HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2012-11-19 ® TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Monday November 19 , 2012
Minutes
Present : Andrew Dixon , Yvonne Fogarty, Bill King , Dave Mountin , Ron Krantz , Kirk
Sigel Chair
Staff Present : Bruce Bates , Director Code Enforcement , Susan Brock , Attorney for
Town and Lori Kofoid , Deputy Town Clerk
Meeting was called to order at 7 : 00 pm
Appeal of Northeast Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , applicant , 1290 Professional
Building LLC , owner, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 221 -6A
( 1 )( a ) and 221 -6( 2 ) " Regulated Signs" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to
place a 15 +/- sq ft sign ( 16 . 75 +/- sq ft including supports ) where only a 4 sq ft sign is
allowed and exceeding the maximum height of 6 ft. , located at 1290 Trumansburg Rd ,
Tax Parcel No . 24 . -4- 14 . 2 , Medium Density Residential .
Melissa Miller, NE Pediatrics and Ron Gray sign contractor were present to answer
questions . The new sign is somewhat bigger ( 8 sq ft) about double than what is
presently there . Ms . Miller explained that they looked at other signage in the area , along
with the landscape of the area when making the decision about the size of the sign . The
goal is not to create new traffic but for patients to be able to find the business . Mr.
Krantz expressed his opinion that we had granted a sign variance for the Museum of the
Earth and we would be remiss not to grant this sign also . Mr. Rosen expressed that it is
a very busy road and increasing the size would be beneficial for people in locating the
business . Ms . Miller also explained her observations about how fast traffic does go
down the road in front of the business and may consider requesting additional signage
in the future .
Ms . Brock , Mr. Rosen and Mr. Sigel put on the record that their children are patients of
the practice but that they don 't believe this would make them biased in voting on this
project .
Board had further discussion with Mr. Gray regarding the slanting of the property and
how that may impact the height of the tallest post . The grade is already elevated and
the estimation of the highest point will not be above 6 ft .
Attorney Brock reviewed a correction to the SEQR by checking yes on # 12 to "ZBA Use
Variance" . The change was noted on the original SEQR form located in the file for the
appeal . Chairperson Sigel moved to make a negative determination of environmental
significance based on the information in Part I form and the reasons stated in Part II of
the environmental assessment form . The motion was seconded by Ron Krantz. Motion
carried unanimously
® Public hearing opened at 7 : 15pm and was closed with no public comment at 7 : 15pm
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 2 of 16
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-060 , SEAR Determination , Sign Variance , 1290
Trumansburg Rd , TP# 24.-4- 14.2
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz
Resolved , that in regard to the appeal of Northeast Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine ,
requesting a variance for the sign on the property at 1290 Trumansburg Rd , Northeast
Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine , that this Board makes a negative determination of
environmental significance based on the information in Part I and for the reasons stated
in Part II of the environmental assessment form .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz , Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — None
Motion passed unanimously .
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-061 , Sign Variance , 1290 Trumansburg Rd , TP# 24.-4-
14. 2
® November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Dave Mountin
That this Board grants the appeal of Northeast Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine ,
applicant , 1290 Professional Building LLC , owner, requesting variances from the
requirements of Chapter 221 -6A ( 1 )( a ) and 221 -6 (2 ) " Regulated Signs" of the Town of
Ithaca Code , to be permitted to place a 15 +/- sq ft sign ( 16 . 75 +/- sq ft including
supports ) where only a 4 sq ft sign is allowed , located at 1290 Trumansburg Rd , Tax
Parcel No . 24 . -4- 14 . 2 , Medium Density Residential ( MDR) with the following :
Conditions
1 . That the total square footage of the sign not exceed 17 square feet and
2 . That the conditions as set forth by the Planning Board resolution A & B that
a . All proposed lighting shall comply with the Town of Ithaca Outdoor Lighting
Law
b . The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign .
With the following :
Findings
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 3 of 16
1 . That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health safety
and welfare of the community specifically that the benefit that the applicant
wishes to achieve , which is that of having a sign that is large enough to be visible
by cars traveling at state highway speeds through this stretch of road can not be
achieved by any other means feasible and ,
2 . That there will not be significant change in the neighborhood character or nearby
properties given that there are other similar uses in the area each of which has
signs that are similar in size or larger and ,
3 . That while the request is substantial , more than twice as large as that which is
allowed , nevertheless the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to
the health safety and welfare of the community and ,
4 . That there will not be adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons
stated in the EAF and ,
5 . That while the alleged difficulty is self created , that again the benefit to the
applicant does outweigh the detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the
community .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz , Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — none
Motion passed unanimously
Appeal of Graham Ottoson , applicant , Ecovillage at Ithaca , Inc , owner, requesting a
variance from the requirements of Chapter 225-3 " New buildings required to have
sprinkler systems" of the Town of Ithaca Code , requiring a sprinkler system be installed
in the Gourd Workshop , located at 77 Rachel Carson Way, Tax Parcel No . 28 . - 1 -26 . 84 ,
Planned Development Zone .
Noah Demarest , Architect and Graham Ottoson , owner, were present for questions . The
board discussed the sprinkler variance . Mr. Rosen believes the request was reasonable
and well documented . Mr. Sigel pointed out that they could build a building three times
the size and would not need a sprinkler. Mr. Demarest said that he is in discussion with
code enforcement about the use of smoke detectors but Mr. Bates clarified that a
smoke detector would not be placed in a bathroom under any circumstances in any
building .
Mr. Mountin pointed out that every room has a large egress window which is a direct
benefit and has access to escape . Mr. Sigel agreed with that assessment . The
maximum occupancy is 12 people per building code . Ecovillage is currently putting in
new fire hydrants and one will be less than 300 ft from the building .
Attorney Brock made a correction on the SEQR Part 1 # 11 changing from Health
Department to Bolton Point . The change was noted on the original SEQR form located
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 4 of 16
® in the file for the appeal . Chairperson Sigel moved to make a negative determination of
environmental significance based on the information in Part I form and the reasons
stated in Part II of the environmental assessment form . The motion was seconded by
Ron Krantz.
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-062 , SEAR Determination , Sprinkler Variance ,
77 Rachel Carson Way, TP# 28 . - 1 -26 . 84
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz
Resolved , that in regard to the appeal of Ecovillage Gourd Workshop , requesting a
variance from the Sprinkler law at the property at 77 Rachel Carson Way, that this
Board makes a negative determination of environmental significance based on the
information in Part I and for the reasons stated in Part II of the environmental
assessment form .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz , Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — none
Motion passed unanimously
Public hearing opened at 7 : 16pm and closed without public comment at 7 : 16pm
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-063 , Sprinkler Variance ,
77 Rachel Carson Way, TP# 28 .- 1 -26 . 84
November 19 , 2012 "
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by David Mountin
That this Board grants the appeal of Graham Ottoson , applicant , Ecovillage at Ithaca ,
Inc . , owner, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 225 -3 " New
buildings required to have sprinkler systems" of the Town of Ithaca Code , requiring a
sprinkler system be installed in the Gourd Workshop , located at 77 Rachel Carson Way,
Tax Parcel No . 28 . - 1 -26 . 84 , Planned Development Zone with the following :
Conditions
1 . That all of the rooms not including the restroom have egress windows that allow
access to and from the wrap around porch which is directly connected to an
accessible route to the public way. Under section 1015 . 1 " Exit or exit access
doorways required " only one means of egress is required since the occupant
load is less than 49 persons .
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 5 of 16
® 2 . That all of the rooms ( not including restroom ) will have hard wired smoke
detectors even though they are not required by the 2010 NYS Building Code
because there are fewer than 100 persons per section 907 . 2 . 7 . 2 " Fire Detection" .
3 . A total of 3 hand held fire extinguishers ( one in each room ) will be made
available .
