Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1988-12-14 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA � yq Date���m� �'y 1 Clea. TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECEMBER 14 , 1988 A regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals was held on December 14 , 1988 at the Ithaca Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Eva Hoffmann , Edward Austen , Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer Andrew Frost , Town Attorney John Barney . ABSENT : Edward King , Joan Reuning . ALSO PRESENT : Evelyn Lane , Richard Lane , Donna L . Hofstead - Duffy , Michael Morusty , John Stebbins ( WTKO ) . The public meeting was opened at 7 : 10 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 . The first item on the agenda was the following . APPEAL OF EVELYN C . LANE , APPELLANT , REQUESTING VARIANCE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE V , SECTION 19 , PARAGRAPH 2 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , TO PERMIT THE ADVERTISING FOR SALE OF HANDCRAFTED ITEMS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CUSTOMARY HOME OCCUPATION LOCATED AT 333 WEST KING ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 37 - 1 - 27 . 2 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . Chairman Aron read the Appeal as submitted by Mrs . Lane , attached hereto as Exhibit 1 . Photographs were presented to the Board showing the property and the location of the shop being used to sell hand crafted items at her home . Mrs . Lane addressed the Board and explained that what is being sold is hand crafted items that have been made by her and her husband on the property such as wooden bowls , jewelry boxes , etc . She stated that they converted one bay of a three car garage into a display area . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Lane if they • are using that garage for manufacturing purposes only . Mrs . Lane responded that that area is only being used for display and storage . . She stated that they have a wood shop that is separate . Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 2 Mr . Lane presented to the Board a copy of a Notice of Decision from the Workers ' Compensation Board stating his disability . Chairman Aron referred to a drawing that was submitted by Mrs . Lane with her appeal . He questioned the size of the shop . He stated that the law says you can have a home occupation within a 200 sq . ft . area as long as there are no extra employees . ` Chairman Aron said that according to the drawing that was submitted it shows a 12 ' x 24 ' area , which is more than 200 sq . _ ft . He asked if this was an inside or outside measurement . Mr . Lane responded that it was an outside measurement . Chairman Aron said that if these are outside measurements , then they are inside the law . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Lane what kind of advertising they wanted to do for their business and what kind of hours would the shop be open . Mrs . Lane responded that they just want to place ads in the Pennysaver stating that they have these items and the times that they might be open . She stated that they are going to be open over Christmas and until the first of the year and then again in the Spring . The times that the shop would be open would. be mostly weekends and maybe some evening hours . • Chairman Aron read a letter from Christiann Dean , dated December 12 , 1988 and attached hereto as Exhibit # 2 . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . Chairman Aron read Part III of the Environmental Assessment which was reviewed and signed by Town Planner Susan C . Beeners on December 4 , 1988 and is attached hereto as Exhibit # 3 . A motion as to the environmental assessment was made by Edward Austen as follows . RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca is the lead agency on the matter of the Appeal of Evelyn C . Lane and that the Board makes a negative declaration of environmental significance with respect to same . Mrs . Eva Hoffmann seconded the motion . The voting was as follows . Ayes - Aron , Hoffmann , Austen . Nays - None . • The motion was unanimously carried . Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 3 Chairman Aron asked if there are any tools being used in the building in question. Mrs . Lane responded that there are no tools or equipment in that building , there is a separate building where they make the hand crafted items . The garage is just for displaying the items and for storage . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Lane to show the Board on the map that was presented where the shop is located . Mrs . Lane pointed out where the shop is and where the barn is that the items are being made in . Attorney Barney asked Mrs . Lane . for the size of the barn . Mr . Lane responded that it is a 30 ' x 40 ' barn . Chairman Aron questioned Mrs . Lane on how often they intend to advertise . Mrs . Lane replied that they think that from now through March will be a busy time for this type of business and then probably in April they will be traveling to craft shows and they may advertise again then . She stated it will not be a great deal of advertising , not on a weekly basis . Chairman Aron asked Mr . Lane when was he declared disabled . Mr . Lane responded that the permanent final decision was made on May 31 , 1988 . He said that the Workers ' Compensation Board has him classified as permanently partially disabled and the case is . now closed : The public hearing was opened . No one appeared . The public hearing was closed . Mr . Austen inquired as to the size of the sign that is on the property for the business . Chairman Aron responded that it is a legal sign . Mrs . Lane stated that they have a sign permit . Mrs . Hoffmann questioned that according to Zoning Ordinance it says that there should be no goods or products publicly displayed or advertised for sale and yet Mr . and Mrs . Lane have been given permission to have a signup , which is advertising in a certain way . She asked for clarification on this matter . Chairman Aron responded that that is true but that in years past , the Town of Ithaca has allowed those who have home occupations to have signs put up . Mrs . Hoffmann also questioned the size of the building and she referred to the part of the Zoning Ordinance that states the size is not to exceed 200 sq . ft . She stated that the shop where the Lanes are doing the actual work is 1200 sq . ft . plus the 200 or so sq . ft . that is in the display area . She asked the Board if it doesn ' t have to consider both of those areas . Attorney Barney stated that his sense of it would be that the display area would be a partial function of the performing of the home occupation and should be • included in determining the 200 sq . ft . maximum . Chairman Aron said that in that case the Board has to consider two variances . Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 4 Mr . Frost stated that it was an oversight on his part , that he was not thinking about where the products were being made when we visited the property and took the pictures . Chairman Aron said that according to the legal opinion that we have here is that a display which is manufactured on the property should be part of the 200 sq . ft . Chairman Aron referred again to the map that was presented to the Board . He stated that the drawing is very misleading . He would like to see some proper drawings so the Board knows exactly what they are talking about , rather than doing it by guess work . Mr . Lane commented that the woodworking shop has been there for years . Mrs . Lane explained that it has only . been recently that Mr . Lane has used his hobby to make money by selling handcrafted items . Chairman Aron stated that even as a hobby , the 1480 sq . ft . measurements are way over the limit that is allowed . Mr . Frost commented that as a hobby ( and he has made this judgment in the past ) , his impression as Zoning Officer is that 2 , 000 sq . ft . is permissible because there are no restrictions for hobbies . Chairman Aron responded that Mr . and Mrs . Lane are working on • 1480 sq . ft . which makes it not a hobby anymore , but it is his understanding that they did not know they could have only 200 sq . ft . to pursue a home occupation which is allowed in that residential neighborhood . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Lane if it would create a tremendous hardship to her if the area of operation was cut down to the 200 sq ft . , which is the legal area that is allowed ? Mrs . Lane replied that yes it would and that it also would not be safe to have people around the saws and tools that are used in . the woodworking shop . Discussion followed on the floor regarding the types of tools that are used in the shop and the amount of space in the shop that is being used to store lumber , etc . Chairman Aron stated that the Board needs to establish what is the used area space for the operation discounting the lumber which is used for other purposes . Mr . Lane responded that it is probably about a 20x20 area . Chairman Aron said that when the Board gives or does not give a variance , they have to be very sure of the exact amount of space that they will allow a person to use so that they can make a living but he cannot see 1500 sq . ft . , to him that is a commercial operation . Mr . Austen asked if the Board could get a scale drawing showing the complete layout such as where the equipment is set up , where the display area is , where the storage area is , etc . • Attorney Barney suggested that the publication for tonight ' s meeting was Just for the advertising request of the Lane ' s not for a variance . He stated that obviously the Lanes were not Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 i� 5 aware that a variance was an issue and he asked the Board if the matter of the advertising could be settled tonight and if the Board saw fit to grant a variance , that it be conditional on the filing of an application very quickly in relation to the square footage area with the drawings that the Board would require and that could come up at the next meeting of the Board after the proper advertising and the neighbors are properly notified . Chairman Aron stated that he concurs with Attorney Barney . Mrs . Hoffmann said that she does not think the Lanes should be allowed to advertise in other ways since they have already been given permission to put up a sign for their business . She stated that to her that is advertising . Mr . Austen stated that he cannot remember the Board ever granting permission for media advertising for home occupations and he would not want to set a precedent . Mrs . Lane explained that once she and Mr . Lane get into the craft shows , they would not need to do much advertising but they are too late for this year . Chairman Aron reiterated that the Board has not ever granted a media advertisement for a home occupation . He stated that the Lanes should start going to craft shows and their merchandise will be their best advertising . Mr . Austen made the following motion , RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals denies the appeal of Evelyn C . Lane asking for permission to advertise , other than the sign which the Lanes have been granted approval for , and be it further RESOLVED , that Mr . and Mrs . Lane come back to the Board with scale drawings for consideration of an area :variance with respect to the area involved' in their home occupation . Mrs . - Eva Hoffmann seconded the motion . The voting was as follows , Ayes - Aron , Hoffmann , Austen , Nays - None . The motion was carried unanimously , The next item on the agenda was the following : APPEAL OF DONNA L . HOFSTEAD- DUFFY , APPELLANT , REQUESTING VARIANCES FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE V , SECTION 19 , PARAGRAPH 6 , AND SECTION 20 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , TO PERMIT THE KEEPING OF HORSES FOR HIRE AT 340 • WARREN ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 68 - 1 - 2 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . THE APPELLANT PROPOSES , WITH RESPECT TO THE KEEPING OF HORSES FOR HIRE , TO CONSTRUCT AN INDOOR RIDING AREA IN A BUILDING TO EXCEED 15 FEET IN HEIGHT Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 6 WITH SAID BUILDING BEING CLOSER THAN 30 FEET FROM A LOT LINE . SAID ORDINANCE DOES NOT PERMIT THE KEEPING OF HORSES FOR HIRE AND FURTHER REQUIRES AN ACCESSORY BUILDING TO BE NO HIGHER THAN 15 FEET WITH SUCH A BUILDING HOUSING HORSES TO BE AT LEAST 30 FEET FROM ANY LOT LINE . THE APPELLANT SEEKS A VARIANCE FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS . Mrs . Duffy addressed the Board and presented a proposal for ' Little Brook Farm ' ( attached as Exhibit # 4 ) and a drawing of the proposed building ( attached as Exhibit # 5 ) . Chairman Aron asked Mrs . Duffy how many horses there are presently