Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA History Combined (27) Zoning Board of Appeals History as of 59.-2-16 903 Mitchell St Tax Parcels involved, with address if known 903 Mitchell St 59.-2-16 with no subdivision or readdressing. History: 2007 – Sign Variance - Approved 1984 – Sign Variance - Approved TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, AUGUST 20, 2007 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 Monday, August 20, 2007 , in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, NY, COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P .M . , on the following matters : APPEAL of Eunice McFall, Owner, Monique Morse, French Lavender Flower Shop, Applicant/Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 , Section 221 -6(A) to allow two wall signs on the French Lavender Flower Shop building, including moving an existing 4 square foot sign currently located on the front of the building to the east side of the building, and installing a 23+/- square foot sign on the front of the building. The French Lavender Flower Shop is located at 903 Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 59-2 - 16 , Medium Density Residential Zone. The Town Sign Law permits one 4 square foot wall sign per building in a residential district. The applicant therefore requests variances from the ZBA to have two wall signs, with one that exceeds the 4 square foot maximum size . APPEAL of Judith Kellock, Owner/Appellant, Burke Carson, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article IX, Section 270-71 (A) and Article XXV, Section 270-205 (A) of the Town of Ithaca Code, to be permitted to install a 5 '6" x 16' sunroom addition onto the front of a single family home located at 110 Judd Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 66-5 -9 . 1 , Medium Density Residential Zone. The property contains an existing non-conforming home on an existing non-conforming lot. Installing the sunrooin=to create additional living space will expand the existing non-conformity and encroach into the 25 -foot niinimum front yard setback. APPEAL of Cornell University, Owner, Robert Blakeney, Appellant, David Schlosser, Schopfer Architects, LLP, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Chapter 270, Article XIII, Section 270- 117(A)(3) of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to install a 1 ,200+/- square foot boat storage shed approximately 5 '4 " from the side property line, in conjunction with the development of the Cornell Merrill Family Sailing Center, located at 1000 East Shore Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 19-2-29, Lakefront Commercial Zone . The Town Code requires a 30 foot minimum setback from any structure to the side property line (for properties in the Lakefront Commercial Zone) . APPEAL of Douglas G . Bianchi , Owner/Appellant, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 of the Town of Ithaca Code to be permitted to erect a new freestanding sign for the East Hill Car Wash, located at 383 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . s 62 -2- 13 . 2 and 62-2- 13 . 6, Community Commercial Zone . The proposal is to install a new 69 +/- square foot; 16-foot tall internally lit freestanding sign on Cornell University property at the new driveway entrance on Pine Tree Road. The sign will be located off-premise and includes a clock and copy change section. The proposal will require several variances from the Town of Ithaca Sign Law as it exceeds the 50-foot maximum allowable area, is off-premise, contains a copy-change element, may contain moving elements, and may be located within 15 feet of the side lot line. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 : 00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in support of such matter or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs, as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 607-273 - 1747 Dated: August 10, 2007 Published: August 13 , 2007 FILE DATE .I..... TOWN of ITHACA ZONING-BOARD-OF_AP-P-EALS fMo.nday_, August 20 72007 7 : 00 p . m . Present: Chairman . Kirk Sigel Vice Chairman Harry Ellsworth Board Members : . Ron Krantz, Jim Niefer, Dick Matthews Alternate Board Member Eric Levine Staff: Chris Balestra , Planner; Susan Brock , Attorney for the Town ; Paulette Neilsen , Deputy Town Clerk Excused : Alternate Board Member David Mountin Others : Monique Morse , 99 Harvey Hill Road Burke Carson , Agent , 110 Judd Falls Road Judith Kellock , 110 Judd Falls Road David Schlosser, Cornell University, Merrill Family Sailing Center Shirley Egan , Attorney , Cornell University , Merrill Family Sailing Center Doug Bianchi , East Hill Car Wash Chairman Sigel — Good evening . Welcome to the August 20th meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals . Tonight we have four appeals which we will take in the following order: The appeal of Monique Morse , the appeal of Judith Kellock , the appeal of Cornell University and the appeal of Douglas Bianchi . The first appeal this evening , that of Eunice McFall , Owner, Monique Morse , French Lavender Flower Shop , Applicant/Agent , requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 , Section 221 -6(A) to allow two wall signs on the French Lavender Flower Shop building , including moving an existing 4 square foot sign currently located on the front of the building to the east side of the building , and installing a 23+/- square foot sign on the front of the building . The French Lavender Flower Shop is located at 903 Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 59-2- 16 , Medium Density Residential Zone . The Town Sign Law permits one 4 square foot wall sign per building in a residential district . The applicant therefore requests variances from the ZBA to have two wall signs , with one that exceeds the 4 square foot maximum size . Chairman Sigel — If you ' d like , you could sit at that deck right there and please , if you could , begin with your name and address . e 1 , MoniqueF,M.o.rse , _99-Harvey-Hill-Road-in-Ith ca a M , Chairman Sigel — Okay . Is there anything you 'd like to add ? Ms . Morse — Just sort of to go over what was pretty much said . The sign that I 'd like to put up would be very , very similar to that of the previous tenant , which was Knitting Machines , Inc . It would be very similar in size and actual lettering to that sign , so there wouldn 't be a huge change from that . And what I ' d like to do , and the reason I would like to move the small sign that is in the front of the building now to the side of the building , is to deter people from parking in my lot , which is happening more and more . I have been getting a lot of Cornell students , of course a lot of people come to use the walking trail , which I don 't mind , because they come and go , but I also get a lot of commercial vehicles parking there for the day and Town vehicles parking there sometimes , and snow ploughs and all kinds of vehicles , So I ' d like to move that small sign in the front of the building to the side and hopefully that will give people the message that basically the lot belongs to me . So . . . Chairman Sigel — Okay , And the lettering that you are proposing , it' s going to be letters attached directly to the fagade , right? No separate backing . . . Ms . Morse — Right . No . James Niefer — Have you decided whether they are going to be 10 inch letters or 6 inch letters? I know the proposal or the material we have here , it says option 2 and it shows 2 different letter heights . Ms . Morse — Yes , the actual French Lavender part of the sign will be 10 inch letters and the smaller lettering underneath it that says Flowers and Gifts would be 6 inch tall . Mr. Niefer — Okay . Chairman Sigel — And the way I read the Planning Board resolution , it appears that they wanted to restrict your request a little bit by saying . . . well it says the proposed signs , which I assume means they were not restricting you to 1 sign or recommending just 1 sign , it says "the proposed signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in total area . " So that would be the 4 square feet , existing sign , plus what you would put in the front , the