Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006 Board of Zoning Appeals/Decision lettersFLED 799 212006 ry`'S OFFICE ?. OFFICIAL BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS RESULTS Following are the unofficial results of the BZA meeting of February 7, 2006: APPEAL NUMBER 2672 Continued from January 3, 2006 135 Linn Street Appeal of Frederic Carrere for an area variance from Section 325 - 25C, location requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for accessory structures. The applicant constructed a garden shed measuring 96 square feet after being informed by Building Department staff that a permit is not required for structures measuring less than 100 square feet. The applicant alleges that Building Department staff also stated incorrectly that no setback from the side yard was required for buildings not needing a building permit, and the applicant constructed the garden shed with zero setback from the side lot line. The zoning ordinance requires a 3' setback, and has no exceptions for structures not requiring a building permit. The property is located in an R -2b residential use district in which the proposed use is permitted, however Section 325 -39 requires that an area variance be granted before a Certificate of Occupancy may be issued. Granted: 3 in favor, 2 opposed APPEAL NUMBER 2674 413 East Lincoln Street Appeal of Heritage Park Townhouses, Inc. for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 12, side yard setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The appellant proposes to construct a two family home at 413 East Lincoln Street on a lot recently made vacant by the demolition of a dilapidated house. The lot is 36 feet wide and the required side yard setbacks are 10 feet and 5 feet, leaving 21 feet for the house. The appellant proposes to construct a house with a ground floor that complies with the setbacks; however, an overhanging second and third floor would encroach 2' into the larger side yard. The appellant states that the resulting larger floor plan is required to allow a reasonable return on his investment given the cost of demolishing the former house, and to allow more desirable room sizes. The proposal complies with all other area and parking requirements. The property is located in an R -2b residential use district in which the proposed use is permitted, however Sections 325 -38 and 325 -39 require that an area variance be granted before a building permit or a Certificate of Occupancy may be issued. Granted: 3 in favor, 2 opposed APPEAL NUMBER 2675 407 Cliff Street Appeal of Incodema, Inc. for a use variance from Section 325 -8, column 2, permitted primary uses of the Zoning Ordinance. The appellant seeks a variance to allow the expansion of their light manufacturing facility at 407 Cliff Street. The proposal includes the demolition of the oldest wood framed single -story portion of the building and replacing it with a two -story addition. The addition would occupy a smaller footprint than the part of the building that is to be removed. The appellant also proposes to construct a covered storage area for bulk liquid oxygen at the rear of the facility. The changes will allow the firm more efficient use of the space, permitting the firm's continued growth, and upgrading the appearance of the building. The number of deliveries to the facility will be decreased by the conversion to bulk storage of liquid oxygen used at the facility. An existing front yard deficiency would not be affected by the proposed construction. The property located at 407 Cliff Street is in an R- 3a residential use zone in which the proposed expansion is not permitted. Section 325 -38 requires that a use variance be granted before a building permit may be issued. Not heard: previous variances permit this expansion. APPEAL NUMBER 2676 815 Taber Street Appeal of Frederic Bouche for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 6 and 7, lot area and lot frontage requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The house at 815 Taber Street was posted as unfit for habitation in 1991 and has been vacant since that time. Because of this lapse of use, the rights to continue residential use, which is nonconforming in the I -1 zone, have been terminated. The appellant proposes to convert this abandoned house to a small wine production and storage facility. The proposal involves repair and reconstruction of the existing building and the construction of an addition at the rear of the house. The lot is 4500 square feet in area and has 30 feet of frontage. The ordinance requires 5000 square feet and 50 feet of frontage in the I -id zone. Section 325 -32 does not allow a building be enlarged when it is located on a property that is deficient in lot size. The appellant also proposes to construct a 3.5 foot wide roof to overhang a walkway along the west side of the building, where the side yard is 58 ", 4" less than the required side yard. The zoning ordinance permits roof projections of 2' into a required side yard. The property at 815 Taber Street is located in an I -1 commercial use district in which the proposed use is permitted, however Sections 325 -38 and 325 -39 require that an area variance be granted before a building permit may be issued or a Certificate of Occupancy may be issued. Granted: 5 in favor APPEAL NUMBER 2677 211 Hudson Street Appeal of Beverly and Steve Beer for a renewed special permit for a bed and breakfast home as required by Section 325 -8, column 2, permitted primary uses of the Zoning Ordinance and section 325 - 9C(4)(g)[3] renewal requirements for special permits for bed and breakfast homes. The property at 211 Hudson Street was granted a special permit to operate a bed and breakfast home on February 8, 1996 and this permit was renewed in 2001. The ordinance requires that the special permit must be renewed at five -year intervals. The property is located in an R -2a residential use district in which the proposed accessory use is permitted by special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals. Granted: 4 in favor, 1 abstention CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 January 10, 2007 Patrick Doyle Rapp Signs 3979 Rt. 206 Greene, NY 13778 -9416 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of December 5, 2006 Appeal # 2713 — 377 Elmira Road The Board of Zoning Appeals heard your request by on behalf of Squeaky Clean Car Wash for a variance from Section 272 -7 of the Sign Ordinance. Proposed are to two freestanding signs, plus one wall sign. The Sign Ordinance permits only one freestanding sign or two wall signs per business. In addition, the total square footage of the proposed freestanding signs is 88.9; the allowable square footage for this building is 15.5. The proposed wall sign is 18 square feet, which falls well within the 46.5 square feet permitted. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The height of all proposed signage is within regulations. 2. The wall sign is an appropriate size for the building and meets regulations. 3. If the menuboard is placed within 5 feet of the structure, it can be considered a wall sign. The total square footage of the two signs would be 50.3, close to the 46.5 that is permitted. 4. The Board questioned the basis for designing the large pole sign with 11 to 15 inch lettering. They felt the volume of traffic in this multi- business area necessitates signage of a reduced size versus providing drivers with enough distance recognition to turn in to the facility as a spur -of -the- moment decision. 5. Simple directional signs could be placed along the driveways to aid customers in finding the proper entrance to the facility. These would not require an additional variance if they meet the required size, content and setback requirements, essentially no more than 25% of the sign occupied by a company logo, only one directional word and symbol per sign, no more than 3 feet high from grade, no larger than 6 square feet and at least 18 inches from the property line. 6. The City Planning Board felt that the two freestanding signs would be adequate but an additional wall sign would be excessive and create visual clutter. (This document was received after the Board hearing.) 7. The County Planning Board saw no long term negative impact in granting the variance. An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 Patrick Doyle January 10, 2007 Rapp Signs page 2 3979 Rt. 206 Greene, NY 13778 -9416 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of December S, 2006 Appeal # 2713 — 377 Elmira Road 8. There were no letters or speakers for or against the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed, with the following conditions: 1. The menuboard will be placed within five feet of the building, and the total of this and the other wall sign will be within the 46.5 square feet permitted. 2. The pole sign will be no larger than the 18.5 square feet permitted, but can be of any height within regulations. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR:lf NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. .. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 January 10, 2007 Robert Ross TC3 Foundation 170 North Street Dryden, NY 13053 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal # 2697 — 114 -118 North Tioga Street Dear Mr. Ross: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your request on behalf of TC3 Foundation, Inc., for a variance from Section 272 -6B(2) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant is proposing to install five signs on the property, two each in windows facing East Seneca Street and North Tioga Street (The Commons), and one roof sign on East Seneca Street. The Sign Ordinance allows two signs per business. The proposed location of the window signs was chosen to balance the existing M & T Bank signs that are located in the arched section of the ground floor windows, and to make the college's location readily visible to passers -by. The roof sign is intended to identify the building's new name as "TC3 Tioga Place ". It was moved to grant the variance for the window signs, based on the following findings of fact: The size and placement will be identical to the existing M & T signs. 