Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBZA 3137-115 Seneca Way-Decision Letter-9-16-2019CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green Street — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & Division of Zoning Gino Leonardi, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Appeals Telephone: 607-274-6550 Fax: 607-274-6558 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT E -Mail: gleonardi@cityofithaca.org CITY OF ITHACA BOARD of ZONING APPEALS Sign Variance Findings & Decision Appeal No.: 3137 Applicant: Lauretano Sign Group for owner Ithaca Downtown Associates Property Location: 115 Seneca Way Zoning District: CBD -60 & CBD -100 Applicable Section of City Sign Ordinance: Section 272-6B (2) and Section 272-9A. Requirement for Which Variance is requested: Number of Permitted Signs; Sign Setback Requirement Publication Dates: September 11, 2019 and September 13, 2019. Meeting Held On: September 16, 2019. Summary: Appeal of Lauretano Sign Group on behalf of the owner Ithaca Downtown Associates for a Sign variance from Section 272-6 B (2), Number of Permitted Signs and Section 272-9 A, Sign Setback requirements of the Sign Ordinance. The property at 115 Seneca Way contains the newly constructed building know as Canopy by Hilton. The property has street frontage along both Seneca Way and East State Street and the applicant proposes to position a monument sign at the East State Street side of the property to designate the parking and drop off areas for the hotel. The proposed monument sign is part of a larger signage package that includes one wall sign for the Canopy Hilton and two wall signs for the Strand Cafe. The three walls signs are permitted by the sign ordinance for the two businesses. The monument sign is in addition to the allowable number of signs for each business. Section 272-6 B (2) of the Sign Ordinance, permits a total of two wall signs or one freestanding sign per business. The monument sign is considered a freestanding sign and there are additional setback requirements for the sign. Section 272-9 A requires freestanding sign to be a minimum of 10 feet from any public highway or street right-of-way and must meet the rear yard setback of 10 feet for the zone district in which it is located. The applicant proposes to site the sign at East State Street side of the property, which is considered the rear yard for the property. Therefore, the monument sign is required to be setback 10 foot from the property line which is also the street right-of-way. The applicant proposes to install the monument sign 2'-3" from the property line, of the 10 feet required by the ordinance. The property is located in the CBD -60 and CBD -100 districts in which the proposed use is permitted. However, the Sign Ordinance, Section 272-18 requires that variances be granted before a sign permit is issued. 1 Public Hearing Held On: September 16, 2019. No public comments in favor or in opposition. Members present: Steven Beer, Chair Teresa Deschanes Stephanie Egan -Engels — non-voting new member Steven Wolf Tompkins County Review per Section 239 -1 & -m of New York State General Municipal Law: N/A or Tompkins County has reviewed the proposal, as submitted, and has determined that it has no negative intercommunity, or county wide impacts. Environmental Review: Type: Type 1 This variance is a component of an action that also includes site plan. Considered together, this is a Type 1 Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act for which the Planning and Development Board, acting as Lead Agency, made a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance on January 27, 2015. Planning & Development Board Recommendation: The Planning Board does not identify any negative long term planning impacts and supports this appeal. The Board has reviewed the signage package on multiple occasions and the applicant has made design changes to address any concerns. The sign package is appropriate in scale and position and fits the character of downtown. Motion: A motion to grant the variance request was made by Steven Wolf. Deliberations & Findings: Factors Considered: 1. Size of sign: The size of the sign is not in question. It is quite modest given the scale of the building and does not create an issue with pedestrians or street traffic. The setback would be exacerbated if this was a large sign, but it is modest sign that will actually mitigate the consideration for the setback. 2. Number of letters: The number of letters is minimal and the artistry of the font is quite an interesting design. 3. Other signs: In relation to the other signs in the vicinity, the overall four sign package is quite reasonable for function, location, and size. Although, the other signs were not the focus of the deliberations, the additional monument sign with the deficient setback was considered for proximity, site lines, and the effect it would have on the surrounding area. 4. The character of the neighborhood: The neighborhood is changing and has changed an urban character. The monument sign is in keeping with the urban character. 2 5. Public Interest: The public interest might be to preserve the setback requirement to allow for less clutter and more open space. Although, in this setting it is not consistent with the current context of the neighborhood. Given the parking constraints within the neighborhood, and balancing the trade-off for allowing or not allowing the variance, it would be in the public interest to grant the variance for the setback. In consideration of location, form, and scale the monument sign does fit and contribute to the change in urban fabric of the district. Second Motion to Grant Variance: Made by Teresa Deschanes. Vote: Steven Beer, Chair Yes Teresa Deschanes Yes Steven Wolf Yes Determination of BZA Based on the Above Factors: The BZA, taking into consideration the five factors for a sign variance, finds that the Benefit to the Applicant outweighs the Determinant to the Neighborhood or Community. The BZA further finds that variances from Sign Ordinance, Section 272-6B (2) and Section 272-9A are the minimum variances that should be granted in order to preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. September 23, 2019 Gin `' ona f i, Zoning Administrator Date Secretary, oard of Zoning Appeals