Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1988-04-13 FILED TOWN OF eIIT//H��ACA Date TOWN OF ITHACA C1erk ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS April 13 , 1988 A regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals was held on April 13 , 1988 at the Ithaca Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward King , Edward Austen , Joan Reuning , Eva Hoffmann , Building Inspector Andrew Frost , Assistant Building Inspector Laura Predmore , Town Planner Susan Beeners , and Town Attorney John C . Barney ALSO PRESENT : Orlando Iacovelli , Gordon W . Maycumber , Shane French , Susan Fertik , G . Wilhelm , Philip L . Cox , Kinga M . Gergely , Peter Gergely , Holly Beermann , Patty Porter , N . W . Rollins , S . A . Hilbert . The public meeting opened at 7 : 00 p . m . Chairman Aron stated that all posting and publication of the public hearings had been completed and that proper affidavits of same were in order . • Photographs of the subject properties were passed around for the Board to review . The first item on the agenda for consideration was as follows : ADJOURNED APPEAL ( from March 9 , 1988 , and from the Board of Appeals meeting of March 23 , 1988 ) of Orlando and Ralph Iacovelli , Appellants , requesting variance of the requirements of Article IV , Sections 14 and 16 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for certain lots proposed as part of the " Klondike Manor " subdivision on Coddington Road , northwest of Juniper Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No . 6 - 53 - 1 - 17 . 11 - 17 ., 21 - 5 , and - 101 Residence District R- 15 . ( The Public Hearing in this matter has been closed . ) Chairman Aron reminded the people present and who had participated at the last meeting on March 9 , 1988 that there had already been lengthy hearings on this matter and the public hearing had been closed since there was nothing else to be said at that time . Chairman Aron stated that the public hearing was still closed . Chairman Aron mentioned that at the Board Meeting of the Town of Ithaca held on April 11 , 1988 , the Town Board had decided • that the Town Board members were not quite satisfied with the layout of the road on the Klondike Manor and needed more 2 • information before they could proceed . Chairman Aron read the memorandum from Noel Desch to Montgomery May , Chairman of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board dated April 12 , 1988 . A copy of said memorandum is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 . Chairman Aron recommended to the Zoning Board of Appeals in light of the foregoing that the matter of Klondike Manor be adjourned . Mr . Orlando Iacovelli was concerned that each time he came before a Board the rules changed or something new had been added that he could have reacted to before the meeting had he known about it . Mr . Iacovelli stated that he found it difficult that the matter had been prolonged . Mr . Iacovelli continued that he would like to meet the needs of the various Boards but it seemed to him that he was being shuffled from one Board to the other . Mr . King interjected that Mr . Iacovelli was correct and that was because the Town of Ithaca was a fractionalized government with three different Boards and three different jurisdictions with the Town Board being the legislative body that determines road policies . Attorney Barney said that the problem was that normally when someone comes in with a subdivision they own all the land that . the road was going to transverse and Klondike Manor was a unique situation . Attorney Barney continued that the Town Board felt that before they invested a lot of time and effort on the matter there should be some demonstrable proof from New York State Electric and Gas that any road would be permitted and indeed the road that would be required to be deeded to the Town would be permitted on their railroad right of way . Given that situation , he said , it did not make much sense for the Zoning Board of Appeals to discuss a variance of a particular nature related to a particular road proposal if it turned out that that road proposal would not fly because of NYSEG ' s position or if the Town Board decided that they did not want the roads in that particular formation . Mr . Iacovelli said his concern was that he should have been directed to the Town Board many months ago . Attorney Barney said that the process called for the Town Board to accept the proposed location of roads in a subdivision . Mr : Iacovelli said that they had been in to the Town Board many months ago and Attorney Barney said that it had been in to the Town Board for a month and a half and had not been discussed at any great length until the April lith meeting . Chairman Aron suggested at this point that if Mr . Iacovelli had a grievance as to the process he should address the matter to the Town Board rather than to the Zoning Board of Appeals • because the Zoning Board of Appeals had no jurisdiction over the Town Board and could act only upon a declared official map , and 3 • concurred