Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2001-04-16 BILEr °L, r� DATE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY , APRIL 16 , 2001 7 : 00 PM APPEAL of Cornell University, Owner/Appellant , James Pung , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit a 42 , 000 ± square foot school building addition at the James A . Baker Institute on Hungerford Hill Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 61 - 1 -7 . 2 , Residence District R-30 . Additionally a variance from Section 18 , Subdivision 10 of said Ordinance is further requested to permit an overall building height of 59 ± feet , whereas height is limited to 36 feet . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Orlando lacovelli , Appeallant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article III , Section 7 and 9 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , and Section 280-a of the New York State Law , to permit the creation of two building lots by subdivision with said lots not fronting on a State , County , or Town highway on an unpaved portion of Pennsylvania Avenue , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos . 54-5-30 , -31 , Residence District R -9 . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Charles Barbay , Owner/Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 2 . 01 -2 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law , to permit the placement of an off- premise sign , to be located at 104 Enfield Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 33- 1 -9 . 3 , Residence District R-30 . Additionally a variance from Section 4 . 01 - 1 of said Law is being requested to permit a sign area of 20 ± square feet , whereas a maximum of 4 square feet is allowed . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Joseph Salino and Todd McGrill , Owners/Appellants , Thomas Schickel , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article VII , Section 34 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit a food service establishment , Italian Carry-Out , located at 1070 Danby Road , 150 feet from West King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 39- 1 - 16 . 1 , Business District C . A variance from Section 38 of said Ordinance is being requested to permit the placement of a screened garbage dumpster and parking spaces proposed to be located within the required yard setbacks . APPEAL GRANTED TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, APRIL 16 , 2001 7 : 00 PM PRESENT : Kirk Sigel , Chairperson ; Harry Ellsworth , Board Member; David Stotz , Board Member; Andy Frost , Director of Building/Zoning ; John Barney , Attorney for the Town ; Mike Smith , Environmental Planner. EXCUSED : Ronald Krantz , Board Member; James Niefer, Board Member. ALSO PRESENT : Jim Pung , Cornell University ; Doug Antczak , Cornell University ; Lee Davis , ENSR Corporation ; David Herrick , TG Miller; Dwight Lopes , Cornell University ; Shirley Egan , Cornell University ; Bill Goodreau , Goodreau Architecture ; Larry Fabbroni , 127 Warren Road ; Orlando lacovelli , Coddington Road ; Bill Hilker, 271 Burns Road ; Charles Barbay , Willowood ; Tom Schickel , Schickel Architecture ; Joseph Salino , Italian Carry-Out ; Todd McGill , Italian Carry-Out . Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7 : 04 p . m . The first appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Cornell University , Owner/Appellant , James Pung , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit a 42 , 000 ± square foot school building addition at the James A . Baker Institute on Hungerford Hill Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 61 - 1 -7 . 2 , Residence District R-30 . Additionally a variance from Section 18 , Subdivision 10 of said Ordinance is further requested to permit an overall building height of 59 ± feet , whereas height is limited to 36 feet . Jim Pung , Baker Institute - We have a prepared resolution for the board . Mr. Smith - There is not a SEQR determination . It is a type I action . The Planning Board is the lead agency. Doug Antczak , Baker Institute - I am the Director of the Baker Institute . We are part of the Cornell Veterinarian College . We have been at this site since 1950 . The Institute has grown slowly over the years . The last major addition to the building was in 1968 . 1 have been on the staff since 1978 . 1 realized in 1995 that we were in severe need for an expansion of the footprint for our laboratories . The second need is for excellent animal facilities . We have always maintained experimental animal colonies at the Institute . We needed a space where we could all meet and have discussions or seminars . We currently have a small , inadequate space that will not hold all our staff members . A new auditorium will address the need . The Institute' s faculty are in two areas . One is in infectious diseases . We develop vaccines for dogs . The other area is in genetics and developmental biology . In this area we work on identifying genetic diseases in animals and making tests that you can use to test animals . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 2 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY 21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Mr. Stotz - Does the Institute only work with dogs? Mr. Antczak - About 70% of our work is with dogs . Fifteen percent of our work is with horses . The last fifteen - percent is with other species . Mr. Stotz - How many people are currently staffed ? Mr. Antczak - We have about 100 employees . The size of the laboratory groups has become larger than the facility was originally designed . We need to increase the footprint of each individual laboratory . Almost all the new space is for new laboratories . Mr. Stotz - Is there going to be an increase in staff? Mr. Antczak - No . We do not expect an increase . We have a total f fifteen faculty level scientists . We are down a couple from that and we are planning to replace the va ancies . Mr . Ellsworth - What is the purpose of the additional lab space ? Mr. Antczak - We need to increase the lab space . The amount of spade is not sufficient . Mr. Stotz - Is there an increase in the number of animals ? Mr. Antczak - No . Animal use has been steady over the years . There is tremendous pressure to use fewer animals . We try to design our experiments to get the maximum biological information using the smallest number of animals . It is hard to predict for the future . Mr. Ellsworth - Are you working on the Foot and Mouth disease? Mr . Antczak - No . We do not work on Foot and Mouth disease or Mad Cow disease . The last disease that we worked on was the K-9 Parvole Virus . It was an epidemic new virus which caused a worldwide epidemic . The Baker Institute was the first to isolate the virus and make the vaccine . We have had similar successes in the past . We are hoping to have the same kind of affect on genetic diseases . Chairperson Sigel - Is the funding something that could jeopardize the project in any way? Mr. Antczak - We have a financial plan that was approved by the Dean of the Veterinary College . We have a grant for partial funding of the plan . We do have another source of funds if we do not receive the grant . Bill Goodreau , Goodreau Architects - Our design challenge was to satisfy the programmatic needs of the new facility . We wanted to create a strong visual statement and he together the mix of materials on the existing buildings with the new building . We wanted to bring a bold statement of materials to the site . We chose a color that was compatible with the tones of the existing cluster of buildings . The building is simple in its form . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 3 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED The stair tower is six feet above the existing building . The grade slopes down about twelve feet . It makes the height of the lower end of the building 47 feet . The stair tower is required for access to the roof . We would be within the 35-foot requirement if the grade of the site were continuous across . The rooftop equipment and air handling equipment range from 8 feet to15 feet . We wanted to do sensitive plantings on the site to provide screening and a new visual address to the Baker Institute . We want to create a stronger sense of arrival at the Baker Institute . It is disjointed visually . Mr. Goodreau presented the landscape plan to the board with the specified species. We would like to soften the presence of the original building . The lighting of the site will also be improved . The new lighting follows the proposed lighting ordinance . Mr. Ellsworth - Will there be any plantings on the west end of the new building ? Mr. Goodreau - There are plantings in the area . It is very lush through the area . There are many large trees . We are also creating a formal parking area . It is an improvement to the site . Mr. Stotz - Are you adding parking spaces? Mr. Goodreau - We are providing more formal parking on the site . We do not have an increase in staff . We may have a small increase in the number of cars . It is more efficient parking . Mr. Stotz - Will the parking along the road be maintained ? Mr. Goodreau - Yes . The tower creates the need for the 59-foot height. The building is level with the existing building . It is a constant elevation of the mass for the building . Mr. Stotz - Is it venting on the roof? It is not very attractive . Mr. Goodreau - Cornell University is a city of stacks . Mr. Stotz - This is a beautiful setting . It is a shame that we need the stacks . Chairperson Sigel - How much higher are the stacks than the roof? Mr. Goodreau - The stacks are 15 feet higher than the building . Mr. Stotz - Are you able to see the building from Pine Tree Road ? Mr. Goodreau - No . The building cannot be seen from Pine Tree Road . Mr. Pung - We do not have a lot of pipes on the top of the building . We have two stacks . One is for the kennels and the second is for the labs . They are up high enough that the gases are carried away quicker. We try to gather the materials sufficiently . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 4 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Mr. Stotz - Are you putting out any more gases than before ? Mr. Pung - No . We are moving into the new building . The investigators will be moving into ten new labs . There is an individual fume hood per lab . They then combine int one stack . This project is not spilling anything more into the environment . David Herrick - We have coordinated with Town planning and engineering a plan to go out in the field and do an accurate determination of the watershed . We wanted to understand the current problems . We wanted to resolve the problems and not add to them with this project . Through the course of design , we have come up with a drainage plan that will mitigate current conditions that are experienced downhill . We will also be taking care of our responsibility for reducing peak rates of run - off from the developed site as well as mitigate some of the pollutants from impervious surfaces . We looked at the entire watershed that the Institute is within . A dry basin has been designed that will treat all of the impervious surfaces current and new within that portio of the watershed . It is a long linear basin . This design was chosen because of the slopes through tie pasture and to the residents below . It will help us mitigate through the use of an outlet control structure . The nature of the dry swale basin will improve the water quality before it is discharged into t � e Snyder Hill Road ditch . Mr. Stotz - Where does it drain to ? Mr. Herrick - It ties into the Town 's storm sewer system on Snyder Hill Road . There is an existing storm system . It is large enough to handle the current flows . We Care looking to reduce the peak rates of run -off from this portion of the watershed to below current leve s . Mr. Stotz - There are kennels on site . Where does the water go from the kennels when they are cleaned ? Mr. Herrick - The water goes into the sanitary sewer. Mr. Stotz - Has the basin been sized for the 50 year or 100 year storm Mr. Herrick - We have been held to 10 and 100 year storms . We have looked at the volumes required for run -off for the storm events . There will be structures and overflow weirs so that when you do get to the 100-year event it is a controlled discharge of the floodwaers . It will be through the piped system to Snyder Hill Road . Lee Davis , ENSR - ENSR conducted the air quality impact assessment of the new location . The board received the report that was completed for SEQR review . The report shows the methodology used to evaluate the air quality impacts . Routinely , Cornell eva uates the air quality impacts associated with the laboratory facilities . There are no requirements f them to do so . This analysis is done to support the design phase of the project and to evaluate ongoing operations for major facilities . The first step is to survey the laboratory and identify all the chemicals used . Cornell conducted the study in the spring of 2000 . We determine the health risk criteria esta lished for each chemical . The ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 5 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED risk criteria are