Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-10-05 ji N014ICE OF DECISION TUESDAY OCTOBER S, 1993 A public hearing to consider the application submitted by WILLIAM GOODHEW of 73 German Cross Road , Ithaca , NY who is requesting permission to CONSTRUCT A VRIVATE GARAGE CLOSER THAN 70 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF GERMAN CROSS ROAD and is requesting a variance to Section 703JI of the Dryden Town Soning Ordiance . A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday , October S , 1993 with members present : Chair . Anne Everett , Charles Hanley , m Joseph 11 Jay , Alan LaMotte and Mark Varvayanis . FINDINGS 1 . Mr . Goodhew requests a variance to an addition to an existing house which is in an RBIzone . The addition will consist of a living room , garageland family room . One part of the addition will be raised . A section of the addition , the garage will be 62 feet from the center of the road . 3 . There are other options available to the applicant such as placement of the addition elsewhere on the property . 4 . No undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood . It will be consistent with the neighboring properties . i 5 . The requested area variance of B ' feet does not appear to be substantial . 6 . The alleged difficulty is self -created in that the house addition can be, placed elsewhere 7 . A letter of support from the neighbor across the street was received . CE CHARLES HANLEY MOVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE VARIANCE BE GRANTED . ALAN LAMOTTE SECOND THE MOTION . DISCUSSION : VOTE YES ( 4 ) A . EVERETT , C . HANLEY , J . JAY AND A . LAMOTTE P NO ( 1 ) M . VARVAYANIS ABSTAINED ( 0 ) 0' VARIANCE GRANTED CU v` L tilCxl'���j DATED _ / /��/ ANNE EVERETT , CHAIRWOMAN r TOWN OF DRYDEN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 3 I OCTOBER 5 , i �993 AGENDA : SERVRITE CORP . : Locate a sign closer than 15 feet from DOT right - of-way at the Etna Lane facility . WILLIAM GOODHEW : Construct a private garage closer than 70 feet from the center of German Cross Road . MEMBERS PRESENT : Chair . Anne Everett ,; Alan LaMotte ; Joseph Jay ; Charles Hanley '; and Mark Varvayanis . Also present but not limited to : Henry Slater and William Goodhew . I„ SERVRITE CORP . 7 : 30 PM FREE STANDING SIGN -J� ETNA LANE I The meeting was called to order by Chair . Anne Everett at 7 : 30 PM by opening the Public Hearing for SerVrite Corp . MARK VARVAYANIS MOVED THAT THE VARIANCE FOR SERVRITE CORP . BE DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS THE APPLIICANT OR HIS AGENT WERE NOT PRESENT TO PRESENT THE CASE ACCORDING TO THE RULES OF PROCEDURE ADOPTED JULY 61 1993 • CHARLES HANLEY SECOND THE MOTION . Discussion VOTE YES ( 5 ) A . Everett , C . Hanjley , J . Jay , A . LaMotte , and M . Varvayanis' NO ( 0 ) ABSTAINED 40 ) VARIANCE IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICEI • v m m m • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • • • • • • v m Ili m • m m m • m • • • • • . • v v v f I ZBA 10-5-93 PG. 2 PU BLIC - PUBLIC HEARING WILLIAM GOODHEW - 7 . 45 PM J Chair . A . Everett opened the Public Hearing at 7 : 45 and read the public notice which was published in the Ithaca Journal . She stated that the noticelof appeal was filed with Henry Slater but not the Chair . however , Mr . Slater had hand delivered a copy to her . This is an Area Variance and the ', criteria which the board must consider was stated as follows :' The Zoning Board of Appeals shall have the power upon an appeal from a decision or determination of an administrative official charged with the enforcement of such ordinance or local law , to grant area variances from the area or dimensional requirements of such ordinance or local law . 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 ; 2a whether, the benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method , feasible for the applicant to pursue , other than an area variance ; 3 . whether the requested area variance is substantial ; 4 . whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district ; and 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 . It goes on to say the board in granting area variances , shall grant the minimum variancethat it shall deem necessary and adequate . and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health safety and welfare of the community , those are the things that we take into consideration . ' f I, �I' ZBA 10 / 5/ 93 RG . 