2. The colors of the signs are those of the official logo. 3. The total square footage of the four signs will be 134 square feet, less than the 279 square feet permitted for this location. (The proposed roof sign measures 50 square feet.) 4. The City Planning Board supported granting the variance for the four window signs. The County Planning Department saw no negative impact of the window signs. There were no speakers for or against the variance. One letter of support was received. The appeal for the four window signs was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. 'An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 1 s Robert Ross January 10, 2007 TC3 Foundation page 2 170 North Street Dryden, NY 13053 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal # 2697 — 114 -118 North Tioga Street The appeal for the roof sign was tabled, based on the following findings of fact. The 50 square foot size is within the allowable maximum for this space (see item 4, above). 2. Although the sign is depicted as being flat, it would probably need to be faceted to fit the window area in which it is to be placed. 3. The City Planning Board felt that the intended purpose of building recognition might not be served, as it would not be highly visible and the building name is somewhat confusing. 4. The County Planning Department felt the roof sign would obscure the architecture of the building and the design is not compatible with the style of the building. 5. There were no speakers in favor or against to this part of the appeal. 6. The Board suggested that the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee might be able to offer suggestions regarding new sign design. The appeal was tabled by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN:lf NOTE: At the time of this decision letter, no further design has been submitted for the roof sign. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 January 10, 2007 David Plaine Gateway Plaza Associates, LLC 323 N. Tioga St. Ithaca, NY 14850 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of September 5, 2006 Appeal # 2706 — 311 East Green Street Dear Mr. Plaine: The Board of Zoning Appeals heard your request on behalf of Gateway Plaza, LLC, for a variance from Section 272 -613 of the Sign Ordinance. A temporary 64 square foot sign containing information on the building under construction was erected under variance #2656. This variance was valid for a period of one year, until July 19, 2006. The appellant is requesting an extension of the one -year time period as the building project is incomplete. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. Due to construction delays the sign was not installed until winter of 2005, some five to six months after the variance was approved. 2. The building is expected to be substantially completed by early summer 2007. Due to its placement the sign will not interfere with construction until the construction is complete. 3. The sign is informational to passers -by and has also served as advertising for prospective tenants. 4. There were no letters or speakers in favor or opposed to the variance. S. The City Planning Board supports granting the extension. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that the sign is removed by July 19, 2007 or 6 weeks following the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, whichever comes first. Sincer y For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN:lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." to CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 January 10, 2007 Penny Goldin Moosewood Restaurant 215 North Cayuga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Ms. Goldin: RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal # 2695 — 215 North Cayuga Street The Board of Zoning Appeals heard the request by of Moosewood Restaurant for a variance from Section 272 -6B(2) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposes to add two additional signs to an awning that is to be placed over the entrance to Moosewood Restaurant. The signs are to face the Seneca Street and the Cayuga Street sides of the awning. Currently there are no signs facing the Cayuga Street side of the business, however there are already two window signs and the seasonal awning that covers the dining patio has three signs. The Sign Ordinance permits only two signs per business. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The total square footage of the signs will be 58.5 square feet, considerably less than the 180 square feet permitted at this location. 2. The existing signs are obscured from the street by trees that have grown since the signs were originally installed. The property owner does not wish to prune or remove the trees 3. Since the business is set back on Seneca Street, the entrance is not visible from Cayuga Street. 4. The existing and proposed signage is not obstrusive or out of scale. It was suggested that the signs on the awning be removed or reduced. The cost of replacing the seasonal awning is approximately $8,000 and must be done about every eight years. 6. There were no speakers or letters in favor or in opposition to the appeal. 7. The City Planning Board approves of the proposed signage, but suggested that the trees might be pruned and would like to reduce the number of signs on the seasonal awning. 8. The County Department of Planning questioned the need for both a canopy and an awning. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co W .jj 008 -' - \ R The Board of Zoning Appeals heard the request by of Moosewood Restaurant for a variance from Section 272 -6B(2) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposes to add two additional signs to an awning that is to be placed over the entrance to Moosewood Restaurant. The signs are to face the Seneca Street and the Cayuga Street sides of the awning. Currently there are no signs facing the Cayuga Street side of the business, however there are already two window signs and the seasonal awning that covers the dining patio has three signs. The Sign Ordinance permits only two signs per business. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The total square footage of the signs will be 58.5 square feet, considerably less than the 180 square feet permitted at this location. 2. The existing signs are obscured from the street by trees that have grown since the signs were originally installed. The property owner does not wish to prune or remove the trees 3. Since the business is set back on Seneca Street, the entrance is not visible from Cayuga Street. 4. The existing and proposed signage is not obstrusive or out of scale. It was suggested that the signs on the awning be removed or reduced. The cost of replacing the seasonal awning is approximately $8,000 and must be done about every eight years. 6. There were no speakers or letters in favor or in opposition to the appeal. 7. The City Planning Board approves of the proposed signage, but suggested that the trees might be pruned and would like to reduce the number of signs on the seasonal awning. 8. The County Department of Planning questioned the need for both a canopy and an awning. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274.6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 April 5, 2006 Andrew Willford 1204 North Cayuga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of April 4, 2006 Appeal #2681 -1204 North Cayuga Street Dear Mr. Willford: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 10. The appellant proposes to removed a deteriorated porch at his residence at 1204 N. Cayuga Street and replace it with a deck and an addition to the second story. The proposed construction would increase the lot coverage from 35 to 42 percent. Permitted maximum lot coverage in this zone is 35 percent. The existing front and side yard deficiencies will not be affected. It was moved to grant the appeal based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will be no adverse affect to the health, welfare or safety of the neighborhood. 2. The new addition will replace dilapidated construction with clapboard siding that complements the existing siding. 3. The interior and exterior improvements will enhance the building's appearance and add value to the property and neighborhood, and will add needed space and functionality for the residents. 4. The planned addition was designed with minimal increase in square footage. 5. The City Planning and Development Board approved and commended the proposed addition. 6. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal; one supporting letter was received from a neighbor. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of fling for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the fling of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CJ CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 May 22, 2006 Steven and Beverly Beer 211 Hudson Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of February 7, 2006 Appeal Number 2677 - 211 Hudson Street Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beer: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your request to renew the special permit to operate a bed and breakfast home at the property located at 211 Hudson Street, as required by Section 325 -8 column 2 and Section 325 -9C (4) (g) [3] of the Zoning Ordinance. The decision of the Board was as follows: Resolved, that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the renewal of special permit granted in Appeal Number 2495 for the property at 211 Hudson Street, with the following findings of fact: 1. The property is located in an R -2a residential zone, and a bed and breakfast home is permitted in that zone with a special permit. 2. The property is occupied by the applicants as their residence, with three (3) rooms to rent for guests. 3. The property has been maintained in good condition, with regularly required inspections. 4. All zoning requirements have been met for operation of a bed and breakfast. 5. There was one speaker in favor of the request; there were no letters or speakers opposed to the renewal. No complaints have been filed against the property. 