Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2001-10-15 FILE DATE �, Qj„® TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY , OCTOBER 15 , 2001 7 : 00 PM APPEAL of Henry Wan Jr. , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to maintain an existing house with a side yard building setback of 13 ' 7" whereas a 15 foot setback is required , at 304 Salem Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 70-9- 9 , Residence District R - 15 . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Ruth Walker, Appellant , George VanValen , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII , Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 , 850 cubic yards of fill material at 929 Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 47-2-6 . 2 , Residence District R-30 and Six Mile Creek Valley Conservation District . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of George VanValen , Appellant , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII , Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 , 950 cubic yards of fill material at 1001 Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 47-2 -6 . 52 , Residence District R-30 and Six Mile Creek Valley Conservation District . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Cornell University , Appellant , Michael Husar, Agent , requesting a special approval under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , in order to construct a 15 , 000 + square foot wrestling facility on the Campus Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No . 67- 1 - 13 . 2 and 63- 1 - 8 . 2 and City of Ithaca Parcel No . 31 - 1 - 1 . 2 , in a Town zoned R-30 district . A variance from Article V , Section 18 is also being requested in order to permit the building ' s entryway to have a height of 42 feet (36 foot height limitation ) . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of Cornell University , Appellant , Kim Martinson , Agent , requesting a special approval under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to modify and upgrade the Oxley Parking lot at NYS Route 366 , Dryden Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 63- 1 -8 . 2 . The upgrades include landscaping , lighting , and walkways . Said special approval includes modifications of previously granted approvals from April 10 , 1991 and January 8 , 1997 , which also include time limits . APPEAL GRANTED APPEAL of George Voss , Owner, Independent Wireless One , Appellant , Timothy Frateschi , Harris Beach , LLP , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Town of Ithaca Local Law #4 , 1998 and Article XIII , Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create and co- locate telecommunication antennas on an existing silo at 385 King Road West , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 35-3- 1 , Residence District R-30 . A variance from Section 70A-5 of said law is being requested in order to deviate from dimensional standards . APPEAL GRANTED TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MONDAY, OCTOBER 15 , 2001 7 : 00 PM PRESENT: Kirk Sigel , Chairperson ; Harry Ellsworth , Board Member; David Stotz , Board Member; James Niefer, Board Member; Andy Frost , Director of Building/Zoning ; John Barney , Attorney for the Town ; Mike Smith , Environmental Planner. EXCUSED : Ronald Krantz , Board Member. ALSO PRESENT: Henry Wan , Jr. , 304 Salem Drive ; Michael Husar, Cornell University ; George Van Valen , 110 Van Dorn Road ; Ronald Brunozzi , Pyramid Site Acquisition ; Tim Logue , City of Ithaca ; Kathryn Wolf , Trowbridge & Wolf ; Shirley Egan , Cornell University; Kim Martinson , Cornell University ; John Guttenberger, Cornell University . Chairperson Sigel called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p . m . The first appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Henry Wan Jr. , Appellant , requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV , Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to maintain an existing house with a side yard building setback of 13 ' 7" whereas a 15 foot setback is required , at 304 Salem Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 70-9 -9 , Residence District R- 15 . Henry Wan , 304 Salem Drive - When we moved into the house , we did not notice the problem with the side yard . Recently we had a survey done and found the deficiency . It is a hardship to remodel the house . Therefore , we are applying for a variance . Chairperson Sigel - This application does not have an environmental assessment review . We have received a letter from Mr. Wan 's neighbor stating that they do not object to the variance . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 06 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7 : 07 p . m . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 70 - Henry Wan, 304 Salem Drive, Tax Parcel No. 70. -9-9, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by James Niefer. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Henry Wan, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain an existing house with a side yard building setback of not less than 13 feet whereas a 15 foot setback is required, at 304 Salem Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-9-9, Residence District R- 15, based upon the following findings: APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES a . Two letters have been included in the appeal from the adjoining neighbors stating that they do not have an objection to the continuing non-conformance of this property, and b. The non-conformance itself consists of a porch which is in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The second & third appeals to be heard were as follows : APPEAL of Ruth Walker, Appellant , George VanValen , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII , Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 , 850 cubic yards of fill material at 929 Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 47-2 -6 . 