on the premises . Mrs . Duffy responded that at the present time there are no horses there . She stated that her husband is a trainer of show horses and a limited partner in the Asbury Farms Corporation at this time but if the Salernos decide that they would like to sell , they need a place to operate out of . She said that she and her husband are trying to secure their future a little bit on the property they have now and are looking at a smaller operation . Mrs . Duffy stated that they would like the variance , not necessarily to use it immediately , but to know that they would not have to be looking elsewhere for space and relocating . Chairman Aron stated that there are two types of variances needed for this project . One is a Use Variance , which means that that barn would be used for a commercial use , the other variance that the Board would have to consider is an Area Variance because Mrs . Duffy wants to build an accessory building closer to the lot line than allowed and because the building that is being requested will be higher than allowed by the Zoning Ordinance . He said that if the Board goes any further with the matter , he will explain to Mrs . Duffy what the criteria is for both types of variances so she will be prepared . Chairman Aron read a letter to Mrs . Duffy and the Board that was received from the Country Club of Ithaca , dated December 13 , 1988 and attached hereto as Exhibit # 6 , and he read a statement of a telephone call from Mrs . Virginia Langhans on December 12 , 1988 , which is attached hereto as Exhibit # 7 . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT . Chairman Aron read Parts II and III of the Environmental Assessment to Mrs . Duffy as attached hereto as Exhibit # 8 . He stated that since the Zoning Board of Appeals is the Lead Agency they are abiding by this form which was signed by Mr . George Frantz , Asst , Town Planner , and dated December 14 , 1988 . Chairman Aron explained to Mrs . Duffy the difference between a negative and a positive declaration . He stated that in this case there may be adverse effects with the project as it has been presented . He recommended to Mrs . Duffy that she contact the Town Planner and fill out the Long Environmental Assessment Form . He recommended to the Board that they adjourn the matter until Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 7 the time that the Town Planner , together with the Zoning Officer , are satisfied that everything has been filled in on the Long Environmental Assessment Form . Mrs . Duffy stated that she understood the procedure . A motion was made by Chairman Aron as follows : RESOLVED , by the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals , that the matter of the Appeal of Donna L . Hofstead - Duffy be adjourned until Mrs . Duffy is ready to come before the Board with a completed Long Environmental Assessment Form . Mr . Edward Austen seconded the motion . Mr . Austen stated that he is concerned about the size of the property for which this project is being proposed . He said that there is only 1 3 / 4 acres there and the Board did not approve Cornell University ' s use that they requested for their riding stable which was a very much larger property than that which Mrs . Duffy is requesting variances for . Mrs . Duffy responded that she thinks that the term ' horses for hire ' is really very misleading . She stressed that there is not any horse for hire . They would be boarding horses only on a very limited basis . Mr . Austen said • that the project that is being proposed is even closer to the residential area than where the Cornell polo facility was proposed to be located at one time . Mrs . Duffy pointed out that less than one - quarter mile from them , at the beginning of the stream , there are 100 horses . She remarked that those horses are outside while hers would be inside as she had explained to Asst . Town Planner Mr . Frantz . Mr . Austen reiterated that she will have to document very well the information in order for the Board to look at it in a positive light . Mrs . Duffy stated that she can appreciate that . A vote on the motion resulted as follows : Ayes - Aron , Austen , Hoffmann . Nays - None . The motion was unanimously carried . The next item on the agenda was the following : APPEAL OF JOHN E . RANCICH , APPELLANT , MICHAEL J . MORUSTY , APPLICANT , REQUESTING VARIANCE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE XIII , SECTION 67 , AND ARTICLE IV , SECTIONS 14 AND 16 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , WITH RESPECT TO THE SUBDIVISION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 25 - 2 - 32 , • KNOWN AS 845 - 847 TAUGHANNOCK BLVD . , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 , INTO TWO LOTS , SAID SUBDIVISION HAVING BEEN GRANTED FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL BY THE PLANNING BOARD ON NOVEMBER 1 , 1988 , SUBJECT TO CERTAIN CONDITIONS . SAID SUBDIVISION , AS Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 8 CONDITIONALLY APPROVED , CREATES ONE LOT 71405± SQ . FT . IN SIZE WITH A FRONT YARD WIDTH OF 59 . 29 + FEET , A FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM AN EXISTING DWELLING OF 16 . 5± FEET , AND A SIDE YARD SET BACK OF 2 + FEET . SAID ORDINANCE REQUIRES A LOT SIZE OF 15 , 000 SQ . FT . , A FRONT YARD WIDTH OF 100 FEET , A FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 25 FEET , AND A 15 - FOOT SIDE YARD . Mr . Michael Morusty addressed the Board . Chairman Aron referred to Zoning Board of Appeals minutes from May 17 , 1966 , October 4 , 1966 , and November 3 , 1966 , which are attached hereto as Exhibits # 9 , # 10 , and # 11 . He read references from these three sets of minutes , and said that actually that property has received two variances . Mr . Morusty stated that he thinks he has asked for two more variances but that one request may have already been granted . Chairman Aron responded that where the deck is it shows 2 feet but the granting was for 5 feet . Mr . Frost stated that he was very conservative when he wrote up the appeal . He said that as he sees it at this point , the actual setback of the house on the side lot is two feet , so Mr . Morusty didn ' t meet the variance that was granted for the side yard in November 1966 , so he is now looking for a side yard that would be 13 foot deficient • or as it is now , 2 feet to the property line from the building . Chairman Aron replied that he was granted up to 5 