Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2016-03-21TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Lori Kofoid, being duly sworn, say that I am the Deputy Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and the notice has been duly published in the official newspaper, Ithaca Journal: □ ADVERTISEMENT^NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Ithaca Journal, Legal Section Friday March 11, 2016 Location of Sign Board Used for Posting: Town Clerk's Office 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Date of Posting: March 09, 2016 Date of Publication: March 11, 2016 "XTYWVcA ori Kofoid Deputy Town Clerk STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) SS: TOWN OF ITHACA) Sworri^to and subscribed before me this , 2016. day of PAULETTE TERWILLIGERNotary Public, State of New YorkNo. 01TE6156809 3 Qualified in Tompkins County / Commission Expires December 4, TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Monday March 21, 2016 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca 6:00 P.M. Adjourned Appeal of Ecovillage TREE, LLC, owner. Solar Liberty Energy Systems, agent, requesting a variance from Chapter 271-9H "Yard regulations", of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, to install roof mounted solar panels that extend beyond the exterior wall and exceed the 12 inches allowed, located at 313 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85, Planned Development Zone (P). Adjourned Appeal of Ecovillage TREE, LLC, owner. Solar Liberty Energy Systems, agent, requesting a variance from Chapter 271-9H "Yard regulations", of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, to install roof mounted solar panels that extend beyond the exterior wali and exceed the 12 inches allowed, located at 315 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85, Planned Development Zone (P). Bruce W. Bates Director of Code Enforcement 607-273-1783 Dated: March 9, 2016 Published: March 11, 2016 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Monday, March 21,2016 Minutes Board Members Present; Rob Rosen, Chair; Bill King; Christine Decker; and Chris Jung; Alternates George Vignaux and Caren Rubin Staff Present: Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Adjourned Appeal of Ecovillage TREE, LLC, owner. Solar Liberty Energy Systems, agent, requesting a variance from Chapter 271-9H "Yard regulations", of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, to install roof mounted solar panels that extend beyond the exterior wall and exceed the 12 inches allowed, located at 313 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85, Planned Development Zone (P). Adjourned Appeal of Ecovillage TREE, LLC, owner. Solar Liberty Energy Systems, agent, requesting a variance from Chapter 271-9H "Yard regulations", of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, to install roof mounted solar panels that extend beyond the exterior wall and exceed the 12 inches allowed, located at 315 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85, Planned Development Zone (P). The applicant stated that they brought their case to the New York State Court of Appeals and the appeal was granted with testimony from the City of Ithaca fire chief. Mr. Bates said he was hoping we'd have the state's findings for the meeting, but he was told it would be at least another ten days. The gist of their decision is that it was partly based on the information from the fire chief that these buildings are built with fire-protected outer walls and also because the work had already been done due to errors on both the applicant's and the town's part. The outer walls are cement board that is fire caulked and covered with vinyl siding. The homeowners went through the extra expense of making the exterior of the houses more fire resistant due to their proximity to one another. So one reason they granted the variance is that there isn't as much of a threat of one catching on fire if an adjacent building catches on fire. They also took into consideration their net zero energy use. In their determination, the state basically said. We granted you the waiver this this time, but don't come back to us for another one the same reason. The applicant agreed to the accuracy of Mr. Bates's statement. Mr. Rosen said the board should request the minutes of the state's findings when they become available to include in the town's record. Mr. King said he agrees with the state in that it's done and we should let it stay, but we should not let it happen again. Mr. Rosen agreed, saying he also respected the judgement of the state and that this should be a one-time exception. Mr. Vignaux pointed out that there was no malice on the applicant's part. The applicant explained that they designed the system to the architect's drawings, but the buildings ended up not being built the way the drawings were laid out, so when the installers went out to install the panels, they installed them as designed. They wouldn't typically want their systems overhanging roof edges. Ms. Rubin agreed. He assumed that the withdrawn application is not coming back. Applicant stated that that is correct. The system was designed for 15 panels, but the owner opted to take off the bottom row so it all fits on the roof. To a question from Mr. Rosen, the applicant said the cement board was required to get the buildings that close together. Mr. Bates added that this is the way the whole EcoVillage was designed because they wanted to build the houses closer together. The code allows buildings to be closer together if you build a fire-rated exterior wall. The overhang is also fire-rated, and you're allowed to penetrate into the separation by a certain distance with the overhang, but the panels can't exceed the overhang, and these do. If you have a fire- rated wall, you can build right up to the property line. These buildings are as close together as they can be according to their PDZ language. Ms. Brock asked what the code requires, because our code requires whatever the New York State code requires. Mr. Bates read the requirement regarding exterior walls, "Construction, projections, openings, and penetrations of exterior walls and accessory buildings shall comply with Table 302.1. These provisions shall not apply to walls, projections, openings, or penetrations in walls that are perpendicular to the line used to determine the fire separation distance. Projections beyond the exterior walls shall not extend more than 12 inches into the areas where openings are prohibited." Table 302.1 shows that the separation distance between walls that are fire-resistant rated with one-hour