total combined 24 square feet is their recommendation . Susan Brock — Kirk , this is actually not correct , the s should not be there on the the word signs . It should be the proposed sign , meaning the sign that the applicant wants to put on the front of the building . The draft resolution in front of the Planning Board had a ( s ) after the word sign , and I , actually , pointed out to them that they should delete the ( s ) , but apparently it did not come through clearly on the tape and so that' s why their final resolution still shows the s . But I can tell you that that is a change that I proposed at the meeting and they did accept it , And in any event , this is just a Planning Board recommendation , it' s not binding on you . ButAheir ; intent was, that she could , have ;two 1 11 signs , one a 4 foot sign and the other, the proposed sign , not to exceed 24 square ffet . Chairman Sigel — Okay. Thank you . Sorry. James Niefer — Is the sign on the front of the building to be spotlighted at all ? Ms . Morse — I would use . . . there ' s existing spotlights , two , on the front of the building that shine down just to the sign , they don 't shine out into the parking lot or anything else . They shine straight down and they light the sign and I would only use that , say , in the winter time when it gets dark early , and I would turn them off when I left the building for the evening . So they wouldn 't be on all night long . Chairman Sigel — Okay. So they would only be on during business hours . Ms . Morse — Yes . Chairman Sigel — And what are your normal hours? Ms . Morse — Our normal hours are 9 : 00 — 5 : 30 , Monday through Friday , 9 : 00 — 3 : 00 on Saturdays , with also a little bit of a holiday exception when I ' m approaching a major holiday or something , that I could be open a few hours here or there . A little longer. Chairman Sigel — Okay , but if we said , say , that it couldn 't be illuminated past 9 : 00 p . m . that would be . . . Ms . Morse — That' s fine . Ron Krantz — The previous sign was approximately the same 24 square feet? Ms . Balestra — The previous sign was a little bit smaller. The size of the French Lavender section of the proposed sign is the same size as the previous sign . The addition of the Flowers and Gifts underneath the French Lavender section adds to the overall square footage of the sign . So that makes it a little bit larger than the previous sign , but it' s essentially , it' s very similar. Chairman Sigel — Because then the bounding rectangle has to go all the way down to the smaller lettering . Ms . Balestra — And that includes any empty spaces in-between the 2 sign sections . Chairman Sigel — It seems that the way it will be attached directly to the fagade , seems to be a pretty modest impact and in character with the sort of: . . quasi-residentiak commercial nature here . t' Dick Matthews — Having driven past there in the recent week or so , I wondered when I saw the sign that' s there how anybody could imagine it was a business . It was so small . Ms . Morse — Most people that come in tell me that they don 't know what the store is , they stop out of curiosity. Dick Matthews — Hmmm . Ron Krantz — And despite the large increase in size , it' s really unobtrusive . Chairman Sigel — Okay . Any other questions , comments? Okay . We' ll open the public hearing . If anyone wishes to speak regarding this appeal . . . if not , we will close the public hearing . Chris , any comments on the environmental assessment? Ms . Balestra — Staff isn 't too concerned with the environmental impact of the proposal . It' s not going to be lit , the sign is relatively small and unobtrusive , it' s attached to the building , it' s residentially styled , on a space that has a history of nonconforming commercial use and we don 't' believe it will have significant environmental impacts . Chairman Sigel — The applicant did , actually , indicate it will be lit from external lighting . Ms . Balestra — Occasionally , although the lights that are existing will be shining strictly back into the building where the sign is , back on the fagade , and not spilling out or glaring anywhere else onto the property . And the existing lights are nonconforming , they are existing prior to the outdoor lighting law . Chairman Sigel — Okay . I will move to make a negative determination of environmental significance in regard to the appeal of Monique Morse , for the reasons stated in the Part II Environmental Assessment prepared by Town Staff. ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2007- 032 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : French Lavender Flower Shop , Monique Morse , Appellant MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Harry Ellsworth RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in regard to the appeal of Monique Morse , for the reasons stated in the Part II Environmental Assessment prepared by Town Staff. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz, Niefer, Matthews , NAYS : None 4 The MOTION was carried unanimously. Chairman Sigel — Okay. I will move . . . let' s see . . . we have a sample resolution prepared . I ' ll just read what Susan has prepared . . . I will move to grant the appeal of Monique Morse of French Lavender Flower Shop requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 , Section 221 -6(A ) , Medium Density Residential Zone , to be permitted to allow 2 wall signs where the zoning allows one and for one of the wall signs to exceed the 4-square foot maximum size , with the following conditions . . . Can we include all conditions from the Planning Board ? Ms . Brock — They had two . Ron Krantz — They only passed one . Ms . Brock — Well , I had two conditions . Chairman Sigel — Two conditions . . . Ms . Brock — The proposed sign . . . Chairman Sigel — Actually, we probably don 't particularly need either of those , because we are going to include the size in our. Ms . Brock — Well you will probably want to state a maximum size . So I think the first condition would be appropriate . Chairman Sigel — Okay . With the condition that the proposed sign for the front fagade of the building not exceed 24-square feet in total sign area as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, and , I suppose it doesn 't hurt to require condition B . , condition 2 , Applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign and , condition 3 , the sign be constructed as indicated as Option 2 on the drawing submitted by the applicant and in accordance with the other information submitted in the application . With a fourth condition that the sign be illuminated only during the hours that the business is open , but in no case should the sign be. illuminated past 9 : 00 p . m . With the following findings : That the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community because : That the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community because : . y. 1 . There is no undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties , given that the sign lettering on the front on the building is approximately the same size as , and is similar in appearance to , the sign lettering for the former Knitting Machines business in the building ; the lettering will lay flat against the building ; and the building is adjacent to a large Cornell- owned industrial building ; and for the further reason that the 2nd 4-foot sign will be around the corner from the larger sign , facing the building ' s parking area and the Cornell building . 2 . For the same reasons , the variances will not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood . 3 . The alleged difficulty is self-created , in that the applicant recently leased the building and knowledge of the Sign Law restrictions is imputed to her. However, this factor is mitigated by the fact the building has been continuously used for commercial purposes for many years and previously. had a large similar sign . 