2 , Residence District R -30 and Six Mile Creek Valley Conservation District . APPEAL of George VanValen , Appellant , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII , Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 , 950 cubic yards of fill material at 1001 Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 47-2-6 . 52 , Residence District R -30 and Six Mile Creek Valley Conservation District . Mr. Frost - The board may want to consider hearing the appeal of Ruth Walker and George Van Valen at once . The parcels are adjacent to each other. Ms . Walker is Mr. Van Valen 's mother- in - law. The board decided to hear the appeal of Ruth Walker and George Van Valen simultaneously. George Van Valen , 110 Van Dorn Road - These are two small ponds . The Walker's pond is a half- acre pond . It is outside the Conservation District . It is 200 feet above the railway easement . They want the pond for recreational purposes . The pond will be located in the middle of agricultural land . We are not changing any watercourses . Dan Walker has already been out and looked at the proposed site . The second pond is on adjacent property , which I own . It is 30 , 000 square feet , just a little more than a half-acre pond . It is the same kind of terrain . It is in the middle of an agricultural hay field . This would be for recreational purposes . We are also using the pond to gravity feed water to a proposed cabin we are building . The cabin will be below the pond by about 1 , 000 feet . Chairperson Sigel - Would it be for drinking water? Mr. Van Valen - No . It would be for gray water and so forth . 2 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Stotz - Where is the source of the water coming from ? Mr. Van Valen - Both ponds have a watershed that encompasses three to four acres . Both proposed sites are wet spots in a field . Mr. Frost - I included the Conservation Zone as part of the appeal because I would rather include it than omit it and create a problem . I was not quite sure where the boundary line was located . The packets also included a memo from Dan Walker, Town Engineer, recommending granting approval for this action . There is no relation between Dan Walker and Ruth Walker. Mr. Niefer - The pond located at 929 Coddington Road looks to be located near an electric transmission line . Mr. Van Valen - It is probably about 200 feet away from that . The excavation will not be in the right- of-way. Mr. Stotz - Are there any requirements to put a fence up around the pond ? Mr. Frost - Many years ago when I worked for the County Health Department they were considered attractive nuisances . There is no requirement for fences . Mr. Smith - The ponds are located in agricultural fields . The run -off is currently there . It is coming off the agricultural fields . During construction the vegetation in the fields will help to reduce any run -off and sedimentation elements . Mr. Walker mentioned in his memo that erosion and sedimentation measures were included in the application . Mr. Frost - The ponds are located in an R -30 zone . It is an agricultural use . Mr. Stotz - Why is this before the board ? Mr. Frost - It falls under Section 70 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding the movement of fill . Mr. Smith - It also falls between 250 cubic yards and 2500 cubic yards . Mr. Frost - Up to 50 cubic yards they can move fill without any approval from the Town . Between 50 and 250 , fill can be moved with a permit from the Town Engineer. Then between 250 and 2500 , it requires Zoning Board of Appeals approval . Any amount over 2500 requires Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals approval . Mr. Stotz - The fill is being pushed from one side to the other to build a dyke . Is any fill being trucked off the site ? Mr. Van Valen - No . Mr. Stotz - Are you retaining the topsoil ? 3 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Van Valen - Yes . It will be pushed back on once the pond is constructed . Mr. Frost - Mr. Van Valen is a professional earthmover. Mr. Niefer - What kind of spill over will there be for overflow? Is it just the grass spillway? Mr. Van Valen - Both ponds will be overland spillways with a primary spillway . There will not be any pipes . Mr. Niefer - Will the spillway be at a level lower than the pond ? Mr. Van Valen - Two feet is standard . There is a watershed area above it . The ponds will be located in the middle of agricultural fields that are currently swaled to that area . Mr. Niefer - What will the ponds be used for? Mr. Van Valen - I am not sure what the Walkers' have in mind . We have already built two ponds on our site . This is the third pond . We will put fish in them . Mr. Frost - Is a permit required from DEC ? Mr. Van Valen - DEC does not have requirements up to a million gallons . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 18 p . m . for the appeal of Ms . Walker and Mr. Van Valen . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7 : 19 p . m . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for Ruth Walker : RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 71 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - Ruth Walker, 929 Coddington Road, Tax Parcel No. 47. -2-6.2, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by James Niefer. RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of environmental significance in the matter of Ruth Walker, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond at 929 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6. 2, Residence District R-30, based upon the environmental review completed by Town Staff dated October 5, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. 4 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Stotz - How large is the Walker's parcel ? Mr. Van Valen - They have eleven acres . Most of their land is in front . We actually own the land in back of their parcel . We own about twenty acres in back of this pond . It is quite an area . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -72 - Ruth Walker, 929 Coddington Road, Tax Parcel No. 47. -2-6.2, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by James Niefer. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Ruth Walker, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article Xlll, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond with the movement of not more than 1 , 900 cubic yards of fill material at 929 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6. 2, Residence District R-30, based upon the following findings: a . There will be no movement of fill from the site, and b. The pond is located on large parcels located in a semi-rural setting, and C, The requirements of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h have been met. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT for George Van Valen : RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -73 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - George Van Valen, 1001 Coddington Road, Tax Parcel No. 47. -2-6. 52, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of environmental assessment in the matter of George Van Valen, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article Xlll, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond at 1001 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 47-2-6. 52, Residence District R-30, based upon the environmental review completed by Town Staff dated October 5, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. 5 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 74 - George Van Valen, 1001 Coddin_gton Road, Tax Parcel No. 47. -2- 6. 52, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of George Van Valen, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond with the movement of no more than 2, 000 cubic yards of fill material at 1001 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6. 52, Residence District R- 30, based upon the following findings: a . There will be no movement of fill from the site, and b. The pond is located on large parcels located in a semi-rural setting, and c. The requirements of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h have been met. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The fourth appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Cornell University , Appellant , Michael Husar, Agent , requesting a special approval under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , in order to construct a 15 , 000 + square foot wrestling facility on the Campus Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No . 67- 1 - 13 . 2 and 63- 1 -8 . 2 and City of Ithaca Parcel No . 31 - 1 - 1 . 2 , in a Town zoned R-30 district . A variance from Article V , Section 18 is also being requested in order to permit the building ' s entryway to have a height of 42 feet (36 foot height limitation ) . Michael Husar, Cornell University - I am the project manager with Cornell University Planning , Design and Construction . We had an issue the last time we met with the Planning Board in terms of our entry tower. The question came up as to whether or not because of our funding issues whether we might be able to afford to build the tower . If we proceed with the variance request at this point in time and are unable to build the tower, I think it gives us the flexibility to build it : If we choose not to go for the variance and have the money to build it later we will be back before the board in a month or so . I think it is best to approach the subject now and have the opportunity to build it if we can afford it . Chairperson Sigel - Is the upper part of the tower purely cosmetic ? Mr. Husar - I would like to call it architectural . It is primarily a glazed tower. Chairperson Sigel - It does not look like it is used for access . 6 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Husar - It is not for access . It is primarily to allow a focal point for the entrance . It is glazed to allow some light inside . There is intended to be a light at the top of the tower to shine down into the lobby below . We have gone through some value engineering and essentially eliminated the tower, the battered wall on the west side and some of the smaller windows that are peppered throughout the elevation . The elevation has been simplified . It is not as architecturally dominant as we would like it to be . We are looking at a 15 , 000 square foot facility . We are sited right now at the location of the current tennis courts . It puts it right inside the Town of Ithaca line . An earlier scheme had it straddling the Town of Ithaca and City of Ithaca boundary . The proposed building is a smaller footprint than the tennis courts itself . When we did the Town planning review for the preliminary we had a negative declaration on the short environmental assessment form . Chairperson Sigel - What will determine if the tower is built? Mr. Husar - We are in a funding raising dilemma . With the condition of the stock market , a lot of the donors have pledged funds that are a little tight right now. We have a cap on the project . We are trying to keep our dollars tight to be able to stay within the cap as well . We are in the process of working with Welliver McGuire to get some pricing . It is a soft bidding process . We are closing the gap . We are identifying items that we can substitute materials . We are currently looking at the exterior, which we did not want to do . Those are the two major items that we have addressed at this point in time . Mr. Ellsworth - Are you going to build the foundation for the tower? Mr. Husar - Right now that is the way it is designed . The structural steel is in place . If we need to lose that as well in order to save dollars it will be gone . Mr. Niefer - How does the height of the proposed tower compare to the height of the Field House ? Mr. Husar - The tower is lower than the Field House . Mr . Niefer - How far is it from the wrestling facility to the Field House ? Mr. Husar - It is about 100 feet . Chairperson Sigel - Are the exterior materials going to be the same as the Field House ? Mr. Husar - We are looking at concrete block . The existing facility is a ground face block. We are looking at possibly a ground face block on the banding and a split face block on the regular field . We are trying to match it reasonably close in color . We are trying to work it so that it is as compatible as we can get it . The Athletics Quad is trying to be consistent with what is there . We have gone through a couple of exercises in terms of the tower. We have worked it so that it is more a single plint that comes up . The different versions have not brought the dollars down . Mr. Stotz — Is the rear of the building going to be landscaped ? 