Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1994-08-10 FILED F114AL TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Date • WEDNESDAY , AUGUST 10 , 1994 Clerk. n NQ � � The following appeals were heard by the Board on August 10 , 1994 : Appeal of James C . Rogan , Appellant , requesting a variance from .the requirements of Section 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to maintain a free - standing sign with a total area of 108 square feet ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) at Rogan ' s Corner , 825 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 40- 4 - 2 , Business District A . GRANTED . Appeal of Robert P . Andree , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 02 - 2b and 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to maintain a 75 square foot freestanding sign ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) , three wall signs ( one wall sign permitted ) and two or more canopy signs at East Hill Citgo , 1000 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62 - 2 - 1 . 13 , Business District C . Interpretations of Sections 3 . 01 - 1k and 4 . 02 - 2b of the Sign Law is also being requested in order to determine the intended requirements for canopy signs and equipment identification signs . GRANTED WITH A CONDITION . Appeal of EcoVillage at Ithaca , Appellant , Joan Bokaer , Agent , requesting a modifica- tion to a previously granted variance ( from December S . 1993 ) to maintain a 70 foot • tall wind testing instrument at Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 26 . 2 , located on West Haven and Mecklenburg Roads , 163 + acres , Residence District R- 30 . The modification requested is to extend the expiration date of the previously granted variance from January 31 , 1995 to August 1 , 1995 . GRANTED . Appeal of Francis E . Egan , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single family residence with a building height of 40 + feet ( 30 foot maximum height permitted ) at 954 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25- 1 - 1 , Residence District R- 15 . ADJOURNED TO SEPTEMBER 14 , 1994 . FILED 1 TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN OF ITHACA Q = q ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS [Date.12414� WEDNESDAY , AUGUST 10 , 1994 ClerkbQ 911 • PRESENT : Chairman Edward Austen , Edward King , Pete Scala , Harry Ellsworth , Town Attorney Randy Marcus , Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer Andrew Frost . OTHERS : James Rogan , Robert Andree , Jeremy Snyder , Mark Crispell , Gossa Tsegye . Chairman Austen called the meeting to order at 7 : 20 p . m . and stated that all posting , publication , and notification of the public hearings had been completed and the same were in order . The first appeal to be heard by the Board was as follows : Appeal of James C . Rogan , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to maintain a freestanding sign with a total area of 108 square feet ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) at Rogan ' s Corner , 825 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 40-4- 2 , Business District A . James Rogan stated the sign has existed for ten years and Howard Cogan originally designed the sign . He commissioned Cayuga Sign , Rudy Christopher , to make the sign and didn ' t know how it came to be 108 square feet . He guessed the top part of the sign was 24 ' , which reads Rogan ' s Corner and the bottom of the sign , which defines what ' s in the project itself is 24 ' , so we figured it was 48 square feet at the time . He didn ' t know how the town officials measure their signs now , but he figures they • measure the air and everything else in between the space . Mr . Frost said the sign law for freestanding signs says you inscribe the smallest rectangle you can get encompassing all the sign . As on the mail out for this particular case , the top of the sign that says Rogan ' s Corner is the top of where you measure the rectangle . You can draw a rectangle down to the bottom panel between the supporting columns . This Board has in a variety of other cases dealt with these kinds of variances . Mr . Frost read the definition of a freestanding sign area from page 16 of the Sign Law : " The area of the smallest rectangle circumscribing one face of the sign panel or sign symbol or of grouped panels or symbols , inclusive of decorative appendages but exclusive of supports . " Mr . Frost said the town is in the process of attempting to change the sign law on items such as that . Mr . Ellsworth asked what had happened with the Board before in terms of granting these variances ? Chairman Austen said they do have a recommen- dation from the Planning Board on this . Mr . Frost said there is no record of any building or sign permits for this sign . Mr . Rogan said there was a change about a year ago where they had the sign painted . It was brown and red and they had it painted green and ivory . Mr . Frost said two of the building ' s weren ' t there up until a few years ago and he couldn ' t remember the older sign before Mr . Rogan redid the color scheme . Mr . Rogan said it was the same sign . Mr . Frost said the other panels said some other things . Mr . Rogan said it read ® gas , pizza , it advertised what was in the store and what they changed on the same