feet so he is 3 feet deficient . Mr . Frost stated that that is assuming , though , that Mr . Morusty ever had a 5 foot set back , which he never did . Mr . Morusty questioned if that is from the actual building itself or from the deck that is running around the outside of the building for a fire escape ? Chairman Aron replied that it is from the deck . Mr . Frost stated that it seems that when they built that deck it ended up 2 feet to the property line rather than the 5 feet . Mr . Morusty replied that the deck is a little wider than the three feet that Mr . Aron had been talking about . He stated that he thinks it is actually a 6 foot wide deck to make it a little more practical for fire because 3 feet would make it terribly small . Mr . Frost stated that the bottom line is that the building is 2 feet from the side yard . Mr . Frost further stated that the other aspect is that the lot that this house sits on , when it is subdivided officially , is under 15 , 000 sq . ft . that is required , the actual measurement is 7 , 405 sq . ft . + , so there has to be two variances . The public hearing was opened . No one appeared . The public hearing was closed . Chairman Aron stated that the two variances that are being • requested are for a 3 foot variance on the side yard and the other is for the lot to be allowed to be only 7 , 405 sq . ft . + rather than 15 , 000 sq . ft . Mr . Morusty stated that he understood and he had no questions . Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 9 Chairman Aron read an Adopted Resolution from the Planning Board , dated November 1 , 1988 , as attached hereto as Exhibit # 12 . Chairman Aron wished to point out to Mr . Morusty that this document is only a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals and it does not mean that the Board has to adhere to it . Mr . Morusty stated that he understood that . Chairman Aron said that what the Board is considering is whether or not Mr . Morusty should receive a side yard variance for 3 feet and whether or not the Board should grant him an area variance of 7 , 405 + ft . vs . 15 , 000 ft . , and a third variance for the front yard width of 40 . 71+ ft . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Chairman Aron read Part III from the Environmental Assessment Form , dated October 27 , 1988 and signed by Susan C . Beeners , Town Planner , as attached hereto as Exhibit # 13 . A motion was made as to the environmental assessment by Mr . Edward Austen as follows . RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals , as Lead • Agency for the Rancich/Morusty Appeal , declares a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance with respect to same . Mrs . Eva Hoffmann seconded the motion . The voting was as follows . Ayes - Aron , Austen , Hoffmann . Nays - None . The motion was unanimously carried . Mr . Edward Austen made the following motion : RESOLVED , that the Board grants the variance for the side yard on the south side of the building to permit no part of the structure to come closer than 2 feet from the lot line and further grants a variance of 40 . 71+ feet for the front yard width , and also grants a variance of 7 , 595 + sq . ft . for the parcel containing 7 , 405± sq . ft . , with the conditions as amended that were imposed by the Planning Board at its November 1 , 1988 meeting . The conditions are as follows , • a . The reduction and restriction of the number of dwelling units as proposed , including removal of third meter and third kitchen in each building by June 30 and • 10 July 31 , 1989 respectively , as stated in the previous Zoning Board of Appeals minutes . b . The provision of adequate screening or containment for garbage cans in a location convenient for the four dwelling units involved , and improvement of the existing blacktop drive to include repair of the westernmost retaining wall . c . The connection to the Town public . sewer main by December 1 , 1989 . d . The amendment of the property survey to show all side , front , and rear yard setbacks to the main building or deck , whichever is closer , such amended property survey to be approved by the Town Engineer prior to the recording of the final subdivision plat in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . e . The approval of access easement and leach field easement if necessary by the Town Attorney prior to the recording of the final subdivision plat in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office , such agreements to be in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney for recording in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . f . The receipt of a letter requesting the subdivision and the related variances from the holder of legal title to • the property . g . At least one unit in each of the properties must be , for at least three years out of every five , occupied by the owner of the premises , based upon the findings that it is a mechanism to alleviate a longstanding problem of having more than two large buildings on one lot and that there is no other practical way of handling the problem , short of subdividing the property and allowing for smaller lots . Mrs . Eva Hoffmann seconded the motion . Chairman Aron stated to Mr . Morusty that it would behoove him to go to the Town Planner or to the Building Enforcement Officer and get a copy of the conditions because they will be strictly enforced . Mr . Morusty replied that he understands . A vote on the motion was as follows . Ayes - Aron , Austen , Hoffmann . Nays - None . The motion was unanimously carried . The last item on the agenda was the following . • AGENDA ITEM . DETERMINATION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DECISION BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO ADJOURNED APPEAL Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 11 ( FROM OCTOBER 26 , 1988 ) OF GEORGE SHELDRAKE , APPELLANT , REQUESTING THE AUTHORIZATION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS , UNDER ARTICLE XII , SECTION 54 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE EXTENSION OF A NON - CONFORMING BUILDING OR USE AT 174 CALKINS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO , 6 - 33 - 2 - 10 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . THE APPELLANT PROPOSES TO EXTEND ABOVE AN EXISTING BUILDING FOUNDATION BY ADDING A TWO -STORY SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE , WITH SAID PARCEL OF LAND PRESENTLY CONTAINING A SEPARATE SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE . SAID EXISTING BUILDING FOUNDATION PRESENTLY CONTAINS A SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE . ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE PERMITS ONLY ONE DWELLING BUILDING ON A SINGLE PARCEL OF LAND . SHOULD THE APPELLANT FAIL TO PROVE A " LEGAL " NON - CONFORMING BUILDING OR USE , A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FROM SAID ARTICLE V . SECTION 18 , HAS BEEN REQUESTED . Chairman Aron read a copy of a letter from William S . Seldin , Esq . , to Judge Wallenbeck , as attached hereto as Exhibit # 14 . Chairman Aron stated that Mr . Sheldrake has two buildings on one lot and that is illegal . He would recommend that the matter • be referred to the Planning Board for a subdivision subject to any variances to come before the Zoning Board of Appeals . Mr . Edward Austen said that this would be pretty tough to make a subdivision because there is one building right behind the other . Atty . Barney stated that he thinks the problem is that this is a prior existing non - conforming use . He said that both of the foundations have been there , as Mr . Sheldrake has testified , since at least 1954 which is before the Town ' s Ordinance , Chairman Aron asked the Town Attorney how can the Town resolve the issue best . Atty . Barney responded that the Board has to make a decision and notify Mr . Sheldrake of that decision . He thinks the sense was to allow him to enlarge a non - conforming use which is basically what Mr. . Sheldrake was asking for . Chairman Aron asked if it is in the footprint . Mr . Frost replied that he is not sure how well the Town ever established that pre - existing foundation , whether it was intended for a barn or for a house . He further stated that Mr . Sheldrake is not extending the footprint of the building or the existing foundation as it was , he is extending the height of the non - conforming building . Chairman Aron asked if a height variance is needed . Mr . Frost responded that a height variance is not needed , what he would need is a variance to have two residential buildings on one parcel of land . Atty . Barney stated that he does not think Mr . Sheldrake needs a variance , that what he is looking for is an extension of Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 • 12 a non - conforming use and that is what the notice also states . Mr . Frost responded that he was not comfortable that Mr . Sheldrake ever established the non - conforming use so he wrote it two ways , one is a variance should the appellant fail to prove the non - conforming use he is looking for . Mr . Frost stated that his question is : was this pre - existing foundation intended to be a residential building which he does not think Mr . Sheldrake ever proved . Mr . Edward Austen asked if Mr . Sheldrake would challenge the decision . Atty . Barney stated that he thought we concluded at the last meeting that if the Town prosecuted Mr . Sheldrake and he pled guilty , and he paid a fine , that he would be granted Special Approval to enlarge a non - conforming use . He said that he would rather see it on that basis than on a variance of allowing two buildings there because then if he ever sells them off , he will have to have a subdivision application at that point , and if the Town grants him a variance , he can sell them . Chairman Aron asked Atty . Barney for clarification that what he is suggesting is to extend the non - conforming use . Atty . Barney responded yes , Special Approval to allow the extension of the non - conforming use . Mr . Frost said that he remembers clearly • that Mr . King said in the resolution that the Board would intend to grant the variance as long as the Town sought prosecution and the fine was paid . Chairman Aron stated that he agrees with Attorney Barney on the suggestion of granting Special Approval to enlarge a non- conforming use . Mr . Edward Austen made the following motion . RESOLVED , That the Town of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals grants special approval to Mr . Sheldrake to extend the non - conforming building to allow the construction of the first and second story of that house , in accordance with the determinations as set forth in Article XIV , Section 77 , Paragraph 7 , Sub - paragrpahs " a " through " f " . Mrs . Eva Hoffmann seconded the motion . The voting was as follows . Ayes - Aron , Hoffmann , Austen . Nays - None . • The motion was unanimously carried . Zoning Board of Appeals December 14 , 1988 i13 Mr . Edward Austen noted that there was no one at the meeting to oppose this action and at the previous meeting people had spoken for the structure being retained as it is . THE NEXT MEETING OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IS SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 4 , 1989 . Chairman Aron wished to thank the Board members for all their time and effort in regard to the Board and a special thanks to Mr . Andrew Frost for an outstanding job as Building Inspector . The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 00 p . m . Respectfully Submitted , _ W 9:� Connie J . Holcomb Recording Secretary Exhibits 1 ough 14 attached • APPROVE Henry Aron , Chairman • 46 TOWN OF ITHACA FEE : $40 . 00 126 East Seneca Street RECEIVED ,* , Ithaca, New York 14850 CASH (607 ) 273 - 1747 CHECK - O • ZONING : A P P E A L For Office Use Only to the Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer % and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca, New York Having been denied permission to S " � r� q „ , � r � i; To -yr PrJ e lib C FROM i0vk A14yr OF OU4 C>r9!� CAE �S d&d�raA is W07yts JR 7c&M ARN News�o� � r.. cccf ✓ee �.Siv® . z� WA•` r,, " 1 )AJ LO 0 k A fie /17-A1 , TO tnAJ 6 Z4 t AM Ll P, A . lAg , at (!S33 klAJr. kogo L /C�57- Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . (v - 3`1 _ � a7 , as shown on the accompanying application and/or plans or other supporting. documents, for. the stated reason that the issuance of such permit would be in violation of : • Article (s ) _ SgctJon( s) 19 z of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, the UNDERSIGNED respectfully submits this Appeal . from such denial and, in support of the ' Appeal , affirms that strict observance of the Zoning Ordinance would impose PRACTICAL DIFF C�M,ES and/or UBNECESSARY HARDSHIP as fol laws : CAdditional sheets may be attached as necessary . ) leis n,r ) Z l-�A&6AJT eJc S6511 CRfQE -- ="L/26T . z!;51AA870A, d, , , iiirkc i .2/,G6 /.t>*a T/> SUB/79/T 1, ,46T tlo19 S A &&m4 67i f,Y/Fsyr >1c .tJ.