with Attorney Barney that they could not in good conscience act upon something that was not yet in existence . Mr . King inquired if Mr . Iacovelli had something from NYSEG on the use of the right of way and Mr . Iacovelli responded that at one of the meetings it was indicated that the NYSEG matter , ( possibly through the Chairman of the Planning Board , he was not sure ) , would not be a problem . Mr . King asked if Mr . Iacovelli had an agreement or easement and Mr . Iacovelli said that he had been instructed to get that after the preliminary approval . Attorney Barney said that was correct that the preliminary approval was conditional upon his obtaining that but what had surfaced was a fairly , clear question as to whether NYSEG would grant anything , and it really had to be resolved before any further action was taken . Attorney King added that if NYSEG said Mr . Iacovelli had to move the road the lots would change and Mr . Iacovelli was asking the Zoning Board of Appeals to pass on the lots . Mr . Iacovelli understood the predicament of the Zoning Board of Appeals but hoped that the Board understood his predicament that he had been shuffled back and forth since November and he thought it was time he got the right information as to what he needed to do . Chairman Aron made a motion was follows : RESOLVED , that the Klondike Manor matter be adjourned until the Town Board has accepted the layout of the road and the easement from NYSEG . Joan Reuning seconded the motion . The voting was as follows : Aye - Aron , Reuning , Austen , King , Hoffmann The motion was unanimously carried . The second matter on the agenda was as follows : APPEAL of Cornell University , Appellant , Gary Wilhelm , Agent , with respect to a request for Special Approval of a University use under Article V , Section 18 , Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for a proposed new building for the Cornell University Department of Life Safety Services , proposed to be located in a Residence District R- 30 at 749 Dryden Road on a two - and -three - quarter- acre portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 64 - 1 - 1 . • Mr . Gary Wilhelm addressed the Board and stated that also present at the meeting was Phil Cox , Director of Facilities 4 , • Engineering at Cornell , and Gordon Maycumber , Director of Life Safety Services at Cornell . Mr . Wilhelm set up several large sketch plans of the proposed site for the Board to review . Chairman Aron declared the Zoning Board of Appeals the lead agency in this matter as to the environmental assessment . Chairman Aron then read from a document entitled "ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Cornell University , Department of Life Safety Services , New Building , 749 Dryden Road , Planning Board , . March 15 , 1988 . " Such document is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . Mr . Wilhelm stated that 749 Dryden Road was the address of the existing house on Route 366 just east of the intersection of Caldwell Road and Route 366 . He pointed to the plans and indicated the extent of the area involved . Mr . Wilhelm continued that the proposal was to remove the existing house and construct a 10 , 000 square foot building ( possibly only an 8 , 000 square foot building ) . The difference in the shorter building , he explained , would be the exclusion of vehicle storage from the building . Mr . Wilhelm continued that the building would be approximately 50 x 160 feet with a shed roof located about 108 feet back of Route 366 with a drive entering from Caldwell Road Extension into a service drive and parking area . Mr . Wilhelm said the drive would be approximately 230 feet from the center line of Dryden Road and • there was ample parking for department use . Chairman Aron inquired what would be stored in the material handling area and Mr . Wilhelm responded that that area was basically a warehouse where laboratory chemicals would be held . for shipment by a disposal contractor to a disposal site . Mr . Maycumber said that the Cornell Department of Life Safety was a licensed generator and transporter of chemicals to a handling location . Mr . Wilhelm said that the chemicals were held for 90 days and then shipped to a disposal site . Mr . Wilhelm said that presently this activity was conducted on Maple Avenue behind the old laundry and the purpose of this project was to consolidate the operation to be housed in one building because at the present time the operation was in three locations on campus . He continued that this project would offer numerous administrative improvements . Mr . Austen inquired if the building would belong to Life Safety and Mr . Wilhelm responded that was correct . The public meeting was opened . No one appeared and the public hearing was closed . Joan Reuning asked if all the land surrounding this area was owned by Cornell and Mr . Wilhelm stated that more than 800 acres • contiguous to this area was owned by Cornell . 