panels was what was in the project , rather than what was in the store . So it says gas , Franco ' s . Traci ' s , laundromat . Mr . Frost said the property has experienced some growth through buildings which has also come before the board since approximately 1987 or 1988 and the message on the panels below the name panel saying Rogan ' s Corner has changed , but what Mr . Rogan is saying is that the same sign area is being used , but different words . Town of Ithaca 2 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • Mr . Scala asked if the issue was measuring the total area , including the posts ? Mr . Frost said there are two issues , one being that there was never a permit issued by the Town until now and clearly the sign has been there for many years , and secondly , issuing the permit and making it legal , but it ' s too big based on the way we measure signs . Mr . Scala asked about the procedure of measuring signs . Mr . Frost directed the board to page 16 of the sign law . Mr . Frost noted that the sign law on page 6 , section 4 . 02 - 2 , describes what you can have in a business zone with regard to signs . On a corner property you can have two freestanding signs , so Mr . Rogan could have two freestanding signs and only has one . Mr . Scala asked what was wrong with the measurement of the sign in Mr . Rogan ' s drawing . Mr . Frost said if you have a dimension of 12 ' across the top , which is the width of the panel saying Rogan ' s Corners , on the right hand side there is a marking of 9 ' which is the depth from the top of Rogan ' s Corner panel to the bottom of the smaller panel reading Franco ' s Restaurant . If you apply the definition of sign area for a freestanding sign , you basically have 9 ' x 12 ' , giving you a total of 108 ' . Mr . Frost said revisions to the sign law that he proposed have been before the codes and ordinance committee and we are now all waiting for a meeting with the attorney to rewrite them . Mr . Scala mentioned the other sign for Franco ' s . Mr . Frost said it is portable and is not legal and that is being changed . • Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . With no one present to speak , Chairman Austen closed the public hearing . ENV RONMENTAL ASSESSH ENT Chairman Austen read Part III of the environmental assessment form and the completed adopted resolution on August 2 , 1994 by the Sign Review Board . p MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the Board make a negative determination of environmental impact based on the recommendation by Jonathan Kanter , Town Planner , reviewed July 25 , 1994 , for the property at Rogan ' s Corner , regarding their existing sign . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , King , Ellsworth , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . MOTION By Mr . Pete Scala , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , with regard to the appeal to retain the freestanding Rogan ' s Corner sign at 825 Danby Road ,- Tax Parcel No . 40- 4 - 2 , the Board allow the sign to remain as it exists , with the following finding : Town of Ithaca 3 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 1 ) The provision of the sign law allows the appellant to have two signs , which would be a total of 100 square feet based on sign definition ; the existing sign being 108 square feet . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None . The second appeal to be heard by the Board was the following : Appeal of Robert P . Andree , Appellant , requesting a variance from the require- ments of Section 4 . 02-2b and 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permit- ted to maintain a 75 square foot freestanding sign ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) , three wall signs ( one wall sign permitted ) and two or more canopy signs at East Hill Citgo , 1000 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62- 2- 1 . 13 , Business District C . Interpretations of Sections 3 . 01- 1k and 4 . 02-2b of the Sign Law is also being requested in order to determine the intended require- ments for canopy signs and equipment identification signs . Chairman Austen asked if the signs are existing and Mr . Robert Andree said no . Mr . Frost said the pictures going around to the Board now will give the approximate location of the freestanding sign . Mr . Ellsworth said everything ' s been torn down . Mr . Frost said the situation with the freestanding sign is pretty clear . Mr . Frost said the other signage that he references in the notice , is the signage • reading auto fuel . He said by definition he is calling this a wall sign , because a wall sign is a sign painted or affixed on and parallel to an exterior wall of a building or structure , but not on window glass . He said when comparing signs , you could have a wall sign , window sign , or freestanding sign . The sign that says auto fuel most closely resembles a wall sign . Mr . Frost read from page three of the sign law under section 3 . 01 - 1 , item #k says , " an exempt sign would be equipment identifi- cation , limited to manufacturers ' standard . " He didn ' t know if they could call the auto fuel sign an exempt sign . Mr . Frost said the other sign that Mr . Andree shows is quik mart . He said that will be on the building that is being constructed and he clearly thought that was a sign that is on the canopy that id the then have a s PY wall sign , by definition . He said y g has a Citgo logo on it . That brings up the next dilemma of the sign law . He referred to page 7 , section 5 . 