Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 Town of Ithaca Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals Tuesday, July 10, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. 215 N Tioga St., Ithaca NY Board Members Present: Rob Rosen, George Vignaux, Caren Rubin, Chris Jung, Bill King, David Filiberto, David Squires Staff Present: Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Appeal of Paleontological Research Institution (PRI), aka the Museum of the Earth, requesting variances from the Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 270, Zoning, Section 252, Criteria applying to signs in all zones and Section 254 Residential and Conservation Zones, to be allowed to place signs (banners) on utility poles and also a sign on a building that exceeds the allowed square footage and aggregate, as described across three parcels located at 1251, 1257 & 1259 Trumansburg Rd. Specific variances are described as follows: 1259 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-252 A(2) to be allowed to have three signs (banners) on utility poles, where none are permitted; Section 270-254 E(4) to have six banners— three at 15 square feet in area and three at 8 square feet in area- that are located less than 500 feet from a public right-of-way; and Section 270-254 E(6)(b) to have an 800 square foot area sign on the museum building, where a 100 square foot aggregate limit is allowed, with no one sign larger than 50 square feet in area. 1257 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-254 E(4) to be allowed to have two banners, each 15 square feet in area, that are located less than 500 feet from a public right of way; and Section 270-252 A(2) to allow these signs (banners) to be placed on utility poles, where none are permitted. 1251 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-254 E(4) to be allowed to have one sign (banner), 15 square feet in area, that is located less than 500 feet from a public right-of-way; and Section 270-252 A(2) to allow the sign (banner) on a utility pole, where none are permitted. Ms. Jung said she's a neighbor of Ms. Lesh, but that wouldn't affect her ability to make an impartial decision. Georgia Lesh, Director of Marketing and Development at PRI, was available for questions. Mr. Rosen stated that the code allows banners of this size as long as they're more than 500 feet from the road, but PRI wants to put them along the road, less than 500 feet back. He noted that they sought a variance before for this site. Ms. Brock added that the ZBA granted a temporary variance in 2012 for six banners along Route 96 and a large sign on the building. The signs had to be removed by May 1, 2017. Mr. Bates pointed out that at that time, banners were not allowed -period. Since then, we've revamped our sign law and they're now allowed under certain conditions. Unfortunately, these banners don't meet those conditions. Ms. Brock explained that the parcels on which the banners are being placed are zoned residential, so we look at the residential zone requirements. The Codes and Ordinances committee spent a lot of time developing the new sign law and decided to allow banners where they weren't allowed before, recognizing that there are institutions in residential zones. But she thinks they were really thinking about Cornell and Ithaca College and came up with the idea that if the banners are more than 500 feet from the public right of way, basically interior to the campus, it would be fine to have these banners. At Ithaca College, they have banners on their internal drives, so they can't be seen from anywhere else. At some point, the town will be looking at institutional zones and will pull these institutions out of the residential zones and give them their own set of rules. But this was the best the COC could come up with for the sign law for now. Unfortunately for PRI, because they want the banners to be on the road to attract attention to people driving by, they don't meet the new code. Mr. Squires said he lives a block from PRI and remembers the banners; they weren't offensive to him at the time. He asked whether there was always a prohibition on banners on utility poles. Mr. Bates responded that no signs were allowed on utility poles, so the last time PRI was here, they were granted a variance for that also. Mr. Squires said he wouldn't want to set a precedent so anybody with a utility pole on their property could negotiate with utility companies to put up banners, because he's sure they'd be happy to take the money. Ms. Brock explained that every variance is considered on its own merits. The ZBA has to consider whether, on balance, the benefit to the applicant outweighs the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community, and make findings based on the area variance criteria. If you had identical cases come in, you could say we've set a precedent by doing this, but it's rare to get two identical cases since there are different circumstances with each application. Mr. Squires asked whether you could put in the findings that the variance was granted because it's a public institution. Ms. Brock said no: you can't favor certain types of entities over others, and there are First Amendment issues related to that. She would not advise putting in a finding like that, effectively saying we like public institutions so we're going to let them have this, but if you're something else, we won't. Mr. Vignaux divulged that he was a volunteer with PRI before they had the Museum of the Earth. Mr. Filiberto asked whether any of the nearby property owners have come forward. ZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 pg.2 Ms. Brock responded that there's a public hearing tonight, and there's nobody in the audience. Mr. Bates added that he has not received any comments since the public hearing notice was published. Ms. Rubin asked why the last variance had a time limit on it. Nobody remembered why it was five years. Ms. Brock didn't know if it was something the applicant asked for or if the ZBA decided to limit it by time to see if there was an issue. Mr. Bates said that because banners were not allowed, they limited the time to see how it went, and then we could decide whether we wanted to allow them to continue. Mr. King asked whether the town is aware of any issues at all with these banners since 2012, such as complaints or motor vehicle accidents. No one was aware of any issues. Mr. Rosen said that from reading the findings from 2012, it looks as if nothing has changed. They wanted six banners "along the road to adequately attract attention to their"location. Regarding neighborhood character, the board found that the area"has commercial and institutional uses along it" and is on a"New York State highway," and that the"signs on the light poles at the entrances to the parking areas are minimally visible from the road." The board found that the benefit to the applicant outweighed the detriment to the community. Mr. Vignaux found the banners to be attractive, and rather than being a detriment to the community, they improved it. They pointed out this attraction, which is one of the six