With the following :
Findings
1 . That the Zoning Board of Appeals is making the finding that the application of the
strict letter of the sprinkler chapter of the Town Code would create a practical
difficulty or unnecessary hardship and ,
2 . That the omission of an approved sprinkler system from all or part of the building
will not significantly jeopardize human life and ,
3 . That the Zoning Board of Appeals' rationale is the same as those provided by the
applicant in its narrative regarding those two criteria .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz, Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays - None
Motion passed unanimously
Appeal of Jeffrey Holmes , owner, requesting a variance from the requirements of
Chapter 270-71 F "Yard regulations , garages" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to construct
a second garage that will exceed the aggregate of 600 sq ft allowed , located at 151
Northview Rd , Tax Parcel No . 52 . - 1 -24 , Medium Density Residential .
Jeffrey Holmes was present for questions . Mr. Holmes emphasized that what is
currently on the property is a carport over asphalt and that they want to add a garage .
Mr. Sigel explained that the 600 sq ft limit is for detached garages therefore , if the
carport was attached it would be compliant with the code . Mr. Bates explained that if the
carport was attached to the garage there would be new requirements to meet fire code ,
needing to make it fire rated . Board members discussed the possibility of attaching the
carport to the home so that the variance would not be required . Mr. Holmes stated that
the cost could be prohibitive to move the car port to connect it and then add a garage .
Mr. Rosen commented that attaching the carport to the garage that would avoid a
variance thus solving the problem .
The board and Mr. Holmes also discussed the letter that was sent by neighbors that
were rescinded in the last couple of days . The letter that was rescinded was from a
® rental tenant of a neighboring property and it was rescinded at the request of the owner.
The Board also received a letter from the property owner stating that they didn 't approve
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 6 of 16
of granting a variance . Mr. Holmes doesn 't believe that the neighbor added any
additional information that would change the project but that his justification was simply
that the code exists and should be enforced . Mr. Holmes presented a picture of where
the end of the garage would be from the neighbor' s house which showed the sight line
to the proposed garage .
The appeal is exempt from SEQR .
Public hearing opened at 7 : 42pm .
Neighbor Pat Clark of 149 Northview Rd was present and stated her support of the
project . She would have a view from her back window and doesn 't have a problem with
the garage being there .
Sayed Redmond of 106 Northview Rd was present and stated that he has a direct line
of sight to the house and he has no objection to Mr. Holmes building the garage and
supports him in doing so .
Public Hearing was closed at 7 : 44pm
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-064 , Area Variance , 151 Northview Rd , TP# 52 .- 1 -24
® November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by
That this Board grants the appeal of Jeffrey Holmes , owner, requesting variances from
the requirements of Chapter 270- 71 F "Yard regulations , garages" of the Town of Ithaca
Code , to construct a second garage that will exceed the aggregate of 600 sq ft allowed ,
located at 151 Northview Rd , Tax Parcel No . 52 . - 1 -24 , Medium Density Residential
( MDR ) with the following :
Conditions
1 . That the proposed garage be no larger than 22 '/2 x 22 '/2 feet and ,
2 . That the garage be built in substantially the location indicated by the applicant
on the sketch provided to this board , as it may need to be moved slightly for
building code purposes .
With the following :
Findings
1 . That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh the detriment to the health safety
® and welfare of the community, specifically:
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 7 of 16
® 2 . That while the benefit that the applicant wishes to achieve which is the ability to
build a new detached garage may be feasible without this variance , given the
possibility of attaching the existing carport to the house that nevertheless , what
the applicant has proposed is essentially equivalent to that and it will have no
greater impact than that , and therefore the benefit to the applicant does outweigh
any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community and ,
3 . That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to
nearby properties for the same reason as given above . Substantial screening of
this garage exists due to the numerous large evergreen trees that are along the
property boundary and ,
4 . That even with construction of the proposed garage the lot coverage in the rear
yard is still well under the allowable 40 % and ,
5 . That while the request is substantial , exceeding the allowable square footage for
garages by approximately 300 sq ft , that again , because the applicant could build
this garage by right with a modest change to their house and carport
configuration , that again the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment
to the health , safety and welfare of the community and ,
6 . That the request will not have any adverse physical or environmental effects and
7 . That while the alleged difficulty is self created , again , the benefit to the applicant
outweighs any detriment to the health , safety and welfare of the community.