exposure on both sides is zero. The distance for non-fire-rated walls with zero-hour rating is 5 feet from the property line, meaning the buildings need 10 feet between them. If the buildings are on the same property, you draw an imaginary line between them and that line acts as the property line. The applicant pointed out that since these buildings are fire resistant, the required distance between the buildings can be zero. There was confusion as to why the applicant needed a variance if the buildings can be next to each other and the 10-foot separation doesn't matter. The applicant said that's the reason they wanted to go to the board of appeals, because the code is a bit confusing on this matter. This is something he discussed with the board and he's not sure whether they address it in their comments. He believes that their reading of the code, as far as overhangs go, relates to walls that have openings. The walls on these buildings don't have any openings, so as far as he understands it, the overhang rule goes out the window. He wasn't sure how the board interpreted that. ZBA Meeting 03-21-2016 page 2 They went for the variance because they were asked to go for the variance, and the state granted it. The walls had to be fire-rated or those homes would not have been able to be built so close together. Mr. Rosen said he was not sure which provision of the building code had been violated. The applicant said his understanding is it's an application of the 12-inch overhang. Ms. Brock said our code doesn't talk about overhangs; it only talks about distances between buildings. She said the board needs to understand what they're granting a variance from and how significant the variance is in terms of what's required versus what's being requested. Mr. Bates said that if the projections have an hour rating on the underside, they can be as close as 4 feet apart. Mr. Rosen thought that it made sense to stick with the violation, which is for the overhang of more than 12 inches, and the state board said it was okay. He didn't think the board should go any further than that. It could be that there is no actual violation. After discussion, Ms. Brock agreed that it made sense to grant it for projections extending more than 12 inches. Mr. Bates stated that the problem is really that these projections are not fire rated. The building code allows 12 inches of non-combustible overhang in the fire separation area. These panels have a Class C fire rating. In order to have a zero separation, everything within that area must be non-combustible. Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing for both appeals at 6:39 p.m. No one from the public was present, so he closed the public hearing at 6:39 p.m. ZBA Resolution 0058-2015 Area Variance 313 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85 March 21,2016 Moved by Rob Rosen, seconded by Bill King Resolved that this board grants a variance for the 21-inch solar panel overhang where they presently exist on the west side of the south-facing roof subject to the following Conditions 1. That the Applicant provide the Department of State Board of Appeals document granting the variance from the New York State Uniform Fire and Building Code. 2. If these panels are permanently removed from the roof, any replacement shall meet the then-current Ithaca Town Code and New York State Uniform Fire and Building Code requirements. Findings ZBA Meeting 03-21-2016 page 3 This board finds that the benefit to the applicants does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, specifically: 1. That there will not be any undesirable change in neighborhood character or to the nearby properties given that the appearance of these solar panels is not noticeably different from the appearance of those on other buildings at EcoVillage; and 2. That the benefit can be achieved by other means feasible by redesigning the system or moving the panels, and 3. That the request is substantial because the panels extend 8 inches over a maximum overhang of 12 inches, which is a 67 percent overrun; and 4. That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects as evidenced by this being a Type II action under SEQR, and because the visual impacts of these panels are not substantially different from the impacts of panels on other roofs at EcoVillage; and 5. That the alleged difficulty is self-created, however, the benefit to the applicant outweighs any potential detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Vote Ayes - Rosen, Jung, Decker, King, and Rubin. Motion was carried unanimously ZBA Resolution 0059-2015 Area Variance 315 Rachel Carson Trail, Tax Parcel No. 28.-1-26.85 March 21,2016 Moved by Rob Rosen, seconded by Bill King Resolved that this board grants a variance for the 21-inch solar panel overhang where they presently exist on the west side of the south-facing roof subject to the following Conditions 1. That the Applicant provide the Department of State Board of Appeals document granting the variance from the New York State Uniform Fire and Building Code. 2. If these panels are permanently removed from the roof, any replacement shall meet the then-current Ithaca Town Code and New York State Uniform Fire and Building Code requirements. Findings This board finds that the benefit to the applicants does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community, specifically: ZBA Meeting 03-21-2016 page 4 1. That there will not be any undesirable change in neighborhood character or to the nearby properties given that the appearance of these solar panels is not noticeably different from the appearance of those on other buildings at EcoVillage, and 2. That the benefit can be achieved by other means feasible by redesigning the system or moving the panels; and 3. That the request is substantial because the panels extend 8 inches over a maximum overhang of 12 inches, which is a 67 percent overrun; and 4. That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects as evidenced by this being a Type II action under SEQR, and because the visual impacts of these panels are not substantially different from the impacts of panels on other roofs at EcoVillage; and 5. That the alleged difficulty is self-created, however, the benefit to the applicant outweighs any potential detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Vote Ayes - Rosen, Jung, Decker, King, and Rubin. Motion was carried unanimously Other Business Approval of Minutes Mr. Rosen moved approval of the February minutes, and Ms. Decker seconded. Unanimous with Ms. Rubin voting. Submitted by l^ra DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk ZBA Meeting 03-21-2016 page 5