�C'F55.S�P.�/� NAS yZAR6 /Q oRi // Qu IPL T07� k rdyX*5 d0AzWj!5: A 4 AP�iPDVi I� l f f l 0112111 Tn P,01 220-M - 1A(N y J � TAYfS � • Signature of Owner/Appellant : C " Date : ,SOL Signature of Appellant /Agent : Date : OPL INFORMATIOW TO BE SHOWN : 1 . Dimensions of lot . 4 . Dimensions and location of proposed structure( s) or •2 . Distance of structures from : or additlon( s) . a . Road, 5 . Nanes of neighbors who bound lot . b . Both side Tot lines, 6 . Setback of neighbors . c . Rear of lot . 7 . Street name and nurber . 3 . North arrow . 8 . Show existing structures in contrasting lines . LZC- L L F' f i i Signature of Owner/Appellant : C "• &40e Date : 7 � a- f Signature of Appellant /Agent : v Date : U10•� I[ O/ �— laxl 1L • PROJECT I .Q. NUMBER 011.21 SEAR Appendix C • State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I— PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1 . APPLICANT / PONSOR 2 . PROJECT NAE AIAr S. PROJECT TION: Municipality T� _ County p 1. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide ) _ _ - �3 � Il d . we, 5 , IS PROPOSED ACTION: ??��, ❑ New CD Expansion Pj Mod ificatlon/alteration 8 , DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: w6Ivows A) k/00jo Dr5eiQ/ Of lie ) F evirv�w 'TTjC'U'j'jey goers' "T'lJ,emw '000/0 &&,*5 SvArgj5es 3 " Kier l�1 =2 7 . AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: - Initially _ __ (', acres Ultimately acres 8 . WILL PROPOSED�ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? 11 Yes USNo If No, describe briefly • 9 . WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ® Residential ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial Agriculture ❑ Park/Fornblopen apace Other Describe: 10 , DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL. OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FRDIM ANY 0T Ok GOVE1111116AWAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? - ❑ Yes *No If yes, list agency(s) and permit/approvals 1 11 , DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPOWAL? Yea ❑ No If yes, list agency name and Vwmit/approlrai 12. AS A RESULTkF ACTION WILL EXISTING PERM ITIAPPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ❑ Yes 1 CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE le TRUE T0'TW 1E :Cr-9VjG1 APWbantlaponsor n z5y ,� A,1 ,l ,C. A/11C Date: signature: , If the action is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state agenc , complete ptets the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER LEGEND NEW YORK STATE PARK LAND H = MOUSE 550 FT. R. E . LANE 9. 1A N THIS AREA TO BE LEFT AS IS E w Y 0 600FT RK S T • LIFE LEASE TO ®� A W. 1 P. SMITH T ` 330 F Te E H � UNOCCUPIED) P BARN A 10FT- EE 100 R K Re ELANE 225FTo L HEDGEROW 30 FT, HIGH A ONE BAY PRIVATE DRIvE D 12X 24 FT. Di LIBERATO GI FT SHOP RAY GARAGE ' 30 � T J, C , LANE • H Go Fr H 275FTO H 220 FTm - RENTALS 25H � SMITH / 5OFn r_ JUNE 1986 �NDTS) ^4 , . \ \ � r R a ti OD �r � SII R « 1` ' II / ...� � �• �� � III � � � • III t s 1 � r • rai— owo�af o� �� O � / C!J ol w y J r r � i 1 330 West King Road • Ithaca , New York December 12 , 1988 Mr . Andrew Frost Zoning Enforcement . Officer Town of Ithaca 126 East Seneca Ithaca , New York 14850 , Dear Mr . Frost : I received a notice that our neighbor , Evelyn Lane , had applied for a zoning variance in order to advertise " the sale. :of handcrafted items in conjunction -with a customary home occupation " . My husband and I think that the Lanes ' woodworking business is an asset to the neighborhood , that their sign is tasteful and appropriate for a quiet . residential neighborhood , and . that they should be allowed to advertise in the newspapers . I am writing to express my hope that the Zoning loard of Appeals will grant this variance , because I won ' t be able to attend the meeting on December 14 to say so . Sincerely yours , Christiana Dean cc : Richard and Evelyn Lane • � �`az PAR= --_Enmironmental Agz-e ament - .WQndera=LL- Wood A . Action is Unlisted . Be Action will receive coordinated review ( Tompkins County Planning Department ) . C . Couidaction r&ault in any adverse Qf =ta on . to or C1 Existing_air_qualitY , surfacoor groundwater guality_or_guantitY.L._noise_ lev_els , _existing_traffic patterns_ solid_waste_production_or_disposal._potential for e r o sisn , d_rainago or_f iQsding_�oblema? No major site alterations are involved . Traffic impact is minor as a result of the handcraft shop . No significant adverse impact is expected . �2�_Aeath�ti4.�_agriQ�alt�a�ai��QhaQ.l.4giQ.a1..�_hi.�tQni� or other_natural_or_cuiturai_resources1_or_coMmmUnity or neighborhood_charactert Because of size and location of the shop , located in a low - density area , no significant impact to these factors is anticipated . No local objections . to the existing permitted sign are known . • C3 . Vegetation orfauna fish , _ shellfish or wildlife - speciaa . significant habitats , _or threatened_orendangerp species ? None would be impacted by , this action . C4 . _A community ' s existingolansor.goals as offi._cially adopted , _ or a change in use_ or_in e sity of use of_ land or_ ot pr_natural resources ? Shop represents a minor increase in land use intensity on a large 8 - 9 acre lot with several dwellings . The plan submitted shows no intention to develop the back portion of the property abutting Buttermilk Falls State Park . The proposed shop itself , as presented in the appeal , would cause no significant adverse impact to these factors . C5 . Growth , subsequent development , or related a iyitiea_lik.QlYtSz.J22_induQadby the proposed action Any further development on the parcel should be subject to review . Any additional appeals of this nature on other properties would be specifically reviewed . Cfi� bones term_ahQrtta�m__.�umulativo , orother elfaats _nQtidenti . ad_in..Qi-C.59 Not expected . • C7 . Other_ im actstincluding changenin_use_of either guantitY_or type of _energy ) ? Not expected . #z� 3 I • p, �Is_ h ,_or is here likmly_tQ be,.contrgygrsy related tg.p.atantl,al adYap- Ylronmen s31_lIDPa.Qta.J. No controversy is known or expected at the time of review . A negative determination of environmental significance is recommended for this action based on the appeal and on the small scale of the action . Lead Agency : Town of °Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Reviewer : Susan C . Beeners , Town Planner Review Date : Dec . 