Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1979-01-30I I r e) I '1 C�l TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JANUARY 30, 1979 The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals met in regular session on Tuesday, January 30, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairman Peter K. Francese, Jack D. Hewett, Edward N. Austen, James V. Buyoucos (Town Attorney), Nancy M. Fuller (Secretary). ALSO PRESENT: Clarence Reed, David Robertson, Attorney Elizabeth Yanof, Becky Bilderback, Kathy Kelly, Michele Ryan, Ed Clement, Beth Updike, Diane Nangeroni, Mrs. Shailer Philbrick, Robert Smock, Attorney Robert I. Williamson, Bruce Bean, Terry Sullivan, Joel Tallmadge, Chairman Francese declared the meeting duly opened at 7:40 p.m. and accepted for the record the Clerk's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and The Ithaca Journal on January 22, 1979, and January 25, 1979, respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of the properties under discussion, as appropriate, and upon the Appellants and/or their Agents, as appropriate, on January 24, 1979. APPEAL OF LOUIS L. NANGERONI, APPELLANT, GROUP HOMES OF TOMPKINS COUNTY, INC., AS AGENT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR BUILDING USE AS A GROUP HOME LICENSED BY THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AT 572 WARREN ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO, 6-72-1-2.12. CERTIFICATE IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER ARTICLE I, SECTION 1, PARAGRAPHS 5 AND 10, AND ARTICLE VI, SECTION 26, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE AND BECAUSE OF QUESTIONS OF APPLICANT'S STATUS AS A FAMILY, AND WHETHER A SPECIAL PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:41 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearing as posted and published and as noted above. Chairman Francese stated that Group Homes will present the case with Mr. Clarence Reed appearing on their behalf, adding, after that the members of the Board 'of Appeals and the Town Attorney will question Mr. Reed, and further adding, after that anyone may speak for or against the Appeal and be heard. Mr. Reed, commenting that in the audience are neighbors of the Group Home that burned in the fire, stated that this is a program to do something about a very serious problem -- those children who are not hardened criminals, but are in a living arrangement that presents problems for them. Mr. Reed, noting that there are two group homes established, stated that there are eight young people involved and 64 Zoning Board of Appeals -2- January 30, 1979 that will be dropped from eight to seven later. Mr. Reed stated that, in addition to what most homes provide, the group home provides a set of house -parents, consisting of four people, two of whom are on duty at all times, in other words, two parents twenty-four hours a day. Mr. Reed stated that the staff contains others who work with the parents at the same time they are working with the kids, adding that they hope these children will at some time return home. Mr. Reed stated that these young people come from Tompkins County and, with some sadness, they come from all segments of our society, adding that they even have some Cornell children of various socio-economic levels, adding that they get in on an equal arrangement, and they do look at them carefully. Mr. Reed stated that they only take kids who want to be in their Group Home, adding that they attend public schools in the summer they have summer jobs. Mr. Reed noted the programming to keep the young people busy so that they see other opportunities. Mr. Reed stated that the Board of Directors of the Homes is made up of people who go all the way from lawyers to Cornell people to citizens in the community who are retired. Mr. Reed stated that they are very proud of their Homes and they want them in neighborhoods that are friendly to them. Mr. Reed stated that as to the legal side of things, they leave that to Attorney Elizabeth Yanof. ® Attorney Yanof appeared before the Board and stated, for the record, that her partner is David Schwartz, who is the Attorney for Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc., and is a Director. Attorney Yanof stated that it is their belief that the courts of the State of New York have defined several group homes of a similar nature as a one -family unit, adding that, obviously, this has been discussed and not totally accepted by the Town. Attorney Yanof stated that this property in question is in a multiple residence district, but it is a single family dwelling, adding, since it is in a multiple residence district, it would be more difficult to sell as a single family dwelling. Attorney Yanof stated that they have a buyer who is willing to purchase it as a single-family dwelling. Attorney Yanof offered that with the parents present, because it is in a multiple family district, she would argue that if there were any danger, that it would be inappropriate in a residential district, that is lessened. Attorney Yanof stated contiguous with this property is School District property, Cornell University property, BOCES across the street, and Warrenwood Apartments, adding that, as she understood it, there are three single family residences within a 500 -foot radius. Attorney Yanof stated that she would ask for a variance. Chairman Francese asked if the people who are to be the parents in this home were here tonight. Mr. David Robertson of Group Homes responded, no. Chairman Francese asked if they were available, to ® which Mr. Robertson responded that they are not because they are on duty. Mr. Robertson