6. The City Planning and Development Board supports the renewal. Vote: 4 yes votes; 1 recusal. Sincerely, For th�-�'liildin De artment Phyllis Radke Building Commissioner and Secretary, Board of Zoning Appeals PR /lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." to May 22, 2006 Steven and Beverly Beer 211 Hudson Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Bed - and - breakfast home at 211 Hudson Street Dear Mr. and Mrs. Beer: Your property at 211 Hudson Street was granted a renewal of the special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) on February 7, 2006 to operate as a bed - and - breakfast home. This special permit expires after five years, or February 2011. In order to continue using your property as a bed - and - breakfast home, you will need to apply for a renewed special permit from the Board of Zoning Appeals. You will need to appear before the Board by no later than the February 2011 public hearing of the BZA. The deadline for submitting an appeal for the February public hearing is December 2010. Please contact the Executive Assistant at 274 -6508 at your earliest convenience to schedule a meeting to review the application procedure. If you do not wish to apply for a renewed special permit, but rather decide to cease the operation of a bed - and - breakfast home at your property, please notify this office in writing, so that we may update our files. Sincerely, Phyllis Radke Building Commissioner PR/If Enclosures: Section 325- 9.C.(4)(g) Decision letter dated 5/22/06 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 July 31, 2006 Amended October 19, 200E Frededric Bouche 212 University Avenue Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of February 7, 2006 Appeal #2676 — 815 Taber Street Dear Mr. Bouche: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 6 and 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is conversion of a former residential dwelling in an I -1 zone to a small wine production and packaging facility. Existing deficiencies in lot size, lot width and one side yard setback will not be affected. Along with extensive reconstruction, repair and renovation, the appellant proposes addition of a roof overhang to cover the sidewalk. This would reduce the other side yard setback from 5.8 to 2.2 feet; required setback is 10 feet. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. Construction of the foundation and drainage systems, along with refurbishing the building will serve as an improvement to the property and neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed business will utilize no motorized machinery and will not be a public facility. It is considered an industrial use that is permitted in this zone. 3. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 4. The City Planning Board supported the appeal. 5. The County Department of Planning found no negative impacts in granting the appeal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 July 31, 2006 Frededric Bouche 212 University Avenue Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of February 7, 2006 Appeal #2676 — 815 Taber Street Dear Mr. Bouche: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 6 and 7 of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is conversion of a former residential dwelling in an I -1 zone to a small wine production and packaging facility. Existing deficiencies in lot size, lot width and one side yard setback will not be affected. Along with extensive reconstruction, repair and renovation, the appellant proposes addition of a roof overhang to cover the sidewalk. This would reduce the other side yard setback from 5.8 to 3.5 feet; required setback is 10 feet. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. Construction of the foundation and drainage systems, along with refurbishing the building will serve as an improvement to the property and neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed business will utilize no motorized machinery and will not be a public facility. It is considered an industrial use that is permitted in this zone. 3. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 4. The City Planning Board supported the appeal. 5. The County Department of Planning found no negative impacts in granting the appeal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, '"--� e— For the )ild g in Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/1f 'An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." to CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 1, 2006 Benderson Development Company 570 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14202 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of May 2, 2006 Appeal #2679 — 374 -380 Elmira Road Dear Sir or Madam: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 11 and 325 - 29.213. Proposed is the construction of two additional retail facilities in addition to the existing Advance Auto Parts store. The first building, Tractor Supply Company, will be set back 125 feet from the curb; the second, a mixed use restaurant/retail facility, will be set back 34 feet from the curb, and will be perpendicular to Elmira Road. The required setback in the SW -2 zone is a maximum of 100 feet, or set between 15 to 34 feet with the structure occupying at least 35% of the street frontage. The building currently housing Advance Auto Parts was built prior to the SW -2 zoning re guations were established; one corner of the building is set back 77 feet from the curb, and is thus deficient but will not be affected. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed stores are within use guidelines of the zone, lighting will be shielded so as not to intrude into the roadway and decorative plantings will be placed around the property to reduce headlight glare and generally soften the hardscape. 3. The construction has been given preliminary site plan approval from the City Planning Board, and the appellants will incorporate their suggestion to erect a low wall along Elmira Road between the two new structures to visually tie them together. 4. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." za CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 3, 2006 Benderson Development Company 570 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14202 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of March 7, 2006 Appeal #2680 — tax parcel 118.- 1 -1.1, now designated 324 Elmira Road Dear Sir or Madam: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is the construction of a restaurant/retail facility on a currently vacant lot at the corner of Elmira Road and Fairgrounds Memorial Parkway. The structure is to be located 58 feet from the curb; required is a 15 to 34 foot setback. Since the curb is located 40 feet from the property line, compliance with the zoning ordinance is not possible. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The structure is designed to be attractive and fit the existing style of the newly constructed stores is the vicinity. The proposed uses are within use guidelines of the zone. Lighting will be shielded so as not to intrude into the roadway and decorative plantings will be placed around the property to shield the dumpster area. The building will occupy 42% of the street frontage, over the required 35 %. 3. There will be adequate parking provided, approximately 47 spaces. 4. The will be no side or rear yard deficiencies. 5. The City Planning Board recognizes that compliance with the front yard setback is impossible. 6. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." c CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274.6508 Fax: 607/274-6521 August 7, 2006 Jyl Dowd 420 N. Plain Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of June 6, 2006 Appeal #2682 — 420 North Plain Street Dear Ms. Dowd: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 8 of the Zoning Ordinance, percentage of lot coverage. Requested is the completion of construction of a deck at the rear of the residence at 420 North Plain Street. The proposed addition will create an increase in lot coverage from 35 to 37percent; maximum allowed is 35 percent. The existing 5.5 and 5 -foot deficiencies in the two front yards will not be affected. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: I. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed work will add to the enjoyment and value of the property and will enhance the utility of the residence. 3. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. Four letters of support were received. 4. The County Department of Planning saw no long term negative impact. 5. The City Planning Board voiced disapproval in the fact that construction began prior to the application for a building permit. They also questioned the presence of a rear yard setback deficiency, which was resolved. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that the deck remain as such and not be enclosed or used as livable space. Sincerely, l � "y For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 11, 2006 Rebecca Kim i 455 Sunrise Highway W. Islip, NY 11795 2008 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal # 2694— 123 South Cayuga Street Dear Ms. Kim: F6 The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your request for a variance from Section 272 -613(2) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposes to erect one awning on the South Cayuga Street side and 4 awnings on the East Green Street side of the clothing store located at 123 South Cayuga Street, each having the name and logo of the business. The ordinance permits only two signs. The appellant claims that the awnings are needed to prevent sun damage to the clothing displayed in the store and that the presence of the signage on each awning gives the fagade a more balanced appearance. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The 55 total square footage of the signs is within the allowable 135 square feet 2. There appears to be a need for the awnings as the protective film on the windows has not prevented damage to the clothing. 3. The appellant has amended the original design and will have smaller crests that will be placed on the flange of the awning, rather than the valence. 4. The design of the proposed signage would fit the character of the building and the neighborhood. 5. There were no speakers for or against the variance. One letter of support was received. 6. The City Planning Board felt the awnings would be a positive addition to the building and neighborhood, adding that recommendations should come from the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee 7. The County Department of Planning felt the awnings and signage would have no negative impact on the neighborhood. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. NOTE: Following the granting of this variance it was determined that this building is in fact located in an historic property and will need to be reviewed by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee before a sign permit can be issued. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR:lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." ro CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 14, 2006 Melanie Lecek 505 West Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of May 9, 2006 Appeal #2684 — 505 West Green Street Dear Ms. Lecek: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a special permit under Section 325 -8, column 3, permitted accessory uses of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is establishment of a dog grooming business as a home occupation. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. A first floor entry area will be used as a reception space. Upstairs the bathing will take place in the bathroom and one bedroom will serve as a waiting room. The only modifications to the residence will be the addition of one doorway. The total business space will occupy 22% of the building. 2. Existing lot area, front and side yard deficiencies will not be affected. 3. While there is no off - street parking on the property, a parking analysis previously conducted by Desman Associates for the City Planning Department indicates there is adequate existing off street parking. 4. Vehicular and foot traffic will be minimal, with no more than two clients arriving or departing at the same time. 5. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall character of the neighborhood. 6. The appellant will encourage pet owners to clean up after their pets, if necessary, and will provide disposal materials for the clients. 7. Barking should be minimized due to limited overlap of appointments and the use of the calming pheromone that will be sprayed in appropriate locations. 8. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 9. The City Planning Board voiced concerns about parking availability. 10. The County Department of Planning felt there would be no negative impact from the business. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. NOTE: This special permit must be renewed every three years. Sincere, , h, Fo e Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 Randy Murphy 315 Warren Place Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of May 2, 2006 Appeal # 2683— 312 First Street Dear Mr. Murphy: August21,2006 - Mailed September 6, 2006 The Board of Zoning Appeals heard your request for a variance from Section 272 -31) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposes to erect a sign on the ridgeline at The Tile House, located at 312 First Street, which is not permitted by the Ordinance. The proposed location of the sign was chosen to improve visibility from North Meadow Street (Route 13). The existing pole sign has become obscured by trees planted along the roadway. It was moved to deny the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The proposed sign would be 48.75 square feet, well within the total permitted square footage for this location — 455 square feet. 2. The appellant would be willing to remove the 49 square foot pole sign; the existing wall sign would remain in place. 3. There were no letters or speakers for or against the variance. 4. The City Planning Board did not wish to set a precedent and suggested moving the pole sign for better visibility. 5. The County Department of Planning voiced concerns about preserving the community aesthetics and suggested mounting the sign below the roofline. 6. The Zoning Board felt alternate strategies could be considered for sign placement within the guidelines of the Sign Ordinance. The appeal was denied by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, 171L41 III -S For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner MGM NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 22, 2006 Mailed September 6. 2006 Jim Williams Kassis Superior Signs 6699 Old Thompson Road Syracuse, NY 13211 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal # 2693— 205 South Meadow Street Dear Mr. Williams: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your request on behalf of CNY Food Service Corporation for a variance from Section 272 -613 (2) of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposes to replace an existing 59 square foot pole sign with a 50 square foot pole sign, which brings this sign into compliance. In addition to the pole sign, the appellant is requesting a variance to allow both a freestanding (menu) sign and two wall signs. The ordinance permits either a freestanding sign or 2 walls signs, not both. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The total proposed signage would be 124.5 square feet, below the 168 square feet permitted for this location. 2. There are no setback issues with the signage. 3. The properties along the opposite side of South Meadow Street are zoned WEDZIa, the proposed number of signs is permitted. In this WEDZIb zone there are only 4 private residences, with this section of properties along the street serving as somewhat of a buffer zone for adjoining residential neighborhoods. 4. An estimated 65% percent of the customers will be drive through. The menu board (freestanding) sign and drive- through directional sign are critical to the success of the business. 5. The sign on the north side of the building is needed to identify the business to traffic going east on Green Street, as the pole sign cannot be seen from that approach. It also directs vehicular traffic to the drive - through access. 6. Most of the businesses in the area have more than the currently allowable signage; the present ordinance was revised in 2003. 7. There were no letters or speakers in favor of granting the variance. There was one letter and two speakers opposed to portions of the request. 8. The City Planning Board did not see any necessity in the south - facing building sign, as did one of the speakers. Additionally it suggested a fence between this property and the adjoining residential property. 9. The County Department of Planning saw no long -term negative impact of the sign installation. 'An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." c Jim Williams August 22, 2006 Kassis Superior Signs page 2 6699 Old Thompson Road Syracuse, NY 13211 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal # 2693— 205 South Meadow Street 10. Based on input from the City Planning Board and neighborhood speakers, the appellant has agreed to the construction of a fence to reduce light and noise traveling to nearby residences and to eliminate the south - facing sign from the proposal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that the appellant adhere to the modifications listed in item 10 above. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR:lf Cc: CNY Food Service Corporation NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. An application must be filed and a sign permit must be issued by the Building Department prior to the installation of any signs. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 23, 2006 Mailed Septembe Davide Sayade 102 Turkey Hill Road Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meetings of August 8, 2006 Appeal #2689 — 116 Delaware Avenue The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a use variance from Section 325 -8, column 2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is the reconfiguration of the building at 116 Delaware Avenue from three to four residential units. Structurally this involves replacing a door at the bottom of the third floor stairs that was removed by the previous owner. This property is in the R -lb zone, and is currently considered legally nonconforming for the number of units. The Ordinance prohibits creating additional units in this zone unless a variance is granted. Findings of fact: 1. There would be no increase in occupancy or required parking spaces, though it should be noted that this property is already deficient in off - street parking as there are 3 spaces and 4 are required. 2. The existing deficiencies in lot area, lot width, front yard setback and one side yard setback would not be affected. 3. The appellant indicated that the unit in question, number 3, has been advertised for Fall 2006 since last November, with no lease signed. Since this is currently a 5- bedroom unit, there is not the level of interest in the larger apartments as there has been in the past. Additionally, having to compete with the newer, high -tech apartments has made finding tenants more difficult. At a rate of $2,500 a month in lost revenue, the loss for a year would be $30,000, not including the ongoing cost of the mortgage and base utilities. With the current rental market showing an excess of rental units, the appellant believes he has a better chance of filling at least one of the proposed units as it would be smaller, thus reducing his financial loss. 4. The appellant claims that the smaller units would reduce partying and thereby the associated noise and improper parking in the yard. 5. The existing larger configuration was not created by the appellant, but by the previous owner. The Board notes that this alteration was done without knowledge of the Building Department. Additionally the appellant should have been aware that there were potential problems in changing the number of units in this building. 'An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." to Davide Sayade August 23, 2006 102 Turkey Hill Road page 2 Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meetings of August 8, 2006 Appeal #2689 — 116 Delaware Avenue 6. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to granting the appeal. One favorable letter was received, citing a possible reduced negative effect of this rental property on the residents in the neighborhood. 7. The City Planning and Development Board did not oppose granting the variance, provided no additional tenants or parking spaces were added. 