HomeMy WebLinkAboutCornellappl.pdf Village of Cayuga Heights
Zoning Board of Appeals
Application Form
ZBA Application Fee: $100 For Office Use Only
Date Received
Check All That Apply: Cash or Check
Area Variance Zoning District
Applicable Section(s)Rf Village Code:
Use Variance ��11IZ; �� 21�5
Interpretation Request
Property address: Tax parcel:
Zoning Officer's determination: / 1�(d4 "
/77�1/ � r 1
Request varianc" interpretation: JE)' -- O4Gi4 ✓'AW:/Yv, _e Aun 40t770A
I;Vor-- iS 4ASS 7-k4g..,i 25 ' ".a 7W6
P.Po�B¢ry L;NE.
Reason(s)that the requested variance or interpretation should be granted:
o See attached page for the criteria that the ZBA must use. o Use additional sheets if necessary.
.SEE .4T7MCJ1rrtp
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.
OwnerQplicant ���P,'StYN r- JTe•NBEPL-�
Signature: Date:
Phone number(s):
Email address: /�+<Ca e° CdQNr 11 • E D tJ
NARRATIVE
511 CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD AREA VARIANCE REQUEST FOR A 6' HIGH
WROUGHT IRON FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD SET-BACK
Cornell University acquired 511 Cayuga Heights Road in 1995 to be used as the
permanent house for Comell's President and family. The house and garage are presumed to be
from around 1923, pre-dating the Village of Cayuga Heights' zoning ordinance. At the time of
Cornell's acquisition in 1995 there was an existing small dog pen on the property. The most
recent survey (completed in 1995) shows that a portion of that dog pen was located as close as
11.5' to the street line of Cayuga Park Road, where a 25' set-back is required for such a fence
under the Village's zoning ordinance. Subsequent to acquisition, Cornell reconstructed the fence
in approximately the same exact location with a sturdy and open 6' high black wrought iron
fence. Currently, the pen is used for gardening by the President's wife as it is attached to the
original potting shed and garage. The fence offers the benefit of protection of the garden from
dogs, deer, children and other large animals. Removal of the fence would expose the garden to
devastation.
511 Cayuga Heights Road is deemed to have 2 front yards since it faces on two roads
(Cayuga Heights Road and Cayuga Park Road). The portion of the fence that is in the set-back
area is approximately 35% 40' long by 13.5' deep. The total length of the property at the street
line is 382'. Therefore, only about 1/10`h of the street line is impacted by the fence. Any deer,
other animals, children, etc. trying to flee an oncoming vehicle or danger on Cayuga Park Road
would have ample room to gain access to safety. The fence is constructed so that it is very open
and is not intended as a solid privacy fence. The fence is also screened by vegetation on the side
facing Cayuga Park Road and has negligible visual impact on the street scape. Lastly, the fence
is located on a downhill slope about 2'-3' feet below the grade of the street and sidewalk. The
visual impact of the fence has no greater effect on pedestrians and drivers sight lines than a 4'
foot fence, which is permitted in the set-back area in question.
As the Board is aware the standard of review is the balancing of the benefit to the
applicant verses the detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community. As articulated
above, the benefit to the applicant clearly outweighs any detriment to the surrounding
community. Accordingly, Cornell University respectfully requests that the Cayuga Heights
Zoning Board of Appeals grant the area variance as requested so that the fence may remain in its
current location and the President's wife may continue to garden free of animal intrusion and
destruction.
Village Law 7-712-B(3)(b):
In making its determination, the zoning board of appeals shall take into consideration the benefit
to the applicant if the variance is granted, as weighed against the detriment to the health, safety
and welfare of the neighborhood or community by such grant. In making such determination the
board shall also consider:
(1) Whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood or
a detriment to nearby properties will be created by the granting of the area variance.
Applicant's justification:
No, because there will be no change to the neighborhood as a fence has been in
approximately the same location for at least 17 years. The applicant is not aware of
any neighbor complaints or that anyone has been negatively impacted by the fence.
The height of the fence relative to the grade of the street (it is on a downhill slope)
and the vegetative screening also mitigate any visual detriment to the surrounding
community. Lastly, the garage and potting shed were built prior to the Village's
zoning ordinance and the fence encroaches no further into the set-back than that
structure.
(2) Whether the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method,feasible for
the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance.
Applicant's justification:
No, because a fence has been in this approximate location for many years and is
constructed of quality and durable materials. To move the fence at this point would
be costly and not feasible for the applicant. Further, the fence is atteahed to the
potting shed and moving it may eliminate the direct access between the shed and
gardening area.
(3) Whether the requested variance is substantial.
Applicant's justification:
No, because the portion of the fence that encroaches in the set-back is only about
35'-40' long and the total property length is 3821. Accordingly, the fence takes up
approximately 10% of the front property line and is not a substantial portion of the
street line. Deer, other animals, children, etc. have plenty of space to utilize should
they need to avoid a dangerous condition in the street or on the sidewalk. Further,
the fence is not constructed on the property line; it is set back 11.5' from the street
line mitigating any negative visual impacts. Lastly, the garage and potting shed
were built prior to the Village's zoning ordinance and the fence encroaches no
further into the set-back than that structure.