04 - 2 of the sign law . He said they use the word canopy and no where else in the sign law do they make reference to canopy signs . It is under a section called marquee and awning signs . He referred to page 6 , section 4 . 02 - 2 ( b4 ) talks about awning signs being permitted and a marquee sign . It doesn ' t give you any square footage , nor does the law call for the number of signs you can have . Mr . Frost referred to the letter dated July 18 addressed to Mr . Andree for clarification . The sign law would allow this business property to have one wall sign , one freestanding sign and one projecting sign . A projecting sign is nothing more than a wall sign , other than it projects on an angle from a building . Because it is a corner property , he could have two freestanding signs as well . Ultimately he is permitted to have the freestanding sign he is proposing , the wall sign that ' s on his building saying quik mart , and then one other freestanding sign and one other wall sign . Town of Ithaca 4 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • Mr . Ellsworth asked when the canopy sign comes in . Mr . Frost said it is not clearly addressed by the sign law because we only use the word canopy under marquee and awning signs and it doesn ' t give us the number that is permitted . Mr . Frost said he could ignore it , but he didn ' t think the zoning officer should . Mr . Frost said Mr . Andree is allowed to have the one wall and freestanding sign and either another freestanding sign or another wall sign . What Mr . Andree is proposing is signs on his canopy , signs on the store that says quik mart , a sign saying auto fuel on the canopy supporting posts , as well as a logo on the canopy . The Planning Board granted him a variance for all the signs . Mr . Ellsworth said the freestanding is allowed 60 square feet and Mr . Frost said yes , and Mr . Andree is proposing 75 square feet . Mr . Frost said Mr . Andree might want to clarify the relationship between the agreement that he has with Citgo that makes these requirements . Mr . Andree said he is allowed two 50 ' freestanding signs , he is only asking for one at 75 ' . The sign Citgo would like to put up is similar to that but instead of 20 ' high , it is 30 ' high , instead of 5 ' wide , 7 ' wide . Chairman Austen asked if this was a standard Citgo sign and Mr . Andree said yes . Mr . Scala asked Mr . Andree if he agreed with the statement in Andy ' s letter dated July 18 , the third paragraph , where he says " In effect , you are proposing to place at least five signs in addition to the freestanding sign , for which you have made a permit application . It appears that you desire to have a 75 square foot freestanding sign , a wall sign on the store , two ( or more ) canopy signs and two wall signs affixed to the canopy ' s supporting columns . " Mr . Scala asked Mr . Andree if he agreed with that summary and Mr . Andree said yes . Mr . Andree said this is what Citgo calls their image package and by abiding with that , it allows us financing and rebates . • Mr . Frost said if Mr . Andree wasn ' t on a corner property , he could have a freestanding sign and a wall sign . Mr . Scala said he doesn ' t have a freestanding sign , and Mr . Frost said he is proposing a 75 square foot freestanding sign . Mr . Scala wanted to know what signs are permitted . Mr . Frost said the freestanding sign that shows the prices , the big one that Mr . Ellsworth has , and that ' s it . The ordinance talks about canopy signs , and Citgo is a logo . Mr . Scala said the law doesn ' t prohibit canopy signs . Mr . Frost said the ordinance doesn ' t refer to the numbers you can have in square footage and refers to it as a permitted sign , by permit . Mr . Scala said you can get a permit for the canopy signs . Mr . Frost said no , because you ' re only limited in a business zone , to three signs and when you take all these signs together , you get six . Mr . King said the problem is the ordinance doesn ' t address this kind of situa- tion . Mr . Scala asked what fits into the law now . Mr . Frost said quik mart on the building , the freestanding sign that says Citgo and gas prices beneath it . Mr . Scala said he needs a drawing that shows all the signs . Chairman Austen said the drawings show the standard canopies . Mr . Frost said envision a canopy in front of the quik mark , similar to the mobil gas station that ' s up on Triphammer Road . Mr . Scala said on that canopy we have citgo and that ' s ok , except the number . Mr . Frost said a sign by definition is a device for visual communication publicly displayed to identify , advertise , and / or convey information . Mr . Scala said the quik mart is ok , but does it have a size restriction? Mr . Frost said one square foot per linear foot of road frontage that the building occupies . • Mr . Scala asked what other signs there are and Mr . Frost said signs on the supporting columns of the canopy that say auto fuel . Chairman Austen asked how many auto fuel signs there are . Mr . Andree said two . Town of Ithaca 5 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • After reasoning that