3 The Chair read a letter signed by Mark Daims and Barbara 9 Y • Toone in support of the variance being granted for Mr . Goodhew . Mr . Goodhew expanded on the need for the variance : The property now is a ranch residence of 1200 square feet . They have a 17 month old daughter and although there are enough bedrooms and baths they do not have enough operable space for a family room and special use room . The variance would relate to a single car garage attached to the structure addition on the creek side . They have a two car garage on the property that is full of lumber and shop equipment relative to his business . They would raise the whole house on the foundation and put an addition out toward the creek 12 feet by 24 feet , at two levels and create a tri — level house by doing so and push out toward the street with the garage 20 feiet and with a new entry vestibule 12 feet . . QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD A . Everett : So that is where the 62 feet , minus 8 feet because of the garage coming out ? r, Mr . Goodhews Correct . • Q . How do you entrancel, the garage ? A . Entrance to the garage would be two fold . The entry door to drive in would be straight off the circular drive and there would be a new entrance door into the vestibule area also . Q . When visiting the property I was concerned about the distance form the side of the house to the creek which appears to be about 4 to 5 feet ? A . No it is not . I have done the stuff with the DEC , I just put in 730 tons of riffraff and have met the specifications of DEC from this point back . The way the DEC views the set backs is from the average normal line of the creek bed , which is down in this zone and now is almost 50 feet away from my house . If I come out 12 feet , I measured my set backs and it comes to be about 35 feet . f ZBA 10 / 5/ 93 PG . 4 A . Everett : Where to where whenyou say 35 feet ? Mr . Goodhew : 35 feet from what would be the new portion of the home to the average water level of the? creek . Which it is ' at average level now . My property line includes the creek and goes to the top bank on the other side . I am about 125 feet away from the edge of my property line . Mr . Jay : The new addition will put you 62 feet from the center line right ? Which is an 8 foot variance . Mr . Goodhew : Right . A . Everett : So the right side is where the addition will go and what part ofithe house are you raising ? it A . The section outlined in red is what we have r now and will raise that whole section up 4• feet . And put a new foundation under this secondary addition , so we will have two levels at this range too . This will involve a walk out and this will do a couple of things for me . It not only gives more space but it will actually give me better flood insurance capability . J . Jay : You are only on 4 x1 4 ' s now ? Mr . Goodhew: No , I have a foundation . There is a crawl space underneath everything but the exception of a five foot section across this area here . A 5 foot by 24 foot which was a deck and the person they bought the house from had enclosed the deck portion and there is a 4 x 4 and a beam supporting that section only . A . Everett Where is the well ? Mr . Goodhew : My well is here . The septic is here . Originally I had wanted to go out back but my septic right now is '; too close to the house for what would be current standards anyway . It is about eight feet away from the house . and the septic leach field is out in back of this section . Which is in good condition and doesn ' t want to endanger that area . IF we go off in this sectioniI start to encroach the easement to my neighbors property here as 0 well as it is not really convenient access route to get to what is our kitchen area . We would have to devise something in the way of hall ways surrounding bedrooms that are already in this section . I ZBA 10-5-93 GCi . 5 i I • A . Everett : Will you still be able to use your driveway ? I MR . Goodhew : Yes . What we will Ido , if you noticed there is a round flower bled arrangement in the center and I will be coming back about 4 or 5 feet to kind of kiss the edge of that so we will be redesigning ' the horse shoe to some degree . C . Hanley : The eight feet that is the problem is the eight feet of the garage ? Mr . Goodhew : Correct . ' C . Hanley : And if the variancell. was not granted would that for stall the project or would you go with a smaller garage or rearrange the garage ? Mr . Goodhew': It would forestall the project at this point . I have played with the design layout trying to get something that would satisfy what we needed to do with implementation of the garage involved ' with the project , to be cost