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz, Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays - None
Motion passed unanimously
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 8 of 16
Appeal of Theodore E . Lauve , Agent for William Frandsen , owner, requesting variances
from the requirements of Chapter 270-73 C & D "size and area of lot" , to permit the
creation of lots ( proposed lot No . ' s C11 , C13 , C15 , C17 ) that have insufficient lot width ,
and the creation of lots ( proposed lots C21 , C23 and C25 ) that have insufficient lot
depth from the highway right of way. The proposed lots are part of the Frandsen
Subdivision located off Park Ln between the crossroads of John St and State Highway
79 , Town of Ithaca , Tax Parcel No . 56 . -3- 13 . 2 , Medium Density Residential .
Theodore Lauve , Project Engineer, Bill Frandsen , owner and Chuck Goodman Attorney
for the owner were present for questions and discussion .
Mr. Lauve emphasized that the dimension changes are minor and are outlined in his
application . The board discussed the modest dimensions . Mr. Lauve explained that the
layout for the subdivision was first created 40 years ago and the mistake in lot line to
setback were noticed when he took on the project last year, therefore the need for the
variance . Mr. Sigel stated that the reason for the different dimensions is due to the
sidelines not being the same length and so the lot tapers in slightly. It would work if the
lots were a perfect square or parallel .
Attorney Brock explained the SEQR and the reason for length of the text on the second
® part which considers the Town of Ithaca Planning Department SEQR . Under SEQR
individual lot line variances are Type II and not subject to SEQR , individually meaning
one project on one lot . In this situation we have multiple lots in a subdivision that are
being considered so it is not a Type II , therefore SEQR is needed . The board can 't
decide to go lot by lot , approving each lot individually because that would be
segmenting the project which could put the SEQR review under legal challenge . Under
SEQR each board or agency that does SEQR, if the review hasn 't been coordinated ,
looks at the environmental impact of the entire project , meaning all of the environmental
impacts from the subdivision not just at the impact from granting lot line variances . The
full form was provided which is basically the same as what was before the Planning
Board when they considered and granted the subdivision approval with a few
modifications written in , therefore this board will make the decision under SEQR
whether they think there is potential for significant adverse impact and whether
environmental statements are required or not .
Mr. Rosen requested explanation of what a " Rain Garden" is . Mr. Lauve explained that it
is a small landscaped area that catches the water from a lot before it is discharged to
the roadside ditch , acting as a filter and a retention that will be required for the particular
lots . The builders will be installing these when they build the houses . They will be in the
front yards of the lots that require them . There are also maintenance requirements for
the plant life and cleaning out the build up of sediment which is the homeowner' s
responsibility. Mr. Sigel explained that there will be a homeowner association that will
ensure that these things are maintained along with the main storm water retention area
® on the unused lots . There will be deed restrictions requiring the rain garden which is
also a requirement of the Planning Board .
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 9 of 16
® Mr. Lauve observed that the Planning Board approved a negative declaration on the
iSEQR on August 8 , 2012 . Mr. Sigel and Ms . Brock explained that since the Planning
Board didn 't coordinate the review, but since it is uncoordinated the Zoning Board has
to make their own determination . In the future , the Town will try to have coordinated
reviews .
The board took a 10 minute adjournment to review the SEAR forms .
Board came back to discussion regarding the EAF Part II . Mr. Rosen summarized his
discussion with Mr. Lauve during the adjournment regarding the rain gardens .
Mr. Rosen and Mr. Sigel expressed that they thought it was detailed and well thought
out .
Chairperson Sigel moved to make a negative determination of environmental
significance based on the information in Part I form and the reasons stated in Part II of
the environmental assessment form . The motion was seconded by Bill King . Motion
carried unanimously
Mr. Krantz made comment that he is a little nervous about there being 8 sites with
slopes over 18 degrees , variable soils with variable drainage , pollution and erosion
® controls that won't be implemented for years because a lot of the lots presumably won 't
be sold for years . He hopes they will be able to keep the controls in place but there will
be individual owners which may be difficult . Mr. Lauve explained that the overall
subdivision controls , the filter pond for water quality control and the retention pond for
volume control will be filled first . The rain garden ponds won 't be filled until the home is
built . Attorney Brock explained that the Planning Board condition that "construction of
the roads , storm water facilities and water and sewer facilities satisfactory to the Town
of Ithaca Public works department is to occur prior to the application for any building
permits for any houses . " This condition addresses Mr. Krantz' s concerns and is an issue
that the Town has addressed with this practice .