stated that there are two adults in the home, for eight kids until July 1st, when it will be reduced to seven. Chairman Francese wondered if they actually lived there, to which Mr. Robertson Zoning Board of Appeals 1 -3- January 30, 1979 ® responded, they work 3-1/2 days each, adding that they are there 24 hours a day. Chairman Francese noted that in the maximum peak hours, there would be ten people in this particular home which, in July of 1979, will be reduced to nine. Chairman Francese asked if it were their intent to keep it at nine. Town Attorney Buyoucos asked if eight would be the maximum allocated, to which Mr. Robertson responded, yes, adding that they are licensed for a maximum of eight and they would not go beyond that. Attorney Buyoucos asked, if the Board should require that the maximum would be eight, would that be satisfactory to Group Homes, adding, you understand that for some unforeseen reason or emergency it were more, you would have to come to the Town and say that these are the circumstances. Mr. Robertson responded, yes. Attorney Buyoucos asked how the young persons are going to be selected who are going to occupy this house, to which Mr. Robertson responded that they take County Probation, Division of Social Services, schools, Family and Children's Services, private sources, and Court referrals, adding that if a child is referred to them, he meets with the child, commenting that he is a certified social worker, and adding that both sets of house parents meet with the child and, at the end of that visiting process, they make a decision as to whether that child is appropriate and that child must make that decision. Mr. Robertson stated that the Court cannot place a child against their ® will, even if we both feel it is appropriate. Attorney Buyoucos asked about the children's ages, to which Mr. Robertson responded, 12 to 17, adding that the average age is 14. Attorney Buyoucos asked what kind of circumstances must a child be in, whether from Services or from someone else, to say that they should be in this situation, to which Mr. Robertson responded, a family situation such that it is detrimental to the child to remain, school problems, some legal problems. Mr. Robertson stated that they will take children with some delinquency problems; no serious mental retardation, no aggressive children. Mr. Robertson stated that there can be a lot of differences, at times, in their opinion and in the opinion of the referral agencies. Attorney Buyoucos stated that he would assume that there would never be psychopathic distorted "problem children", to which Mr. Robertson responded, yes, they all attend public schools. Attorney Buyoucos noted that that is a condition to attend public schools. Attorney Buyoucos asked if it were a condition that they must stay in this house for, say, continuity such as a family set up, and wondered how long -- perhaps, two weeks? Mr. Buyoucos noted that, for the present and future, it is, if, as the Court of Appeals attempted to say, that this is a family, and, that there is continuity if you have young people in this community. Mr. Robertson stated that that is what group homes are all about, adding that the average length of stay is ten to fourteen months, adding that, based on experience on Utica Street, they have two there approaching two years, the shortest they have is two months, but they ® see her staying up to a year or more. Attorney Buyoucos commented that, in that respect, one might look • Zoning Board of Appeals -4- January 30, 1979 at these children as sabbatical children, to which Mr. Reed responded, no, they are a home that has some residents who become of age, and then it has regular children, adding, other children replace those who leave their home, such as adopting. Reffering to the house parents, Attorney Buyoucos asked Mr. Robertson what he could tell this Board about their average stay, asking if they were employees. Mr. Robertson stated that they ask for a one-year commitment on Utica Street, adding that one couple has been with them for two years; the other two are not a couple, they are single individuals, but they provide supervision, they have been just about a year around August, and until the end of the year. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if this were a corporation, with Mr. Robertson responding, a not-for-profit corporation. Attorney Buyoucos noted that the selecting of the children is done by the staff, adding that the Board of Directors does not have intake authority; that is a condition of the New York State Department of Social Services, as well as a Master's in Social Service. Attorney Buyoucos stated that the court cannot order any child into the home, adding that the chance is extremely small that a child would be there as a result of the court. Attorney Buyoucos asked Mr. Robertson if they have regulations and if they are in writing, to which Mr. Robertson responded, yes, they are available. Attorney Buyoucos stated that the Board cannot ® discuss any variance without discussing parking. Mr. Robertson stated that they lease one vehicle and have two others for a maximum of three around the clock, and, in addition, during the day, others perhaps for meetings, however, three permanent cars. Attorney Buyoucos noted for the people that are living in the house -- Mr. Robertson is saying no more than three. Mr. Robertson stated that they have a policy that the residents do not have cars. Attorney Buyoucos asked if Mr. Robertson would feel comfortable with five parking spaces, reiterating, that would be satisfactory, to which Mr. Robertson responded, yes. Attorney Buyoucos mentioned neighbors' objections such as garbage cans and asked if Mr. Robertson could guarantee that theirs will not be worse than their neighbors'. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if conditions such as enclosed garbage would be any problem, to which Mr. Robertson responded, no. Attorney Buyoucos asked, with respect to the use of the premises outside of the house, if Mr. Robertson planned to enlarge this house in any way, to which Mr. Robertson responded, no. Attorney Buyoucos asked about outside. Mr. Robertson said, no. Attorney Buyoucos asked about addition. Mr. Robertson answered, no, improvements. Attorney Buyoucos wondered what use Mr. Robertson had contemplated in the back yard -- what activities -- noise -- washing -- to which Mr. Robertson responded, no, basketball hoop, gardening, volleyball. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if there would be electric lights. Mr. Robertson stated that he had not anticipated that. ® Attorney Buyoucos asked if there would be a barbeque pit. Mr. Robertson said that they had not anticipated that. Mr. Robertson stated that with regard to lighting, the whole area is extremely well lighted now. 0 Zoning Board of Appeals -5- January 30, 1979 Attorney Buyoucos asked what the regulations or practices with respect to visitors are -- during the day. Mr. Robertson responded that, during the day they leave before 10:00 during the week and 11:00 on the weekends. Attorney Buyoucos wondered about early morning hours, to which Mr. Robertson responded, not at all. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if there were any people coming in the middle of the night, to which Mr. Robertson responded, occasionally a resident who has a friend with a car, but they have to be able to keep that under control, adding that there would not be, in the wee hours, cars coming to the Home. Attorney Buyoucos asked about music, to which Mr. Robertson responded that lights are out at 11:00 p.m. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if all activities ceased. Mr. Robertson said, yes. Attorney Buyoucos wondered, during the week, what Mr. Robertson's experience has been in the Utica Street house with respect to musical activities. Mr. Robertson stated that they do play stereos, but they have a rule that it must not be played loudly. Attorney Buyoucos wondered if any reasonable restriction by the ZBA on noise would be palatable to Mr. Robertson who responded, yes. A letter, dated January 26, 1979, from John A. Gaines, Executive Director of the Tompkins County Youth Bureau was entered into the record and is attached hereto as Exhibit #1. Chairman Francese noted that there is currently an apartment above the garage and asked if Mr. Robertson planned to make any use of that apartment, to which Mr. Robertson responded, not initially. The State has stated that we must get rid of the present owner --- perhaps as his office -- but not as a residence. Mr. Robertson stated that they have been informed that they must go through the ZBA if they intended to use it. Chairman Francese asked about water and sewer. Mr. Robertston stated that there is public sewer, but not public water, adding that the Health Department has said that the water is okay. Mr. Robertson stated that they would hope to tie into water in the future, adding that the Health Department has said that the well passed, and further adding that there has been no test for adequacy, Attorney Buyoucos asked if this building complies with the multiple residence code. Mr. Robertson stated that Mr. Bonnell went through it with him and noted some minor plaster work and in the furnace area major work for fire, such as enclosing the furnace and installing detectors, adding that the electrical inspector required a new service panel. Attorney Buyoucos inquired about State agency requirements, with Mr. Robertson responding that they must meet all zoning requirements, code requirements, fire requirements. Chairman Francese asked if there were any questions from the Board. There were none. Chairman Francese asked if anyone present wished to speak. Mr. Robert Smock, 303 Klinewood Road, spoke from the floor and stated that he has been associated with the Group Homes since the very Zoning Board of Appeals 1-6- January 30, 1979 ® beginning, adding that, as one of the Presbyterian Church elders he was one of the first to work with the Group Homes, Mr. Smock stated that he visits once a week, is a volunteer probation officer, and he is on the Board. Mr. Smock stated that he has told the people on Utica Street that they could move in next to him any day. Mr. Terry Sullivan, 113 Utica Street, spoke from the floor and stated that he lives right next door and they have had no.problems with the kids next door, no noise; they are wonderful neighbors. Mr. Sullivan commented that there would have to be a lot more noise in order for that amount of noise to reach Lansing East, Beth Updike, 112 Utica Street, spoke from the floor and stated that she lives across the street and it is an excellent residence, adding that they are worried about who will move into the house adding that their garbage cans are better than hers. Chairman Francese wondered why they would not repair the Utica Street home, to which Mr. Robertson responded that it is a very small house, and adding that they were planning to move it. Mr. Reed stated that, just like any home, they are trying to substantially update their home. Attorney Buyoucos, referring ® parcel in question, asked what is there are woods in that area, wondered about from the west side with Mr. Robertson responding that to the tax map, and looking at the in there. Mr. Robertson