efficient about it and it really needs • to be involved wiW this other addition work . l C . Hanley : The other garage is !, used for your business ? Mr . Goodhew : Yes , that is used for general storage for our own purposes but .it ' is used for my business for lumber storage primarily . M . Varvayanis : You don ' t feel a 12 !' X 12 garage would be sufficient for one car ? �I Mr . Goodhew ;e A 12 X 12 ? The car '' I drove here is aizuzu VVrooper that is 15 feet long , there aren ' t many vehicles you are going to fit in something like that : The standard , the base is about 20 X 24 feet for a two car garage . ( Also indicated wouldn ' t buy a new car in order to fit and would not have a resalable piece of property . ) C . Hanley : Do you sell lumber out of the other garage ? Mr . Goodhew : I utilize it in my business . I have a rough shop set up in there , building contractor . 6 ZBA 10-5-93 PG . b A . Everett : Henry , hat is the "size of a one car garage ? y � 9 g Do you know ? H . Slater : What you desire . For a two car garage is 24 wide by 20 long , the average I would say is 22 X 20 . My own I think is 28 X 24 . A . LaMotte : What is the area which appears as a right of way in front of the garage ? Mr . Goodhew : The Molar ' s have property that they access the easement drive to their home the road frontage that they have make it difficult and this is an established drive . The Chair inquired if the side line toward the creek was the board ' s concern ? H . Slater stated " NO " as it was well beyond the 15 foot side rule and thelowner had been working with DEC . M . Varva anis : The area behind they a y g rage , what is that going to be ? Mr . Goodhew : It is going to be a ' living room on the upper level and the lower level will be the family room area . Right now my living room section comes across this whole facing area but it is really only about 10 feet wide . It is very narrow in the section because the traffic is through here to thesliding glass doors that go out onto the deck . We will step up two steps from this existing level and then have this be the new living room space and underneath this would be elevated so we will have a finished ceiling . Down below will be 9 feet in that section and underneath the rest of the house will be 8 feet . A . Everett : The family room andiliving room will be in the new addition ? Mr . Goodhew : Correct . Mr . Varvayanis : You said by raising'; the house up you get better flood insurance ? Are you going to finish the basement '; also ? �i, ZBA 10-5-93 PG . 7 Mr . Goodhew : Yes I will . It ' s an oddity ,, thel" first year that I was Y there we had a flood that came through which almost had some damage involved in the property . WeV . had about an inch of water in the crawl space and the wat "ler entered my garage which is at the base level of the property ! so this house was built right on base level and then they back filled it around all. of the footings and foundation and raised that elevation to the 11 first floor . If water contacts my Hirst living floor then I 11 am coveredias far as my flood insurance . Right now my garage is under 4 or 5 feet of water before ',, I ever get any kind of contact coverage for my flood insurance , due to the way my house is positioned . If I have a walk out available then that becomes the first contact floor which will be at the same level as the garage is now for entrypwater and my extension of coverage will be to that structure as well . CLOSED PUBLIC HEARING The Chair . explained the deliberating process and Mr . P 9 Goodhew decided to stay and hear the !llresults of the findings . DELIBERATION PORTION11OF HEARING A . Everett : I thought this was a reasonable request . It certainly will be a t . . . . . . . ) structure when it is done . Eight feet is not a substantial request . J . Jay : Indicated it was not a concern in the neighborhood as the houses were all over the place . C . Hanley : ( indicated he had been inlland out of the crawl space before this owner purchased it ',; when asked by Mr . Jay if he had visited the property ) I ' d like to hear what you guys think , I have to tell you that this is one of those that really drive you nuts . Because , I try to get a feel for why we ' re here . : This is obviously an excellent citizen , he ' s done his homework well . He has worked with DEC and has put a lot of money into the bank that he probably didn ' t have to . So here we have a sterling human being and he is only talking about eight feet for a garage which as you say is not substantial . But I guess this is one of the ones that bother me because I can ' t get a feel for this one , it ' s just . . . why are we here ? We all have things with zoning . I have zoning infringing on me that does not let me do things that I would like to do . Now it would be wonderful to have a nice garage there . Is it our job to say what the hell , I know this man is nod' taking advantage of the Town , it is improving property , he ' s done a hell of a nice job here but where do we draw the line ? 