5 Mr . King asked if the existing house on the structure was inhabited and Mr . Wilhelm responded that it was not , had been empty for a number of years and would in fact be removed . Mr . King asked where the nearest residence would be to the proposed structure and Mr . Wilhelm responded that it would be on Game Farm Road . Mr . Wilhelm said the area in question was inhabited by service buildings , university warehouses , etc . Joan Reuning asked how many people would be working in the proposed building and Mr . Wilhelm responded that approximately sixteen people would be working 9 to 5 but that they functioned around the clock and part -time people came on shifts after that . Mr . Austen inquired if Life Safety was moving all similar facilities to the proposed area . Mr . Wilhelm responded that presently there were three facilities , Tabaggon Lodge on Forest Home Drive , Life Safety Shop Facility on Judd Falls Road and the chem waste facility in East Ithaca , and all would be moved to the Dryden Road site . Mr . Frost asked if the proposed building would be 150 feet from the road and Mr . Wilhelm responded that it would be 108 feet from the line of the street and 100 feet from the right of way . Chairman Aron read Ms . Beeners ' recommendation as to the • environmental assessment entitled " ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PART - II - Cornell Life Safety Services , Relocation , Susan C . Beeners , Town Planner , 3 / 15/ 88 " . A copy of such document is annexed hereto as Exhibit 3 . Ms . Hoffmann inquired if there was any possibility of chemicals leaking from this storage into areas such as the orchard . Mr . Wilhelm said that the DPA guidelines call for two levels of containment , basically the container that the chemical comes in and the second level of containment being the building itself , and also call for curves and curved floors so that if there was a spill it would not get out of the building . He continued that in this project multiple levels of containment would be provided - the container would be the initial containment , movable storage carts with a capacity of approximately 150 gallons being the second , ramping and sills in the building providing the third and an exterior drainage swale with provision for an emergency dam providing the fourth level of containment . In addition , Mr . Wilhelm stated , there would be a sprinkler system in the event of a fire and this sprinkler system would extinguish any fire before large volumes of water were released . He said that this site was particularly suitable because there was a natural swale which would hold 35 , 000 gallons worth of water on the site by damming up a culvert . Mr . Wilhelm was confident that in the very unlikely event there was a spill • they could contain it within the confines of the site without having it spill into the drainage systems . In fact , he stated , 6 • the drainage patterns work back into the campus . Mr . Maycumber stated that they were inspected annually by an EPA or DEC inspector , or both , as they were regulated by these departments for their generator ' s license . Mr . Maycumber further stated that the quantities of chemicals they dealt with were quite small ranging from viles to probably a maximum of five gallons . He said that liquids were only approximately 70 % of what was collected with the rest being solids and dry materials . Mr . Maycumber continued that their storage capacity would be about 3450 gallons but they had a legal option of up to 8800 gallons . He felt it worthwhile to note that this presentation was discussed with a representative from Region 7 , DEC , in late February or early March who had no qualms about what was being suggested . Chairman Aron asked if a letter could be obtained from them that this project complied with their requirements and Mr . Wilhelm said that the man they spoke with said it would be no problem to send a letter to the Board as to the project . Mr . Wilhelm said that in fact no inspections would be made until the building was built and the project was in operation , and that as to the construction of the building the requirements of the New York State Building Code was the criteria being followed . • Attorney Barney asked how big the material handling area would be and Mr . Wilhelm responded that it would be 3 , 000 square feet in a 10 , 000 square foot building and 2 , 500 square feet in an 8 , 000 square foot building . Mr . Austen inquired if there would be containment so different chemicals would not mix and Mr . Wilhelm responded that the carts he mentioned previously would take care of this with materials being sorted and placed in separate carts . Mr . Frost asked if the building would be part of the private college and would a building permit be applied for through his office . Mr . Wilhelm responded that the building would be part of the endowed college and that they would be applying for a building permit through Mr . Frost ' s office . Mr . King asked if there were provisions in the State Building Code for the construction of a dangerous material handling site . Mr . Wilhelm responded that there were provisions for the storing of