4 , 1988 • PROPOSAL FOR LITTLE BROOK FARM Donna and Gary Duffy 340 Warren Rd . Ithaca , NY 13205 ( 607 ) 257 - 3368 INTRODUCTION : Gary Duffy has been a professional trainer of horses specializing • in show hunters for fifteen years . He is • one of the top horse trainers in the country , his sales have been nationwide and , very sucessful in regards to " matching " a rider to the proper animal . The training , showing , and sale of show horses is all interrelated in this unique type of business . Presently Gary is workingoutof Asbury Hill Farm located in Freeville , NY . In the event that he . is no longer able to have access to this facility for whatever reason , we Ir are trying to secure the future of possibly using our 11 property if the need ever arises . Our property is well suited u to carry on this business , the financial aspects are in line , the location is convenient yet isolated , and the farm has always had horses in the past so wi11 th some tasteful addition • it could once again be a " working " "farm . OPERATION : The proposed barn that would replace some of the • 1 existing smaller barns and outbuildings would have ten stalls , wash stall , tack room and office . The riding area would be enclosed as the area weather cannot be allowed to dictate the trainingschedules . A limited number of stalls would be available for local show clients to board their horses . C In reference to variance request for " horses for hire " ) . The other riding area would most likely be a outdoor ring that would serve as a turnout paddock as well as a schooling area . Thus , the horses are ° allowed in their stalls or designated riding area . We will fence the entire perimeter of our property with four plank fence to assure that our • neighbors , the Country Club of Ithaca , will never have any unwelcomed guests . Some extra parking would be available in front of the barn , but this need would be no more than three or four spaces . If for any reason there is an immediate need for extra parking , the circular drive behind our house can accommodate five to six vehicles . The issue of sanitation is one that needs to be addressed in two parts , the first is the immediate waste from the horses . It is usual in barns ofilthis sort and location to have a garbage disposal company to "sell a dumpater and provide pick up service . We have contacted one company up the • road from us and they would be willing to service us . The second need is for our conversion from septic to town sewer . We feel that this would be both for' the house and for the barn area . We realize that the coat of this would be considerable but for this proposal we see no alternative . I was told the sewer line is about twohundredand eighty feet from our property and will not be extended because of the low population density on our road . In fact , we are very isolated In this location , we. feel this isolation is key in asking for these variances . The variance to build C In reference to variance to build closer than thirty foot from property line ) would have very little impact on ourllneighbors . The existing buildings presently exceed or are very close to thirty foot height , ( In reference to variance for maximum of fifteen foot • height for accessory building ) and they held horses for years so there is some aspects of " grandfathering " in this situation . CONCLUSION : The need for these variances would be critical in 11 the event the present situation changes and Gary needs to relocate his horses . We feel the approval to have horses on our property would protect our future . To have the peace of mind that this is where we can stay : and raise our family and not worry about selling and relocating would be the ideal . We truly treasure our house and property and hope that we will not have to leave it in order to have financial security . • 1 • rze � e " I - -' -- - --- --- - .- 'p• i es vAfqiACK 1 1 1 • Offsc4 y 4 a i O r 50'-0 i I a M 10 N D G 1 - 0 I • 1 y � O I I 1 I ' i y r . N 0 c � a V v � ti y e r 9 0 E - 4 • 0 Uro. 0 • Vd4e4a December 13 , 1988 Mr . Andrew S . Frost Bldg . Insp . / Zoning Town of Ithaca Ithaca , New York 14850 RE : Appeal of Donna L . Hofstead - Duffy - Zoning Variance Dear Mr . Frost . Until more information is presented on this proposed building , the Country Club of Ithaca would have to oppose the construction by Donna Hofstead - Duffy at this point in time . Further documentation on various .aspects of the project would be required for review at the Club ' s next board of directors meeting . The Club has the following concerns : 1 . Is a fence proposed for the area surrounding the structure , and would horses be allowed to run freely outside of the building 2 . Would need proof of insurance coverage on horses for possibility of property damage on golf course in the event of escape .. 3 . Proposed plan to alleviate odor during summer months 4 . Design of structure to be built 5 . Is structure primarily for indoor riding use , or would horses also be housed on site 6 . Would stream running across property lines be used for any riding or cleaning purposes A response regarding these concerns would . be appreciated . Sincerely , Mar H . Davies General Manager i • MHD / Ib 4 L 189 PLEASANT GROVE ROAD • ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 • (607 ) 257-0010 TMA�A December 13 , 1988 On 12 - 12 - 88 the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals ( Henry Aron ) receiveda telephone call from . Town Board Member , Mrs . Virginia Langhans of Halcyon Hill Road which is located a half mile from the proposed - horse boarding for hire facility proposed by Mrs . .Donna Duffy of Warren Road . The purpose of Mrs . Langhans telephone conversation with Mr . Aron was to . . let Mr . Aron . be aware that she is not in favor Of having horses boarded for hire in- a Residential R- 30 District . She feels that this seems to be the beginning of a commercial endeavor not related to a Residential District . ' Mrs . Langhans also - feels that the Board of Zoning Appeals - . should not set a precedent . / � CA 7 1418.4 (2187)—Text 12 PROJECT I.D. NUMBER 617.21 SEAR Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review • SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I — PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1 . APPLICANT /SPONSOR 2 . PROJECT NAME ,t)A1R g 3 . PROJECT LOCATION! Municipality l t r= ffltAt, A County � 1 � 4 . PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road Intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map) 340 WA2 � Foo-ow , 5 , IS PROPOSED ACTION: ❑ New ❑ Expansion odification/alteration . 