museums we have in the county. They were not obtrusive and did not interfere with his driving. Ms. Jung said that, if anything, the banners make it easier for someone looking for the museum to see the driveway, and avoid having to make an abrupt turn. Mr. Rosen agreed, adding that the banners actually make it safer for drivers; they don't have to stop suddenly when they see the driveway or slow down to look. Ms. Brock said the application materials pointed out that because of the berm and the fact that the building is so far off the road and isn't very high, this helps guide the drivers in. Mr. Rosen opened the public hearing at 6:21 p.m.; hearing no one, he closed the public hearing. ZBA Resolution 0038-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1251 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.4 ZBA Resolution 0039-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1257 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.5 ZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 pg.3 ZBA Resolution 0040-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1259 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.1 Moved by Rob Rosen; seconded by Caren Rubin RESOLVED, that this board makes a negative determination of environmental significance based on the information in the EAF Parts 1 and 2 and for the reasons stated in the EAF Part 3, and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes: Rosen, King, Jung, Rubin, Vignaux Time limits were discussed Mr. Rosen thought we could safely abandon the time limit. He asked whether a nightclub could take over the location in the future and use the banners to advertise their business. The variance stays with the property. Mr. Bates pointed out that if the property is sold, the new owner will have to come before the planning board for a change of use. He asked whether a condition could be put on the variance in that case. Ms. Brock said they don't have a right to override the variance. Mr. King asked whether a condition of the variance could be that PRI owns the property. Ms. Brock said no because the variance goes with the property, not the owner. The board agreed that imposing a time limit was a good idea and the consensus was that ten years was reasonable. ZBA Resolution 0038-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1251 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.4 ZBA Resolution 0039-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1257 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.5 ZBA Resolution 0040-2018: SEQR, Sign Variance, Paleontological Research Institute 1259 Trumansburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 24.-3-3.1 Moved by Rob Rosen; seconded by Chris Jung RESOLVED, that this board grants the appeal of Paleontological Research Institution (PRI), aka the Museum of the Earth, requesting variances from the Town of Ithaca Code, Chapter 270, Zoning, Section 252, Criteria applying to signs in all zones and Section 254 Residential and Conservation Zones, to be allowed to place signs (banners) on utility poles and also a sign on a ZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 pg.4 building that exceeds the allowed square footage and aggregate, as described across three parcels located at 1251, 1257 & 1259 Trumansburg Rd. Specific variances are described as follows: 1259 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-252 A(2) to be allowed to have three signs (banners) on utility poles, where none are permitted; Section 270-254 E(4) to have six banners — three at 15 square feet in area and three at 8 square feet in area- that are located less than 500 feet from a public right-of-way; and Section 270-254 E(6)(b) to have an 800 square foot area sign on the museum building, where a 100 square foot aggregate limit is allowed, with no one sign larger than 50 square feet in area; 1257 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-254 E(4) to be allowed to have two banners, each 15 square feet in area, that are located less than 500 feet from a public right of way; and Section 270-252 A(2) to allow these signs (banners) to be placed on utility poles, where none are permitted; 1251 Trumansburg Rd—Variances from Section 270-254 E(4) to be allowed to have one sign (banner), 15 square feet in area, that is located less than 500 feet from a public right-of-way; and Section 270-252 A(2) to allow the sign (banner) on a utility pole, where none are permitted; With the following conditions: 1. The proposed signs shall not be illuminated. 2. The applicant shall submit documentation that the signs are acceptable to the NYS DOT. If the approval by the NYS DOT is not required, the applicant shall submit documentation to that effect. 3. If any of the signs become ripped or tattered, they will be promptly replaced or removed. 4. None of the signs on utility poles shall interfere with the line-of-sight of motorists traveling on Route 96. 5. The banner sign on the facade of the building shall occupy no more than the six panels of window that are indicated on the simulation presented by the applicant to this board in 2012, regardless of whether that ends up being less than 20' by 40'. 6. All such signs shall be removed by July 10, 2028. With the following findings: That the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community, specifically: 1. The benefit the applicant wishes to achieve cannot be achieved by any other means feasible given their desire to grab the attention of drivers on Route 96. The applicant has stated their belief that they need at least 6 banner signs along the road to adequately attract attention to the museum's location. Additionally, the board finds that the banners will increase safety by reducing the chance that drivers will stop suddenly or slow down erratically to look for the entrance. ZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 pg.5 2. There will not be an undesirable change in neighborhood character or nearby properties, given that this is an area that has cornmercial and institutional uses along it and it is on a New York State highway. This signs on the light poles at the entrances to the parking areas are minimally visible from the road because of the slope, and because of the distance from the road, the sign on the faqade of the building is minimally visible from the road. 3. The request is substantial insofar as these signs far exceed the allowed square footage of signs in this zone, but that is mitigated.by the fact that this is a large institution in a residential zone. 4. The request will not have adverse physical or environmental effects for the reasons stated in the EAF and given that it does not involve significant construction, but is merely the addition of signs on existing structures. 5. While the alleged difficulty is self-created by the applicant's desire to increase their visibility, the benefit to the applicant does outweigh any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes: Rosen, King, Jung, Rubin, Vignaux The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. Submitted by f. bra-DeAugistine, Dieputy Town Clerk ZBA Minutes 2018-07-10 pg.6