4 . Even though the sign size is significantly larger than what is allowed , and the benefit might be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant , these factors are outweighed by the other factors . SZ115-RES0LUTI0N-N0:20:O7=-033:Sign-Variance ,—French-Lavender-FIower-Shop) RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Monique Morse of French Lavender Flower Shop requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 , Section 221 - 6 (A ) , Medium Density Residential Zone , to be permitted to allow 2 wall signs where the zoning allows one and for one of the wall signs to exceed the 4-square foot maximum size , with the following : CONDITIONS : 1 . The proposed sign for the front fagade of the building not exceed 24-square feet in total sign area as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, and , 2 . The Applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign and , 3 . The sign shall be constructed as indicated as Option 2 on the drawing submitted by the applicant and in accordance with the other information submitted in the application . 4 . With a fourth condition that the sign be illuminated only during the hours that the business is open , but in no case should the sign be illuminated past 9 : 00 p . m . FINDINGS : That the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community because : 5 . There is no undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties , given that the sign lettering on the front on the building is approximately the same size as , and is similar in appearance to , the sign lettering for the former Knitting Machines business in the building ; the lettering will lay flat against the building ; and the building is adjacent to a large Cornell- owned industrial building ; and for the further reason that the 2nd 4-foot sign will be around the corner from the larger sign , facing the building ' s parking area and the Cornell building . 6 . For the same reasons , the variances will not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood . 7 . The alleged difficulty is self-created , in that the applicant recently leased the building and knowledge of the Sign Law restrictions is imputed to her. However, this factor is mitigated by the fact the building has been continuously used for commercial purposes for many years and previously had a large similar sign . 8 . Even though the sign size is significantly larger than what is allowed , and the benefit might be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant , these factors are outweighed by the other factors . The MOTION was carried unanimously . AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz, Niefer, Matthews NAYS : None FILE DATE ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2007- 032 : ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : French Lavender Flower Shop , Monique Morse , Appellant MOTION made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Harry Ellsworth RESOLVED that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in regard to the appeal of Monique Morse , for the reasons stated in the Part II Environmental Assessment prepared by Town Staff. The vote on the MOTION resulted as follows : AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer, Matthews , NAYS : None The MOTION was carried unanimously. STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA : I , Paulette Neilsen , Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting on the 20th day of August 2007 . Deputy Town Cler Town of Ithaca RLE ..�. ..r... DATA � ZB RESOLUTION NO . 2007m 033 : Sign Variance , French Lavender Flower Shop RESOLVED , that this Board grants the appeal of Monique Morse of French Lavender Flower Shop requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 , Section 221 - 6 (A) , Medium Density Residential Zone , to be permitted to allow 2 wall signs where the zoning allows one and for one of the wall signs to exceed the 4-square foot maximum size , with the following : CONDITIONS : 1 . The proposed sign for the front fagade of the building not exceed 24-square feet in total sign area as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, and , 2 . The Applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign and , 3 . The sign shall be constructed as indicated as Option 2 on the drawing submitted by the applicant and in accordance with the other information submitted in the application . 4 . With a fourth condition that the sign be illuminated only during the hours that the business is open , but in no case should the sign be illuminated past 9 : 00 p . m . FINDINGS : That the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community because : 1 . There is no undesirable change in neighborhood character or to nearby properties , given that the sign lettering on the front on the building is approximately the same size as , and is similar in appearance to , the sign lettering for the former Knitting .Machines business in the building ; the lettering will lay flat against the building ; and the building is adjacent to a large Cornell- owned industrial building ; and for the further reason that the 2nd 4-foot sign will be around the corner from the larger sign , facing the building ' s parking area and the Cornell building . 2 . For the same reasons , the variances will not have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood . 3 . The alleged difficulty is self-created , in that the applicant recently leased the building and knowledge of the Sign Law restrictions is imputed to her. However, this factor is mitigated by the fact the building has been continuously used for commercial purposes for many years and previously had a large similar sign . i TO 4 . Even though the sign size is significantly larger than what is allowed , and the benefit might be achieved by other means feasible to the applicant , these factors are outweighed by the other factors . The MOTION was carried unanimously . AYES : Sigel , Ellsworth , Krantz , Niefer, Matthews NAYS : None STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA : I , Paulette Neilsen , Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy of the same adopted . by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeting on the 20th day of August 2007 . v � Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca � _ OF ITS o - _ __ - TO " OF ITHACA - _ 4' M 'R¢ 215 N . Tioga Street, ITHACA , N . Y . 14850 TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 HIGHWAY ( Roads, Parks, Trails, Water&Sewer) 273- 1656 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 ZONING 273- 1783 FAX (607) 273- 1704 PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To : Planning Board Members From : Christine Balestra, Planner Date : August 6, 2007 RE : French Lavender Flower Shop Sign Variances Enclosed please find materials related to the proposed sign variances to allow two wall signs for the French Lavender Flower Shop, located at 903 Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 59-2- 16 , Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes installing one 23 +/- square foot sign on the front of the French Lavender Flower Shop building and moving an existing 4 square foot sign currently located on the front of the building to the east side of the building. The Town Sign Law permits one 4 square foot wall sign per building in a residential district . The applicant therefore needs a variance from the ZBA to have two wall signs, with one that exceeds the 4 square foot maximum size. The applicant has indicated that customers frequently pass by the business, even with the modifications and the presence of a 4s. f. sign that complies with the Town Sign Law. She therefore wants to place a larger, 23 +/- square foot wall sign on the front of the building and move the existing 4s. f. sign to the side of the building, along the parking lot . The proposed sign will consist of black or purple cut-out plastic letters (whatever best coordinates with the building paint color) , placed directly on the building. The main large area of proposed sign is similar to the previous "knitting machines, inc. " sign that was roughly the same size and in the same location on the building as the proposed (see enclosed applicant-submitted photos) . The Planning Board , acting as the Sign Review Board, reviewed this proposal at their August 7'h Planning Board meeting. Enclosed is a copy of the resolution from that meeting. The Planning Board recommended approval of the proposed signs, with conditions . Also enclosed with the application materials are photos of the area showing the location of the proposed signs, and a copy of the environmental assessment prepared for the ZBA . Please contact me by phone at 273 - 1747 or by email at cbalestra a ,town . ithaca.ny. us with any questions you may have regarding this proposal . Att. • c, TOE OF ITHACA � �? °n a 1 • L 5 N . Tio a Street, ITHACA, N .Y . 