stated that no buildings. Attorney Buyoucos of the property to the back side, there is natural screening. Mr. Joel Tallmadge spoke from the floor and stated that he has lived up there and he would be happy to have them in there, adding that he lives in Warrenwood Apartments and noting that there seems to be no connection with Burleigh Drive, Chairman Francese asked if there were any further questions, there were none. Chairman Francese noted that there was no opposition to this matter. Chairman Francese, noting that he would outline the procedure, stated that the Board will find some facts, and perhaps attach some conditions regarding cover of trash, parking spaces, any exterior additions without coming back for more review. Mr. Robertson stated that there is a very large paved area which would accommodate at least six cars. Attorney Buyoucos pointed out that a decision, to have validity, should have some findings of fact. ® Chairman Francese stated that this matter will be adjourned until the Board has heard the other apellants here, then the Board will discuss this further and prepare a resolution. Chairman Francese asked the Board if they were opposed to this approach, they were not. Zoning Board of Appeals -7- January 30, 1979 ® Attorney Buyoucos pointed out that what the Board was doing here was listening to an appeal from the decision of the Building Inspector, and in no way is to be construed as complying, adding that this is not an action of the municipality; it is an action of the Board of Appeals. Chairman Francese wished the record to show that he had visited the site. Upon Motion, the Group Homes matter was set aside until later in the meeting. APPEAL OF EASTERN ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION COOPERATIVE, INC., APPELLANT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENYING EXTENSION OF A NON -CONFORMING USE AT 219 JUDD FALLS ROAD, TAX PARCEL NO. 6-63-1-3.4, ITHACA, N.Y. PERMISSION IS DENIED UNDER ARTICLE XII, SECTION 54 AND ARTICLE V, SECTION 18, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE. Chairman Francese declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:30 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Attorney Robert I. Williamson was present. Attorney Williamson stated that he rather felt like the cart was ® before the horse because anything the Board of Appeals does is conditioned upon the Planning Board approving the extension. Attorney Williamson stated that they wanted to sign their contract with McGuire and Bennett and at Mr. Fabbroni's suggestion they are here. Attorney Williamson stated that the proposed addition is to the rear of the unit which is the home office of the Eastern Artificial Insemination Cooperative, Inc., and will be 3,200 square feet, that is, two stories to the rear, containing 1600 square feet each. Attorney Williamson stated that the extension is all office building, no barns, with no additional help coming in so the parking area will be adequate for this additional space. Attorney Williamson noted that there are 125 parking spaces already, including six for visitors. Attorney Williamson stated that the addition would not be seen from Judd Falls Road; it is between that building and the barns, adding that the outside exterior will be cement block, painted white, the same as the building now is. Attorney Williamson stated that they were assured by the restaurant owners that they would appear if necessary to support them. Attorney Williamson stated that the exterior location as well as the plan have been submitted and Mr. Fabbroni is going over the entire building as to building and fire codes. Attorney Williamson noted that the Planning Board approval is contingent upon the approval of the ZBA. Attorney Williamson stated that Mr. Bruce Bean, Project Manager, was present. ® Chairman Francese asked Mr. Bean if this facility were needed because they are overcrowded, to which Mr. Bean responded, yes, adding that it is an expansion of the facilities, but no personnel expansion. Mr. Bean stated that Mr. Fabbroni has detailed plans and noted that Zoning Board of Appeals the storage tank is being moved to the south end plans. January 30, 1979 as shown on the Chairman Francese asked Mr. Bean if he could foresee this as meeting their needs for some time to come, to which Mr. Bean responded, yes. Attorney Williamson pointed out that Cornell owns the land and Cornell also has to approve these plans. Chairman Francese noted that the use is just office, with Mr. Bean responding, not quite, the first floor. is storage, the second story is computer area and clerical. It was noted that the building permit application should be amended to show 1,600 square feet for each floor. Chairman Francese asked if anyone present wished to speak for or against this matter. No one spoke. Chairman Francese noted that no one appeared in opposition or in favor. Chairman Francese asked Mr. complaints from the neighbors, to Hewett pointed out that the Depot appear to support the appeal. Bean if they had ever received which Mr. Bean responded, no. Mr. Restaurant owners said they would Chairman Francese asked the Board members if they wished to consider any conditions. Planning Board approval, building codes, and Cornell approval were noted. Chairman Francese noted that the Breeders' plans show no more staff; it cannot be seen from the road; the building will have the same exterior appearance. MOTION by Chairman Peter Francese, seconded by Mr. Edward Austen: RESOLVED, that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca grant and hereby does grant the Appeal of Eastern Artificial Insemination Cooperative, Inc. for authorization to extend a legal non -conforming use by the addition of a 3,200 sq. ft. two-story addition, being 1,600 sq. ft. per story, to the existing office headquarters building located at 219 Judd Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-63-1-3.4, according to the plans presented to said Board on this date, January 30 1979, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of such addition by the Planning Board; 2. Approval of such addition by Cornell University; 3. Meeting of appropriate Building Codes, Attorney Williamson commented that a tiny jog can be seen which is a fire escape and support system, reiterating that, in addition to the addition, is a fire escape. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Austen, Hewett. Nay - None. Zoning Board of Appeals -9- January 30, 1979 ® The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Francese declared the matter of the Eastern Artificial Insemination Cooperative, Inc. expansion duly closed at 8:45 p.m. INFORMAL DISCUSSION IN RE JOHN PERIALAS PROPERTY ON HONNESS LANE -- PROPOSED MONTESSORI SCHOOL A memo, dated January 30, 1979, from Mr. Fabbroni to the Zoning Board of Appeals was read as follows: "Be advised that the four -unit building, in which the subject of a basement school is in question, is one of two legal non -conforming uses in East Ithaca. Our own feeling is a family -run school along the lines of a home occupation is one thing; a school with teachers other than resident family members is quite another given the already intensive use of R-15 land." It was noted by the Board that the Perialases own the home and are proposing 15 children in a Montessori setting. It was noted that the house contains 4 units and the configuration would be 3 living in one and renting 2, with one for the school in the basement. It was noted that there will be one additional teacher, plus maybe one more, with two assistants, involving 15 children in the morning. The Board members outlined the problem: is with three teachers altogether, it is unlikely that it could be called a home occupation. 2. Traffic -- the neighbors are concerned already about traffic through Eastwood Commons. 3. Uncertainty as to what kind of variance could be involved, if this is not a home occupation. NEXT MEETING -- FEBRUARY 27, 1992. It was noted that an appeal by Evan Monkemeyer to build a two-family house with the second unit more than 50% of the primary dwelling unit and the Perialas matter should be scheduled for the next meeting. CONTINUATION OF THE GROUP HOMES OF TOMPKINS COUNTY, INC. MATTER. The following Findings of Fact, Determinations and Decisions were made by the Board based on the statements and other proof submitted at the Hearing. MOTION by Chairman Peter Francese, seconded by Mr. Jack Hewett: FINDINGS OF FACT ® 1. The home will be owned and operated by Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc., as a group home, pursuant to the provisions of Section 374-c of the Social Services Law. Zoning Board of Appeals -10- January 30, 1979 2. There will be adult supervision at all times. 3. There will be no more than eight (8) children in the home at one time; the age range of the resident children will be from 12 to 17, upon admission, no person will be kept in the home after age 21. 4. There will be no more than four (4) automobiles permanently parked on the premises at one time. 5. The children are not allowed to have automobiles. 6. The choice as to which children are accepted by Group Homes lies entirely with the administrators of the Group Home. They will accept only children who agree voluntarily to come. The home will not be used as a detention or residential center to which children with psychopathic problems or children charged with, or found to be guilty of, serious criminal or serious delinquent acts, will be sent. Courts do not have power to assign children to the home, without approval of the home. 7. All children must attend public school. 8. It is expected that the average stay will be between ten and fourteen months. ® 9. The house in question is located in a multiple residence zone. Immediately to the south is a public junior high school; immediately to the northeast is an apartment complex of ten buildings with fifteen apartments in each building. The nearest single family dwelling lot is over 300 feet to the west. 10. No one appeared in opposition to the granting of this Appeal. Two neighbors from Utica Street, the previous location of this facility, appeared and stated that this Group Home were good neighbors and caused no difficulties whatsoever. One person, a potential neighbor, said he would approve. The Board finds that the occupancy of the Group Home in its previous location on Utica Street in the City of Ithaca has not created adverse effects on neighboring properties but appears, instead, to have obtained the approval of owners of property in the neighborhood. 11. The Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals lives in the area and has visited the site and finds it to be appropriate for this particular use. 12. This Board has received several letters including the Tompkins County Youth Bureau, New York State Department of Social Services, Tompkins County Department of Social Services, and Tompkins County Probation Department, all speaking in favor of group homes and saying what an important public service they ® perform. 