11 I� ZBA 10-5-93 PG . 8 J . Jay : Well our job is to take theyfive criteria and we weigh it against health , safety , welfare of the neighborhood , and the benefit to the applicant . C . Hanley : OK take the five criteria J . Jay : Can he do it another way ? (Sure . He can go without the garage . C . Hanley : That ' s right or he can make it 12 X 12 or he can make a car port . None of which willleffect his living space . J . Jay : Not a car port because he would have to have a variance for that also . But the thing of it is you sit there and you weigh the benefit to the neighborhood . The neighbor across the street , sent the letter saying they liked it . I would too , because that is going to increase the value of his property and the best thing that can ,li, happen to me is the guy across the street increases the value of his property , so it does help the neighborhood . There are homes all over that neighborhood that is way out of , I mean if they went strict zoning half the houses would have tolbe moved back . A . Everett : M . Varvayanis : They we 're all ready there . J . Jay : It ' s against number 4 does it have an adverse effect ? If all the other houses in the neighborhood were way back and he wants to jet forward that ' s different . So does, it have an adverse effect ? You weigh it against these five things . Self created ? Yes . He doesn ' t have to do it . But then you weigh it and see the benefit to the applicant , benefit to the neighborhood . M . Varvayanis : Well let me play devils advocate here . You say it benefits the neighborhood . The project as presented is rather extensive . The issue that we ' re concerned about is only the garage . Is the erection oflla one car garage really going to improve the value of the next door neighbors property ? I have trouble believing that if my neighbor attached a one car garage the value of my house would go up? C . Hanley : I guess that what sticks me . If he were talking about his living space and the living room I ' d say go for it . I guess the problem is , I mean if weireally just are an appellate board and we ' re not suppose to be reinterpeting 11 zoning . I have trouble with what you ' re saying , to sit here and just try to outweigh the benefits , then why have zoning ? . ZBA 10-5-93 PG . 9 A . LaMottes. Who else is going to we 'iigh them ? Henry has no authority . We ' re the only ones who ihave that authority . C . Hanley : Well I think you ' re giving us more then we got . A . Everett : What are your findings igoing to be ? Are there other options available to the man ? I' He can make his garage smaller ? he can come in a few feet . ill He can put it somewhere else . Are those part of the findinglis ? C . Hanley : I guess that ' s what my first impression was , this 11 is not a do or die project . Obviously it would be wonderful to have that . J . Jay : Right . Number 2 is can the benefit be achieved another way ? Obviously he does havel';lother options for a garage . He could put an addition on 'Ithe other garage . Get: rid of the stuff too . That is a finding . A . LaMotte : Why don ' t we begin at the beginning . Whether or ii not an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood ? J . Jay : That ' s number one and I bel 'iieve not . Because other properties in the neighborhood have set backs . . . A . Everett : That ' s water over the dam . , J . Jay : and argued that you can say that because by creating this does it create an undesirable thing ? No . If he was the only one that was shooting out it would yes . . Cause it maintains the consistency with the neighborhood . In your opinion Henry are other houses , I know they ' re grandfather in , are they in violation of the setbacW laws on some of the adjoining properties , maybe a quarter of a mile each way ? H . Slater : No they are not in violation , they are preexistent . Would it be consistent ';, with other properties ? Yes . J . Jay : Number 2aCan the benefit be achieved another way ? He has a lot of land and can put the garage anyplace . Number 3 is the variance substantial ? It is . M . Varvayanis : I wouldn ' t call it substantial . C . Hanley : I guess that is where we have to wonder . If we are assuming that 70 feet is an arbitrary line that some bureaucrat thought sounded neat , than eight feet isn ' t substantial . I am assuming there was a reason for 70 feet having to do with health and safety . ZBA 10-5-93 PG . 