7 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Husar - We worked with the Planning Board to extend some of the existing plants that are around the walkways and the parking lot . We have added some Japanese flowering crabs in the front as well . Mr. Frost - Are the trees in the elevation representative of the landscaping ? Mr. Husar - It is more an artist version of what it would look like . Mr. Stotz - Are any improvements going to be made to the front of the complex? Mr. Husar - Right now all we are doing in front is adding a couple of handicap parking spaces . The actual parking lots along the Campus Road are under a separate project in order to do parking lot improvements . I do know that we were talking about working some of the handicap parking curb cuts across the driveways as part of the ADA accessibility projects . These will be done as a separate project come this fall or early spring just to be able to get the curb cuts in place . We would coordinate that with our project to be able to make sure it is consistent with what we are looking for. Mr. Stotz - Is there going to be a sidewalk around the building ? Mr. Husar - There is a sidewalk down to the handicap parking spaces . A second walk will cut across and tie into the sidewalk along Campus Road . There are back doors , but they are meant to be strictly for emergency exits . The circulation is meant to come through the front door. Chairperson Sigel - There is a sidewalk across the entire front of the site . Attorney Barney - When would you be making your decision on the tower? Mr. Husar - We will be making the decision before the November 6th Planning Board meeting . We are pricing it now . We will be showing the simpler version for our final review. Our hope is that if we can afford the tower we will put it back in . It is safer for us to ask the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow us the height variance so if we have the ability to put it in we will try to put it in . We will ask the Planning Board to accept us without the tower with the understanding if we can afford to we will put it in . Attorney Barney - What is the height of the building ? Mr. Husar - We are at 36 feet right now . One of the value engineering proposals is to take 2 feet 8 inches worth of corsing out and lower the entire structure . It would take the tower down as well . Attorney Barney - What would you assess the chances of that going back in ? Mr. Husar - I would say it is more likely we will not have a tower than we will have a tower . Mr. Stotz - Is there exterior lighting ? 8 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Husar - The exterior lighting that we have is strictly going to be the lighting along the street . No additional exterior lighting is anticipated . Chairperson Sigel - I assume there will be lighting inside at the top of the ceiling that will spill out . Mr. Husar - That is correct . The arena will be lit . There are only a handful of events per year where we will have evening events . The lower section is weight room and offices . There is also a lounge area . Chairperson Sigel - Then only during a meet will the upper part be lit at night . Mr. Husar - The level of lighting they have during a meet would be a little different than they would during a regular practice . They will not need as a high a level during practices as they will during events . Chairperson Sigel - We do not have an environmental assessment . Mr. Smith - It was treated as an unlisted action . We did it as a coordinated review with the Zoning Board of Appeals and City of Ithaca . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 7 : 40 p . m . Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 7 : 41 p . m . Attorney Barney - The board should make a separate motion granting the variance . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 75 - Cornell University, Campus Road, Tax Parcel Nos. 67. 4 - 132 & 63. - 1 -8.2, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by David Stotz. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a special approval under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, in order to construct a 15, 000 square foot wrestling facility on the Campus Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 67- 1 - 13. 2 and 63- 1 -8. 21 R-30 district based upon the plans and sketches presented to the Zoning Board of Appeals and having met the requirements under Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -76 - Cornell University, Campus Road, Tax Parcel Nos 67, 443.2 & 63. 442, October 15, 2001 . 9 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES MOTION made by Harry Ellsworth, seconded by James Niefer. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct the entrance tower at a maximum height of not more than 42. 5 feet as part of the wrestling facility on the Campus Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 67- 1 - 13.2 and 63- 1 -8. 2, R-30 district conditional on the designs and construction detail being approved by the Planning Board. It is noted that the adjacent building has a higher roofline than the proposed tower. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The fifth appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of George Voss , Owner, Independent Wireless One , Appellant , Timothy Frateschi , Harris Beach , LLP , Agent , requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Town of Ithaca Local Law #4 , 1998 and Article XIII , Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to create and co- locate telecommunication antennas on an existing silo at 385 King Road West , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 35-3- 1 , Residence District R-30 . A variance from Section 70A-5 of said law is being requested in order to deviate from dimensional standards . Ronald Brunozzi , Pyramid Site Acquisition Services - I am representing Independent Wireless One , who would be the carrier for the phone operation . We are proposing to co- locate six antennas on a silo of Mr. Voss at 385 West King Road . The antennas would be at 80 feet on the silo . Along with that we will have a ground installation that would consist of a 9 foot by 12 foot concrete slab with steel cabinets . There would be no structures or shelter that you could occupy . The cabinets are roughly the size of a small refrigerator. There would be an 8 foot chain link fence around it . The Planning Board requested screening to match the existing vegetation . Our engineers are talking with Mr. Kanter. The board left it up to his discretion . The antennas are roughly 6 feet in length . They are approximately 11 inches wide . We did include some photo simulations in the board 's packet . Chairperson Sigel - It looks like from the simulation the intended materials are similar in appearance to the exterior of the silo . Mr. Brunozzi - We can also paint the material to match the existing material if we need to . Chairperson Sigel - Will this installation involve any additional wire cabling ? 10 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Brunozzi - The wires will be run underground . Cable will run up the side of the silo to get to the antennas . Chairperson Sigel - Will more cabling be strung along utility poles ? Mr. Brunozzi - The wire would run back to the utility pole and tap into an existing telephone line . Mr. Frost - The Planning Board recommended that the Zoning Board of Appeals waive certain requirements of Local Law #4 of 1998 . The board needs to take action on those recommendations . Chairperson Sigel - Are other companies able to use the silo ? Mr. Brunozzi - The technology is different . When we co- locate on towers , there is 10 feet of vertical separation required between the antennas . We are at 80 feet . Someone could co- locate at 70 feet or 90 feet at the silo . Chairperson Sigel - Have any of your dealings with the owner precluded him from renting space to another company? Mr. Brunozzi - No . Every carrier has their own frequency and FCC license . We have not precluded Mr. Voss from renting space to another company . Mr. Stotz - What size is the building that is being constructed ? Mr. Brunozzi - We are not constructing a building . We would construct a 9 foot by 12 foot concrete pad . We would put metal cabinets on the pad . Mr. Stotz - What is in the cabinets ? a Mr. Brunozzi - One cabinet contains a battery with backup . They contain the electronics of the antennae . Mr. Stotz - Is there any fire protection for the cabinets? Mr. Brunozzi - I am not aware of any . Anything could happen . Mr. Ellsworth - I would like to congratulate the firm on using an existing structure . Cell towers are popping up everywhere throughout the valleys . Mr. Niefer - The applicant is proposing to install an eight foot high chain link fence . Does that require a variance ? Attorney Barney - No . The reason is the eight foot fence comes out of our local law . We require that around facilities like this . 11 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Frost - There seems to be a little debate about the interpretation of our height of fences in our Zoning Ordinance . One interpretation has been that you can have a fence over six foot high if the fence is out of the required setbacks . Chairperson Sigel - Is there an environmental assessment? Mr. Smith - No . It was an unlisted action . It was done as a coordinated review between the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals . The Planning Board was pleased to see the antennas being attached to an existing tower: Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 00 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8 : 01 p . m . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -77 - George Voss, 385 King Road West, Tax Parcel No. 35. -3- 1, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by David Stotz, seconded by Harry Ellsworth . RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of George Voss, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Town of Ithaca Local Law #4, 1998 and Article Xlll, Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create and co-locate telecommunication antennas on an existing silo at 385 King Road West, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35-3- 1 , Residence District R-30 based upon the following: FINDINGS: a . This is being constructed in a rural area, and b. It does not involve the construction of an additional tower, and C, It is not an eyesore in the community, and d. It has a minimum environmental impact on site, and e. The facility is needed to provide adequate wireless coverage for the operator, and f. This appeal meets the requirements of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h and the requirements of Local Law #4 of 1998: ( 1) there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location, as demonstrated by the applicant; (2) the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected as a result of the proposed project; (3) the specific proposed change in use as a result of the proposed project is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development for the Town of Ithaca; (4) the proposed telecommunication antennas are necessary to meet current or reasonably expected demands for services; (5) the facility conforms with all federal and state laws and all applicable rules or regulations promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission, Federal Aviation Administration, or any other federal agencies having jurisdiction; (6) the facility is considered a public utility in the State of New York; 12 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES (7) the facility is sited, designed, and constructed in a manner which minimizes (i) visual impact to the extent practical, and (ii) adverse impacts upon migratory and other birds and wildlife; (8) the facility complies with all other requirements of this ordinance, unless expressly superceded herein; (9) the chosen site is the most appropriate site among those available within the technically feasible area for the location of a telecommunications facility. CONDITIONS: a . The requirements stipulated by the Planning Board in Resolution No. 2001 -91 of October 2, 2001 be met, and b. This board waives the following requirements from Local Law #4 of 1998: ( 1) an inventory report specifying existing telecommunication facility sites and evaluation of opportunities for shared use, and (2) the dimensional standards indicating the fall zone having a radius equal to the height of attached antennae, and (3) the agreement to negotiate with subsequent applicants seeking to co-locate telecommunication facilities on the initial applicant's structures. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. The sixth appeal to be heard was as follows : APPEAL of Cornell University, Appellant , Kim Martinson , Agent , requesting a special approval under Article V , Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to be permitted to modify and upgrade the Oxley Parking lot at NYS Route 366 , Dryden Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No , 63- 1 -8 . 2 . The upgrades include landscaping , lighting , and walkways . Said special approval includes modifications of previously granted approvals from April 10 , 1991 and January 8 , 1997 , which also include time limits . Kathryn Wolf , Trowbridge & Wolf - I am acting as an agent for Cornell University. The project that is under consideration to the board this evening currently has an approval for a temporary use of parking at the former Oxley site . The approval expires December 31 , 2001 . This proposal , which is a joint undertaking of the Cornell Plantations and Cornell Department of Transportation , would result in a permanent solution for the site . We are requesting a special approval from the board of an institutional use in a residential zone . We are also requesting the continuation of the existing use until such time as the proposed site plan is implemented . The parking lot has been used for the last ten years for contractor parking . This is for contractors working on Central Campus . It is also used in the summer months for the increased temporary staff. 13 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES The location is ideally suited for this because of the close proximity to Central Campus . The lots in Central Campus are overwhelmingly used for staff parking . It is not practical to have contractors parking among the cars . The demand still exists for this use . We do not see it going away in the near future . Contractors require parking close to the site . It is close enough for the contractors to walk to the site . The proposal will remove the existing storage shed . The removal of the storage shed allows for a more efficient parking lot . The proposed parking lot is a smaller footprint with fifteen more parking spaces . We are able to move the parking lot further away from the creek . The parking lot will be paved asphalt with curbing . The existing curb cut will be shifted slightly to the east . The site east of the parking lot will be re-vegetated . The landscaping will be consistent with the type of landscape that exists along the creek . There will be a seasonal , recreational trail that will connect the East Hill Recreation Way through the project to the existing sidewalk at the intersection of Route 366 . There is a drainage plan for the parking lot . The parking lot currently sheet drains to the creek . The new site has curbing . The storm water will exit to filtration basins . There will be an increased water quality. The intention is to begin work on the site in spring of 2002 . The first item will be to remove the shed and the excess gravel from the lot . We will maintain the gravel parking lot for the next several years . The storage function will be removed . The rehabilitation of the site will take more than one season . The soils are very poor. The first item will be soil rehabilitation and weed removal . The second season will begin the planting of the landscape . The construction of the parking lot will begin in 2004 once the peak demand for Duffield Hall has been met . Chairperson Sigel - Do we need to pass a separate resolution for the parking lot? Attorney Barney - The board could extend the approval until the end of 2004 . It gives them 3 years to start the construction of the parking lot . Mr. Smith - The environmental assessment was treated as a Type I action at the Planning Board . It was done as a coordinated review . Chairperson Sigel opened the public hearing at 8 : 19 p . m . With no persons present to be heard , Chairperson Sigel closed the public hearing at 8 : 20 p . m . Mr. Ellsworth - Will there be light poles for the parking lot? Ms . Wolf - There will be seven lighting fixtures around the perimeter of the parking lot . They will be the shoe box cut-off fixtures . Mr. Stotz - Are we extending the previous approval ? Mr . Frost - Yes . 14 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Stotz - Do we want to carry over the conditions from the 1997 approval ? One condition does not apply any more regarding the site being restored in 2001 . Attorney Barney - The condition could be modified for 2004 or the board could choose to eliminate the condition . Chairperson Sigel - Do we need to pass two resolutions? Attorney Barney - They could be passed in one resolution . The approval will become invalid after 36 months if the work has not been started . The East Hill Parking Lot had an approval to make improvements to the parking lot . The approval was not tied to anything . This is tied to something . I think if the University is unable to start the parking lot by 2004 they will be making an application for an extension . Ms . Wolf - Does the lot need to be fully complete by the end of 2004? We need to have begun substantial construction . That was my understanding at the Planning Board . Attorney Barney - That would be correct . The sunset provision is 36 months . Mr. Frost - It is a Planning Board requirement . They need to obtain a building permit for the Zoning Board of