13. The dwelling is connected to public sewer. Zoning Board of Appeals -11- January 30, 1979 14. The Board finds that efforts to sell the house as a single-family house have not produced a willing buyer at a reasonable prices that because of the unique circumstances arising from the fact that this property is located in the middle of a multi -residence district and adjacent to a property used for school purposes, the value and desirability of the property as a single-family dwelling as ordinarily understood is considerably diminished. Accordingly, the Board finds that the owner will suffer undue economic hardship unless this variance is granted. 15. The Board further finds that as a matter of State Policy, the home will be administered and used in the manner of a single- family home with a couple acting as surrogate parents. 16. The Board finds that there will be no adverse effect on the surrounding property. DETERMINATION AND DECISION RESOLVED, that the Appeal of Louis L. Nangeroni, Appellant, Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc., as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying Certificate of Compliance for building use as a Group Home licensed by the New York State Department of Social Services at 572 Warren Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-72-1-2.12, be approved and that,' based upon special hardship ® occasioned to the owner of the parcel, a variance be granted to permit Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc. to use or occupy the parcel as a "group home" for the care of children as authorized by section 374-c of the Social Services law, subject to the following conditions: 1. This variance is limited to the operation of the premises as a group home under the above provisions of the Social Services law. 2. That no more than eight (8) children and two (2) adults be resident in the entire structure at any one time, the age range of the children will be from 12 to 17, inclusive, upon admission. No person over 21 years of age will reside in the house other than the group home parents. 3. That sufficient off-street parking be provided for up to five (5) automobiles. 4. That any exterior storage of trash or other materials be deposited in suitable garbage containers and that these be placed in an enclosed and covered area. 5. That the garage apartment which is presently in violation of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance not be used for residential purposes. ® 6.A. That the exterior lighting be of sufficiently low level so as not to affect any neighboring residents. 6.B. That outdoor activities be restricted and conducted in such Zoning Board of Appeals -12- January 30, 1979 ® manner that the noise level will not be unreasonably excessive. The intention of this provision is that the outdoor activities be of the type, nature, and duration which would be expected if the premises were occupied by a family, as now defined in the zoning ordinance, which would be of average size and which use the premises with due regard and consideration for their neighbors. 7. That there be compliance with the appropriate building codes, zoning laws, regulations of the Department of Social Services, and any other mandates of the State of New York, 8. That the Tompkins County Health Department approve the water quality and supply, and that the premises be lawfully connected to a public sewer. 9. That there be no exterior additions to the present structure without prior approval of the Board of Appeals. 10. That the premises shall be used and occupied substantially in compliance with the Findings of Fact not specifically included above. 11. If any of the above conditions be breached, any aggrieved owner of property immediately adjacent to the subject parcel may file a complaint with the Zoning Officer of the Town of Ithaca and if ® the matter is not satisfactorily resolved, the Zoning Officer shall bring the matter before the Board of Appeals for determination upon notice as required in ordinary appeals to the Board. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Francese, Hewett, Austen. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman Francese declared the matter of the Group Homes Appeal duly closed at 9:30 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion, Chairman Francese declared the January 30, 1979 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals duly closed at 9:32 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy M. Fuller, Secretary, ® Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals. Peter K. Francese, Chairman TOMPKINS COUNTY YOUTH 0 N • Ithaca, New York 14850 January 26, 1979 Mr. Peter K. Francese, Chairman Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals 501 Warren Road Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Mr. Francese: I have noted, with interest, the legal advertisement for a public hearing of the Zoning Board of Appeals scheduled for January 30, 1979. One of the items for discussion - the appeal of Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc. for issuance of Certificate of Compliance- is of particular concern to this office. ® The County Youth Bureau was created, in part, to assist county muni- cipalities and agencies in identifying and meeting the needs of County youth. While the Bureau is in no position to speak to the issue of the specifics of Town Zoning Law on the matter of the legal definition of "family", the Bureau is in the position to offer services in two related areas - municipal technical assistance and expression of community need for the Group Home program. The County Youth Bureau is able to offer the Town of Ithaca whatever technical assistance the Town might request to improve this system of services available for County youth. These technical assistance functions are in the general areas of research, planning, program development and education, and program