the two auto fuel signs are exempt , Mr . Scala said the issue left is the canopy with its two signs and the sign on the building . Chairman Austen mentioned the over- sized freestanding sign . Mr . Andree said it is oversized because it ' s larger than 50 ' but the end result is still smaller than 100 ' . He thought one 75 ' sign would look better than two 50 ' signs . Mr . Frost said they have to be mindful of the purpose of the sign law . He read from page one of the sign law . Mr . Scala asked if Mr . Andree could bring the freestanding sign down to 50 ' by deleting the credit card information and using it somewhere else as a separate sign . Mr . Frost said Mr . Andree has to follow certain requirements from the people he ' s buying the gas from and he ' s already down sizing . Mr . Scala said Mr . Andree has no choice but to follow the requirements as much as possible in order to get his package deal . Mr . Andree said basically . Mr . Scala asked if a variance was needed for either the canopy or the quik mart auto sign . Mr . Frost said if they put the canopy sign aside for now , Mr . Andree has three wall signs ; the quik mart and the two auto fuel signs . You can choose to exempt the auto fuel signs or you can choose to grant variances to prevent the bill signs as additional wall signs . Mr . Scala asked what was wrong with the canopy sign . Mr . Frost said the canopy is a sign by definition and is on the canopy for the gas covering the gas pump . Mr . Scala said what they have to agree on is whether the auto fuel signs become product identification and then the problem of the 75 ' freestanding sign . Chairman Austen said the quik mart sign is a painted sign on the building . He said that ' s not exempt , that ' s a wall sign . Mr . King asked what purpose the auto fuel sign serves . Everybody knows that it ' s • auto fuel . Mr . Andree said it also says " Self Serve and No Smoking " on the ends . Mr . Ellsworth asked if this was the standard package and Mr . Andree said yes . Mr . King asked if there was any full service , to which Mr . Andree said no . Mr . Ellsworth asked what the penalty from Citgo would be if the two back- to-back auto fuel signs were left off . Mr . Andree said he wasn ' t sure . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . Since no one appeared to address the board , Chairman Austen closed the public hearing . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Austen read Part III of the environmental assessment form completed by Jonathan Kanter on July 25 , 1994 , the letter from the James Hanson , Tompkins County Planning Commissioner dated August 4 , 1994 , and the Sign Review Board resolution dated August 2 , 1994 . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Edward King . RESOLVED , that the board make a negative determination of environmental impact based on the recommendation from the Town Planning Department , as reviewed by Jonathan Kanter of July 25 , 1994 , for the property at 1000 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62 - 2 - 1 . 13 , for the proposed signs . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Austen , Ellsworth , King , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . Town of Ithaca 6 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • MOTION By Mr . Pete Scala , seconded by Mr . Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED , that the Board grant the variance on the freestanding sign of 75 square feet , as supplied by Citgo , for the appellant , Bob Andree , 1000 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62 - 2 - 1 . 13 , with the following findings and condi- tion : 1 ) Based on the fact that there really aren ' t any options for anyone contracting on this Citgo product . 2 ) The appellant couldn ' t get a smaller sign or modify in any profitable way . 3 ) The burden on the owner is undetermined at this stage . 4 ) It ' s a neat sign , well placed , and proportional to the size of the property . 5 ) There are 2 signs marked auto fuel which could be interpreted as wall signs , but which could be interpreted as equipment or product identification signs . It is suggested for the purpose of this business that they be interpreted as equipment signs . As long as they don ' t carry any other message for the customer , we propose that this be allowed and accepted as a product of equipment identification sign for both of the canopy signs for the proposed filling station . • A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - King , Ellsworth , Austen , Scala . NAYS - None . The motion was carried unanimously . The third appeal to be heard by the board was the following : Appeal of EcoVillage at Ithaca , Appellant , Joan Bokaer , Agent , requesting a modification to a previously granted variance ( from December 8 , 1993 ) to maintain a 70 foot tall wind testing instrument at Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1- 26 . 