HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-07-22-BZA Minutes Final
Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes
Tuesday 22 July 2025 at 7:00PM Mary Ann Barr 2021
The Town of Danby
1830 Danby Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
danby.ny.gov
MINUTES
PRESENT:
Lew Billington
Tobias Dean
Ted Jones
Betsy Lamb
Earl Hicks
OTHER ATTENDEES:
Town Planner Greg Hutnik
Public: John Czamanske (Interim Planner)
Zoom: Katharine Hunter (Town Board Member)
Please note that the recording secretary was not present via Zoom or in person during the
duration of the meeting. Meeting minutes were prepared after the meeting using the Zoom
recording.
Due to technical difficulties, the meeting was called to order at 7:40 pm.
1. AGENDA REVIEW
There were no additions or deletions to the agenda.
2. MINUTES APPROVAL
No action taken on the June BZA minutes as not all members of the board had reviewed
them.
Chair Hicks briefly introduced John Czamanske to the board. Mr. Czamanske will act as
interim planner while Planner Hutnik is away on paternity leave.
3. NEW BUSINESS
VAR 2025-04 Address: 365 Troy Road Parcel: 3.-1-9.3 Applicant: Hasham Qaisar
Anticipated Action: Public Hearing; Consider Variance SEQR: Unlisted
Applicant Request: Subdivide the 3.8-acre property into two lots, one of which
would be ~0.2 acres less than the 2-acre lot area minimum
Chair Hicks reviewed the application, noting the property is in the low density
residential zone. An area variance is required for this subdivision to be approved
because this district has a minimum requirement of two acres and one of the lots to be
formed in this application will be roughly .2 acres less than two acres. He also noted
that an environmental impact determination is required for this application, and that
such was already completed by the Planning Board.
Chair Hicks inquired if anyone needed to recuse themselves from the decision today,
and nobody did. They reviewed the process until now regarding this case with both the
BZA and the Planning Board. Chair Hicks read aloud the July 15th written
recommendation from the Planning Board to the BZA regarding the variance. The letter
recommended that the variance be approved given the similarity of the lot development
pattern to the rest of the neighborhood, that the reduction in lot size is less than 10% of
the minimum standard of two acres, and that granting the variance found no adverse
impact to the neighborhood. The Planning Board went on to recommend that the 50-
foot stream buffer required by the zoning law for intermittent streams be shown on the
subdivision plat and that the second structure, a garage and ADU, also be shown on the
plat.
They discussed the other structures on the land and their locations. The applicant was
unsure why they were not on the recent survey. They located where the stream buffer
would appear on the survey, and Planner Hutnik clarified that those locations are more
relevant to the Planning Board’s subdivision application for this address and less
relevant to the area variance.
Public Comment:
The public hearing was opened at 7:57 pm.
No one spoke. There were no emails or phone calls received prior from the public.
The public hearing was closed at
Board Questions and Discussion:
Area Variance Findings and Decision:
The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the appeal of Hasham Qaisar regarding the
property at 365 Troy Road (tax parcel 3.-1-9.3) for an Area Variance from the zoning
code Section 603(5) that requires a minimum lot size of 2 acres in the Low Density
Residential area.
1. The Board agreed no undesirable change would be produced in the character
of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, noting multiple other
smaller or undersized lots in the same neighborhood.
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 that the requested variance was not substantial, as it is a 10%
reduction of the minimum standard.
4. The Board agreed that the variance would not have an adverse impact on the
physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood as the development is
aligned with the existing development patterns, and the buffer required from the
potential stream would mitigate any potential impacts.
5. The Board agreed that the alleged difficulty was self-created, noting that the
applicant does not have to subdivide the land.
The Board of Zoning Appeals found that an area variance of .19 acres from section 603
(5) from the zoning law is the minimum variance that should be granted in order to
preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health and welfare of
the community because the proposal is consistent with the development pattern of the
neighborhood, there are no other feasible alternatives, the hardship, though self-created
has no significant importance, and further the BZA mirrors the recommendation
suggested by the Planning Board, as the lead agency.
They discussed how to ensure proper placement of new construction in the future, the
expectation that the plat will be corrected upon presentation to the Planning Board at
their new meeting, and that the public hearing for the subdivision at that meeting is
dependent upon the granting of the variance. They suggested to the applicant that he
consider flood insurance.
MOTION: To Pass Resolution 3 of 2025: The Benefit to the Applicant Outweighs
the detriment to neighborhood because of the reasons stated above.
Moved by Billington, seconded by Lamb
The motion passed.
In favor: Billington, Dean, Jones, Lamb, Hicks
The planner and the applicant discussed having a written record of what is
needed to add to the plat.
4. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
---- Recording Secretary, Cindy Katz