monitoring and evaluation. In this specific case, the Bureau could provide the Town with information that might not be available from other sources. As a staff member of the Bureau, I am in a position to speak to the question of community need for the Group Homes program. As you are well aware, there have been tremendous shifts in the juvenile justice system over the past few years. Group Homes of Tompkins County was created through local initiative with a local Board of Directors as a structured alternative.for those young people for whom institutionalization was deemed inappropriate. After a shaky start, this program under Dave Robertson's capable hand, has become a sound, rational approach to rehabilitation of a group of youth who need guidance but not incarceration. ® These Tompkins County young people are best helped in an environment EXHIBIT #1 Telephone (607 ) 272-5339 o Mr. Peter K. Francese, Chairman January 26, 1979 Page #2 ® which provides the necessary structure, maintains many of the important qualities of family life, and relates to the surrounding community in a positive fashion. One of the strengths of the Group Homes program is that it is based in the community and relies on community resources. This is an effective approach to helping young people. Group Homes of Tompkins County provides a service not available through any other agency and is meeting a critical community need. From my contacts with Dave and his staff over the past year, I would endorse the approach and quality of the program. If I had an adolescent who needed this type of service, I would not hesitate to send my son or daughter to Dave and this, for me, is the ultimate test of any youth program. Youth Bureau business will keep me out of town on January 30, and I will be unable to appear at the hearing. Should you or the Board have any questions or desire to take me up on my offer of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, John A. Gaines Executive Director ® JAG/ngg cc: David Jennings, County Youth Board member, Town of Ithaca EXHIBIT #1 AT a Public Hearing Yield by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street (second floor), Ithaca, N.Y., on Tuesday, January 30, 1979, commencing at 7:30 p.m., all members of said Board having received due Notice thereof and there being present Chairman Peter K. Francese, Vice -Chairman Jack D. Hewett and Member Edward N. Austen, Member Edward W. King and Member Joan Reuning being absent, and proper Affidavits of Posting and Publication and Service by Mail of the Notice of Public Hearing in re the matter hereinafter cited having been presented, said Zoning'Board of Appeals determined and resolved as follows: APPEAL OF LOUIS L. NANGERONI, APPELLANT, GROUP HOMES OF TOMPKINS COUNTY, INC., AS AGENT, FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPEC- TOR DENYING CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR BUILDING USE AS A GROUP HOME LICENSED BY THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES AT 572-WARREN ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-72-1-2.12. CERTIFICATE IS DENIED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR UNDER ARTICLE I. SECTION 1, PARAGRAPHS 5 AND.10, AND ARTICLE VI, SECTION 26, OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE AND BECAUSE OF QUESTION OF APPLI- CANT'S STATUS AS A FAMILY, AND WHETHER A SPECIAL PERMIT MAY BE REQUIRED. The following Findings of Fact, Determinations and Decisions were made by the Board based on the statement and other proof sub- mitted at the Hearing: 4P.' FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The home will be owned and operated by Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc., as a group home, pursuant to the provisions of Section 374-c of the Social Services Law. 2. There will be adult supervision at all times. 3. There will be no more than eight (8) children in the home at one time; the age range of the resident children will be from 12 to 17, upon admission, no person will be kept in the home after age 21. 4. There will be no more than four (4) automobiles permanently parked on the premises at one time. 5. The children are not allowed to have automobiles. 6. The choice as to which children are accepted by Group Homes lies entirely with the administrators of the Group Home. They will accept only children.who agree voluntarily to come. The home will not be used as a detention or residential center to which children with psychopathic problems or children charged with, or found to be guilty of serious criminal or serious delinquent acts, will be sent. Courts do not have power to assign children to the Home, without approval of the Home. 7. All children must attend public school 8. It is expected that the average stay will be between ten and fourteen months. ___- _9,0 The house in question is located in a multiple residence zone. Immediately to the south is a -public- junior =h: gh-- school; immediately to the northeast is an apartment complex of ten buildings with fifteen apartments in each building. The nearest single family dwelling lot is over 300 feet to the west. 10. No one appeared in opposition to the granting of this Appeal. Two neighbors from Utica Street, the previous loca- Group Homes Appeal - January 30, 1979 - Z.B.A. -2- tion of this facility, appeared and stated that this Group Home were good neighbors and caused no difficulties whatso- ever. One person, a potential neighbor, said he would approve. The Board finds that the occupancy of the Group Home in its previous location on Utica Street in the City of Ithaca has not created adverse effects on neighboring pro- perties but appears, instead, to have obtained the approval of owners of property in the neighborhood. 