe c and architectural
requirements are intended for a home that is directly off the road -- and this home
is not. He stated he is less concerned about what they DO on the lot, and more
concerned about losing the opportunity to have something else there that would
be near the road and contribute to the "village" feel.
Lamb wondered about the loca on of the driveway in rela on to the wetlands,
and the applicant explained that they plan to uncover the previously built drive-
way, and that the driveway and road will be separate. The smaller houses, which
are beyond the scope of his variance, will be along the 2nd road, and they plan on
living in the ny house while they build the main house -both on the slab. When
the main house is complete, they will live in it and the ny house will become a
studio/guest house. He would also like to build a wood working studio with a
rental on top, and clarified that the preference is to make the houses on the side
road rentals, although maybe there will be one vaca on home. He said they are
planning to keep the coffee shop under 1500 in which case he can draw the
plans himself and has a friend who can help him.
Lamb returned to the driveway, and if there are any alterna ves if they weren't
able to build on the pad. With all the wetness, the changes in eleva on, and the
plan for the coffee shop, they all agreed it is a bit ght and it makes sense to use
the pad.
Dean commented that no one has yet built a house in this area and wondered if it
is irrelevant to look at architecture since the house would be so far back from the
road. Lamb asked about landscaping plans, and the applicant clarified that the
environmental impact is really important to them and she is hoping to create rain
gardens, use no ll agriculture, and that they are really seeking to be good steward
of the land. This is their reasoning for wan ng to use the slab and the road. Lamb
clarified she is thinking about what can be done to keep it all looking a rac ve
from the road, although she won't be giving condi ons about what they ought to
do.
Applicant added that an important goal for them is to keep the rentals affordable,
to build community, and create a welcoming place for folks to come.
Hicks added one sep c system for mul ple houses if they are owned by the same
owner is allowed and that this allows for crea ve sep c.They discussed the well
and diversion of water. Planner West clarified that their piers will go through the
slab, as the slab itself isn’t good quality. Billington wondered about drainage and
what will be needed for the coffee shop. The applicant responded that he’d like to
use as much permeable paving as possible and would like to avoid concrete.
Area Variance Findings & Decision
The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Zachary Larkins regarding
the property at 1914 Danby Road for an Area Variance of approximately 250 to
allow building on the exis ng slab from the zoning code sec on 604-6 that
requires a maximum front-yard setback of 20 in the Hamlet Neighborhood
Zoning District.
1.The Board agreed no undesirable change would be produced in the character of
the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby proper es.
The Board agreed this proposed plan would improve the current character
and the future suggested work would enhance the Hamlet concept. They
also noted the benefit of improving the driveway,
2.The Board agree that the benefit sought by the applicant could not be achieved by
a feasible alterna ve of the variance.
The Board agreed that by re-using the slab, which is more than 20
setback, they are able to prevent encroaching in any other area. Lamb
added that if they build the coffee shop as intended, there is no alterna ve
for the loca on of the house.
3.The Board agreed the requested variance was substan al.
Dean stated that yes, it is substan al, but the circumstances negate the
impact. The other Board members agreed it was substan al.
4.The Board agreed that the variance would not have an adverse impact on the
physical or environmental condi ons in the neighborhood.
The Board agreed that the proposal seems like an improvement, and will reduce
impact by using the original slab.
5.The Board agreed that the alleged difficulty was self-created.
The Applicant did choose to purchase the property, and their desire to re-
use the slab creates the need for a variance. In a way, the difficulty is also
created by the site itself, because that is where the slab is located.
The Applicant stressed that they are very serious and committed to this project. They
discussed the location, the interest in some of their friends in joining the project, and a bit
about the history of commercial bakeries in the area.
They discussed the distances and measurements in order to establish how much of a
variance should be granted to ensure building on the slab is possible. Planner West
measured the distance using the county website, and concluded that the variance
should be around 250 feet in order to be safe. They discussed conditions and Lamb
said that there are some things that would be nice to see, but that they aren't conditions.
MOTION: to Pass Resolution 3 of 2023: The Benefit to the applicant does outweigh the
detriment to the neighborhood or community.
Moved by Dean, seconded by Lamb.
Planner West measured the distance using the county website, and concluded that the
variance should be around 250 feet in order to be safe. They discussed conditions and
Lamb said that there are some things that would be nice to see, but that they aren't
conditions. They discussed the septic system and other conditions on the site.
The motion passed.
In favor: Dean, Lamb, Billington, Hicks
The applicants thanked the board and the BZA expressed excitement with their project
(and coffee!).
Planner West gave updates about the STR survey for residents to please fill out, that the
noise ordinance is being considered, and the Town Board is also working on a logging
ordinance that the CAC has proposed. There is also the community development
rehabilitation project. Hicks asked about packages of plants and seeds from a program
at a Saratoga Nursery.
4. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 8:29 pm