2 , located on West Haven and Mecklenburg Roads , 163 + acres , Residence District R-30 . The modification requested is to extend the expiration date of the previously granted variance from January 31 , 1995 to August 1 , 1995 . Chairman Austen asked why the time extension was needed . Mr . Jeremy Snyder said because he expected as soon as the tower went up , putting the data logger on the tower would be a very simple and quick process . The data logger is the small specialized computer . He expected that to go right on . It turns out that the data logger that they shipped us originally was not working correctly and it took us months to figure that out and get the new logger on there . Mr . Frost handed pictures around to the board and said when he took the pictures , he could barely see the tower from Mecklenburg Road . He said there ' s not a visual impact from the road . Mr . Ellsworth asked when this went into operation to get visible data . Mr . Snyder said quite recently , a week or two ago . They put a chip in and took it out and sent it back to the company to find out that it actually was working and once we Town of Ithaca 7 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 found that out , I put a chip in for the long haul that stays in for a couple of • months . Mr . Ellsworth said you need to get through the winter . Mr . Snyder said through the winter and through the spring . Mr . Scala asked if there was a propeller up there now . Mr . Snyder said no , it ' s not a real propeller , it ' s a small instrument . It ' s called an annenometer . Mr . Scala said there is no power being generated there now . Mr . Snyder said , technical- ly , a very small amount , just to send out a signal . Mr . Scala asked if that was permitted in the permit to put in a power source propeller or generator . Mr . Frost said the original proposal was to put up the tower and it exceeded the 30 ' height limitation by our ordinance . It was decided by the Zoning Board to give them a deadline of January 31 , 1995 . The only thing they are asking for is to extend what was previously granted by this board to keep it up beyond January 31 . Chairman Austen opened the public hearing . Since no one appeared to address the board , Chairman Austen closed the public hearing . Chairman Austen read from the environmental assessment form prepared by Town Planner , Jonathan Kanter . He also referred to the letter from the Commissioner of Planning , James Hanson . MOTION By Mr . Harry Ellsworth , seconded by Mr . Pete Scala . RESOLVED , that the board grant an extension to EcoVillage of Ithaca for their 70 ' tall wind testing instrument and tower , located at the corner of Mecklenburg and • West Haven Roads , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 26 . 2 , extending the date for gathering data until August 30 , 1995 , with the following findings : 1 ) Based on the technical difficulties suffered by the appellant and not getting any data until recently . 2 ) The tower is not visible from Mecklenburg Road . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES - Scala , King , Ellsworth , Austen . NAYS - None . The last appeal to be heard by the board was the following : Appeal of Francis E . Egan , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section it of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single family residence with a building height of 40 + feet ( 30 foot maximum height permitted ) at 954 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25- 1- 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Chairman Austen stated there are no houses on this side of the road yet . Mr . Gossa Tsegye identified himself and stated that Mr . Egan could not be present but that Mr . Tsegye could answer any questions as he is very familiar with the property . Chairman Austen asked Mr . Tsegye if he was an architect , to which Mr . Tsegye answered ® no . Mr . Tsegye said they are asking for 8 ' in excess height . Mr . Frost explained that when he advertises in the Ithaca Journal , he has a tendency to add 6 or more inches to the building to give the appellant a little room for error . He said there is a slight discrepancy on the building permit application and on the front page of the blueprints , they show . 38 ' 9 " in height . Town of Ithaca 8 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • Mr . Ellsworth asked if this land keeps rising up behind where the house is going to be . Mr . Tsegye explained the property becomes level and then the hospital property starts . He further explained the old railroad tracks used to be back there , where the hospital property begins . Mr . Scala asked if this was another situation where a height variance was needed due to the slope . Mr . Tsegye said yes . Mr . Scala asked what the height is from the first floor to the top of the roof . Mr . Frost asked the first floor or the lowest floor in contact with the ground . Mr . Scala asked if there was a basement also . Mr . Frost explained this was a two- story home over a basement . Mr . Frost asked Mr . Tsegye if you could walk out from the basement and Mr . Tsegye said yes , to a garage . Mr . Scala said the garage is built into the slope and over and above that you have the two- story house . He asked what the height of the two story house was . Mr . Frost said you have a 10 / 12 pitch and referred to page Al of the plans . Mr . Frost said the 10 / 12 pitch was a steep pitch and probably adding to the height of the building . Mr . Frost said , referring to page Al , from the uppermost portion of the ridge of the roof to the finished grade , you ' ve got 38 ' 9 " . Chairman Austen asked the name of the builder for the record and Mark Crispell from Crispell and Scott Brothers answered . Chairman Austen asked about the driveway and Mr . Crispell showed him on the site plan . Mr . Frost added that this is a legal non-conforming building lot because the lot was created before 1954 . As long as he maintains building setbacks as required by zoning , he has every right to build on it . • Mr . Scala said the slope is down to the road from the house and Mr . Tsegye said yes . Mr . Scala said from the road the house will look higher . Chairman Austen said the property ends at the railroad tracks and Mr . Tsegye said yes . The Board discussed the required property setbacks for this lot . Mr . Scala said the house will not interfere with anyone ' s view . Mr . King said the question is the impact of that height being so close to the road . Mr . Ellsworth said the Town Planner mentioned the planting of trees along the road . Mr . Frost said there is a memorandum from the Town Planner dated August 4 , 1994 to Chairman Austen . Attorney Marcus said they will also have attention called to the memorandum of the County Planning Department because this is one of the rare occasions where they may have done additional comment with regards to the impact with reference to the fact that the property will be adjacent to the proposed black diamond trail . It read as follows : " For these reasons , the proposed height could have a visual impact on the trail . " Attorney Marcus said this letter ends the way they regularly do , but it does not make a recommendation , just calls your attention to this fact . Mr . King didn ' t think the height would bother a walker or a bicyclist . Mr . Frost said he bikes the railroad tracks , though it will be located close to the tracks , he doesn ' t see a significant impact . The higher impact is on the cars on Taughannock • Boulevard . Mr . Scala said lowering it 10 ' isn ' t going to make any difference . He said the view from the trail is going to have a house , whether it ' s 10 ' lower or higher , so what counts is the exterior decorations . Mr . Scala asked if there was a landscaping plan with the application . Mr . Crispell said they haven ' t gotten that far yet . Mr . Tsegye said he just needs the height variance . Mr . King said the board doesn ' t want them cutting down trees until Town of Ithaca 9 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • the board has their say . Mr . Scala asked if enough landscaping would be provided to prevent it from being an eyesore from the trail . Mr . Frost again mentioned the memo from the Town Planner . Mr . King asked if the driveway had a permit from New York State . Mr . Tsegye said they received a permit years ago when the driveway was built . Mr . Tsegye stated the property has been owned by him for the last five years . This property was given to him , as a gift , by Mr . and Mrs . Egan . He couldn ' t build the house himself because of his financial situation . What he did was transfer this property to Frank Egan , who had the money to do it , now it becomes his property . All he could do , financially , is put the driveway in and clear some trees . Mr . Frost said Mr . Tsegye is tied to the building lot and Mr . Tsegye said absolutely . Mr . Tsegye said he is put in the position where he has the opportunity to do something and in order to see this come to reality , he has a problem with the height . Mr . Scala suggested it is a rather ambitious house for the size of the lot and that should be taken into account . Maybe the appellant could squeeze in 29 square feet and get the house lower . The key point here is that he doesn ' t see why he should allow an exception of 10 more feet as it now stands . He said he wouldn ' t have any trouble changing the design to bring it down from the 40 plus feet and get it to an acceptable state . The question is can the architect agree with that . Mr . Frost said one of the considerations is asking for this to be adjourned , play around with the design , and come back to the board on September 14 , Mr . Tsegye said • he would be more than happy to come back before the board . Mr . Tsegye said there is an unfortunate scenario here in that some of the public can ' t meet the basic standard of the american dream to own our home and live in it , which is very unfortunate . The law is the law and that is why we live in this country . He said he will do everything he can , but it is going to cost money to go back to the architect to redesign it . Mr . Scala said the appellant would save more money if he could make the height lower . Mr . Tsegye said somebody still has to design it . Attorney Marcus said given that the lot is what it is and the fact that it is a legally buildable lot , the board certainly has to keep in mind the basic point that the applicant just made that he has the legal right to build a house on this lot , designed as he wishes , given the applicable restrictions , one of which happens to be the 30 ' height and to jump the hurdle for the height variance , the various criteria which is summed up in the practical difficulty . Attorney Marcus said this is his opinion and the board doesn ' t have to share it , but the point has been made that there is a practical difficulty given the size , shape and slope of the lot . Attorney Marcus continued with what the board is correct in focussing on , what was missing from the elements of