8. The County Planning Department had no objections to granting the appeal. The appeal was denied by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, based on the following: 1. It appears that the appellant purchased the property as a 4 -unit rental, and was at least aware of its conversion to a 3 unit. It is unclear exactly when the original conversion took place and who initiated it. Recent Certificates of Compliance acknowledge the change from 4 to 3 units indicated by the current property owner. 2. The inability to rent the larger apartment is not unique, as many large units in the City are vacant. This is the result of current market preferences, which change from time to time. 3. The conversion would not alter the character of the neighborhood. 4. While the appellant claims there are four on -site parking spaces, Building Department records indicate there are only 3 legal spaces on the lot. Sincerely, it, -, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 28, 2006 Eric Skalwold 222 Floral Avenue Ithaca, NY 14850 2008 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of June 6, 2006 Appeal #2686 — 222 Floral Avenue Dear Mr. Skalwold: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 10, maximum lot coverage and column 11, front yard setback from the Zoning Ordnance. Proposed is the construction of a new home to replace the existing fire- damaged house. The proposed construction will be very nearly the same footprint as the existing structure. The percentage of lot coverage would be increased from 36 to 39 percent; 35 percent coverage is the maximum allowed in this district. An existing front yard setback deficiency would be increased from 4.5 to 6.5 feet; a ten -foot setback is required. The existing one -foot side yard deficiency would be eliminated and the existing 21 -foot rear yard deficiency would not be altered. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed work will restore housing for longtime residents and improve the appearance of the neighborhood. 3. The house is designed to fit the character of the neighborhood and slightly increase the living space and exterior access to the house. 4. The house cannot be adequately designed to meet setback requirements due to a cliff in the back yard. it is also placed to preserve several mature trees in the front. 5. There were no speakers in favor of the proposal. One speaker voiced concern over the height of the house. If it is to be built on a tall foundation, the roofline will be visible from the property that backs the residence and is farther up the hill. The appellant plans a four -foot crawl space but no basement. The second floor s planned to have 1.5- foot higher ceilings than in the current house, but the peak of the roof could be lowered to stay within the 40 foot height restriction. 6. There were no letters in favor or opposed to the construction. 7. The City Planning Board recommended the addition of a porch or gables to better fit the style of the neighborhood but it was pointed out that this would increase the lot coverage and setback deficiencies. 8. The County Planning Department had no objections to the new construction. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. Sincerel U U Fo Building De artment Tom Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 30, 2006 Linda Lerch Mary Anne Termotto 130 East Court Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 11, 2006 Appeal #2687 — 130 East Court Street Dear Ms. Lerch and Ms. Termotto: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, column 10, maximum percentage of lot coverage. Proposed is an addition to the rear of the residence on 130 East Court Street to add a bedroom and enlarge the kitchen. This addition will replace a deteriorated back porch. A garage will be added at the rear of the property. The proposed construction will result in 45 percent lot coverage; maximum permitted lot coverage is 35 percent. Existing deficiencies in the front and both side yards will not be affected. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed work will add to the value of the property, enhance the utility of the residence, and fit the general character of the neighborhood. 3. The addition of a garage will provide off - street parking, where previously there was none. This will eliminate one of the property's deficiencies. 4. The side of the garage which is contiguous to that of the neighbors at 128 East Court Street will be constructed of noncombustible material as a safety precaution. 5. There was one speaker in favor of the proposal, and two letters of support. 6. There were no speakers or letters opposed to the proposal. 7. The City Planning Board supported the construction, but wanted to withhold final determination pending review by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee. It was noted that in this case the ILPC review would be done following approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals. 8. The County Department of Planning saw no negative impacts of the project. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that an urban easement must be granted and entered on the survey for 128 East Court Street and must be recorded in the deed. Sincerely, lz., s For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 28, 2006 Jean Walters 104 East Lewis Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 11, 2006 Appeal #2688 — 104 East Lewis Street Dear Ms. Walters: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a special permit for the use of an office within the home as offices and meeting space for a non - profit mental illness support organization, as required by Section 325- column 1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is the use of a legally nonconforming physical therapy office to store records, literature and related material for use by the support group. It is considered a home occupation since the meetings will involve the need for parking. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. Existing area deficiencies will not be affected. 2. There will be no employees associated with the group; the appellant will serve as office manager. 3. The space to be used occupies less than 25 percent of the dwelling as required. 4. A small informational sign will be erected to identify the location, otherwise no exterior changes will be made to the residence. 5. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall character of the neighborhood. Meetings will be held monthly which will be the only time there would be additional traffic in the neighborhood. The appellant estimates fewer than a dozen members at meetings. 6. The organization, National Alliance of Mental Illness, Finger Lakes Chapter Inc., will provide a needed service to the community. 7. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. Three letters of support were received. The appeal was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Note: A sign permit must be granted before a sign can be installed. The sign must comply with regulations as to maximum square footage and must be attached to the house, not freestanding. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." is CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 31, 2006 Jeff Kay 274 Westwood Knoll Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2006 Appeal #2678 — 107 Williams Street Dear Mr. Kay: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 6 and 7, street frontage and lot size. Proposed is renovation and improvement of the third floor of the residence to be used as habitable space. To make the stairs code compliant, the appellant proposes to expand one of the dormers on the building. A 50 -foot frontage and 7,000 square foot lot is required in this R -3a residential area. An existing street frontage deficiency of 8 feet and lot size deficiency of 3,913 square feet will not be affected by the work, however a variance is required due to the proposed increase in habitable space. At the March 7, 2006 meeting the Board tabled a decision based on the following findings of fact: There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The dwelling is in an R3 -a zone and is currently legal for 5 persons with 3 legal parking spaces. There will be no changes to the number of tenants. The reconfigured third floor will be used as a lounge area only; no sleeping rooms will be added. The appellant cites increased competition for Collegetown area rentals especially from the newer more modern apartments has prompted the need to make his property more attractive to prospective tenants. 4. The appellant will install a sprinkler system. The alteration to the dormers is necessary to meet required code for headroom in the stairway and landing. The Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Committee has approved the exterior alteration. The proposed work is part of an overall upgrade to the exterior of the property that will add to the value of the property and will improve the appearance of the neighborhood. 6. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 7. City Planning Board commended the owner on improvements and addition of the sprinkler system, but voiced reservations about the ability of the owner to prevent over occupancy of the building. The Board of Zoning Appeals had questions regarding the use of third floors as habitable space and voted to table a decision pending additional information. The appeal was tabled by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co Jeff Kay August 31, 2006 274 Westwood Knoll page 2 Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of March 7, April 4, and May 2, 2006 Appeal #2678 — 107 Williams Street At the April 4, 2006 meeting the following was determined: 1. This property is grandfathered for 5 occupants. Additional tenants would require an additional variance as the dwelling would be classified as a multiple dwelling rather than a single family dwelling. The variance currently under consideration is for deficient lot size. 2. The appellant does not plan to use the third floor as a sleeping space and has a clause regarding length of stay for visitors and possible termination of the lease for violations. It was moved to table the variance pending more information on the proposed reconfiguration and fire escape plans. The appeal was tabled by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. At the May 4, 2006 meeting the Board voted to approve the appeal based on the following findings of fact: 1. The appellant has redesigned the stars to extend into a portion of a second floor bedroom thus eliminating the need to widen the dormer on the exterior. The unbalanced appearance of the dormer had been an issue of some concern for the Zoning Board members. 