Public hearing opened at 8 : 23 and closed without public comment at 8 : 23pm
ZBA Resolution No . 2012=065 , SEAR Determination , Area Variance , Frandsen
Subdivision , TP# 56 . -3- 13 . 2
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Bill King
Resolved that in regard to the appeal of Theodore E . Lauve , Agent for William
Frandsen , owner, that this Board makes a negative determination of environmental
significance based on the information in Part I form and for the reasons stated in Part II
of the environmental assessment form .
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 10 of 16
® Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz , Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — none
Motion passed unanimously
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-066 , Area Variance , Frandsen Subdivision , TP# 56 . -3-
13 . 2
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz
That this Board grants the appeal of Theodore E . Lauve , Agent for William Frandsen ,
owner, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270-73 C & D "size and
area of lot" , to permit the creation of lots ( proposed lot No . ' s C111 C131 C151 C17 ) that
have insufficient lot width , and the creation of lots ( proposed lots C21 , C23 and C25 )
that have insufficient lot depth from the highway right of way . The proposed lots are part
of the Frandsen Subdivision located off Park Ln between the crossroads of John St and
State Highway 79 , Town of Ithaca , Tax Parcel No . 56 . -3- 13 . 2 , Medium Density
Residential ( MDR) with the following :
Conditions
® That each of the varied measurements on each of these lots be no greater than 1 foot
more than what is listed in the applicant' s table on page 2 under the "difference"
column .
With the following :
Findings
1 . That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health ,
safety and welfare of the community , specifically that the benefit that the
applicant wishes to achieve , which is to build the number of lots proposed in the
locations proposed , cannot be achieved by any other means feasible and ,
2 . That undesirable change to the neighborhood character or nearby properties will
not occur given that the variances involved are such small percentages of the
requirement and ,
3 . That the request is not substantial for the same reason that the variances are
small percentages of the requirements and
4 . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects , again
for the same reason that the differences in the dimensions are very small and ,
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 11 of 16
® 5 . That finally, while finding that the alleged difficulty is self created , that
nevertheless , the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the
health , safety and welfare to the community .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz, Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — none
Motion passed unanimously
Appeal of James Marshall of E & V Energy Corp , agent, Asher Grossman , Ithaca
Realty, owner, requesting variances from the requirements of Chapter 270- 144
" Permitted principal uses" and Chapter 270- 146 " Permitted accessory buildings and
uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to operate a retail propane filling
station with outdoor storage of propane tanks associated with the retail use of the
business . Variances are also requested from the requirements of Chapter 221 -6 B and
221 -7 "Signs" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to have a 24+/- ft tall , 58 . 33
sq ft sign where only 20 ft tall 50 sq ft sign is allowed , and be permitted to have a copy
change sign on other than a theatre , located at 614 Elmira Rd , Tax Parcel No . 33 . -3-
2 . 42 , Light Industrial Zone .
James Marshall was present for questions . Mr. Marshall clarified that the tanks being
® stored on sight are not for retail sales but are simply there as storage for him to take to
a customers home for their use .
Mr. Marshall questioned the size of the sign that Mr. Bates is using as he comes up with
a different dimension than Mr. Bates . Mr. Bates clarified that his dimension includes the
posts because the posts are outside of the sign panel , so must be included in the total
size . He also had questions regarding where the copy change signs are excluded in the
code . Mr. Sigel and Mr. Bates explained that copy change signs are not addressed in
the code so they are not permitted was clarified by Mr. Bates and Mr. Sigel .
Discussion about what is the primary use of the building . The inside of the building will
be used for office space which is different than what is being done outside of the
building . The retail side is because they will be selling and filling small propane tanks .