Appeals . Ms . Wolf - It sounded as if the parking lot had not been constructed by the end of 2004 , the parking shall cease . Attorney Barney - We are dealing with a condition that was put in 1997 that in the year 2001 when the special approval expired the area could no longer be used as parking . What is the time frame for the parking lot to be completed ? Ms . Wolf - The intention is to complete the parking lot at such time that the peak demand for Duffield Hall ends . It is anticipated that that will be sometime in late 2004 . Then construction will begin . Mr. Ellsworth - What is the construction cycle ? Ms . Wolf - The landscape of the site will be complete by that time . Mr. Ellsworth - We are trying to make a cut-off date to make sure it is done . Chairperson Sigel - I intended the motion to mean that on December 31 , 2004 the parking lot could no longer be used in its present form as a gravel parking lot . Ms . Wolf - The intention is to have begun construction on the parking lot by then . Attorney Barney - The board could include in the resolution that the board reserves to the University the right to come in and request an extension of time if they need it . 15 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Ms . Wolf - I wanted to make sure the parking lot did not need to be 100% complete by December 31 , 2004 , RESOLUTION NO. 2001 - 78 - Cornell University, Oxley Parking Lot, Tax Parcel No. 63. 4 -8.2, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Cornell University, requesting a special approval under Article V. Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to modify and upgrade the Oxley Parking lot and the extension of the previously granted approvals from April 10, 1991 and January 8, 1997, allowing the continued use of the gravel parking lot, until December 31 , 2004, at NYS Route 366, Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63- 1 -8. 2 based upon the following: FINDING: a . The conditions of Section 77, subdivision 7, subparagraphs a -h have been met, and CONDITIONS: a . The six construction trailers, and b. The construction workers to be restricted to commuting to construction projects on the Cornell Campus, and C. The parking area shall be maintained as shown on the plan entitled "Oxley Arena Site Improvements and Temporary Parking " dated September 24, 1990, and d. This board gives the Director of Planning the authority to modify the easterly end of the trail to conform to the reconstruction of Route 366 North, and e. The conditions imposed by the Planning Board in Resolution No. 2001 -89 be met. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz, Niefer. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS : Mr. Frost - At the September meeting , the City of Ithaca came before the board with an application for the pedestrian bridge . The NYSDOT sent the City of Ithaca a letter regarding the bridge . The resolution stated that the City may obtain an opinion from DOT or other state body suggesting that fencing covering the bridge is not necessary and the board would be willing to reconsider the condition . The City has obtained such a letter from DOT . The letter did not tell us exactly what we wanted to hear. I spoke with Scott Bates of DOT this morning . Mr. Bates basically said the 8 foot straight fence was adequate . He was not aware in his experience with the State that they have ever 16 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES required or had a condition that would require fencing over the top of a bridge . He wanted to know why the board wanted the bridge covered . I explained that the board was concerned about items being thrown from the bridge . He is not aware of the State ever making it a requirement . I asked Mr. Logue to come in tonight on behalf of the City to ask the board to modify the condition . Chairperson Sigel - Does the City consider it to be a major problem to put the fence across the top of the bridge ? Tim Logue , City of Ithaca - It would be nice to avoid it . The contract has been awarded . The bridge is being constructed . It would be a change order in the process . It would not be the end of the world . Mr. Ellsworth - Would someone be able sue the Town if something were to happen on the bridge ? Attorney Barney - Anyone can make a lawsuit . The question is if they can collect on it . In this circumstance , you have a City owned structure . The City has been advised about the Town 's concern regarding the fence . If the City chooses not to do it , they are doing it in part based on a statement from the State of New York . The City has that to rely on . I think if I were the executor of an individual killed by a cinder block thrown over the top of the bridge , I would be looking strongly at the City for having responsibility. Mr. Frost - Mr. Bates said he couldn 't recollect even at the State Fair where they've had fence requirements over the top . He also said that there was nothing precluding the City from including a fence over the top of the bridge . The letter from the State is consistent with the resolution passed by the Zoning Board of Appeals . Attorney Barney - It is up to the board . Chairperson Sigel - Did the specifications call for a straight fence or a fence with a curve at top ? Mr. Logue - It is a straight fence . I spoke with the City Bridge Engineer. He said it was fine with him . Chairperson Sigel - How do board members feel ? I could go either way . Mr. Niefer - I really feel that Mr. Stevens should clearly say the fencing cover over the bridge is not necessary . Mr. Frost - I called because the letter was not clear. They did state in the letter that straight fence complies with DOT standards . Mr. Niefer - The board stated in the resolution that we would reconsider if we received a letter from the State . We do not have a letter from the State stating the cover is not necessary . Mr. Frost - I think that we do . The last sentence states , " the straight 8 foot fence complies with DOT standards and specifications " . 