inflammable and combustible liquids . Mr . King asked if they applied to this construction and Mr . Wilhelm responded that they did . Mr . Frost said that in terms of the direct control of the chemical handling itself he was not sure a code would address that or address the type of high -hazard occupancy of inflammable materials . Mr . Maycumber concurred and • said that the state code references the NFPA Codes . • Mr . King said he was concerned with the design of the building and Mr . Frost said that most likely this would be a high -hazard storage type classification and fire - safety features would be applied . Mr . Wilhelm said there was a four-hour fire wall separating the material handling section from the rest of the building . Mr . King asked if this section of the building was drained and Mr . Wilhelm responded it was not because it was contained . Mr . King asked how the rest of the building was drained and Mr . Wilhelm responded it would have sewer connections to the City of Ithaca . Attorney Barney inquired about damming the culvert and asked how that was functionally going to occur and Mr . Wilhelm responded it would be with sandbags . Ms . Hoffmann asked how a fire would be handled and Mr . Wilhelm responded that there would be a heavy-duty sprinkler system . Mr . Frost inquired if this would not dilute the chemicals where a dry type of extinguisher , such as Halon , might not . Mr . Maycumber said that the problem with Halon was that it had an effect on the ozone layer and that the future of Halon was somewhat in question at this point . He continued that the building was built for containment . Ms . Hoffmann inquired about the possible pollution of the air and Mr . Wilhelm responded that they were dealing with small amounts of chemicals , and every six • weeks the building would become empty and then the collection process would start all over again . As to the environmental assessment a motion was made by Joan Reuning as follows : RESOLVED , that this Board declare a negative determination of environmental significance as to this matter . Edward Austen seconded the motion . The voting was as follows : Aye - Hoffmann , Reuning , Aron , Austen , King Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried . Ms . Hoffmann inquired what would be affected if the building were made smaller and Mr . Wilhelm responded that the vehicle storage feature would be eliminated with the smaller building . Ms . Hoffmann wanted to clarify that no safety feature would be eliminated if the smaller building were constructed and Mr . Wilhelm stated that the material handling portion of the building would remain the same no matter what the size of the building was • and that no safety feature would be eliminated . • 8 Mr . King asked where the materials were handled now and Mr . Wilhelm responded that they were handled in a building on Maple Avenue and indicated on the sketch plans the location of such building . As to special approval a motion was made by Edward King as follows : WHEREAS , based upon the findings of the Planning Board as stated in its adopted resolution which this Board hereby also adopts , and WHEREAS , this Board also finds : ( a ) The health , safety , morals and general welfare of the community in harmony with the general purpose of this ordinance shall be promoted , except that as to all public buildings and educational buildings wherein the principle use is research , administration , or instruction , the same shall be presumed to exist . ( b ) The premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use , and that such use , except as to public and educational buildings , will fill a neighborhood or community need . i ( c ) The proposed use and the location and design of any structure shall be consistent with the character of the district in which it is located . ( d ) The proposed use shall not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate neighboring property or seriously inconvenience neighboring inhabitants . ( e ) The proposed access and egress for all structures and uses shall be safely designed . ( f ) The general effect of the proposed use upon the community as a whole , including such items as traffic load upon public streets and load upon water and sewerage systems is not detrimental to the health , safety and general welfare of the community . ( g ) No one appeared from the public for or against the matter . IT IS THEREFORE RESOLVED , that this Board grant special approval pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 , subdivision 4 of the Town of • Ithaca Zoning Ordinance for the construction and use of the building as proposed by Cornell University upon the 9 • understanding that all laboratory chemical waste material handling that is now located on Maple Avenue will be relocated to this site and that the four levels of containment that are outlined in the proposal are in fact accomplished in the construction of the building . Edward Austen seconded the motion . The voting was as follows : Aye - Aron , Reuning , King , Austen , Hoffmann Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried . Mr . Cox inquired of Chairman Aron how they might go about petitioning the Board for rezoning of designated lands at Cornell . Chairman Aron ' s recommendation was to go to the Planning Board and make such request . He stated that the Planning Board in turn , after hearing the request and presentation , could make a recommendation for rezoning to the Town Board who was the legislative body and the only one that could approve the rezoning . Chairman Aron recommended further that Mr . Cox contact Ms . Beeners , the Town Planner , for advice as • to how to proceed . The last item on the agenda was as follows : APPEAL of Shane French , Appellant , requesting authorization by the Board of Appeals under Article XII , Section 54 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , to extend a legal non - conforming dwelling structure located at 1038 East Shore Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 19 - 2 - 12 , Residence District R- 15 . Said non- conforming dwelling is on a legal non - conforming lot of approximately 39 feet in width with an existing south side yard setback of 3 . 5 + feet and with an existing north side yard setback of 17 . 5± feet . The proposed extension is for additional living space on the dwelling ' s north side which would create a north side yard setback of 7 . 5 + feet . Mr . Shane French appeared before the Board . Chairman Aron read from Mr . French ' s appeal as follows : "As it is now our house is very narrow . When it was originally built it was used as a summer cottage . This is our year- round home and if we could do the construction work that was denied we would then have a more conventional living room and kitchen . The porch will create a dry entryway and the deck will enhance the look of our house as • well as giving us a nice place to sit when outside . We believe that these improvements will upgrade the value of 10 our home enormously . " Chairman Aron asked how long Mr . French had been living in the house and Mr . French responded that they had rented it for a year and had owned it for a year . Chairman Aron inquired how many were in Mr . French ' s family and he replied that there were now three . Chairman Aron asked how many rooms were in the house and Mr . French responded that there were two bedrooms , a kitchen , living room , bathroom , and no basement . Chairman Aron inquired if Mr . French was satisfied with the living space of the house when he rented it and Mr . French responded that it was still quite small as far as storage but since then they had had a child and now it was far too small . Chairman Aron inquired what Mr . French intended to add to the house . Mr . French explained that he wanted to add five " feet of living space on the north side which would create a little more storage space and also an entryway , and wanted to enclose the existing screen porch which would enlarge the living room which was now 14 x 12 feet . Chairman Aron referred to a sketch of the proposed construction and asked how important the deck was in the construction since it was not a matter of living space but a matter of convenience . Mr . French agreed that the deck was a convenience but it would be nice to have it . Chairman Aron said that it looked like the deck would have a depth of 10 feet and that would encroach even closer to the neighbor ' s property . Chairman Aron asked if Mr . French • could live without a deck since a lot of people do and Mr . French said he could but the ';side piece was actually a five foot porch that was creating a dry entryway and if they did not have that porch on the side there would just be a door walk- in without any kind of roof overhang to keep one dry as one entered with groceries , etc . Mr . French said that what the addition would provide was five feet of living space and a five foot porch to create a dry entryway . Chairman Aron asked if the porch was there when Mr . French rented and bought the house and Mr . French responded that was correct . Attorney Barney asked where the Albanese property was and Mr . French responded it was to the north . Chairman Aron then read a letter from Jon Albanese to the Zoning Board of Appeals dated March 14 , 1988 , a copy of which letter is annexed hereto as Exhibit 4 . Chairman Aron further read a letter from David B . Gersh to Mr . Andrew S . Frost dated April 8 , 1988 , a copy of which letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 5 . Chairman Aron pointed out that both letters supported the French application as to additional living space . Mr . French inquired if it would help if both Mr . Albanese and Mr . Gersh approved the porch . Attorney Barney stated that Mr . Albanese was aware of the • porch because he attached a drawing to his letter clearly showing the porch in question . Chairman Aron concurred but said that Mr . 