11. The Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals lives in the area and has visited the site and finds it to be appropriate for this particular use. 12. This Board has received several letters including the Tompkins County Youth Bureau, New York State Department of Social Services, Tompkins County Department of Social Services and Tompkins County Probation Department, all speaking in favor of group homes and saying what an important public service they perform. 13. The dwelling is connected to public sewer 14. The Board finds that efforts to sell the house as a single family house have not produced a willing buyer at a reason- able price; that because of the unique circumstances arising from the fact that this property is located in the middle of a multi -residence district and adjacent to a property used for school purposes, the value and desirability of the pro- perty as a single family dwelling as ordinarily understood is considerably diminished. Accordingly the Board finds that the owner will suffer undue economic hardship unless this variance is granted. 15. The Board further finds that as a matter of State Policy, the home will be administered and used in the manner of a single family home with a couple acting as surrogate parents. 16. The Board finds that there will be no adverse effect on the surrounding property. DETERMINATION AND DECISION RESOLVED, that the Appeal of Louis L. Nangeroni, Appellant, Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc., as Agent, from the decision of the Building Inspector denying Certificate of Compliance for building use as a Group Home licensed by the New York State Depart ment of Social Services at 572 Warren Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-72-1-2.12 be approved and that based upon special hardship occasioned to the owner of the parcel, a variance be granted to permit Group Homes of Tompkins County, Inc. to use or occupy the parcel as a "group home" for the care of children as authorized by section 374-c of the Social Services law, subject to the following conditions, 1. This variance is limited to the operation of the pre- mises as a group home under the above provisions of the Social Services law. 2. That no more than eight (8) children and two (2) adults be resident in the entire structure at any one time; the age range of the children will be from 12 to 17, inclusive, upon admission. No person over 21 years of age w 1 -1 --reside. in the house other than the group home parents. 3. That sufficient off-street parking be provided for up to five (5) automobiles. 4. That any exterior storage of trash or other materials be deposited in suitable garbage containers and that these ___..___�....�._-.•._..�-.-v,—...�.vr•��..'SYN.vs'tYs_•o.'.t'-+L�s�i.4F4H:tl:n+:r.A.x¢r.yNti^.la!aR�.�:tiit?�.4o9�N9't`. Group Homes Appeal - January 30, 1979 - Z.B.A. be placed in an enclosed and covered area. 5. That the garage apartment which is presently in viola- tion of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance not be used for residential purposes. 6A. That the exterior lighting be of sufficiently low level so as not to affect any neighboring residents. B. That outdoor activities be restricted and conducted in such manner that the noise level will not be unreasonably excessive. The intention of this provision is that the out- door activities be of the type, nature and duration which would be expected if the premises were occupied by a family as now defined, in the zoning ordinance, which would be of average size and which use the premises with due regard and consideration for their neighbors. 7. That there be compliance with the appropriate building codes, zoning laws and regulations of the Department of Socia Services and any other mandates of the State of New York, 8. That the Tompkins County Health Department approve the water quality and supply, and that the premises be lawfully connected to a public sewer. 9. That there be no exterior additions to the present structure without prior approval of the Board of Appeals. 10. That the premises shall be used and occupied substan- tially in compliance with the Findings of Fact not speci- fically included above. 11. If any of the above conditions are breached, any aggrieved owner of property immediately adjacent to the subject parcel may file a complaint with the Zoning Officer of the Town of Ithaca and if the matter is not satisfactorily resolved, the Zoning Officer shall bring the matter before the Board of Appeals for determination upon notice as require( in ordinary appeals to the Board. Aye - Peter K. Francese, Jack D Nay - None. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Hewett, Edward N. Austen. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss.. COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) I, the undersigned Secretary of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals and Deputy Town Clerk of said Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, DO HEREBY CERTIFY: That I have compared the foregoing excerpt of the minutes of the meeting of Zoning Board of Appeals of said Town of Ithaca, including the resolution contained therein, held on the 30th day January, 1979, with the original thereof on file in the office of the Town Clerk of said Town of Ithaca, and that the same is a true and correct copy of a portion of said original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said Town of Ithaca this 9th day of March, 1979. S E A L Nanpy M. er, , Deputy Town Clerk and (/ Secretary, Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Ithaca