granting a height variance , was this issue of granting a minimum variance necessary . He said the board is never obligated to grant a variance . The variance is an extraordinary remedy . There is never an obligation . All he is saying is that it is important to keep those four criteria that the state dictates in mind . Some of those have been satisfied and others haven ' t , but it is the board ' s judgment . He just wanted the record to show clearly that they have addressed this criteria and distinguished among them . For instance , if they do vote no tonight , the record should show that the basis for the no vote is the fact that it is an extreme . Town of Ithaca 10 Zoning Board of Appeals August 10 , 1994 • Mr . Scala said the only other time the board has considered a height so high , is where you have an obvious steep slope , where the slope has added 10 ' . Mr . Ellsworth said you have four things to work with , the height , the pitch of the roof , the basement , and the distance from the road . Mr . Scala said the appellant has to come in with an argument as to why you have to be over 30 ' in order to get a 2 , 100 square foot house . Mr . Frost asked the board to indicate how they might vote , if they voted tonight , to at least offer Mr . Tsegye the option to adjourn it . Chairman Austen asked the board members how they would vote as the plans are shown . Nays - Ellsworth , Scala , King , Austen Attorney Marcus suggested an adjournment until the next board meeting . Mr . Frost said Mr . Tsegye ' s point is well appreciate by the board , that they recognize it is going to cost him to have an architect play around with this . Chairman Austen adjourned the meeting until September 14 , 1994 . Mr . Scala said the two key drawings needed are the plot plan and the cross section that shows the deck . Mr . Frost said if Mr . Tsegye has any questions , Mr . Tsegye could call Mr . Frost . • Upon motion , the meeting adjourned . O Dani L . Holford , Recordin Secretary C azj� Chairman Edward usten • FINAL • TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , AUGUST 10 , 1994 7 . 00 P . M . By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday , August 10 , 1994 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , ( FIRST Floor , REAR Entrance , WEST Side ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P . M . , on the following matters : Appeal of James C . Rogan , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to maintain a freestanding sign with a total area of 108 square feet ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) at Rogan ' s Corner , 825 Danby Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 40- 4 - 2 , Business District A . Appeal of Robert P . Andree , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 02 - 2b and 5 . 03- 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to be permitted to maintain a 75 square foot freestanding sign ( maximum 50 square feet permitted ) , three wall signs ( one wall sign permitted ) and two or more canopy signs at East Hill Citgo , 1000 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 62 - 2 - 1 . 13 , Business District C . Interpreta- tions of Sections 3 . 01 - 1k and 4 . 02 - 2b of the Sign Law is also being requested in order to determine the intended requirements for canopy signs and equipment identification • signs . Appeal of EcoVillage at Ithaca , Appellant , Joan Bokaer , Agent , requesting a modification to a previously granted variance ( from December 8 , 1993 ) to maintain a 70 foot tall wind testing instrument at Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 28- 1 - 26 . 2 , located on West Haven and Mecklenburg Roads , 163 ± acres , Residence District R- 30 . The modification requested is to extend the expiration date of the previously granted variance from January 31 , 1995 to August 1 , 1995 . Appeal of Francis E . Egan , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 11 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to construct a single family residence with a building height of 40 + feet ( 30 foot maximum height permitted ) at 954 Taughannock Boulevard , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 25- 1 - 1 , Residence District R- 15 . Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time , 7 : 00 p . m . , and said place , hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273- 1783 Dated : August 2 , 1994 Publish : August 5 , 1994 FINAL • TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA WEDNESDAY , JULY 27 , 1994 7 . 00 P . H . By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday , July 27 , 1994 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , ( FIRST Floor , REAR Entrance , WEST Side ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P . M . , on the following matters : 1 ) Election of temporary chairman for this meeting . 2 ) Appeal of Kenneth Ritter at 249 Coddington Road . 3 ) Appeal of T-S -T BOCES at 555 Warren Road . 4 ) Appeal of David Gersh at 1046 East Shore Drive . 5 ) Appeal of James Hilker at 158 Kendall Avenue . Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time , 7 : 00 p . m . , and said place , hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent • or in person . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer 273- 1783 Dated : July 19 , 1994 Publish : July 22 , 1994 •