The main use is the business , and retail and storage are accessories . Pyrus Energy will
accept telephone calls and schedule site visits for potential clients to evaluate
renewable energy needs . No solar panels or equipment that Pyrus Energy will sell will
be sold or stored on site . Equipment will be storage at another location or delivered
directly to the client' s property .
The large tanks are loaned at no charge to customers who purchase the propane from
E & V. They are not sold to customers directly but will be stored there so are not
considered retail . The large tanks that will be stored on sight are there to replace the
tanks at customer' s property . The largest tanks they will fill is a DOT portable tank which
® goes up to 420 Ib tank which he has never seen brought in . A customer could bring a
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 12 of 16
100 Ib tank that holds 23 gallons . The majority are the small tanks used on grills which
are 20 lbs . with some 30 Ib tanks used in campers .
Mr. Sigel discussed that this property was before the ZBA a year ago for the Biodiesel
Company that received a variance . The financial justification would be the same since
there has not been a tenant in between and there has not been a substantial change .
There is also some limited retail in the area now and there has been retail in that area in
the past .
It was also discussed that outside storage is difficult and illegal to store these types of
tanks indoors . The planning board specified in their site plan review a vegetative
screening and fencing on the property . The vegetative screening would be for the shed
and storage shed with the exception of the access road .
There would be a large 1000 tank that would be used for refilling but they would not be
filling trucks . The 1000 would be north of the oval behind the pump on the survey map .
It would be behind the old gasoline islands .
Ms . Fogarty asked about large trucks being filled on site . Mr. Marshall explained that
they will not be but are filled at another location . Large tanks that are at residential sites
are not delivered filled but rather have some but is not transported and installed at the
home filled . All the storage tanks are new now but eventually there will be a mix of used
and new as they are swapped out at the homes .
Changes to SEQR were made by Ms . Brock . # 12 should be checked for site plan
approval on both SEQR' s . On C1 on part II form the word retail will be stricken before
the word inventory .
ZBA Resolution No . 2012=067 , SEAR Determination , Use and Sign Variance , 614
Elmira Rd . , TP# 33 . -3-2 .42
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz
Resolved , that in regard to the appeal of E & V Energy, James Marshall , agent, Asher
Grossman , Ithaca Realty , owner, requesting variances from the use and sign laws on
the property located at 614 Elmira Rd , that this Board makes a negative determination
of environmental significance based on the information in the two short environmental
assessment forms , one for the sign variance and one for the use variance , and for the
reasons stated in Part II of the environmental assessment form .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz, Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays — none
Motion passed unanimously
Public hearing opened at 8 : 59pm and closed without public comment at 8 : 59pm
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 13 of 16
Discussion among board members regarding the sign variance commenced . Some
board members expressed disapproval of the copy change section of the sign noting
that it did not have visual appeal and should be removed . One issue is that Mr. Marshall
can not remove that part of the sign because he does not own the property. He has
purchased new copy change to use which improves the look .
Mr. Sigel , Mr. Bates and Ms . Brock discussed the Town Code in regard to how the
signage needs to be removed following the closing of the business . In this situation
there had never been a determination made by a code enforcement officer that the sign
needed to be removed . The code would require this to happen and the determination
made that it had to be removed because it could not be utilized by a subsequent
business .
Mr. Rosen was against keeping the copy change portion of the sign
Public hearing opened on the sign variance at 9 : 45pm and closed at 9 : 45pm .
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-068 , Use Variance , 614 Elmira Rd , TP# 33 . -3-2 .42
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by Ron Krantz
That this Board grants the appeal of James Marshall of E & V Energy Corp , agent ,
Asher Grossman , Ithaca Realty, owner, requesting variances from the requirements of
Chapter 270- 144 " Permitted principal uses" and Chapter 270- 146 " Permitted accessory
buildings and uses" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to operate a retail
propane filling station with outdoor storage of propane tanks associated with the retail
use of the business , located at 614 Elmira Rd , Tax Parcel No . 33 . -3-2 . 42 , Light
Industrial Zone , with the following :
Conditions
1 . That the location of the 1000 gallon propane filling tank , the tank filling shed , and
the area for outdoor storage of tanks , be approximately as shown on the site plan
submitted by the applicant to this board and ,
2 . That the installation of landscaping to screen the proposed propane tank storage
area ( except for the storage area access aisle ) from Elmira Road be done prior to
June 2013 .