(4) Whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or
environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district.
Applicant's justification:
No, because there will be no adverse effect or impact to the neighborhood as a fence
has been in approximately the same location for at least 17 years. No construction,
ground disturbance, erosion, or drainage issues will result if this fence remains in its
current location
(5) Whether the alleged difficulty was self-created; which consideration shall be relevant to
the decision of the board of appeals, but shall not necessarily preclude the granting of the
area variance.
Applicant's justification:
No, because the situation was created prior to the applicant's acquisition of the
property in 1995—it is unclear who constructed the original fence and how long it
had remained in the set-back. Also, the fence is specifically designed to permit
direct access between the potting shed and garden and the location of the potting
shed has been established for at least 90 years— again, prior to the applicant's
acquisition of the property.
+.• zy
0k .6P
�SURiEp
6`
Q 185 . s'
360. 5' _ �RIED
8 : 04
POTTING , a {
fM[D
t
icz -�
� = C
PEN O G7
'7
�12av 1
a,P n,
�E SEE MODIFICATION t 0
OF RESTRICTIONS IV i
DEE00 SK 215,PG 361 i
► SE D
N0.S 11 C7
Y
Ac Wr '
O
y
175 0 U i
_ a
S77^w 360.5' yFIEO
99
w �
r=Q, .a
w[a "t A
TAX MAP PARCEL No. '• Y •
9'I-3.1 <
°�u>•q DOc Ix c
3,05' ACRES PEN O ACC l
I�O O_J
a0 a3 aaq 120_ y
D
' SEE YOOIFI AVION I o A
w OF R[STRICTIONS 1[[�'f[
DEED•.611219,P6 961 I'- +
e b 1
w E, .D 10? 16E � tN C7
= o N tN4c Np511 � C7
� 125': .� oaa • I
^'moo
v s •ec k= 1 '
i ' 1
w
0 79•
M
8 FtGIN 011.A' �rON:M 1
N LY FROM
NORTHERLY
tOF (Q� N76°E 330.50" •
UPLAND
PLAND RD.T — � 185.5 0— I
145 '
pE Nf J. I 7
wie I^. 'i 2t
� P �
J I
!'f�Ri If ICPT fON
SURVEY MA t N...oy cart!/y tP<an[u NnnaLn,•v.[l,f went t.huu.
No.511 CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAD.1;'tpaty,,aW i"York State 1-Icamaa Lana Sur Wr.RP larbt:
ap w°reetly al Vratu an aelw? turwY
VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGHTS °" tna ground ease tg +a,Ana t FPuna re aroroaerrnb el tna.
'ai°aPt
TOWN OF ITHACA 'N„' /as .rom tirPon. ,/
TOM PKINS COUN TT,NEW PORK SIGHED:L-CrC«a<e A�/5�.-G I OP1EOz :cN 26. i3J9
SCALE 1"- 60 JAN 26. 1993
OIRON STAR
STREET LINE
NTS NOT TO SCALE wl a:ur��s:'•�i••wi.��i....L.. r
•
IIAFA 745°1GF 294 •
ly
/1 i
'�` CvRQENr ` Onp�?1'ON �
s i
— 75 BURIED — —
S77'W 360,5' _ VRIED
B:
M
t0.pp
acts '° n
TAx MAP PARCEL N 3.1
't ° Y •
OT�t 006 I2 C
3,05! ACRES rER o.c�
Door
12d.- {zo9
�F SEC YOOIFICATION I o A
W . OF R[STRICTIONS x
= W N _ / DEEDS 9K 217,rG AI 1-
_o a
O N u4� Nq 511 Im O
laD � tv 4• �• N ,�
Q 4tWa i
U d °ao Pr I
� { i
W \
O �9 {
NN
6(:GIN FROM
'PILLAM {
N R FROM
NORTHERLY
i3OF WEST N76°E 330.50' •
UPLAND RD.�
4$
�Of mil-
to I``✓S r �
361%,y�pW j
!D IAND 51w
SURVEY MAP CEa•IC ICA•:o"
I Mnby cart!Iy to Cw.RI avwpvh.w•t Qa
No.511 CAYUGA HEIGHTS ROAL) I as a w. vor. stag llaamaC Laro surwyor.b urbu
Sit sa,ae Iola ap .o•r¢tiv sal lnaHu an aclua� mrvfY
VILLAGE OF CAYUGA HEIGN TS °" t'. 1 °'✓'4 aaw av "a•a"4 I taw ro a"eroacn.r"ta al uv°
TOWN OF ITHACA .sy,aKuot a roam tinon.
I
TOMPKINS COUNTT•NEW YORK s:GNE7: �(!«.<.r/ /S%�.-G 15PTE0: -cn 25, 13)5
SC+LE 1'- 60 JAN 26, 1995 {
Q IRON STAKE ""y.u•"•w.^.•. • ...
jSiREET LINE
NTS NOT TO SCALE
•