10 H . Slater : ' I think you hit on it your first statement . • C . Hanley : You think 70 feet is an arbitrary number ? H . Slater : Probably . In my experience in querying people who are involved , there were people in the beginning of zoning who said we can ' t have this because it is communistic . Then there were people who said you have to have this . , because you have to have ways of controlling density and provide safety and so on . So probably 70 feet became substantiated like 125 feet of frontage is the number that could bellagreed upon by a large group of people who may have had some adversary position with each other . C . Hanley : So it was a political decision ? H . Slater : I think the important thing is , this is my opinion , pedistrian in and vehicle safety of the highway that goes by there , to benefit both of those people . A . Everett : That might be a problem there because the visibility is very poor actually and 'i� that is why it is good that he has ' a circular drive . I wouldn ' t want to be backing out of that garage on to the road definitely . I J . Jays. My feeling is that it is not substantial in this situation . If you had a whole new development like Logans Run and they are all in a straight line , ' a new development and one house jets out eight feet , that ' s substantial in feet . In a broken neighborhood like this . . . A . LaMottes. , If I am reading this sketch correctly the adjoining house is only 62 feet . J . Jay : So eight feet is different in each situation . 15 11 foot side set back , 8 feet is more than half of what you are allowed . This is only . . . 62 so it 'lis not as substantial . What do you think Anne ? A . Everett : I actually think it is1 ,; 8 feet where it is placed . I think that he has other options available , redesign , shorting the garage , or putting the garage elsewhere . J . Jay : A . LaMotte : That ' s number two , can the benefit be achieved another way , may not be financially , and we all agree you can . A . LaMotte : How wide is the existing house sir . From the street side to the rear corner ? ZPA 10-5-93 PG . 11 Mr . Goodhew : It ' s 50 feet . • A . LaMotte : So in other words we could set another house directly in front oaf that and still have a 12 foot setback . Mr . Goodhew : No the footprint ofdllthe home is 50 K 24 right now . The width of ;the house facing the street is 50 feet . A . LaMottes. Left to right then ? i! Mr . Goodhew : Right the depth of the house is 24 feet . A . LaMotte : So that gives us even more room , if you double the house there . Just trying to use some prospective . Mr . Slater is there a question on your mind ? H . Slater : The set back is measured from the center of the blacktop , not the edge of the road right — of —way . So You wouldn ' t want the house to set at the edge of the blacktop . A . LaMotte : The dimension that we are talking about the 62 feet is from the ,lcenter line . A . Everett : How . many think it is substantial ? • J . Jay / A . LaMotte : I don ' t . C . Hanley : I ' m not sure J . Jay : You do notice that this is 62 feet next door ? A . Everett : That ' s why we have zoning . C . Hanley : That ' s why I get concerned when you say stuff like that . I ' ll tell you honestly my instinct is to grant the man a variance because , as I said I think he is a good citizen , he ' s done his homework and has the interest of the community . But if I follow your line of thinking where ever there is a grandfather ' d housed we through zoning out the window . J . Jay : That ' s where anything consistent with the neighborhood is . Number one one of the things we take intouconsideration . . . . . ZHA 10-5-93 PG . 