With the following :
Findings
® That the applicant has demonstrated unnecessary hardship including all of the
following :
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 14 of 16
® 1 . That they can not realize a reasonable return as substantiated by competent
financial evidence given the evidence submitted approximately one year ago ,
showing a loss on the property for at least the prior five years plus the fact that
the property remained vacant up until the current applicant signed the lease and ,
2 . That the alleged hardship is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of
the district or neighborhood given the fact that this property has been
documented by this applicant and by prior applicants , in the application of
approximately one year ago , and in previous use variance applications , to be
fairly small for the district it is in . The property has had a history of retail use and
an orientation towards retail use and therefore , is less suited for typical light
industrial uses than other properties in this district and ,
3 . That the requested variance will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood given that the primary use of the current applicant is for an allowed
business administrative or professional office and that the retail aspects and the
outdoor storage area appear to be accessory to the use as office space . The
proposed use of the property is not substantially different from the use of nearby
properties and ,
4 . That the alleged hardship has not been self created given the long history of this
® property' s difficulty in finding tenants that extends well before the current owner
purchased the property. In addition , retail use was allowed in years past and was
made illegal by changes in the town code .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz , Mountin , King and Rosen
Nays - None
Motion passed unanimously
ZBA Resolution No . 2012-069 , Sign Variance , 614 Elmira Rd , TP# 33 . -3-2 . 42
November 19 , 2012 .
Motion made by Kirk Sigel , seconded by David Mountin
That this Board grants the appeal of James Marshall of E & V Energy Corp , agent ,
Asher Grossman , Ithaca Realty, owner, requesting variances from the requirements of
Chapter 221 -6 B and 221 -7 "Signs" of the Town of Ithaca Code , to be permitted to have
a 24+/- ft tall , 58 . 33 sq ft sign where only 20 ft tall 50 sq ft sign is allowed , and be
permitted to have a copy change sign on other than a theatre , located at 614 Elmira Rd ,
Tax Parcel No . 33 . -3-2 . 42 , Light Industrial Zone , with the following :
Conditions
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 15 of 16
® 1 . That the sign as is currently configured , remains substantially as is except for
changing of the panels of the upper portion of the sign and changing of the copy
on the copy change portion and ,
2 . That any lighting will comply with the Town ' s Outdoor Lighting Law
With the following :
Findings
1 . That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health ,
safety and welfare of the community specifically, that the benefit that the
applicant wishes to achieve , which is that of utilizing the existing sign structure ,
can not be achieved by any other means feasible and ,
2 . That there will not be an undesirable change in the neighborhood character or to
nearby properties given the fact that this sign has existed in this location for
many years and ,
3 . That the portion of the request for the upper panel is not substantial being just
slightly over approximately 50 square feet and ,
4 . That the request to allow copy change elements where it is otherwise not
allowed , is substantial but is mitigated by the fact that this particular copy change
sign has existed in this location for many years and ,
5 . That the request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects given
that it is allowing an existing sign to remain and will not involve any new building
and ,
6 . That the alleged difficulty was not self created given that it was created by the
inability of the owner to find a new tenant within six months of the previous tenant
vacating .
Vote : Ayes — Sigel , Krantz, Mountin and King
Nays — Rosen
Motion passed .
ZBA 11 / 19/ 12
Page 16 of 16
® Mr. Bates will be sending at letter to the Tompkins County Planning Department
explaining the reason that the Zoning Board of Appeals approved the variance despite
the Planning Department being against it in their GML . The reasons being the reasons
outlined in the resolution and that the retail aspect was minor and would not increase
traffic which was of concern to the county .
Other Business
There was no other business discussed by the board .
Adjournment
With no further business , Chairperson Sigel adjourned the November 19 , 2012 meeting
of the Zoning Board of Appeals at 9 : 50 p . m .
1
Kirk Sige , Chairperson
r-
Lori Ko oid , Dep &4y To n Irk