The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-01-16 } - APPROVED Town of La Tuesday, January 16, 2007 5: 00 PM, Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBERS (*Denotes present) Gregg Travis, Chairman David Dittman * Linda Hirvonen * Dan Konowalow Ronald Bricker * Henry (Hurl) Sheldon * Richard G. Platt, Code Enforcement Officer * Bud Shattuck, Town Board Liaison Lorraine Moynihan Schmitt, Esq. * Darby Kiley, TOL Environmental Planner PUBLIC PRESENT • Cliff Noel GENERAL BUSINESS David Dittman, Acting Chairman of the Board called the meeting to order at 5:12 PM. ApproVWDenial of October 17, 2006 Minutes Daniel Konowalow made a motion tc) approve the minutes as submitted. Henry (Hurf) Sheldon seconded VOTE AS FOLLOWS: David Dittman - Aye Linda Hirvonen " Aye Daniel Konowalow - Aye Henry (Hurf) Sheldon - Aye MOTION CARRIED. Acceptance/Denial To Hear Case For. Area Variance, 932 Auburn Road, Parcel # 18 443, RA District. Applicant: Cliff Noel & Cynthia Ruin ;l APPROVED Mr. Noel appeared before the Zoning Board of Appeals Board requesting to be heard for an Area Variance. When W. Noel purchased this home in 2006, it had an existing 10' x 6` Mud Room on the south side of the home. Mr. Noel started construction on converting thus room into a Greenhouse, when his construction came to a halt due to our Zoning Regulations. As it stands currently, the entire home is in the right of way. Mr. Noel would like to extend the existing porch to within 41V of the right of way. Linda Hirvonen made a motion to accept the Application and set a Public Hearing .date for Tuesday, February 20, 2007 @ 7:00 PM. Henry (Hurf) Sheldon seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : David Dittman - Aye Linda Mrvonen - Aye Daniel. Konowalow - Aye Henry (Hurf) Sheldon - Aye MOTION CARRIED . • Mr. Noel was advised to return to the Hearing with a Sketch Plan of his proposal. Nominationi/Apppiniment of Chairperson Linda Hirvonen made a motion to nominate Gregg Travis as Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals for the year 2007. Daniel Konowalow seconded. VOTE : David Dittman - Aye Linda Hirvonen = Aye Daniel Konowalow - Aye Henry (Hurf) Sheldon -- Aye MOTION CARRIED . Bud Shattuck, Town Board Liaison- Update Zoning Board of Appeals Members were made aware that effective January 1, 2007 Ms. Darby Kiley will officially become the Town of Lansing Environmental Planner. Ms. Kiley will be undertaking the Administrative duties of The Code Enforcement, Planning/ Zoning and Electrical Department within the Town Hall. All Zoning issues/ concerns shall be brought before Ms. Kiley, All Members introduced themselves to Ms. Kiley and welcomed her aboard. APPROVED Linda Hirvonen made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 5:30 PM. Henry (Hurd Sheldon seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS: David Dittman - Aye Linda Hirvonen - Aye Daniel Konowalow - Aye Henry (Hurt) Sheldon - Aye MOTION CARRIED. Town of Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting January 16, 2007 Visitors Please Sign In Below : (Please Print) Name Address http : //www . lans ingtown . com/ 1 � Zoning Board of Appeals 2006 Applications Application Applicant ' s Name/Project Title Number 3zLaJOIQa OkP- k 3 - � act c_ re a +' c� � S►>. tits 3 —l ' 17 . `FI C ) - 0 ,3 e a e r-i - 30 ) Jl,1G c a C5 CS 3S � 7 - 4 _ p c C � 07 Wok Le. A4611 T alb CS +^N I �L o C At Sco 44 LCL wrc 3T� � 2- - 3 61 bf5k ��+ -e- va,i a • • November 6, 2006 Mr . Edward C. Marx, AICP Commissioner of Planning Tompkins County Department of Planning 121 East Court Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re : Review Pursuant to GML § 239-1 and in Action: Use Variance : A . Scott Pinney, 2073 East Shore Drive, Tax Parcel No . 37. 1 -2-3 Dear Mr . Marx : Thank you for your correspondence dated October 13, 2006 . Pursuant to your request, I write to advise of the decision of the Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals in the above referenced matter . A public hearing was conducted on the application for use variance on October 17, 2006 and the Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals determined that that Appellant established, by competent financial evidence, that strict application of the ordinance would produce unnecessary • hardship and further, that the Appellant would be deprived of an ability to earn a reasonable return for the property in question if limited to the use permitted under the ordinance because, given the current market conditions, the property is not suitable for the uses for which it is zoned and the applicant will incur an undue hardship if the applicant is retrained from continuing to utilize his property for the storage and warehousing of non-agricultural goods and materials . The Zoning Board of Appeals members were very appreciative of the Tompkins County Planning Board' s concerns, as outlined in your correspondence of October 13, 2006, and restricted the use variance to a term of five years . The variance will take effect on October 17, 2006 and will expire on October 17, 2011 . Upon expiration of the five year variance, the Applicant may reapply for another 5 year variance if he still cannot receive a reasonable return for any of the uses permitted in the B-1 district or, if the district is re-zoned, for any uses allowed under the new zoning ordinance . It was further determined that: a . The hardship created is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of the district or neighborhood; d i • b . The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; C . The hardship is not self-created; d . The variance is the minimum necessary to grant relief from the hardship; e . The variance will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community; and f. The variance will not result in any significant adverse effects to the environment. In addition, The Applicant represented that he has eventual plans to develop the site into office space and will, hopefully, not need to seek to renew the use variance for another five year term. The Applicant further agreed to approach the Town of Lansing Planning Board for suggestions as to how he may improve the property . • I have enclosed a copy of the ZBA' s October 17, 2006 decision for your records . If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me . Thank you for your attention to this matter . Sincerely, Richard G . Platt Town of Lansing Code Enforcement Officer APPEAL ACTION REFERENCE : Appeal No . Dated ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF LANSING TO: A . Scott Pinney 411 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York At a public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals conducted on October 17, 2006, the referenced appeal was considered and the action indicated below was taken on your request for a use variance to the Town of Lansing Zoning Ordinance . By resolution of the Board, it was determined that Appellant has established by competent financial evidence that strict application of the ordinance would produce unnecessary hardship and that the Appellant would be deprived of an ability to earn a • reasonable return for the property in question, if limited to the use permitted under the ordinance, because : Given the market conditions, the property is not suitable for the uses for which it is zoned; the applicant will incur an undue hardship if the applicant is retrained from continuing to utilize his property for the storage and warehousing of non-agricultural goods and materials . This variance is conditioned upon: The variance is restricted to current allowable uses plus the requested use variance for storage and warehousing of non-agricultural goods and materials . The variance is further restricted to a temporal limitation of five years . The variance will take effect on October 17, 2006 and will expire on October 17, 2011 . Upon expiration of the five year variance, the Applicant may reapply for another 5 year variance if he still cannot receive a reasonable return for any of the uses permitted in the B-1 district or, if the district is re-zoned, for any uses allowed under the new zoning ordinance . It was further determined that: a . The hardship created is unique and does not apply to a substantial portion of • the district or neighborhood; b . The variance would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood; c . The hardship is not self-created; d . The variance is the minimum necessary to grant relief from the hardship; e . The variance will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community; and f. The variance will not result in any significant adverse effects to the environment. CONCLUSION : Therefore, it was determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals that the requested variance be granted, and that the previous decision of the Enforcement Officer be reversed . Gregg Travis, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Lansing •