HomeMy WebLinkAbout212 Hanshaw Rd ZBA Application.pdf BA Application Fee: $100 Check All That Apply: J{ Area Variance Use Variance _Interpretation Request Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals Application Form For Office Use Only Date Received ________ _ Cash or Check ________ _ Zoning District ________ _ Applicable Section(s) of Village Code:
Property address: ~/ Z,, /htl(5/btfuJ t(} Tax parcel: / Z -/ -3
Zoning officer's determination: ffijlfty;/v!J &; r ff/JC('? ~ 0 t; 11 s {_£~
nd1tJJ Z-2 1 5~/!Jt&illlft(>
Req@ interpretation: --------------------
Reason(s) that the requested variance or interpretation should be granted:
0 See attached page for the criteria that the ZBA must use. 0 Use additional sheets if necessary.
Please attach any additional information that will help the ZBA to evaluate your appeal,
such as a narrative, survey map, photos, building plans, etc.
By filing this application, you grant permission for Village of Cayuga Heights ZBA
Members and Village Staff to enter your property for inspections related to your appeal.
:::p-li-ca_n_t=~=~~~~~~--:~t:J~:~~~~Lc~~--"2.---"'_-N~~e~-·,_,~-'/f--~~~=-D-a-te_:_S-_ji_1..._-Z,_A_'/_l
Phone number(s): ---~~S___,]~/__,_____,,_:\Jl---'{~_,,.2'-----------
Email address: __ e_c._~-----""'-( --"Q= ______ &-"----r_N-'--~__._._I, _~dt--=-q ___ _
To: Village of Cayuga Heights Zoning Board of Appeals From: Ezra and Daphne Cornell Date: May 26, 2016 RE: New Fencing around swimming pool at 212 Hanshaw Road Back story: We purchased and moved into our home in 1992. The home was built in 1932-1933. According to legend, in the early 1950's Mrs. Nulle added the swimming pool and fence west of the house facing Devon Road. Most people walking and driving on Devon pay little regard to the pool because of the bushes and the grade. The pool sits about ten feet higher than the road. The pool is about 38' x 17' roman style made of cement. The pool deck is concrete. From the time we acquired the property, surrounding the pool on three of four sides, including the side facing or fronting on Devon Road, is a wood fence with sections varying in length from five to six feet high. The fourth side has a recently installed four foot chain link fence. Although over the years we have replaced boards, added braces and stained it to maintain its appearance and
integrity, the wood fence is rotting and now needs replacement. The new fencing will have masonry columns
and six foot high fencing panels. We are working with both Cayuga Landscape and a mason. The masonry
columns are designed to reflect the style of our masonry house. The bushes will be maintained and will also
continue to protect and disguise the pool.
Request for a variance: A variance from the four foot fence height restriction is requested, including a
variance, if needed, from any materials requirements for fences over four feet high.
Reason for aooroval: In general a swimming pool is an attractive nuisance. There have always been
children in our neighborhood which is close to the elementary school. A higher fence that further shields the
pool from view and discourages entry to the pool is the right thing to install. We believe that the existing
fence represents a prior existing non-conforming use with respect to the current statutory provisions and so
its general variance from the height requirements should be grandfathered and the only issue should be the
final height allowed. With respect to the requirement that the portion of any permitted fence taller than four
feet be 90% open, we feel that the openness requirement would partially defeat the purpose of the fence as a
deterrent to entry because it could make the pool visible and maintain the attractive nuisance problem.
Further, the existing fence is, as mentioned, already a non-conforming prior use, so that replacement in the
same manner/style should be grandfathered.
Other considerations:
1. No undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood, nor any detriment
to nearby properties created by the new fence. The pool has been there for over 60 years.
Neighbors have been informed of the proposed new fence and are supportive.
2. Would a shorter fence be as good a deterrent? Logic says no. A five foot child would have more
difficulty with a six foot fence than a four foot fence.
3. The requested area variance is the same as the existing fence which is currently greater than four
feet high.
4. The new fence will have no adverse effect or new impact on the physical or environmental
conditions in the neighborhood or district. The new fence replaces the current fence in the same
location. The upgrade to the fence well benefit the property and neighborhood, and be safer.
5. The proposed fence complies with and exceeds the requirements of the New York State Building
Code provisions relating to "Barrier (Fence) Requirements for Outdoor Residential Swimming
Pools."
6. The last question on the NYS DOS Local Government Planning Zoning Law Guide asks whether the
alleged difficulty was self-created. No. The current wood fence deteriorated. It was poorly
designed and installed before we purchased the property 24 years ago. Weather and bugs have caused the decline not the owners who have tried to maintain it. The new fence will be of better materials and a more attractive design. We expect the new fence will be safer and enhance the value and appearance of the property.
.a • • • I ... ·-·· _.-... ~--,.....---.·-·..,., .. , __ , ................ _:-···-····---·-· --___ ... ,_... ..... -.,..·.···~,.,.,., . -·-·-. .:~---·--:~ I. I 1 I I ~ • ca It N I WF j..jl!OBETI <20.) . ,'tllf PAIJCALOO (e.o.\ {/_~ 1'2-1-1 ' rz-1--z. o-" EA5T LUIE OF I WEST LIME.. /d?~~-OE\IOM E:D. zio;,'i ALD"" OF HAIJSMAw ~i.,J' P --. eo -'"-• u ~ LEA~AIJT G~i!: CUCIC . 1"'11· . -II tp<~eiz.•:L''E 21~~L-t._.-=-fTeAv. LIM-:..:=====:=: .. -' PAe:x BEl'UAMIM0 t 6ANC>eA j. GIMS!!>EeG <e.o) 0C:.04-S7't r-z-I· "3 SUl!>.TO ~Teic:no ... s ~ CONDITIOM'S IM DUO ~O'?>· 5~'-7 11:.. /, .. : .,/t ~t.;J ti '/ 1 h?I .{,~ " n I(} • . • • fV 0 \ .:·\ NI lc4J ,. : ~ I l'P ' .. :--.} ,u '0/ I I I EEFEe~i. Ttl ''MAP OF Tf.IE LAMOS OF 'T'HE CAYUGA • t4£f4f.ITS PAek' Assoc." av / C .Cl:AMOALL JVM£ '2Z1 1~2.1 ~ '5 63~Z5 w "Z 1c;..-z.' I ---------_ ... ____ _... ____ _ I N ~ ~· Sur~ey Mop of 212 Hanshaw New York AME!.10£0 7,,..,,n WF CO IZ Mf:LL ( ~ .0 .) IZ-I-" . Rood-Village of Cayuga Heights-Town of Ithaca-Tompkins County-. Aug. 29,1984 Scale 1H=40' flLEABS ~~ r (: i! ~ ~ l ·~~----------~~--~~-~~-----------~K.A.BAKERL~.049415 -• • ··-· ~-..... ~