17 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Mr. Niefer - Sometimes responsibility goes beyond specifications and standards . Specifications and standards is not the end all as far as liability and responsibility . If it is reasonably foreseeable that something could take place or happen then the standards in and of itself are not a total defense for the State under the circumstances . Mr. Stotz - I think if we try to cover our basis on everything , we will have all kinds of netting and barriers sprouting up everywhere . I think the 8 foot fence is adequate . There are many places that do not even have a fence . The only place I have seen the coverings is New York City . It is a different population in New York City . Mr. Frost - All building codes are minimum standards . Mr. Stotz - My feeling is that it is overkill . Mr. Ellsworth - I agree with Mr. Stotz . RESOLUTION NO. 2001 -79 - City of Ithaca, New York State Route 13 Pedestrian Bridge, Tax Parcel Nos. 31 . =2-3. 1 and 38. -3-20, October 15, 2001 . MOTION made by Kirk Sigel, seconded by Harry Ellsworth. RESOLVED, that this board revokes condition "a " from the Zoning Board of Appeals Resolution No. 2001 -65 requiring the bridge to be completely covered by a mesh or fencing material to prevent anything from being thrown over the bridge into traffic based upon the letter from Barry Stevens of NYSDOT dated October 10, 2001 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Sigel, Ellsworth, Stotz. NAYS: Niefer. The motion was declared to be carried. Mr. Stotz = I am not going to be in Ithaca for the January , February , and March meetings . I would like to continue on as a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals , though I do not believe it is fair to fellow board members that I continue to serve . Chairperson Sigel - Attorney Barney mentioned before that we could have an alternate . Attorney Barney - The current draft of the proposed revised Zoning Ordinance has provisions for alternates for Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals who can be called in on a per meeting basis . It might be something we should discuss with the Town Board . Your experience and judgement would be missed on the board . Mr. Frost - We do have four cases set up for the November meeting . 18 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - NOVEMBER 19, 2001 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED OCTOBER 15, 2001 MINUTES Chairperson Sigel adjourned the meeting at 8 : 56 p . m . 1, Kirk Sigel , Chairpers n Carrie Whitmore , Deputy Town Clerk/Deputy Receiver of Taxes 19 TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, OCTOBER 15, 2001 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, October 15 , 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 Henry Wan Jr., Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article IV, Section 14 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to maintain an existing house with a side yard building setback of 13 ' 7" whereas a 15 foot setback is required, at 304 Salem Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 70-9-9, Residence District R- 15 . APPEAL of Ruth Walker, Appellant, George VanValen, Agent, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 ,850 cubic yards of fill material at 929 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47-2-6.2, Residence District R-30. APPEAL of George VanValen, Appellant, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Article XIII, Section 70 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create a freshwater pond with the movement of 1 ,950 cubic yards of fill material at 1001 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 47- 2-6.52, Residence District R-30 and Six Mile Creek Valley Conservation District. APPEAL of Cornell University, Appellant, Michael Husar, Agent, requesting a special approval under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, in order to construct a 15,000 ± square foot wrestling facility on the Campus Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 67- 1 - 13 .2 and 63- 1 -8.2 and City of Ithaca Parcel No. 31 - 1 - 1 .2, in a Town zoning R-30 district. A variance from Article V, Section 18 is also being requested in order to permit the building' s entryway to have a height of 42 feet (36 foot height limitation). APPEAL of Cornell University, Appellant, Kim Martinson, Agent, requesting a special approval under Article V, Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to modify and upgrade the Oxley Parking lot at NYS Route 366, Dryden Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63- 1 -8 .2. The upgrades include landscaping, lighting, and walkways. Said special approval includes modifications of previously granted approvals from April 10, 1991 and January 8,, 19970 APPEAL of George Voss, Owner, Independent Wireless One, Appellant, Timothy Frateschi, Hams Beach, LLP, Agent, requesting a special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Town of Ithaca Local Law #4, 1998 and Article XIII, Section 70A of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create and co-locate telecommunication antennas on an existing silo at 385 King Road West, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35-3- 1 , Residence District R-30. A variance from Section 70A-5 of said law is being requested in order to deviate from dimensional standards . 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 . 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. Andrew S . Frost Director of Building and Zoning 273- 1783 Dated : October 4, 2001 Published : October 10. 2001 TOWN OF 1THACA 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 hearines to be held by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals in Towne Hall, 215 North Tioea Street, Ithaca, New York on Monday, October 15, 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: October 5, 2001 Date of publication: October 10, 2001 Dani L. Holford, Building and Zoning partment Secretary, Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS. : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of October 2001 , 41 Notary Public CARRIEWHiTMOFtE. : Notary Public, State of New York Not 01 WR6052877 . Tioga County- Commission Expires December �Q /1