2. Tom Parsons Assistant Fire Chief of the City Fire Department spoke in favor of the appeal. He stated that if the third floor were to be newly constructed as a sleeping space, State Code would require the building to a complete sprinkler system and not require exterior fire escapes. The appellant plans to install a sprinkler system voluntarily and the Fire Department supports this variance on the basis that the sprinkler system will be installed as part of granting the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that the lease clearly limits tenants to five and that the third floor cannot be used for sleeping. Sincere�Y�, &I or the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN/If CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 August 28, 2006 Moira Lang Simeon Moss 231 Elm Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal #2692 — 231 Elm Street Dear Ms. Lang and Mr. Moss: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 14/15, rear yard setback of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is an addition to the rear of the residence at 231 Elm Street to add a first floor half bath and to expand the kitchen area. An existing deck will be removed. The proposed addition will create a rear yard setback of 23 feet where the existing setback is 24 feet; required setback for this property is 50 feet. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The addition will not be visible to the neighbors and will add to the value and enjoyment of the property. 3. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 4. The City Planning Board had found that the shape of the yard made setback compliance difficult, and had no objections to the construction. 5. The County Planning Department saw no negative impact. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely L ! v ' For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 September 5, 2006 Mark Wickham Lakeview Mental Health Services' r - 280 S. Main Street Canandaigua, NY 14424 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal 92691 — 402 South Albany Street 7-_--l-o Dear Mr. Wickham: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 10 and 12 maximum percentage of lot coverage and side yard setback of the Zoning Ordinance. The appellant proposes to add a roof over an existing cement patio to be used as an outdoor smoking area for the facility at 402 South Albany Street. The proposed construction will decrease the side yard setback from 9.7 to 5.5 feet; required setback for this property is 10 feet. The 47percent of lot coverage would be increased to 49 percent; maximum allowed is 35 percent. The existing 6 -foot deficiency in one of the front yards, the 13.1 -foot rear yard deficiency and the 50 square foot lot size deficiency would not be affected. It was moved to deny the variance based on the following findings of fact: The addition of the covered area would create no undesirable visible change to the neighborhood. The proposed work would be shielded from the rear of the property by a privacy fence that is to be constructed. The appellants wish to eliminate the smoking area from the front porch, which is constructed of wood. Additionally, State code discourages smoking in public entryways, and the appellant states that all eleven of the facilities owned by the company have shelters for outdoor smoking. 2. There were no speakers or letters in favor of the proposal. The neighbors in closest proximity to the proposed smoking area submitted a letter of opposition, as well as speaking at the appeal hearing. 3. The City Planning Board saw no long -range planning issues, but felt that neighborhood opinion should be taken into consideration. 4. There were concerns regarding adverse affect to the health and overall enjoyment of the neighboring house as a result of placement of the smoking facility in close proximity to the house, which is situated near the property line. The rear yard setback is deficient by 13.1 feet. This existing deficiency added to the proposed increased side yard deficiency places the proposed smoking area very close to the adjacent properties. An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." i o Mark Wickham September 5, 2006 Lakeview Mental Health Services page 2 280 S. Main Street Canandaigua, NY 14424 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of July 18, 2006 Appeal #2691 — 402 South Albany Street 5. The Board finds that the balance of benefit to the appellant versus the detriment to the immediate neighbors does not justify granting the variance in light of such large setback deficiencies. The appeal was denied by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. S inc er 1 L. For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN/If Penny Goldin September 8, 2006 Moosewood Restaurant page 2 215 North Cayuga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Ms. Goldin: RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal # 2695 — 215 North Cayuga Street The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed, with the condition that the south - and west - facing signs be removed from the seasonal canopy within 5 years. The resulting square footage would be 46 square feet. Sincerel , For the Building Department Tom Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN:lf Cc: William Downing NOTE: The date of this letter is the date of filing for the purposes of appeal of this decision. There is a statute of limitations on the filing of an Article 78 appeal of thirty (30) days from the filing of this decision. CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 September 14, 2006 Anne Chernish 620 Shaffer Road Newfield, NY 14867 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of September 5, 2006 Appeal #2701 — 315 Taughannock Boulevard Dear Ms. Chernish: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a special permit as required in Section 325 -8 column 3, permitted accessory uses of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is establishment of a financial planning service as a home occupation. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. A 110 square foot room on the ground floor will be used as an office. This falls within the maximum 25% of the building and 500 square feet permitted for a home occupation. There will be one employee in addition to the appellant. 2. The appellant will reside in the remainder of the first floor apartment. The second floor unit is rented as an apartment. 3. There are four off - street parking spaces in a lot to the south of the property. 4. Traffic will be minimal, with office hours from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and on weekends by appointment only. Rarely are there more than 2 clients at one time. 5. The existing 7 -foot rear yard deficiency will not be affected by granting this appeal. The rear yard abuts the Cayuga Inlet and the business will have no negative impact on the businesses adjoining or across the Inlet from this property 6. There will no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall character of the neighborhood. 7. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 8. The County Department of Planning felt there would be no negative impact from the business. 9. The City Planning Board recommended granting the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf Cc: Tom Newton NOTE: A sign permit must be issued by the Building Department prior to the erection of any signage for this business. 'An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." c CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 September 14, 2006 Thomas Hoard HOLT Architects 217 N. Aurora St. `f Ithaca, NY 14850: Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of September 5, 2006 Appeal # 2703 — 311 East Green Street F �� Dear Mr. Hoard: The Board of Zoning Appeals heard your request on behalf of Gateway Plaza, LLC, for a variance from Section 272 -613 of the Sign Ordinance. The appellants propose to erect two directional signs on the property, one at each of the two entrances to Gateway Plaza. Two signs are needed to indicate the entrances on East Green Street and East State Street. Signs identifying each of the two buildings on the Plaza have been granted sign permits. The two directional signs will be located on property contiguous to the two buildings, under the same ownership. A variance is requested as the proposed signs will have the name of the building complex in addition to traffic directions, and exceed the maximum square footage and height permitted by the Ordinance. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: The signs will be located no closer than 18 inches from the right -of -way. 2. Due to the shape of the property, the configuration of the streets, and the high volume of traffic, the appellants want the signs to clearly identify the property. The proposed signs would be 5 feet high; the maximum height permitted for directional signs is 3 feet. 3 0 5. The signs will be 8 square feet; only 6 square feet is permitted. The total square footage of all the Plaza signs is well below the maximum allowed. The lettering and top of the signs will be internally lit at night. The signs are designed to complement the style and color of the existing architecture, and fit the mass of the buildings. An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CON Thomas Hoard September 14, 2006 HOLT Architects page 2 217 N. Aurora St. Ithaca, NY 14850 Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of September 5, 2006 Appeal # 2703 — 311 East Green Street 6. The proposed signage is the minimal size needed to identify the building and directions. 7. The City Planning Board felt that the size of the signs was appropriate in view of traffic configuration and the DOT's desire to have visible signage. The County Department of Planning felt the size of the signs was more appropriate for a suburban or highway setting. 