Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-26 BZA MinutesThe Town of Danby 1830 Danby Road Ithaca, NY 14850 danby.ny.gov M& ry A Board of Zoning Appeals Mllnuteg Tuesday 26 March 2024 at 7:OOPM Town of Danby Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of Hearing and Meeting March 26 2024 PRESENT: Lew Billington Tobias Dean Ted Jones (via Zoom) Earl Hicks ABSENT: Betsy Lamb, BZA Member Cindy Katz, Recording Secretary OTHERATTENDEES; Town Planner Greg Hutnik Public in -person George Adams (neighbor), Keith Liblick (Renovus Solar via Zoom), Katharine Hunter (Town Board Member) The meeting was conducted virtually on the Zoom platform. Please note the planning secretary was not present during the meeting in -person or virtually. These minutes were compiled from minutes taken by the planner as well as from the Zoom recording of the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. 1. AGENDA REVIEW There were no additions or deletions to the agenda. 2. MINUTES APPROVAL MOTION: To Approve the meeting minutes from the January 2024 BZA meeting Moved by Dean, seconded by Jones The motion passed. In favor: Dean, Jones, Hicks Abstain: Billington Chair Hicks sought to acknowledge that he misspoke during a previous meeting when he requested an recommendation from the Planning Board on an application. He now understand such a request is actually improper. They discussed upcoming training opportunities. 3. NEW BUSINESS VAR 2024-03 67 Marsh Road Parcel: 12.-1-5.61 Applicant: Tom Seaney Anticipated Action: Public Hearing, Review application; consider variance SEQR: Granting or Denying this Area Variance is a Type 2 Action requiring no further review Chair Hicks reviewed the request for a side yard setback of 37.5 feet for a ground mounted solar array where 50 feet is required in the Rural 2 zone. No further enviromental review is required. The owners were not present; however, they had a friend (and neighbor) representing them. No one felt they needed to recuse themselves, including Chair Hicks who is friends with the applicants. After considering, he decided he did not need to recuse himself. He added they did not speak about the application. He explained that to pass the variance, they need three out of the four BZA members present to vote in favor (if all BZA members were present, they would need three out of five votes in favor). No objections were raised. Public Comment: The public hearing was opened at 7:21 p.m George Adams spoke in favor. The other option would make routine maintenance more difficult for the applicant. Also, in the proposed location, the array will likely not be very visible. Chair Hicks inquired about if there were other comments sent in and called in from other neighbors. Planner Hutnik replied there was one written comment, which was attached in the application packet. It was in support. The public hearing was closed at 7:29 p.m. Area Variance Findings and Decision The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal regarding the property at 67 Marsh Road for an Area Variance from the zoning code Section 714(iii)(a)(ii) that requires 50 foot side set -backs in the Rural 2 Zone District. They began to review the balancing questions. 1. The Board agreed that no undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. Planner Hutnik commented that there have been a few variances from this same requirement recently. This may signal that the Town Board might consider changing the zoning so that a solar array is characterized like an assessory building and not a primary one. This would alter its required setbacks and remove the need for variances like this. 2. The Board agreed that the benefit sought by the applicant could not be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance. 3. The Board agreed the requested variance was NOT substantial. 4. The Board agreed that the variance would not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions of the neighborhood. 5. The Board agreed that the alleged difficulty was self-created. The BZA found that an Area Variance of 12.5 feet from section 714(iii)(a)(ii)) of the Zoning Code 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 because: the applicant has devised a solution that will not be a detriment to the neighborhood or the environment. MOTION To Pass Resolution 3 of 2024: The Benefit to the Applicant does outweigh the detriment to the neighborhood or community. Moved by Dean, seconded by Jones The motion passed. In favor: Billington, Dean, Jones, Hicks 4. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m.