11 • Gersh ' s letter stated that he had no objections to Mr . French adding to his house to enlarge the living space . The public hearing was opened . No one appeared and the public hearing was closed . Mr . Austen inquired if they had done some previous remodeling and Mr . French responded that they had last year and explained the renovations that had occurred . Mr . King inquired if Mr . French was on a septic system and Mr . French responded they were sharing with the parcel to the south . Mr . Austen inquired if Mr . French ' s land was included in the new sewer line coming down through that area and Mr . French responded that the only information he had about that was through Jon Albanese who said that he thought they would be included . Ms . Hoffmann asked if there was any provision about how close to the shore line one can build . Chairman Aron explained that the Zoning Ordinance requires setbacks , rear yard , front yard , and side yard , and the shore line could be either the front yard or the rear yard . Ms . Hoffmann wondered if there were any special provision because the property borders on water . Mr . • Frost said that the property line would start at the high water mark of the lake . Attorney Barney said that as he recalled the law briefly one got accretion rights to the high water mark and as he read the French survey , the existing shore line was presumably the high water line or maybe it was the existing shore line when the survey was done which could have been in the middle of winter . Mr . King asked if the proposed addition would come to eight feet from the north property line and Mr . French said that was correct . Mr . King said that there was another eighteen feet between his north line and the Albanese house . Mr . King continued that the French proposal would put his porch about 25 - 1/ 2 feet from the Albanese house which was a fair separation . Ms . Hoffmann felt that in conjunction with the other houses which are all so close , the French proposal would not be out of line . Joan Reuning said that aesthetically speaking the addition would improve the looks of the house . A motion was made by Edward King as follows . WHEREAS , this Board finds that this proposal will not change • the character of the neighborhood , all of the houses being relatively close to each other in this particular area along 12 • East Shore Drive , and would actually be a aesthetic improvement to the looks of the existing dwelling , and WHEREAS , no one appeared against the proposal but in fact two of the neighbors wrote in support of the proposal ; THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that this Board grant special approval under Section 54 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance authorizing the extension of a non - conforming use ; and it is further RESOLVED , that this Board grant permission to extend the dwelling as proposed provided that it not encroach closer than 7 . 5 feet to the north line and conform to the drawings submitted by Mr . French , and it is further RESOLVED , that an area variance be granted , there being practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships in that the size and shape of the lot make it difficult to have a reasonably livable space without a slight variance to the north . Edward Austen seconded the motion . • The voting was as follows : Aye - Reuning , Aron , Austen , King , Hoffmann Nay - None The motion was unanimously carried . There being no further business to come before the Board , the meeting was adjourned at 8 : 30 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Beatrice Lincoln Recording Secretary Exhibits 1 through 5 attached APPROVED • HENRY A ON , CHAIRMAN MEMORANDUM TO : Montgomery May , Chairman Town of Ithaca Planning Board FROM : Noel Desch RE : Klondike Manor Subdivision - Road Network DATE : April 12 , 1988 The Town Board , at its meeting last evening determined that it needs written assurance from the developer that an arrangement has been worked out between NYSEG and the developer for access along and across the abandoned railroad . The Board also asked the staff to recommend changes to the Official Highway Map so that they could be assured that the proposed roads will serve circulation needs in the surrounding area as well as within the subdivision itself . I have asked the staff to inform Mr . Iacovelli of this position and to prepare the necessary highway map changes for your review . • ND/ js cc : tAenry Aron , chairman Zoning Board of Appeals • Cornell University Department of Life Safety Services - 1 - New Building 749 Dryden Road Planning Board , March 15 , 1988 ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Cornell University Department of Life Safety Services New ' Building 74 9 , Dryden Road . Planning Board , March 15 , 1988 MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Dr . William Lesser : WHEREAS : 1 : This action is the Consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of - Appeals with - rdspect to Special Approval of a School Use for a proposed new - building for Cornell University Life Safety Services , proposed . to . be located . An a . Residence District R- 30 at 749 Dryden Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 64 - 1 - 1 . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals has been legislatively determined to act as Lead° Agency for environmental review . The Dormitory Authority of the State of New York 'and the Tompkins County Planning Department are potentially - involved agencies which have been notified of this action . 3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on March 15 , 1988 , has reviewed a SEQR Long Environmental Assessment Form , Site Plan , Building Plan , and other materials submitted for this proposal . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that a negative determination of environmental significance be made for this action , subject to the mitigating measures included as part of the proposal . 2 . That the Planning Board determine and hereby does determine that there is a need for the proposed use in . the proposed location ; that the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood in which the use is to be located will not be adversely affected , and that the proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town . 3 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that Special Approval for the proposed facility be granted , subject to compliance of the � h � 6-TZ Cornell University Department of . Life ' Safety Services - 2 - New Building 749 Dryden Road Planning Board , March 15 , 1988 • facility and its operations with all pertinent codes and requirements . Aye - May , Grigorov , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller . Nay - None . CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY . Nancy M . rullerip Secretary , Town . of Ithaca Planning Board . March 21 , 1988 . 1 r • 1URONMEKAL REY.IEEK.EA 1_1J.- ® Cornell Life Safety Services Relocation Susan C . Beeners , Town Plannpr 3 / 15 / 88 IMPA-QT_9N WATER.3-_MF.AQ1..QN PiiBU!Z.HKALTH The proposed action would require the collection and short - term storage of used laboratory chemicals with a maximum estimated quantity of 3400 gallons . Provisions for storage are discussed in Page 2 of the proposal , and indicate the intention to remain under strict compliance with any state or federal requirements for chemicals handling , storage , and transport . The same procedure is currently in place at three campus locations . The removal of the facility from its current location to a less congested location is a beneficial impact . Subject to compliance of the facility and its operations with all Pertinent codes and `' requirements , no significant adverse environmental impact is expected from this action . • 07 • J (�NnrHAN O. ALBANESE AT IORNEY AND COUNSELOR -AI-LAW 507 NO11SrAn BANK BUILDING ITIIACA , Nnv YonK 14850 TELEPHONE 272-5212 March 14 , 1988 Zoning B(xird of Appeal ! , Town of IA-Ihar_ a 126 E . Sr ,neca St . Ithaca , Hy 14850 Re : Frei v. -I1 -- 10 .i6 E . Shore Drive Dear Mr . Ar. (m and fellcxv mc %rnlxnrr of the 'Town Zoning Board of Appeals : I am thc% neighbor. di i"c �ci: l. y adjacent- to Shayne and Shelley French who currently h lve an apex 11 I x ruIi. ng in f wilt of your board for the purpose of extendirx:l an existing n� II nf� lllning t r;e . I wish to express to the B (ird , that I fully stipEx)rt Mr- . - m( ] ]: r(lnch in this project- . The French ' s have providre cl me with 1 1011911 outl. i. nr. of the plans, for their extension of the existing horr>E� . 111.." I al:- Lached a copy pf that rough outline . Mr . French has• alr(�� ltly done a fantastic joh of improving the condition of his property , and I ant° mire i his 1111-oject will go a Tong way towards en- hancing his home as well F. l , the entire nei gW)r1#_)od . Ve7han y yours , JoO . Albaese lls enc . a^,eta-....p....-. ... . d.Z.n^n..«. -.-_F•^r.— - ... ..r.- .._ , .4 . . . . .. . . - . �� �, u r` • Q���1�.j�,., � fY `-- yam- � � ' ,� �J �j . VA "lo 0 d p 'J I vi w d `� u ° / :2 --�► '' 8 I S L Xobddd— r� 0 � z 0 d a old ° o"1 0p � a I �� a �� AV inw —01 LL I Iw \f) Lo ` I V V / 1 o a Ul 0 / _ ci in Lo f4 1 p 0 roc, iT 0 o. d) O cr 0Fe 00 Ul U) N i C cribi Q / W J sa IL CD W Q o • o � �n Oz _e81 ty U. w ON — « y 0 1 a Uf 101` a A , i M / al .4win m 0 : J ` ut N � b� Mme ' W7ao � .9 d 1n � rn Z _ _ : , da 3 � or+ 5 r a0 -a+ nay. Ga 3 o ►W- oh 44 Li f a 0 a _ DAVID B. GERSH ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW 404 NORTH CAYUGA STREET ITHACA , NEW YORK 14850 TELEPHONE April 8 , 1988 (607) 277.3300 Mr . Andrew S . Frost Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer Town of Ithaca 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca , New York . 14850 RE : Appeal of Shane French Dear Mr . Frost . I own property at 1046 - 1052 East Shore Drive , and have received notice of an appeal by my neighbor , Shane French , which is to be heard on Wednesday , April 13 . I will be unable personally to appear at this meeting , but would appreciate your accepting this letter in ° support of this application . I feel the re - maining setback would be adequate while providing the French family with the additional living space that they need . Respectfully , David . B . CGers DBG : j em •