14850 g I J TOWN CLERK 273 1721 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273- 1747 BUILDING AN! HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks & Trails, Water & Sewer) 273- 1656 TO�NhI OF ITHACA FAX (607) 273- 1704 BUILDI ►drVZONMG Application for Appearance in front of the Zoning Board of Appeals Fee $ 100 For Office For. Office Use Only _ e Use, Only . . . , CHECK ALL THAT APPLY Property is located within or adjacent to Date Received 3 /d Area Variance County Ag District Use Variance UNA Cash or Check No. U3 y 7l 7 1. CEA ' D —� Sign Variance Zomn g tsmct Sprinkler Variance Forest . Home Historical District Special Approval Requesting an appearance to be allowed to a A) eij a at D3 PA"T & . ) . s .-1;1-� cLCf. , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 5� Z - , as shown on the accompanying application and/or plans or other supporting documents, under Article(s) ; Section(s) , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Application Form. A description of the practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and/or the Special Approval authorization request is as follows : I (Additional sheets may be attached as necessary.) e4cs � t Si ! 4— i 'Y t �L K. KO 4- �I�n-ue� �,� I I -� t'% . -� Q krna. c� kLue Vert, 4?�(j c i ,rtuc ` C� s � � � 5 - &eG�w4 `�, e � � � � 1: -{�, e � h►- y u57ne5S y By filing t is application, I grant permission for members of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals or staff to enter my property to inspect in connection with my application. Signature of Owner/Appellant: Date: Signature of Appellant/Agent ���- Date : 9 Z Print Name Here 40/11 -Telephone Number 0 Z I Z7 7 - ZG O Z Work Telephone Number. 1046 -7 - 445'/ 71 NOTE : If construction of work in accordance with any variances given does not commence within 18 months, the variance will gxg. Your attendance at the meeting is strongly advised. Revised 8/9/06 Town of Ithaca Environmental Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Located in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins , County WjON�LY PART 1 - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be com leted by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 2. Project Name 1 . Applicant/Sponsor j . ' - tip �U �S 3 . . Precise ocatio (street address, roa intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map :) D 3 .S� N� S he A -�o 4S� +(tiw �, ' I` ec. +-c�v 41 C., ) C / eS; elz . c4 c7 % uv. •`c � Tax Parcel Number. e Lbw e . c\ ni 4. Is proposed action : _ `'Z — / ( / NEW? EXPANSION? MODIFICATION/ALTERATION ? L/ 5. Describe project briefly: (Include project purpose, present land use, current and future construction plans, and other rele'va 'nt items) : �+ e, jn l �e � 1� �"f e . 31 !^ 4 t5 �v 1A JSi +� lM —�� al .l'�! C. �4 �c7 (Attach a arate sheet(s) if necessary to adequately describe the proposed project.) 6. Amount of land affected : iv pr Initial) 0-5 rs Acres 6-10 rs >I0 rs) Acres 7. How is land zoned presently? 8. Will pr posed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? Yes NO If no, describe conflict briefly : 9. Will proposed action lead to a request for new : Public Road? YES NO / Public Water? YES NO Public Sewer? YES NO V" 10. What is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project? Reside ial ✓ Commercial Industrial Agriculture Park/Forest/Open Space Other Please Describe: cal > -� I�►� 'I. .c �c. (fie -�1�I ;� , . .v ; . l Zc�e1 Q 11 . Does pr osed action involve a permit, a proval, or funds g, now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, State, Local?) YES NO= If yes, list agency name and permit/approval/funding: 12 . Does any aspect of the proposed action have a currently valid permit or approval? YES NO If yes, list agency name and permit/approval. Also, state whether it will require modification. I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE A plicant/Sponsor Name (Print or Type) : Signature and Date: Revised 8/9/06 t French Lavender 903 Mitchell Street Ithaca, NY 14850 (607) 277 - 3171 July 5 , 2007 Dear members of the Zoning Board, Attached is a proposal for a sign variance for the front of my business . My request is for a larger, and therefore more visible, sign. Attached are photos of the existing signage, the previous tenant ' s sign, and the proposed sign. The existing sign is very small and not very noticeable from the road. Most of my customers are coming in through "word of mouth" , and many others say that they just stopped in, but had no idea what my business is (and that they did not notice the existing sign) . I feel that this is directly causing me to miss a lot of customers, therefore affecting the viability of my business . My proposed sign is very similar to the previous tenant' s sign, and I feel that while it will improve the visibility of my business, it will not have an adverse impact on the neighborhood in any way. If allowed, I would also like to take the existing small sign, and move it to the side of my building, indicating to people using the East Ithaca Recreation Way (there is no official parking for the trail) Cornell ' s neighboring building, people parking and walking to Cornell , and many commercial landscaping vehicles, not to park adjacent to my building. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Moni e L . Morse French Lavender Flower Shop Signs PART II - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A. Does proposed action exceed any Type I threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617. 12 or Town Environmental Local Law? YES NO X If yes, coordinate the review process and use the full EAF. B. Will proposed action receive coordinated review as provided for unlisted actions in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.6 YES NO X If no, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency, if any. C. Could proposed action result in any adverse effects associated with the following. C1 . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production and disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems ? None Anticipated. Project includes placing a 23 +/- square foot wall sign on the front of the French Lavender Flower Shop building and moving an existing 4 square foot sign to the side of the building. C2 . Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources? Community or Neighborhood character? No significant negative aesthetic impacts are anticipated . The proposed sign is similar in appearance, size and style as a previous sign on the building. The proposed sign will consist of black or purple cut-out plastic letters placed directly on the painted wood siding. The building is residentially-styled, located within a residential district but adjacent to a Cornell-owned industrial building. The proposed signs will not be internally lit and are not out of character with the surrounding area. The Town's East Ithaca Recreation Way is adjacent to the property but is not expected to be negatively affected by the proposed signage. C3 . Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish, or wildlife species, significant habitats, unique natural area, wetlands, or threatened or endangered species ? None Anticipated . C4. The Town ' s existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources ? The property is zoned Medium Density Residential . The proposed 23 +/- square foot sign exceeds the permitted 4 square foot sign allowed in a residential district. The Sign Law also allows one wall sign where the applicant proposes two wall signs (the existing 4s . f. sign and the proposed 23 +/- s . f. sign) . Although zoned residential , the property has a long history of non-conforming commercial use, first as a neighborhood grocery store and gas station, then a knitting shop, and now a flower shop . The proposal will be consistent with the use of land and will only slightly increase the intensity of the use, by virtue of increased traffic to the site due to more visible signage. C5 . Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action ? None Anticipated . C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 -059 None Anticipated . C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy) : None Anticipated , D. Is there, or is there likely to be controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts ? YES NO X If yes, explain briefly : E. Comments of staff CB other attached. (Check as applicable.) French Lavender Flower Shop Signs PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Instructions : For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important, or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i .e. urban or rural) ; (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope, and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting material . Ensure that the explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately address . Check here if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the full EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. X Check here if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on Attachments as necessary the reasons supporting this determination. Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Name of Lead Agency Preparer' s Signature(If different from Responsible Officer) Kirk Sigel, Chairman Name & title of Responsible Officer In Lead Agency Signature of Contributing Preparer DATE : Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency July 6 , 2007 Dear Members of the Zoning Board, I , Eunice McFall , give permission as owner of 903 Mitchell Street to attach the new proposed sign to that building by Monique Morse of French Lavender Flower Shop . Sincerely, Mrs . Eunice McFall FILE DATE �7 ADOPTED RESOLUTION . PB RESOLUTION NO . 2007 - 079 Recommendation to Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Sign Variance — French Lavender Flower Shop 903 Mitchell Street Tax Parcel No . 59 -2-16 Sign Review Board ( Planning Board ) August 7 , 2007 MOTION made by Kevin Talty , seconded by Susan Riha , WHEREAS . 1 . This action is consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a sign variance to allow two wall signs on the French Lavender Flower Shop building , an existing 4 square foot sign to be moved from the front of the building to the east side of the building , and a 23+/- square foot sign to be installed on the front of the building . The French Lavender Flower Shop is located at 903 Mitchell Street , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 59-2- 16 , Medium Density Residential Zone . Eunice McFall , Owner, Monique Morse , Applicant, and 2 . The Planning Board , at a Public Hearing held on August 7 , 2007 , has reviewed and accepted as adequate photos and documents containing the existing and proposed French Lavender Flower Shop sign information , and other application materials containing the dimensions of the new proposed sign . NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board , hereby recommends to the Zoning Board of Appeals approval of the request for a sign variance for two wall signs , where the Town Sign Law permits one wall sign in residential districts , AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board , hereby recommends to the Zoning Board of Appeals approval of the request for a sign variance for one 23+/- square foot wall sign , where signs in residential districts are restricted to four square feet in size , such approval subject to the following conditions : a . The proposed signs shall not exceed 24 square feet in total sign area , as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law , and b . The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Wilcox , Hoffmann , Conneman , Thayer, Talty , Riha and Erb NAYS : None ABSTENTIONS : None The motion passed . STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) SS : TOWN OF ITHACA) I , Paulette Neilsen , Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , New York , do hereby certify that the attached resolution is an exact copy o same adopted by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca at a regular meeti g t 7th day of ugust 2007 . Deputy own Clerk Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals 11 May 16 , 1984 There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Rogan Appeal duly closed at 8 : 03 p . m . APPEAL OF ERNEST McFALL , APPELLANT , SHELLEY M . BLACKLER , AS AGENT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A PERMIT TO ERECT A SIGN GREATER THAN 4 SQ . FT . AT 903 MITCHELL STREET , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 59 - 2 - 16 . PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER SECTION 4 . 01 - 1 ( a ) OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA SIGN LAW . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 04 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mrs . Blackler was present . Chairman Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Shelley M . Blackler under date of April 27 , 1984 , as follows : " . . . Having been denied permission to erect a sign of more than four square feet at 903 Mitchell Street . . . Reasons for the appeal : 1 . The name of the business is too long to fit effectively into the allowed four square feet . 2 . The ' walk - in ' trade will be mostly from motorists who must be able to read the sign from a distance allowing them to safely stop . 3 . The existing outdoor lights are about twelve feet apart . 4 . The existing sign is in excess of 30 square feet and has been [ there ] for many years . QThe name of ray business , established by use , is KNITTING 14ACHINES . . . ETC . It would be impossible to fit such a long name into a four square foot sign and still have the sign be effective . 5[ Since the store is not located in a heavily - trafficked business area , it will be very necessary for me to attract the attention of passing motorists : those who are actually looking for the store as well as those who did not realize it was there but would be interested in my wares . They must , of course , be able to see the sign . from a distance such that they can decide to stop without creating a hazard . SI am planning a sign made of individually carved wooden letters ( sketch from Cayuga Signs enclosed ) , each about 1 . 5 ' high , which will extend across the front of the store , above the front windows where ' BUD ' S RED & WHITE ' appears now . ( See photos enclosed . ) .Although the sign does not have to be as long as the existing sign , I would like to be able to take advantage of the two outdoor lights to iluminate the sign when necessary . [ The sign ( and the store ) will be decorated and painted with good taste in mind . I am aware that it is located at the edge of a residential neighborhood and I plan to respect the rights of my neighbors . I feel it is absolutely essential , . however , that I be allowed to attract the attention of passers -by from a safe distance . The sign will be an important way for me to bring people into my store and thereby run a successsful business , well - suited to its location . " Chairman Aron read aloud the following Resolution unanimously adopted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on May 1 , 1984 : Zoning Board of Appeals 12 May 16 , 1984 " RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , in its capacity as Sign Review Board , recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals approval of a 132 sq . ft . sign , reading ' knitting machines , . . etc . ' , to be located on the front facade of the former ' Bud ' s Red. & White ' , 903 Mitchell Street . " The photographs submitted by Mrs . Blackler were passed around among the Board members . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Blackler if she wished to add anything to her Appeal statement . Mrs . Blackler stated that she was opening up a business selling knitting machines and if she had only a four - square - foot sign no one would see it , adding that the store is not in an area where people usually walk . Mrs . Blackler stated that the sign is in very good taste and simply shows the name of the business . Mr . King asked if the proposed sign is bigger than the one that has been there for years . Mr . Cartee stated that ' Bud ' s " sign was 32 square feet in size and Mrs . Blackler is proposing a sign about half that size . 1 . Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the proposed signage . No one spoke . Chai -rman Aron closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 08 p . m . MOTION by Mr . Edward Austen , seconded by- Mrs . Joan Reuning : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant a variance from the requirements of Section 4 . 01 - 1 ( a ) of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to permit the erection of a sign reading " knitting machines . . . etc . " at 903 Mitchell Street , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 59 - 2 - 16 , said sign not to exceed 132 sq . ft . in size . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Austen , King , Reuning . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman Aron declared the matter of the McFall / Blackler Appeal duly closed at 8 : 09 p . m . APPEAL OF FOREST HOME CHAPEL , . APPELLANT , CHARLES TRAUTMANN , AS AGENT , FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE FOREST HOME CHAPEL , AN EXISTING LEGAL NON - CONFORMING STRUCTURE , WITH A REAR LOT LINE OF LESS THAN 30 FEET , AT 222 FOREST HOME DRIVE , TOWN OF I `i',1iACA TAX PARCEL N0 . 6 - 66 - 3 - 179 PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV , SECTION 14 , ARTICLE XII , SECTION 54 , AND ARTICLE XIV , SECTION 75 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 10 p . m . ana read aloud from the Notice of ' 1 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AREA VARIANCE CRITERIA - (completed by Applicant) Applicant . 1 V) Vk o r s 4, 10 Address of Property Concerning Appeal : Q 3 ; �c e11 SI �� f I t,f gS d cc Tax Map No . : J- "� TEST : No area variance will be granted without a consideration by the Board of the following factors : 1 . Whether undesirable change would be produced in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties : Yes No ease explain below even if you checked No Reason Q {-2at S i' " f ki j ZZ • , , . 2 . Whether benefit sought by applicant can be achieved by a feasible alternative to the variance : Yes No ✓Please explain below even if you checked No Reason �4.�-c 1-.2,e.� a � u�t �•` s b J s ; �. e sS a � � S o �2 /` e 2<� u d, e vA t..9. f -F- 4a4 11-CL - +t�r via <L e x; s I � , S ; 3 . Whether the requested variance is sastantial�es No ► Tease explain below even if you checked No Reasons : a II Q L 2 G f:f Aiiv- i a v l r 1 b_e 15 " x 1 O ,� L 7 4. Would the variance have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood? : Yes No _✓Please explain below even if you checked No Reason S LA- ' S t w 1� 4- 5;��JL L ci 5 . Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created: Yes No Please explain below even if you checked No Reasons : r Al Q. 3 M m r 'JSj I kA 8A Zy ' O W � � 1 m � r z r n ° f - a c _ ,r t G 9 i tS" 9 a � l .1 �- r z Tom AV s�t. ! JUL 2 3 2007 � � p-V h ?EP.4: '1�'MINENT�'c�;F vTu�.�IlTrIl�NG - — � t� TOI 441PN iA , ENGI PLklf� lh� CS , ZOi�! i ,+1G , � "aGlNEERING X121 EasttCou�rSt r eta Edward C. Marx, AICP Ikthkca rk 148'50 Commissioner of Planning .19 Telephone (607) 274-5560 and Public Works Fax (607) 274-5578 �f July 19 , 2007 Mr. Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning Town of Ithaca 215 N. Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Re : Review Pursuant to §239 -1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law Action : Sign Variance for business at 903 Mitchell Street, Tax Parcel # : 59,-2-16 Dear Mr. Kanter: This letter acknowledges your referral of the proposal identified above for review and comment by the Tompkins County Planning Department pursuant to § 239 -1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law. The Department has reviewed the proposal, as submitted, and has determined that it has no negative inter- community, or county-wide impacts . Please inform us of your decision so that we can make it a part of the record. Sincerely, P Edward C . Marx, AICP Commissioner of Planning and Public Works French Lavender Sign Proposal,903 Mitchell Road Sign Review Board,8/7107 and Zoning Board 8/20/07 Close-up of existin 4s.f. si n I i French .Laven.Jer fine dowers & gifts �. l r French Lavender Sign Proposal,903 Mitchell Road Sign Review Board, 1 Board 8/20/07 flower isting •p with existin" Avenj �-. l r y .- OPTION#2 - 10"LETTER5 6" LETTERS ,. RED+ »to=-K Y%3 A < p P, `` . c 0 0 am' ( 0 in r 4 �, � n o0 0 L {- fl. Z -- �, N CA : 0 - Y w .,_ 00 ! 4 1' y ►. O>-z CD CDO T 'ti TI � French Lavender Sign Proposal,903 Mitchell Road Sign Review Board, 8/7107 and Zoning Board 8/20/07 Existing non-confonnin s otli htin —no changes proposed y - i I French.Lavender [ine flowers &OAS n O�' Q . { s i Site Location for 903 Mitchell Street 515 817 903 901 105 0 111 113 0 Town Parcels L_ - J LI - Buildings __] LR UNA MDR _ C , MHP Zoning I MR 113 AG NC L J C C_ OPC L - CC L P _l HDR J VFR C l \ I � Roads N LC 119 1 Forest LDR Home District TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APP NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY , 4 MAY 16, 1984 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 -tea.: Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Wednesday, May 16, 19842 in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, REAR Entrance, WEST Si&,%), Ithaca, N.Y., COMMENCING AT 7:00 P.M., on the following matters: APPEAL of Kirk C. Sapa, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying Certificate of Compliance for a parce=l of land with 'a width at the front yard setback of less than 100 feet, 621 Elm Str et Extension-;, an approximately '3.2 acre portion of Town of -11,haca Tax No, 6-29-8-5.1.(5.2 acres). Certificate is denied under Article IV, Section 16, and Article XIV, Section 76, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Kirk C. Sapa, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying a building permit for the construction of a two-family dwelling with each dwelling unit of equal floor area, on an approximately 2 acre portion.of Town'of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-29-8-5.1,-621-E'lm Street Extension (5.2 acres). Permit is denied under Article IV, Section al, paragraph 2, and Article XIV, Section 75, of the Town of .Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Mary L. Carey, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a onc.-family dwelling by more than three (3) unrelated persons at 320 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-42-1-3. Permission is denied under Article IV, Section 11, paragraph 1, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of William E. Murray, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying a building permit for the conversion of an existing structure to a one -family dwelling on a lot with a width at the front yard setback of 'less than 100 feet and a side yard of less than 15 feet, a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-42-1-1 with a depth of approximately 419 feet, 308 Coddington Road. Permit is denied under Article IV, Sections 14 and 16, and Article XIV, Section 75, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of James C. Rogan, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector, denying permission to. incorporate, as. an incidental use, the consumption -of food goods, e: g., pizza, sandwiches, -.ice cream, at (continued .on Page Two.) loon oz i tnaca Zoning Board of Appealsn- Notice of Public Hearings44va I/ IMay 16, 1984 Page Two Rogan's Corner Convenience Market, 825 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 6-40-4-2 and 6-40-4-3,. Permission :is denied under Article VII, Section 32, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Ernest McFall, Appellant, Shelley M. Blackler, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying a permit 'to erect a sign greater than 4 sq.ft. at 903 Mitchell. Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-59-2-16. Permit is denied 'under Section 4.01-1(a) of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law. APPEAL of Forest Home Chapel, Appellant, Charles Tram -mann, as Agent, 'from the decision. of the Building Inspector denying a building permit for the construction of an addition to the Forest floiiie Chapel, an ekis.ting _legal non -conforming structure; with a rear lot line of less than 30 feet, at 222 Forest Home Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-66-3-17. Permit 'is denied under Article IV, Section 14, Article XII., Section 54, and Article XIV, Section 75, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of William S. Seldin, Appellant, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying a building permit to erect 'a fence greater than 6 feet in height at 120 Northview Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-52-2-1. Permit is denied under Article X111, Section 65, and Article XIV, Section -75, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of ITD Group, Inc., Appellant, Nevin E. Lewis, Architect, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the development upon the Lands of :hake Shore West of a 120 -bed nursin home facility; denying permission for 1 parking space per unit rather than 1.3 parking spaces per unit on the Multiple Residence District portion of said Lands of Lake Shore West (approximately 27.27 .acres) proposed to contain 400 life -use units; and denying permission for the development of said 400 life -use units on said Multiple Residence District portion of said Lands of Lake Shore Nest (approximately 27.27 acres) in a structure, the height of which exceeds the maximum height requirement established by the Zoning Ordinance, it being that the proposed height be permitted provided that the new.roof heights extend no higher than the established ridge line profile of the existing main buildings at the entrance road grade, or extend higher than the horizontal ridge line of the existing wings to be attached to, exclusiveof the tower. Lake Shore Nest is to be located in the 1200 block of. Trumansburg Road, formerly known as the Biggs Memorial . Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Notice of Public Hearings v ay 16, 1984 (/" I &I� d4 1 &44 Page Three Hospital Complex, a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-24-3-2,2. Permission is denied under Article V, Section 18, paragraph 11, Article VI, Section 28, paragraph 5, and ARTICLE VI, Section 29, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Eastern Heights Associates, Appellant, Mark Goldfarb, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a two-family dwelling by more than three (3) unrelated persons at 202 Eastern Heights Drive (sometimes referred to a5104 Sharlene Road), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-8.108. Permiss-ion is denied under Article IV, Section 11, paragraph 2a, sub -paragraph :3, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance* APPEAL of Eastern Heights Associates, Appellant, Mark Goldfarb, as Agent,. from the decision -of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy.of a two-family dwelling by more than three (3) unrelated persons at 204 Eastern Heights Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel.No. 6-57-1-8.107. Permission is denied under Article IV, Section 11, paragraph 2a, sub -paragraph 3, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. APPEAL of Eastern Heights Associates, Appellant, Mark Goldfarb, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a two-family dwelling by more than three (3) unrelated persons at 206 Eastern Heights Drive, Town of Ithaca. Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-8.106. Permission is denied under Article IV, Section 11, paragraph 2a, sub -paragraph 3, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, APPEAL of Eastern Heights Associates, Appellant, Mark Goldfarb, as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying permission for the occupancy of a two-family dwelling by more than three (3) unrelated persons at 225 Snyder Hill Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-57-1-8.68. Permission is denied under Article IV, Section 11, paragraph 2a, sub -paragraph 3, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. 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. Lewis D. Car -tee Building Inspector Town of Ithaca Dated: May 8, 1984 Publish: May 11, 1984 ilk AUG 2 01984Lit a �r OWN OF ITHACA w ON: A P P L I C A T 1 0 N A N D P E R M I T TOWN OF ITHACA 126 E. SENECA ST., ITHACA, N.Y. 14850 (607) 273-1747 FEE - $5.00 APPLICATION FEE PLUS $1.00 PER SQUARE FOOT OF SIGNAGE AREA DATE OF APPLICATION ZONING DISTRICT - iS TAX PARCEL NO. APPLICANT n// r //VC _ ADDRESS OF APPLICANT �'Uc3 1417-6*C&[. SST, PROPERTY OWNER ADDRESS OF PROPERTY OWNER ' SCAT I ON OF SIGN(S) 4doy OF SIGN(S): WALL SIGN(S) Mc )Ceq-4-L Ch/ / 7tH -CA S77 AMOUNT RECEIVED DATE RECEIVED PERMIT NOIR ISSUE DA For Offi se On r&Al r- W I Al OeW 4�- Ib , x to, /3.5 FREESTANDING SIGN(S) PHONE PHONE (07} X73. "a-W�m TS 77 ATTACH SCALE DRAWING, BLUEPRINT, OR PHOTOGRAPH ACCURATELY REPRESENTING THE FOLLOWIN (1) SIZE OF SIGN(S); (2) LETTERING; (3) LOCATION ON BUILDING OR PREMISES; (4) SET B" K. (5) NORTH POINT, SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER DATE PERMIT: �� j APPROVED BY ,�� °t TITLE /r� �+ ea- et 6'} DATE DENIED UNDER SECTION DATE ACTION: SIGN REVIEW BOARD jar' w •, r DATE ' S I ONw�,� . e t 24 ,40N.ING BOARD OF APPEALS: DATE OF APPEAL a � �° � � � DATE OF HEARING DECISION Cy\ 9-/6_of mmmmml� I Zoning Board of Appeals 11 May 16, 1984 There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Aron, Austen, King, Reuning. Nay —None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in and the matter of the Rogan Appeal duly closed at 8:03 p.m. APPEAL OF ERNES`I' THE DECISION OF MCFALL, APPELLANT, SHELLEY M. BLACKLER, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A PERMIT AS AGENT, TO ERECT A FROM SIGN GREATER PARCEL TOWN OF THAN 4 NO. 6-59-2-16. ITHACA SQ. FT. AT 903 MITCHELL STREET, TOWN PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER SECTION 4.01-1(a) SIGN LAW, OF ITHACA OF TAX THE Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:04 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mrs.. Blackler was present. Chairman Aron read aloud from the Appeal Form as signed and submitted by Shelley M. Blackler under date of April 27, 1984, as follows: "...Having been denied permission to erect a sign of more than four square feet at 903 Mitchell Street... Reasons for the meal: 1. The name of the business is too long to fit effectively into the allowed four square feet. 2. The�'walk-in' trade will be mostly from motorists who must be able to read the sign from a distance allowing them to safely stop. 3. The existing outdoor lights are about twelve feet apart. 4. The existing sign is in excess of 30 square feet and has been [there] for many years.;The name of my business, established by use, is KNITTING MACHINES...ETC. It would be impossible to fit such a long name into a four square foot sign and still have the sign be effective. S[Since the store is not located in a heavily -trafficked business area, it will be very necessary for me to attract the attention of passing motorists: those who are actually looking for the store as well as those who did not realize it was there but would be interested in my wares. They must, of course, be able to see the sign.from a distance such that they can decide to stop without. creating a hazard. ;[I am planning a sign made of individually carved wooden letters (sketch from Cayuga Signs enclosed), each about 1.5' high, which will extend across the front of the store, above the front windows where 'BUD'S RED & WHITE' appears now. (See .photos enclosed.) Although the sign does not have to be as long as the existing sign, I would like to be able to take advantage of the two outdoor lip hts .. to iluminate the sign when necessary. r[The sign (and the store) will be decorated and painted with good taste in mind. I am aware that it is located at the