9. There were no letters or speakers for or against the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. Sincerel For the Building Departm nt Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN:lf Cc: Gateway Plaza, LLC CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274.6521 October 20, 2006 Franziska Racker Centers, Inc. 3226 Wilkins Road Ithaca, NY 14850 OFFICE RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of September 12, 2006 A.. Appeal # 2707 — 1001 West Seneca Street Dear Mr. Brown and Ms. Costello: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the request by Franciska Racker Centers, Inc. for a variance from Section 272 -6B of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant proposed three wall signs plus one directional sign. The ordinance permits either two wall signs or one freestanding sign. The facility at 1001 West Seneca Street has been operating for some time using one wall sign at the rear of the building to identify the entrance; however, the appellant found that clients were having difficulty identifying the building and the proper driveway to use to access the business. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: Due to the configuration of the surrounding streets, it was determined that a wall sign attached at approximately the second floor level on the east side of the building would assist in identifying the location of the business. 2. The proposed directional sign will be placed at the driveway that accesses the rear (west facing facade) of the building. As many clients are elderly and /or disabled, parking and accessing the business from the west side of the building helps clients avoid much of the heavier traffic that uses the east entrance and the many vehicles that move around the parking lot and associated loading dock at the south of the building. 3 9 5. The directional sign will be no closer than 18 inches from the right -of -way. Two new wall signs, not more than 6- square -feet each, will direct clients to the main door, which now is not readily apparent to visitors. The total square footage of the signs will be 38 square feet, less than the total 84 square feet, which are permitted for this location. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0 Franziska Racker Centers, Inc. October 20, 2006 3226 Wilkins Road page 2 Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of September 12, 2006 Appeal # 2707 — 1001 West Seneca Street 6. Directional instructions, along with the street name and building number will be displayed on the signs. The style and color of the signs will be chosen to complement the existing architecture. 7. The City Planning Board felt that the configuration of the site merited the additional signage, but felt the directional sign could serve the intended purpose while remaining within the 3- foot - height requirement. 8. The County Department of Planning saw no long -term negative effect in granting the appeal. 9. There were no letters or speakers for or against the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR:lf Cc: John Novarr CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274.6521 October 20, 2006 Ms. Susan Christopherson 106 Ithaca Road Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of September 12, 2006 Appeal #2708 — 106 Ithaca Road Dear Ms. Christopherson: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325- 19(C), setback requirements for accessory structures. Proposed is the construction of a 14 x 20 foot garage in the northwest corner of the back yard. In order to utilize and existing turnaround, the appellant proposed to place the garage three feet from the side property line; required side yard setback is 6 feet. All other setback requirements would be met. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1 There will no adverse effect to the health, welfare, safety or overall wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The additional structure will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The proposed work is designed to complement the style of the house and will allow the appellant to use a previously existing turnaround in order to avoid backing down the steep driveway into the roadway. The garage is designed to be the minimum size needed to meet the storage requirements of the owner. 3. The appellant tested turning the turning radius of her vehicle and found that placing the proposed garage within the permitted setback would not provide adequate space for maneuvering. 4. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. The neighbors whose property will be directly affected by the construction of the garage have indicated to the appellant that they anticipate the garage would provide additional privacy for their property. 5. The City Planning Board felt the appellant should be able to construct the garage within the required setbacks. 6. The County Department of Planning anticipated no long term negative effect of granting the appeal. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, with 1 recusal. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0a CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 October 20, 2006 Mr. Alvin Kolb United Refining Company of Pennsylvania PO Box 688 Warren, PA 16365 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meetings of July 11 and August 8, 2006 Appeal # 2690 — 303 Elmira Road Dear Mr. Kolb: The Board of Zoning Appeals heard your request on behalf of United Refining Company of Pennsylvania for a variance from Section 325 -8, column 11, front yard setback and columns 14/15, rear yard setback of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 272 -7A, maximum size of signage of the Sign Ordinance. The appellant plans to construct a new gasoline station and convenience store on the property at 303 Elmira Road, to replace the existing building on the site. As the front property line on Elmira Road is 64 feet from the curb, it is impossible to site the front structure, the gas pumps and canopy, within the 15 to 34 foot required setback. On the South Meadow Street frontage, a curb cut prevents the convenience store from being compliant with the front yard setback requirement on that side. In order to provide as much distance between the two proposed structures, the appellant proposes to locate the rear structure, the convenience store, ten feet from the rear property line. The required rear setback is 20 feet. Lastly, the appellant plans to erect a new 90 square foot freestanding sign at the northwest corner of the property to advertise the business's name and current fuel prices. For this property the maximum single sign size is 75 square feet. It was moved to grant the area variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The reconfiguration and various utility easements on Route 13 (Elmira Road) make compliant construction impossible. 2. The curb cuts on South Meadow Street were determined by the State Department of Transportation and the City Engineering Department. 3. Adjacent to the rear property line is a drainage ditch in the City -owned right of way. A screening fence will be constructed at the rear property line to separate the business from the residential neighborhood to the east. 4. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the appeal. 5. The City Planning Board felt that granting the appeal was appropriate, noting that the 20 -foot City -owned drainage swale, plus the 10 -foot rear yard provided would create a 30- foot separation between this property and the adjoining lot. The area variance was granted at the July 11, 2006 meeting by a vote of 4 in favor, none opposed. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." c Alvin Kolb October 20, 2006 United Refining Company of Pennsylvania page 2 PO Box 688 Warren, PA 16365 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meetings of July 11 and August 8, 2006 Appeal # 2690 — 303 Elmira Road The sign appeal was tabled pending receipt of additional information, with the following findings of fact: 1. The total square footage of the signs will be 132 square feet, less than the 150 square feet permitted. The dimensions of the fuel pump canopy were used to calculate the allowable square footage, rather than dimensions of the convenience store building. 2. The Board questioned the planned 90 square foot size of the pole sign. Part of the dimensional measurement includes the actual supporting device of the sign. The State requires that fuel prices must be displayed, and the business logo (Kwik Fill) is designed to be readily visible to passers -by. 3. There were no letters or speakers for or against the variance. 4. The City Planning Board felt that the size of the sign is appropriate due to the setback from the street and that greenspace surrounding the sign will mitigate its size to some extent. 5. The Board tabled a decision at the July 11 meeting, requesting a survey of other nearby fuel station sign sizes and the submission of a complete plan to include store identification signage. At the August 8, 2006 meeting it was moved to grant the sign variance with additional information presented: 6. Two other nearby gas stations have pole signs of 123 and 86 square feet. The larger sign was granted a variance for its size. 7. There will be a 9 x 2 foot "Kwik Fill" sign on the side of the fuel station canopy facing Route 13, with 4 x 3 foot price signs on both ends to the canopy. These are considered building signs, and fall within the size and placement restrictions of the Sign Ordinance 8. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the variance. 9. The City Planning Department felt that the setback necessitated the larger sign. 10. The County Department of Planning saw no negative effects of granting the variance. The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR:lf CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 December 1, 2006 � Scott Reynolds/Paul Mazzarella Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services 115 W. Clinton Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of November 7, 2006 Appeal #2704 — 218 Second Street Dear Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mazzarella: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 11, 12 and 14/15, front, side and rear yard setback requirements in the R -2b zone. Proposed is the construction of a new single family residence on a currently vacant lot. In order to protect an existing tulip tree, the appellant proposes to construct the house 24.5 feet from the property line on the Madison Street side, which is considered one of the front yards. This results in a side yard setback of 5' 3 "; required is 10 feet. The appellant wishes to align the house on the Second Street side with the existing homes on the street. This creates the second front yard setback of 5' 1" where 10 feet are required. In the rear yard, an entry porch from the driveway reduces the required 20 foot setback to 17' 4 ". It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will be no adverse effect to health, welfare, safety or wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The structure will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The design of the house complements existing homes in the neighborhood. The proposed placement of the house will give added protection to a mature tree that adds to the appeal of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. 