12 A . Everett : No . . . If he started to have a body shop in the middle of that neighborhood that ' s not • consistent with the ,ineighborhood . Just because those thingis were grandfather 59 years ago doesn ' t mean that much to his request . That ' s why we have zoning to consider these things . M . Varvayan .is : Could we have a philosophy discussion at a 11 latter date perhaps ) A . Everett : The requested area (variance of 8 feet is substantial . . . . How would you describe it ? J . Jay : Mark , do you think this is substantial in this situation ? M . Varvayanis : I wouldn ' t say it it substantial . A . LaMotte : I don ' t think it islllsubstantial . C . Hanley : In light of what Henry said , the one in which he explained road way situations in terms of fire truck needs and that kind of stuff it made sense , and I trust Henry ' s judgement he seems pretty convinced that this 70 feet does not directly result 'ilfrom needs of fire safety help . In that light then no , than the 8 feet is not substantial . '' I have to tell you I say that with some , with a lot more nervousness than you guys because I would hate to find out latter on that . . . . J . Jay : Well I ' ll tell you if I knew the house next door was smashed up before by a fire truck or C . Hanley : So you wouldn ' t accept zoning unless you have first hand experience . Mr . Hanley did explain that he because Mr . Slater could not point to anything explicit , concerning the 70 foot setback , is what he needed to know in order to consider if this would be a substantial variance . ZBA 10-5-93 PG . 13 The Chair . read the following findinl'gs which were concluded • from the discussion and input by members . 1 . Mr . Goodhew requests a variance to an addition to an existing house which is in an RBllzone . The addition will consist of a living room , garagelland family room . One part of the addition will be raised . 2 . A section of the addition , the garage will be 62 feet from the center of the road . s 3 . There are other options available to the applicant such as placement of the addition elsewhere on the property . 4 . No undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood . It will be consistent with the neighboring properties . 5 . The requested area variance of 811Ijfeet does not appear to be substantial . 6 . The alleged difficulty is self -created in that the house addition can be placed elsewhere : 7 . A letter of support from the neighbor across the street was received .. �. CHARLES HANLEY MOVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS AT THE E VARIANCE BE GRANTED , ALAN LAMOTTE SECOND THE MOTION . DISCUSSION : VOTE YES ( 4 ) A . EVERETT , C . HANLEY , J . JAY AND A . LAMOTTE NO ( 1 ) M . VARVAYANIS ABSTAINED ( 0 ) r .,.. f D NOV 51993 • STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF TOMPKINS TOWN OF DRYDEN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In the matter of the appeal of WILLIAM GOODHEW for the property located at 73 GERnAN CROSS ROAD CERTIFICATE if ( Town of Dryden Tax Map Parcel No . k E 71 - 1 - 33 . 2 ) I , ANNE EVERETT chairperson of the Tow p I n of Dryden Zoning Board of .Appeals , do hereby certify , pursuant to Rule 6 of the Rules of Procedure of such boardl, that the foregoing are the findings of fact and decision approved by such board on OCTOBER 5 , 1993 • Dated . Dryden , New York Y � it November 3 , 1993 ( date ) ANNE EVERETT j II " r .1 ; w NOTICE OF DECISION TUESDAY OCTOBER 5I , 1993 A public hearing to consider the application submitted by WILLIAM GOODHEW of 73 German Cross Road , Ithaca , NY who is requesting permission to CONSTRUCT AIjPRIVATE GARAGE CLOSER THAN 70 FEET FROM THE CENTER OF GERMAN CROSS ROAD and is requesting a variance to Section 703 .� 1 of the Dryden Town Soning Ordiance . 11 A public hearing was duly conducted by the Town of Dryden Board of Zoning Appeals on Tuesday , October 5 , 1993 with members present : Chair . Anne Everett , Charles Hanley , m Joseph Jay , Alan LaMotte and Mark Varvayanxs . ryil FINDINGS ^4 1 . Mr . Goodhew requests a variance to an addition to an existing house which is in an RBllaone . The addition will consist of a living room , garagelland family room . One part of , the addition will be raised . A section of the addition , the glarage will be 62 feet from the center of the road . �I 3 . There are other options availablie to the applicant such as placement of the addition elsewhere on the property . • 4 . No undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood . It will be consistent with the neighboring properties . 5 . The requested area variance of 611feet does not appear to be substantial . 6 . The alleged difficulty is self - created in that the house addition can be placed elsewhere . 7 . A letter of support from the neighbor across the street: was received . if CHARLES HANLEY MOVED BASED ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE VARIANCE BE GRANTED . ' ALAN LAMOTTE SECOND THE MOTION . DISCUSSION : VOTE YES ( 4 ) A . EVERETT , C . HANLEY , J . JAY AND A . LAMOTTE NO ( 1 ) M . VARVAYANIS ABSTAINED ( 0 ) VARIANCE GRANTED III l; L vvlk �. ti 11�ZC�� �j DATED / /��/ I ANNE EVERETT , CHAIRWOMAN 4' I