Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-03-25 BZA Minutes Final Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes Tuesday 25 March 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 (arrived 7:03 pm) Tobias Dean Ted Jones Betsy Lamb Earl Hicks (Chair) OTHER ATTENDEES: Town Planner: Greg Hutnik Recording Secretary: Cindy Katz Public: Zach Larkins Zoom: Nicole Bright; Katharine Hunter (Town Board Member) This meeting was conducted virtually on the Zoom platform. 1. AGENDA REVIEW The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. There were no additions or deletions to the agenda. The Board members and planner noted that the applicant was not present, apparently due to a miscommunication and him being out of town. They reviewed the options for the meeting: 1. Consider the variance and make a decision today. 2. Hold the advertised public hearing today , but make the decision at the next meeting. 2. LIAISON REPORT Katharine Hunter, Town Board member, gave a brief update on the regulatory review and the Safe Streets initiative. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (JANUARY 2025 ) BZA members said they had not read the minutes and therefore will consider approving them at the next meeting. Planner Hutnik noted in the future he could add a reminder to read minutes with the application packets he prepares. They discussed training hours , relevant topics for trainings, and where to register for trainings. Planner Hutnik offered to periodically update the BZA on topics of interest that the Planning Board or the Town Board may be discussing. Ted Jones confirmed he was sworn in. They discussed town email addresses. 4. NEW BUSINESSES VAR 2025-02 Address: 143 Nelson Road Parcel: 3.-1-42 Applicant: William Wilcox Anticipated Action: Review Application; Public Hearing; Consider variance SEQR: Type 2 Applicant Request: The applicant is seeking to reduce the side setback from the required 50 feet in Section 603(6)(b) of the Zoning Law to 20 feet to allow for the construction of a new home. Board Discussion: Chair Hicks reviewed the request, which requires no further environmental review. He read from part of the staff memo , and asked if anyone needed to recuse themselves. No one did. Chair Hicks asked a few questions about the property’s histor y. Audience member Larkins stated he believed it was purchased in December; they discussed how long it had been abandoned for, believing it to be potentially as long as 18 years. Planner Hutnik put up the aerial image of the parcel on the large screen. Lamb questioned which area qualifies as the “front” and Planner Hutnik explained both areas adjacent to the street are considering the “front”, the “side” is anything that intersect s those lines, and the “rear” is anything else. He noted that this property has two rear property lines, and that it is essentially “unbuildable” except for a small sliver of ten feet. They examined the parcel map, reviewing the orientation of the home/driv e-way of the parcel under consideration as well as of the neighboring homes. The owner of the adjacent home was on Zoom and had already discussed with the Planner what would be needed if they wanted to build as well. BZA members agreed that they wanted to hear from the applicant directly before they make a decision, but that the public hearing ought to be held today as planned. Public Comment: The public hearing was opened at 7:31 p.m. Nicole Bright: (285 Ridgecrest Road) Ms Bright explained that she s poke to Planner Hutnik as well as Wilcox already. She explained that this property was given to her by her father, the current house on it is dilapidated, but she plans to build a house there. As long as Wilcox rebuilding doesn’t impinge on her ability and right to build, she’s fine with it. They discussed the proximity between the two houses, and Ms . Bright expressed her desire that the houses not be made any closer than they previously were. Planner Hutnik pulled up the drawing, and they reviewed the placement of the house s. The current house on the parcel under discussion is about 25 feet from the property line, the new one the applicant is considering would be 28 feet, while the applicant is considering requesting the set-back be put at twenty feet. Planner Hutnik clarified that there has not yet been a survey, so these numbers are approximations, and that nothing that the BZA could decide in regards to this property would impede what Ms. Bright can do on hers. Chair Hicks inquired about other correspondence: Yes, an email from neighbor Jim Nichols, which they reviewed. They commented that where a drive -way is built is not actually within the scope of the variance, and also pointed out that the current location of the drive-way off Ridgecrest is actually closer to the stop sign then the distance to the stop sign if the drive -way goes out to Nelson, as proposed. They reviewed the email sent by neighbor Nicole Bright. The public hearing closed at 7:52p.m. They discussed if they ought to move forward now or wait until next month and ask him their questions. Bright asked for clarification on the distances being requested. Planner Hutnik explained the BZA will grant the minimum variance necessary. She asked if he were granted a permitted set-back of twenty feet, could he build up to that line, and the answer was yes. She expressed her objection to him building any closer to her property than the house already was. They discussed the need to have a survey done, as all the numbers they currently have approximations. MOTION: The BZA will make a decision on this application after receiving a survey showing the location of the existing home, and the proposed building in relation to the property line . They request to receive this before the meeting next month. Moved by Jones, seconded by Lamb The motion passed. In favor: Billington, Jones, Lamb, Hicks Against: Dean 5. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned 8:16 p.m.