3. The amount of the variance is not excessive. 4. The home will be available only to owner occupants who meet the criteria for affordable housing for twenty years, and the appellant hopes to be able to retain low- income stipulation for ownership in perpetuity. 5. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. 6. The City Planning Board felt the design and placement of the house was consistent with the character of the neighborhood and the preservation of the existing landscape would benefit both the homeowner and the neighborhood. The variance was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Buil ing Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." to CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 December 1, 2006 Scott Reynolds /Paul Mazzarella Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services 115 W. Clinton Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of November 7, 2006 Appeal #2710 — 502 First Street Dear Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mazzarella: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 12 and 14115, side and rear yard setback requirements in the R -2b zone. Due to a proposed 4'6" porch roof overhang in the side yard, a variance is required from section 325 -18(B) of the Ordinance, which permits a maximum of 2 feet roof projection into the setback. Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Service plans to construct a new single family residence on a currently vacant lot. Because this is a corner lot, there are two front yards, each requiring a 10 foot setback. In order to meet this requirement and provide protection to the large sycamore tree in the tree lawn, a deficiency is created by a sitting porch planned for the rear of the residence and by a protective overhang over the entrance at the west side of the house. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will be no adverse effect to health, welfare, safety or wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The structure will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The design of the house complements existing homes in the neighborhood. The proposed placement of the house will give added protection to a mature tree that adds to the appeal of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. 3. The percentage of lot coverage will be less than the maximum allowed. 4. The amount of the variance is minimal and the lot is narrow, at approximately 40 feet. 5. For twenty years the home will be available only to owner occupants who meet the criteria for affordable housing. 6. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal, one letter of support was received. 7. The City Planning Board felt the design and placement of the house was appropriate for the neighborhood, enhances the neighborhood feel by utilizing a currently vacant corner lot, and provides for the protection of an impressive tree The variance was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Building Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." CIO CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 December 1, 2006 Scott Reynolds /Paul Mazzarella Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services 115 W. Clinton Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of November 7, 2006 Appeal #2704 — 218 Second Street Dear Mr. Reynolds and Mr. Mazzarella: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for an area variance from Section 325 -8, columns 11, 12 and 14/15, front, side and rear yard setback requirements in the R -2b zone. Proposed is the construction of a new single family residence on a currently vacant lot. In order to protect an existing tulip tree, the appellant proposes to construct the house 24.5 feet from the property line on the Madison Street side, which is considered one of the front yards. This results in a side yard setback of 5' 3 "; required is 10 feet. The appellant wishes to align the house on the Second Street side with the existing homes on the street. This creates the second front yard setback of 5' 1" where 10 feet are required. In the rear yard, an entry porch from the driveway reduces the required 20 foot setback to 17' 4 ". It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. There will be no adverse effect to health, welfare, safety or wellbeing of the neighborhood. 2. The structure will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The design of the house complements existing homes in the neighborhood. The proposed placement of the house will give added protection to a mature tree that adds to the appeal of the lot and the surrounding neighborhood. 3. The amount of the variance is not excessive. 4. The home will be available only to owner occupants who meet the criteria for affordable housing for twenty years, and the appellant hopes to be able to retain low- income stipulation for ownership in perpetuity. 5. There were no speakers in favor or opposed to the proposal. 6. The City Planning Board felt the design and placement of the house was consistent with the character of the neighborhood and the preservation of the existing landscape would benefit both the homeowner and the neighborhood. The variance was granted by a vote of 5 in favor, none opposed. Sincerely, For the Buil ing Department Phyllis Radke, Building Commissioner PR/lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." co December 12, 2006 David Beer Beer Properties, LLC 211 Hudson Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal #2699 — 143 Maple Avenue Dear Mr. Beer: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a special permit for a neighborhood commercial facility as required by Section 325 -8, column 2, permitted primary uses of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is the use of a vacant building to serve baked goods and coffee. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The existing building has been used as an office for coal and gravel sales, used furniture sales and as an apartment. No expansion is planned for the 16 x 20 building, which can seat approximately 12 patrons. 2. Five parking spaces will be provided on the property. This will also serve as a turnaround spot for emergency vehicles, as required by the Ithaca Fire Department for the apartment complex which is to be constructed on the same lot. Much of the clientele is expected to come on foot from the nearby apartment complexes and Cornell facilities. 3. There will be no cooking on -site. The tenant will have access to the apartment dumpster for garbage disposal. 4. There will be no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall character of the neighborhood. 5. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The coffee shop would add a convenience for the neighbors. Due to its size it would not create excessive noise and is unlikely to be an attractive loitering spot. 6. Hours of operation would be no earlier than 6:00 a.m. and no later than 11:00 p.m. 7. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 8. The City Planning Board recommended granting the variance, indicating there would be a benefit to the neighborhood. 9. The County Department of Planning felt there would be no negative impact from the business The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, with one recusal. Sincerely, For the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf CITY OF ITHACA 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 -5690 BUILDING DEPARTMENT Telephone: 607/274 -6508 Fax: 607/274 -6521 December 12, 2006 David Beer Beer Properties, LLC 211 Hudson Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of August 1, 2006 Appeal #2699 — 143 Maple Avenue Dear Mr. Beer: The Board of Zoning Appeals considered your appeal for a special permit for a neighborhood commercial facility as required by Section 325 -8, column 2, permitted primary uses of the Zoning Ordinance. Proposed is the use of a vacant building to serve baked goods and coffee. It was moved to grant the variance based on the following findings of fact: 1. The existing building has been used as an office for coal and gravel sales, used furniture sales and as an apartment. No expansion is planned for the 16 x 20 building, which can seat approximately 12 patrons. 2. Five parking spaces will be provided on the property. This will also serve as a turnaround spot for emergency vehicles, as required by the Ithaca Fire Department for the apartment complex which is to be constructed on the same lot. Much of the clientele is expected to come on foot from the nearby apartment complexes and Cornell facilities. 3. There will be no cooking on -site. The tenant will have access to the apartment dumpster for garbage disposal. 4. There will be no adverse affect to the health, welfare, safety or overall character of the neighborhood. 5. The addition will create no undesirable change to the neighborhood. The coffee shop would add a convenience for the neighbors. Due to its size it would not create excessive noise and is unlikely to be an attractive loitering spot. 6. Hours of operation would be no earlier than 6:00 a.m. and no later than 11:00 p.m. 7. There were no speakers or letters in favor or opposed to the proposal. 8. The City Planning Board recommended granting the variance, indicating there would be a benefit to the neighborhood. 9. The County Department of Planning felt there would be no negative impact from the business The appeal was granted by a vote of 3 in favor, none opposed, with one recusal. Sinc ILw r the Building Department Thomas Nix, Deputy Building Commissioner TN /lf "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 0