established in a New York State Air Guide . There were criteria for most of the chemicals . There were no criteria for a handful of chemicals . In that case we establish a protocol to determine what would be the most suitable criteria based upon various toxicological studies . The next step is to evaluate what is the best practice for handling the chemicals . The categories of controls are two different types . One is administrative control and the other is the engineering control . We then calculate the emission rates for the chemicals . We look at the worse case scenario . We assume the container would break in the lab and that 100% of the contents would be exhausted to the atmosphere . The reality is that the spill would be wiped up and disposed of properly . Perhaps only 5 or 10% of the chemical would be evaporated . We then determine if the impacts are less than the accepted criteria . We refine the emission estimates if they are not within the accepted criteria . We would make observations as to how long it takes for the chemicals to be evaporated into the atmosphere . The result is that the impacts are below the established criteria . The elevation of the building was used to determine the actual stack heights . The objective is to select a stack height so that the content of the exhaust air is not drained back into the laboratory . The wind flows over the building . The flow separates at the corner of the building and creates a recirculation area . We try to design the stack so that the tip of the stack is outside the aerodynamic regions . The building can be contaminated if the stack is within the region . We did a study to determine all possible wind directions . The second impact is to determine the impacts to the general population . The first step was to make sure we did not contaminate the building . - The results of the study on all the chemicals suggest that the maximum impact occur within 500 feet of the building . This area is well below the risk criteria for each chemical . Chairperson Sigel - This analysis only addresses concentrations outside the building . Mr. Davis - Yes . The analysis was conducted to evaluate the exposures of the outdoor public and insure that the make up air for the building would not be contaminated . Chairperson Sigel - Is the ventilation in the original building changing ? Mr. Davis - The new building has a much better design . Laboratories were originally designed to have an exhaust stack for each different laboratory . We combined these stacks into a single stack. It allows a greater flow rate . The actual exhaust at peak operations is the same as it currently is . The difference is that we bleed in outside air. During low laboratory operations outside air is bled into the system to maintain the flow at all times . The concentrations of the contaminates are very low . Mr. Stotz - Is there any chemical being used creating a toxic environmental within the neighborhood of the building ? Mr. Davis - We assume that the largest container breaks and 100% of the chemical is evaporated over one hour period . We calculate what the resulting impact would be . Mr. Stotz - What is the most toxic chemical being vented ? ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 6 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY 21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Mr. Davis - It depends . We cannot determine which chemical is most toxic until you look at the dosage . The highest impacts were from chloroform . Mr. Stotz - I have never heard anyone complain of odors coming from the Institute . This is a larger facility . It is a greater space and a greater volume of air. What is the distance from that building down to Snyder Hill Road ? Mr. Davis - It is approximately 2500 feet . We looked at every wind direction . The highest impacts would be to the higher terrain as you are going to the east . The maximum impact is at 500 feet . The impacts are lower during higher winds . Mr . Stotz - The Eastern Heights Development is close to the Inst tute . It is in the path of the prevailing winds . I do not want people complaining from odors or hea aches . Mr. Davis - The types of chemicals being used in the future operation care the same as they are now . Dwight Lopes , Baker Institute - We have a long list of chemicals , butthey are used in small quantities . This is not a chemistry laboratory environment . We have a hood in eery laboratory for the safety of the people in the laboratory . We have ten laboratories with one hood each . The larger volume of air going through the system does not mean that there is a larger quantity of chemicals being exhausted . It is a more dilute chemical mix . Mr. Ellsworth - Are more chemicals going to be brought in ? Mr. Antczak - We will not be bringing in any new chemicals . Some of current laboratories do not have fume hoods . Currently the fume hoods are shared among staff. The use we will have will be safer. Mr. Lopes - We knew that what our new facility would look like from the surrounding area would be important to the Town . We tried to demonstrate what the facility currently looks like from different locations in the Town . Mr. Lopes presented slides from various locations within the Town of Ithaca facing the Baker Institute. Mr. Pung - We have attempted to answer the questions of the special approval appeal application . We have also tried to address Section 77 , Subdivision 7 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . Our one hardship is that as the site narrows down the hill , there is bedrock . We would have an extraordinary expense in order to lower the building further into the ground . The new addition would not relate to the existing building . Chairperson Sigel - Do we need to vote to approve the Environmental ssessment? Mr. Smith - No . It is a type I action . The Planning Board declared themselves as lead agency . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 07 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8 : 08 p . m . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 7 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY 21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Mr. Stotz - The applicant did a commendable job on the presentation . It was very thorough . One complaint that we often receive is that Cornell 's lighting is visible from a distance . Will the lighting be visible from off site ? Mr. Pung - The lights will be directed downward . There should not be spillage off the site . Attorney Barney - The board should make a motion concurring with the Planning Board 's designation of lead agency. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 = 19 — Designation of Lead A_gencV, Cornell UniversitV, Hungerford Hill Road, Tax Parcel No. 6141 7.2, April 16, 2001 , MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED, that this board concurs with the designation of the Planning Board as lead agency for the SEOR review purposes regarding the James A . Baker Institute school building addition on Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 61 - 1 - 7. 2, Residence District R-30. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -20 - Appeal of Cornell University, Hungerford Hill Road, Tax Parcel No. 61 = 1 - 7.2, April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit a 42, 000 + square foot school building addition at the James A . Baker Institute on Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 61 - 1 - 7. 2, Residence District R-30 with the following finding: a . the appeal has met all conditions of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 8 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -21 - Appeal of Cornell Universitv. Hun 1 erford Hill Road Tax Parcel No. 614 -7.2, April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Cornell University, equesting a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article V, Section 18, Subdivision 16 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit an overall building height of not more than 61 feet on the new building addition at the James A . Baker Institute on Hungerford Hill Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 61 - 1 - 7. 2, Residence District R-30, with the following findings: a . the land slopes considerably from a point where the building would normally be 36 feet in height; and b, there is subsurface rock that would involve additional expense in excavation; and C. the 59 foot height specified in the appeal would not impact the iew shed from any point to the west of Hungerford Hill Road. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The second appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Orlando lacovelli , Appeallant , requesting a - variance from the requirements of Article III , Section 7 and 9 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , and Sectioh 280-a of the New York State Law , to permit the creation of two building lots by subdivision with said lots not fronting on a State , County , or Town highway on an unpaved portion of Pennsylvania Avenue , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos . 54- 5 -30 , -31 , Residence District R-9 . Larry Fabbroni , 127 Warren Road - In 1897 a plat was made in the area of Pennsylvania Avenue . Numerous lots were platted at that time and recorded . Some of the roads were built and some were not . The area we are looking at was platted as an extension of PennsIxlvania Avenue that was meant to meet an extension of Kendall Avenue . Kendall Avenue and Pen, nsylvania Avenue were never extended . In the mid 1970s , owners of the lots on Pennsylvania Avenue petitioned the Town to extend Pennsylvania Avenue . The petition failed . It is required to have half of the fronting owners want the extension . There is one major owner to the east of the lots in question . They have consolidated numerous parcels into their homestead . Their house fronts onto the end of Kendall Avenue . There is no real hope of extending Pennsylvania Avenue under the criteria that exist . The only way to extend Pennsylvania Avenue is if the Town was to condemn the area as a Town road . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 9 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED We went before the Planning Board and asked to take three of the existing 50 lots and turn them into two 75 -foot lots . A variance is needed under Section 280-a of Town Law . The access to the lots would be along the Platted Street . It would be between two properties that have houses on them that are owned by Mr. lacovelli . The 16 -foot driveway would extend to the east to service the two lots . The right-of-way is 50 feet wide . The proposed driveway is 16 feet wide . It is adequate access for emergency vehicles . Water was extended down this right-of-way . There is a hydrant at the corner of Marilyn Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue . The grade is less than 5 % . There is no other alternative for access to these properties . Marilyn Avenue does not exist as a street . There are only two parcels on Marilyn Avenue that could be built upon . This is the most straightforward way to access the parcels . Mr. Iacovelli did not self-create this situation . We may access the sewer on Pennsylvania Avenue through an easement . Utilities are available . Chairperson Sigel - Is the proposed driveway compatible with a future street? Mr. Fabbroni - Yes . It is roughly centered in the 50-foot right-of-way . Mr. Stotz - Who owns the lots directly across from these parcels? Mr. Fabbroni - There are several different owners . One of the four lots provides access to a much larger parcel that runs down and behind all the lots . Mr. Stotz - What are the Town requirements when someone puts in a driveway and then other parcels can use the driveway as access to their property? Does it become a private road ? Attorney Barney - The problem is no one knows who has title to this roadbed . It is presumably in the Ithaca Land Company . There are some cases that say when a map is filed with a road shown that it is an offer of a dedication of a road to the municipality . The municipality only then has to accept the dedication . The Town of Ithaca has never formally accepted the dedication . Most of the. road has been developed by user rather than by conveyance . We are in the process of getting the title abstract prepared to try to trace the title from the Ithaca Land Company . Mr. Fabbroni - The Planning Board asked Mr. Iacovelli sign an agreement to maintain the driveway. Mr. Iacovelli would amend the agreement if someone else wanted to use the driveway . They would jointly share the responsibility to maintain the driveway . Chairperson Sigel - Is there an agreement in place to insure that the other owners would be granted access? Attorney Barney - The board could choose to impose it as a condition . It should include that anyone who uses the driveway would share in the cost of maintaining it . Chairperson Sigel - Could we require Mr. Iacovelli to agree to allow other people to use the driveway? ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 10 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Attorney Barney - The board might not want to make it a condition because of the nature of the road . The road might be a public road . The road might not be a public road . There is no guarantee there is a road base . Chairperson Sigel - I assume that Mr. lacovelli would be willing to let someone else pay for some of the cost of maintaining the road . Mr. Fabbroni - Yes . It is Mr. lacovelli 's intention at this point . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 35 p . m . Bill Hilker, Burns Road - I own one of the lots directly across from Mr . lacovelli ' s proposal . I am in favor of the project . In the mid 1970s we tried to get the road opened by the Town for a circular drive to Kendall Avenue . I developed the proposal and started the petition . The petition failed . The Planning Board did allow a similar extension of a private road on Ke dall Avenue . The Town has a precedent to fall back on . Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8 : 36 p . m . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -22 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - Orlando lacovelli, Pennsylvania Avenue, Tax Parcel Nos. 54. -5-30, -31 , April 16, 20011 . MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of enironmental significance in the matter of Orlando lacovelli, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article III, Section 7 and 9 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, and Section 280-a of the New York State Law, to permit the creation of two building lots by subdivision with said lots not fronting on a State, County, or Town highway on an unpaved portion of Pennsylvania Avenue, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 54 -5-30, - 31 , Residence District R-9 based upon the findings in the environmental assessment review completed by Town Planning Staff dated April 9, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Sigel - I do not remember granting this type of variance before from Section 280a . Is the motion the same ? Attorney Barney - Yes . It is treated as an area variance . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 11 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -23 - Appeal of Orlando lacovelli, Pennsylvania Avenue, Tax Parcel Nos. 54. -5-30, -31 , April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Orlando lacovelli, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article 111, Section 7 and 9 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, and Section 280- a of the New York State Law, to permit the creation of two building lots by subdivision with said lots not appearing to front on a State, County, or Town highway on an unpaved portion of Pennsylvania Avenue, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 54-5-30, -31 , Residence District R-9 based upon the following findings: a . there is a practical difficulty and an unnecessary hardship in that the lots do not front on the portion of Pennsylvania Avenue that is a public road; and b, the only way to utilize the lots is to allow a private drive to run from the publicly traveled portion of Pennsylvania Avenue; and the following condition: a . the conditions set forth by the Planning Board at their March 20, 2001 meeting be met. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The third appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Charles Barbay, Owner/Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 2 . 01 -2 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, to permit the placement of an off- premise sign , to be located at 104 Enfield Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 33- 1 -9 . 3 , Residence District R-30 . Additionally a variance from Section 4 . 01 - 1 of said Law is being requested to permit a sign area of 20 ± square feet , whereas a maximum of 4 square feet is allowed . Charles Barbay, Willowood - I bought the property in 1982 . The original owner gave me a variance that he had obtained . The variance was for a 17 square foot sign . I replaced the sign when I took over. Then in 1988 1 replaced the sign again . Each time I was not challenged when I replaced the sign . I sold the property in 1990 . 1 then had to foreclose in 1992 and take the property back . The sign was in rough shape again . Another sign was made . It was located on the same posts . I never measured the sign . Last April , I had a professional sign made . We put the sign up and received many positive comments . The owner of the property likes the sign and does not have a problem with the sign . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 12 APRIL 16, 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED I was approached in August about the sign . I bought the proper perm t for the sign . Then in October of last year Mr . Frost notified me that the sign was not in complianc I am asking the board for a variance so that I do not need to redo the sign . Mr. Stotz - The original variance granted in July of 1976 stated that re of the reasons for granting the sign was that one third of the business comes from people who are looking for another place to stay when the park is full . Is it still the intended purpose of the sign ? Mr. Barbay - The sign is to give people direction to our site . I have filfe parks that send the overflow to our campsite . It is a directional sign . I have three signs giving direction to the site . There are people who come in from all over the United States . They need to have directional signs . Mr. Stotz - Many businesses could follow the argument that they ne d directional signs . Is there a reason why your business is unusual as compared with other businesses? Mr . Frost - The ownership has changed over the years . I inspected Willowood when I worked with the Health Department . The site is located far into the woods . It is difficult to sign . Mr. Barbay - It was an honest mistake that the sign was made three square feet larger than the previous sign . Mr. Stotz - What is the Squire Inn ? Mr . Barbay - It is a restaurant . Mr . Stotz - What is Music in the Hills? Mr. Barbay - It is an amphitheater. Mr. Frost - Has the camping and RV camping declined over the years ? Mr. Barbay - No . The camping industry is growing in leaps and bouds . We are part of a national franchise . The amount of RVs is growing and the size of RVs is growing . Chairperson Sigel - It sounds as if the signs had to be replaced many imes over the years . How long do you anticipate this sign lasting ? Mr. Barbay - The sign is made out webbed aluminum . It is supposed to last a while . Chairperson Sigel - How much did you pay for the sign ? Mr. Barbay - The cost of the sign was approximately $500 . 00 . Mr. Frost - The Zoning Ordinance allows 50 square feet for a freestanding sign . The 1976 off premise variance was granted for 17 square feet . The current sign is 3 square feet larger. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 13 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY 21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Chairperson Sigel - I feel hesitant to allow an increase in size . At the same time I would like to accommodate Mr . Barbay . He has an investment in the sign . I would consider a time limited variance to allow this sign to remain for some reasonable life span . Mr. Stotz - Mr. Barbay spent $500 . 00 on the sign . I do not think Mr. Barbay would have spent that kind of money on a sign intentionally knowing before hand that the sign was too large . The sign is tasteful . I do not have an objection to the sign . Chairperson Sigel - I am not comfortable with a permanent increase of 20 square feet . Mr. Stotz - The argument can be made that Mr. Barbay has a business way out in the country . He needs to direct traffic on a busy road to the establishment . It would not be useful to put the sign further up the road where there is no traffic to see it . Mr. Barbay - In many of our advertisements we always indicate the directional signs . The sign does not attract people . It is strictly directional . Mr. Stotz - I would not want to see Mr. Barbay lose the money he has put into the sign . Chairperson Sigel - The County does object to the sign . Mr. Barbay - There is another sign in front of my sign . My sign can not be seen for a short distance . Chairperson Sigel - The board does not need to rejustify the original variance . We can justify allowing the additional 3 square feet based upon the hardship of the cost of the sign . Attorney Barney - This is a modification of an existing variance for a period of time . Then the variance would revert back to the previous variance . Mr. Barbay - I do not have an objection to changing the sign back to 17 square feet after the life of this sign has expired . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 9 : 02 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 9 : 03 p . m . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . Mr. Smith - The Planning Board acting as the sign review board did look at the project . They did not make a recommendation . There were only four board members present. The vote was 3 to 1 . It was not a recommendation . Attorney Barney - It turns into a positive recommendation since no action was taken . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -24 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT " Charles Barbay, 104 Enfield Falls Road, Tax Parcel No. 33. 443, April 16, 2001 . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 14 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the matter of Charles Barbay, requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 2. 01 -2 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, to permit the placement of an off-premise sign, to be located at 104 Enfield Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33- 1 -9. 3, Residence District R-30, based upon the findings in the environmental assessment review completed by the Town Planning staff dated April 13, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz- NA YS: totz.NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 "25 " Charles Barbay, 104 Enfield Falls Road, Tax Parcel No. 33. - 1 -9. 3, April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Charles Barbay, requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 2. 01 -2 and Section 4. 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, to permit the placement of an off-premise sign, to be located at 104 Enfield Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33- 1 -9. 3, Residence District R-30, based upon the following finding: a . because of the cost of the sign it would be a hardship to have to remove the sign immediately; and with the following conditions: a . the sign remain on the site for a maximum of ten years or until replacement is necessary, whichever occurs first; and b. it is the intention of this motion that after such expiration, thevariance granted in 1976 will be the only variance in effect. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The fourth appeal to be heard was as follows : ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 15 APRIL 16, 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED APPEAL of Joseph Salino and Todd McGill , Owners/Appellants , Thomas Schickel , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article VII , Section 34 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to permit a food service establishment , Italian Carry-Out , located at 1070 Danby Road , 150 feet from West King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 39 - 1 - 16 . 1 , Business District C . A variance from Section 38 of said Ordinance is being requested to permit the placement of a screened garbage dumpster and parking spaces proposed to be located within the required yard setbacks . Thomas Schickel , Schickel Architecture - We are before the board for special approval of the project . It is a retail food store in a Business " C " zone . The second reason is because we were unable to fit a sufficient amount of parking within the setback requirements . This will be a family owned business . Mr. Salino and Mr. McGill are brothers and will be working there themselves. The business being proposed is a sandwich and pizza carryout . It would fit well into the community . We have made an effort to design the business in such a way that the building and the parking fit very well into the site . The existing site has fill . The building would straddle the upper level and lower level . The Salino family also owns the Ziebart property. The zoning around the site is Business " C " . The one exception is the residential property in an R-9 zone . The property owners surrounding the site have sent in letters of support . This includes the property within the residential zone . The front parking lot will be paved . The driveway leading to the rear driveway and the rear driveway will be gravel . Mr. Walker suggested that we modify the contours slightly so that the water drains into the right-of-way. It is a 24- inch storm line . The site plan enumerates the various setback issues . The building is within the setback requirement . There is single loaded parking in the front of the building . The tail end of the cars would be in the front setback area . The first space would not be in compliance . We have tried to pull the parking in towards the building as much as we possibly could . We have tried to establish a sufficient amount of parking for the business . The employee parking would be in the rear. This would be a simple building . Large windows would be facing the street . It would have a mild illusion to Italian architecture . I have reviewed the plans with the New York State Department of Transportation . They felt the access to the highway and the relationship to the easement was appropriate . The Planning Board made a series of recommendations . They recommended buffering along the north side . They did not accept the fact that there is an existing buffer because it is on the adjoining property. The concerns will be addressed in the final site plan . There had been some discussion about a fence along the north property . Mr. Monkemeyer owns the property behind this site . He does not want a fence as a buffer. He would prefer a vegetative screen . Mr. Stotz - There is an exterior staircase . Who would be using the staircase ? Mr. Schickel - It would be used by employees and patrons parking in the back . ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 16 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED Mr. Stotz - Have any provisions been included for a handrail on the staircase ? Mr. Schickel - The handrail would be along the building . It would be preferable not to have a handrail on the north side of the staircase . Mr. Stotz - What provisions have been made for drainage on the parking lot in the front ? Mr. Schickel - The site slopes from the south to the north . We did not try to create a tight swale . We wanted a relaxed swale with the idea that the water would have more of an opportunity to be retained on the site . Mr. Stotz - The water would be coming across the parking spaces in the rear. Is there a drainage pipe in that area ? Mr. Schickel - I do not anticipate that we will need it . It is fair to say that this is not an enormous investment because this is a gravel lot . I did talk with Mr. Walker an, d if for some reason it were a problem the applicant would be the primary victim of the problem . We would be able to solve the problem easily . Chairperson Sigel - Is there a stairway inside the building ? Mr. Schickel - No . Mr. Frost - The rationale of the State is that if there is no interior stairway then a non - handicap and a handicap person both have the ability to use the outside stairway . Mr. Stotz - This business might be so successful that there will be pe 1 ple lined up waiting for orders . It would be difficult for a handicap person to get from the rear parking lot to the front door. Chairperson Sigel - Why are tables included in the plan if this is only a carryout business? Joseph Salino , Troy Road - The only reason for the tables is to have a place for someone to sit while they are waiting . We are not planning to have people sit down and ea Mr. Stotz - Will there be a lit sign in the front? Mr. Salino - There will not be a lit sign on the front of the building . Mr. Schickel - We do have a sign within the 50 square foot limit in front of the building . There is one light pole lighting the front parking lot . There is one light pole that wou d light the steps . Then there is one light mounted on the back of the building that would light the back area . Mr. Stotz - Will there be landscape between this building and the parki g lot . Mr. Schickel - There will be landscaping between the parking lot a d right- of-way . We were not planning to plant along the south end of the property . This is low budget project . The applicants are ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 17 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED going to build the building themselves . They also own a Christmas tree farm and use the plants from there to plant on the site . Chairperson Sigel - What are the anticipated hours of operation ? Mr . Schickel - The hours of operation are 7 : 00 a . m . to 1 : 00 a . m . Mr. Salino - We will be making Italian pastries and homemade donuts for sale . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 9 : 32 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 9 : 33 p . m . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT : Mr. Smith - The project has to go back before the Planning Board for Final Approval , RESOLUTION NO. 2001 =26 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT = Joseph Salino & Todd McGrill, 1070 Danby Road, Tax Parcel No. 39. 446. 1 , April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the matter of Joseph Salino and Todd McGill, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article VII, Section 34 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit a food service establishment, Italian Carry- Out, located at 1070 Danby Road, 150 feet from West King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 39- 1 - 16. 1 , Business District C based upon the findings in the environmental assessment review completed by Town Planning staff dated April 9, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 =27 - Appeal of Joseph Salino & Todd McGrill, 1070 Danbv Road, Tax Parcel No. 33. = 1 - 16. 1 , April 16, 2001. MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Joseph Salino and Todd McGill, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article Vll, Section 34 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit a food service establishment, Italian Carry-Out, located at 1070 Danby Road, 150 feet from West King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 39- 1 - 16. 1 , Business District C based upon the following finding: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 18 APRIL 16, 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY2112001 - APPROVED - APPROVD - APPROVED a , the appeal has met all requirements of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h; and the following condition : a . the setbacks are to be as listed in the submitted documents. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Mr. Stotz - Is the dumpster going to be screened with latticework? Mr . Schickel - There would be a wood or masonry enclosure . It would be screened from the south , east and west . The dumpster would be more visible to the neighbors if we locate the dumpster elsewhere . It would give ease to the access . Chairperson Sigel - Would there be a problem with locating the dumpster at the corner of the building ? Mr. Schickel - We would lose a parking space . We do not want to mix the waste with the parking . Mr. Stotz - It would be more difficult for the trash to be removed if the dumpster were located in that area . Mr. Schickel - The neighbors have written letters of support . This is a small business . It is smaller than Rogan 's Corners or Big AI 's . Mr. Stotz - The neighbors might not want to see the dumpster. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - Appeal of Joseph Salino & Todd McGrill, 1070 Danby Road, Tax Parcel No. 33. - 1 - 16. 1 , April 16, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Joseph Salino and Todd McGill, requesting a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Section 38 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit the placement of a screened garbage dumpster to be located no closer than 5 feet from the southwest property line and to allow parking spaces as shown on the submitted proposal to be located no closer than the setbacks listed in the submitted documents, located at 1070 Danby Road, 150 feet from West King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 39- 1 - 16. 1 , Business District C. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 19 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY 21 , 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVO - APPROVED AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS . Chairperson Sigel - Is Mrs . Rumsey coming back before the board in May? Mr. Frost - We will put her on the May agenda . It will be a full night . The board could meet at 6 : 30 p . m . for the Rumsey appeal . The board discussed the appeals coming up for the May agenda . Mr. Ellsworth - Has there been a decision on the Eddy appeal ? Attorney Barney - We submitted to the judge to make a decision . The judge has 60 days to make a decision . Mr. Stotz - I will be resigning from my position on the board at the end of the year. Attorney Barney - The new Zoning Ordinance might include a section to allow an alternate for extended absences . It is still under discussion . Chairperson Sigel - I received a letter regarding the communication towers . Is the Town trying to get the County to recognize our land use regulations? Attorney Barney - There is a debatable issue . There was a case in Monroe County where the County of Monroe wanted to expand the airport located in the City of Rochester. The City of Rochester wanted to deny application . The ruling was that the City of Rochester could not deny the County of Monroe the expansion of the airport . Criteria have now been established . The position that we are taking is the initial determination of whether we have the option of being involved as an involved agency . We are not the only township challenging the County . The towers cannot be barred , but they can be regulated . The issue is governmental rights . Communication towers are different because they are not going to be used explicitly by the County . They are discussing building towers that will be available for rent . Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at 9 : 51 p . m . Kirk Sigel., Chair erson va lkn 'C Carrie Whitmore , ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS PAGE 20 APRIL 16 , 2001 APPROVED - APPROVED - APROVED - MAY21 , 2001 - APPROVED - 4PPROVD - APPROVED Deputy Town Clerk/Deputy Receiver of Taxes TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Dani L. Holford, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am the Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Department Secretary, Tompkins County, New York; that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of public hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York on Monday, April 16, 2001 , commencing at 7: 00 P.M ., as per attached. Location of sign board used for posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of posting: April 9, 2001 Date of publication: April 11 , 2001 %Kbsi(. ( Dani L. Holford, Building and Zoning Depart ent Secretary, Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS. : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 11 th day of April, 2001 . fl � ` n Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Notary Public, State of New Yli t No. 01 WH6052877 Tioga Commission Expiry December ber TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, APRIL 16, 2001 7 : 00 P.M. By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE 1S HE EBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Monday, Aril 16, 2001 , in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, N.Y. , COMMENCING AT 7 : 00 P .M. on the following matters: APPEAL of Cornell University, Owner/Appellant, James Pung, Agent, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordnance, to permit a 42,000 + square foot school building addition at the James A. Baker Institute on Hungerford Hill load, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 61 - 1 -7.2, Residence District R-30. Additionally a variance from Section 18, S bdivision 10 of said Ordinance is further requested to permit an overall building height of 59 ± feet, whereas height s limited to 36 feet. APPEAL of Orlando Iacovelli, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirer - ents of Article III, Section 7 and 9 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, and Section 280-a of the New York Statc Law, to permit the creation of two building lots by subdivision with said lots not fronting on a state, county, or Town highway on an unpaved portion of Pennsylvania Avenue, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 54-5 -30, -31 , Residence Di trict R-9 . APPEAL of Charles Barbay, Owner/Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Section 2.01 -2 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, to permit the placement of an off-premise sign, to be loc ated at 104 Enfield Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33 - 1 -9.3, Residence District R-30. Additionally a variance from Section 4.01 - 1 of said Law is being requested to permit a sign area of 20 + square feet, whereas a maximum of 4 square feet is allowed. APPEAL of Joseph Salino and Todd McGill, Owners/Appellants, Thomas Schick 1, Agent, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article VII, Section 34 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to permit a food service establishment, Italian Carry-Out, located at 1070 Danby Road, 150 feet from West King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 39- 1 - 16. 1, Business District C. A variance from Setion38 of said Ordinance is being requested to permit the placement of a screened garbage dumpster and parking spaces proposed to be located within the required yard setbacks. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 : 00 p. m. , and said place, heaj all persons in support of such matters 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 the time of the public hearing. Andrew S. Frost Director of Building and Zoning 273 - 1783 Dated : April 6, 2001 Published : April 11 , 2001