edge of a residential neighborhood and I plan to respect the rights of my neighbors. I feel it is absolutely essential, I that I be allowed to attract the attention Uf passers-by (rom- a safe distance. The sign will be an important way for me to bring people into my store and thereby run a successsful business, well-suited to its location." Chairman Aron read aloud the following Resolution unanimously adopted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on May 1, 1984: Zoning Board of Appeals 12 May 16,1984 "RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, in its capacity as Sign Review Board, recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals approval of a 132 sq. ft. sign, reading 'knitting machines...etc.', to be located on the front facade of the former 'Bud's Red & White', 903 Mitchell Street." The photographs submitted by Mrs. Blackler were passed among the Board members. Chairman Aron asked Mrs. Blackler -if wished to add anything to her Appeal statement. Mrs. Blackler that she was opening up a business selling knitting machines and around she stated if she had store stated only a four -square -foot sign no one would see it, adding that the is not in an area where people usually walk. Mrs. Blackler that the sign is in very good taste and simply shows the name of the Aron business. the matter of the McFall/Blackler Appeal duly closed at 8:09 Mr. King asked if the proposed sign is bigger than the one that has been there for years. Mr. Cartee stated that 'Bud's" sign was 32 square feet in size and Mrs. Blackler is proposing a sign about half that size. Chairman Aron asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak for or against the proposed signage. No one spoke. Chairman. Aron closed the Public Hearing at 8:08 p.m. MOTION by Mr. Edward Austen, seconded by Mrs. Swan Reuning: RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby does grant a variance from the requirements of Section 4.01-1(a) of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to permit the erection of a sign -reading "knitting machines...etc." at 903 Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-59--2-16, said sign not to exceed 13, sq. ft. in size. There being no further discussion, the Chair called fora vote. Aye Aron, Austen, King, Reuning. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Aron declared the matter of the McFall/Blackler Appeal duly closed at 8:09 p.m. APPEAL OF FOREST HOME CHAPEL, APPELLANT, CHARLES TRAUTMANN, AS AGENT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE CONS'T'RUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE FOREST HOME CHAPEL, AN EXISTING LEGAL NON -CONFORMING STRUCTURE, WITH A REAR LOT LINE OF LESS THAN 30 FEET, LT 222 FOREST HOME DRIVE, TOWN OF I`, hACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-66-3-17. PERMIT IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE IV, SECT.%ON 14, ARTICLE XII, SECTION 54, AND ARTICLE XIV, SECTION 75, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted from the Notice of matter duly opened at 8:10 p.m. -ana read .aloud I TOWN OF ITHACA 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca, New York 14850 (607) 273-1747 A P P E A L to the Building Inspector and Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, New York Having been denied permission to at 503 IUU hAeU Parcel No. a. S i OT m FEE: $7.50 RECEIVED: CASH CHECK - () ZON I NG: For Office Use Only Town of Ithaca Tax as shown on the accompanying appli- cation and/or plans or other supporting documents, for the stated reason that the issuance of such permit would be in violation of -- SECTIONS) of the :Town of Ithaca*Sign Law., Local Law No. 6-1980, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal from such denial and, in support of the Appeal, affirms that strict observance of the Sign Law would impose PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES and/or UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP as follows: k Dated: o2 7 a04d 04 Signed APPEAL. FOR A VARIANCE 'TO THE SIGN LAW Reasons for- the appeal a i. The name of the business is too long to fit effectively by use, is KNITTING into the allowed .four- square feet. to fit such The 'walk: ---in' trade will be mostly from motorists who must be able name to read the sign four from a distance foot allowing and them to safely the stop. effective. 3M The existing outdoor lights are about twelve feet apart. is not Located in a heavily -trafficked business area, it will 4. The existing for me sign is in excess attract of 30 square -feet and has sts s been for many actually years. l ook: i ng for the store as well distance such that they can decide to stop without creating a hazard. I am planning a sign made of individually carved wooden letters ( sk:etch from Cayuga Signs enclosed ), each about 1.5high, which will extend across the front of the store, above the front windows where 'BUD'S RED & WHITE' appears now. ( See photos enclosed ) Although the sign does not have to be as long as the existing sign, I would 1ik:e to be able to take advantage of the two outdoor- lights to illuminate the sign when necessary. The sign ( and the store ) will be decorated and painted with good taste in mind. I am aware that it is located at the edge of a residential neighborhood and I plan to respect the rights of my neighbors. I feel it is absolutely essential, however, that I be allowed to attract the attention of passers-by from a safe distance. The sign will be ah important way for me to bring people into my store and thereby run a successful business, well-suited to its location. Respectfully submitted, The name of my business, established P by use, is KNITTING MACHINES....ETC. It would be impossible to fit such a lonq name into a four square foot sign and still have the sign be effective. Since the store is not Located in a heavily -trafficked business area, it will be very necessary for me to attract the attention of passing moi_or-i. sts s those who are actually l ook: i ng for the store as well as those who did not realize it was there but would be interested in my wares. 'They must, of course, be able to see the sign from a distance such that they can decide to stop without creating a hazard. I am planning a sign made of individually carved wooden letters ( sk:etch from Cayuga Signs enclosed ), each about 1.5high, which will extend across the front of the store, above the front windows where 'BUD'S RED & WHITE' appears now. ( See photos enclosed ) Although the sign does not have to be as long as the existing sign, I would 1ik:e to be able to take advantage of the two outdoor- lights to illuminate the sign when necessary. The sign ( and the store ) will be decorated and painted with good taste in mind. I am aware that it is located at the edge of a residential neighborhood and I plan to respect the rights of my neighbors. I feel it is absolutely essential, however, that I be allowed to attract the attention of passers-by from a safe distance. The sign will be ah important way for me to bring people into my store and thereby run a successful business, well-suited to its location. Respectfully submitted, She'll ey M. B'1 ack:l er owner P She'll ey M. B'1 ack:l er owner It r. TOMPKINS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING Frank R. Liguori PE Commissioner of Planning LMMW41 Ith.T.84-13 May 22, 1984 To: Lewis D. Cartee, Building Inspector Town of Ithaca 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca, New York 14850 EC�E�VE Re. Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239-1 and -m of the New York State General Municipal Law. Case: Area variance appeal of Ernest McFall at 903 Mitchell Street (county highway) This will acknowledge receipt of the proposal for review under Section 239-m. The proposal, as submitted, will have no significant deleterious impact on intercommunity, county, or state interest. Therefore, no recommendation is indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to act without prejudice. Respectfully submitted, Frank R. Ligu i, Commissioner Tompkins County Planning Department 128 East Buffalo Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 Telephone (607) 274.5286/274.5287