8 . DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: &PACS Oc.DFfl t3heN,s w 1 � HEw 57 'UGrU S �yE o�� iU f7 FM 7b 7>T •y�+•N•ic1S �i�ivs 7 . AMOUNT OF LAND A FECTED: �a Initially 6 acres Ultimately acres 8 . WILL PROPOSED AAUON COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? Clu Yes No If No, describe briefly Nee 1154; VAJe1AflJ64V j�iO2 AOL � S6G q. HA2 � � -- 1100.5-65 o4eZ e ;91.,-r, Sa.y� w�� Oss1N ,Q� 13f� ds4 DLeJ.IJCz �S POT . £"XC'c.US1a94. y DU (Z. AIJ/ 14465, 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ❑ Residential ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Agriculture ❑ Park/Forest/Open space ❑ Other Describe: S U R6Lf�v �•'�gD g i fOoM FpOlAolg, 10, DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE -,OAR ,LOCAL)? �ee ❑ No If yes, list agency(s) and permlVapprovals CO 614 11 . DOES ANY ASPECyOF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? Cl Yes o If yea, list agency name and permlVapproval 12 . AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACJION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ❑ Yes ❑ No �JLA I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE nor r )ate: Applant/epo4 TU S Signature: If the action Is in . the Coastal Area, and 4u are a state agency, complete the . Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 • ���_ II _ �nvirQnment��._��.eeemen�_= �PPea�._o�_�onn��n�_S��rY Dnffv A . Action is Unlisted . B . Action will receive coordinated review . ( Tompkins County Planning Department ) . _��al�anti.Qn �alt _in_anx_ �r� e_nff s _4n� tQo "rizing from the_fallaKing- or_grgundkaat.er quality or quantity,_noise_ levels , existing_tr1ffjc pattern , .aoJid.. ante production_or d sPQsaiy_potenlia forerQsion . drainage : The proposed riding rink/ stable building is adjacent to Pleasant Grove Stream , which is listed as " protected " by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation . There is potential for pollution from surface water runoff and soil erosion into the stream from the proposed project . Any outdoor paddock area , if constructed on the site , may also generate soiul erosion and manure runoff into the stream . There is potential for .adverse impacts on air quality in the area from odors generated onsite . Such odors may affect a number of homes to the north on the site. including two which are + / - 500 feet or less from the proposed riding rink/ stable building . • C2a Aathe# ici._agriual , .4ic12eologigAl . historic . or other natur4i_Qx cultural resources , or conity or neighborhood character ? The site of the proposed . riding rink is approximately 400 feet from a residential area . Establishment of an essentially agricultural use in the area - - the proposed housing of up to 10 horses - - without the minimum setbacks required for accessory buildings housing domestic animals under Section 19 , par . 6 ( 30 feet ) , or the minimum setbacks required under Section 18 , par . 8 ( 100 feet ) for buildings housing farm animals , may have an adverse impact on the character .of the adjacent residential area . The scale of the proposed riding rink will exceed that of existing surrounding structures , including homes . Allowing a building of such size without minimum required setbacks may have an adverse impact on surrounding neighborhood character . The granting of a variance of the 15 ' maximum height re - striction for accessory buildings under - Section 19 , par . 6 will further increase the scale of the proposed riding rink and may may result in further adverse- impacts on neighborhood .character . Q . Vegetation_or fauna fishu_ahe11fish_or_wi1 1 ' e s_Pecies, ignificant habitats , or thrmaten._or endngered sPecieS ? No.. information is available on aquatic life in Pleasant • Grove Stream , or any potential impacts to aquatic life from runoff from the site . No significant species or habitats that would .be adversely impacted are known to exist on the site . • C4 . �_c4mmunity ' nd�tesl�_Qr_�_oh�nga_in_�an�s�r_in ansity of gr other, The keeping of horses for hire on the site may be incon - sistent with existing community plans and goals for the area , which are generally residential , institutional and related uses . The addition of the 120 ' X 70 ' indoor riding rink , covering 8 , 400 square feet of ground area , will increase lot coverage by buildings to + / - 20 . 3 % , or more than double the existing + / - 9 . 3 % building coverage , and above the . 10 % maximum lot coverage under Art . V Sect . 22 of the Zoning Ordinance . Granting variances from - the height and setback requirements of the Zoning Ordinance , - based on the present appeal , may not provide the adequate protections -. to adjoining property owners normally expected of a zoning ordinance . likely to be_induced_by the proposed action ? Granting of the requested variances , especially the setback and height variances , may limit the development of adjacent lands owned by the Country Club of Ithaca for anything other than the existing golf course uses . C6 . Long termer short term cumulative�_or other effects not identified in C1 - 05 ? None expected . C7 . Qther MT)acts ( incl.uding_chanas in use of either guAntitror t.ype of enemy ) ? None expected . D. Is there , or is there likely to • be , controversy related to potential sdv_erseenvironmental impacts ? Correspondence has been received from a Forest Home resident and from the adjacent Country Club of Ithaca with respect to concerns about site use and the commercial nature of the proposed stable . PART TIS A positive declaration of environmental significance is recommended for the appeal as currently presented , therefore a Long Environmental Assessment -Form must be submitted prior to any further review of this appeal because of possible significant adverse impacts . to local air and water quality , and to the character of the neighborhood , due to the size of the proposed facility and its operation . • Lead Agency : Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Reviewer : George R . Frantz , Asst . Town Planner Review Date : 12 / 14 / 88 // `IN IN .1 .y R*. . YJ ". ZIN- � 4 ei a " r _ 3 �' ' t I . 4I I. I.J.i . i t f 3+ $ �31tro 'ti rdl�a- 3 "t -. . .� 11 r r. : , z ? ' ! .' • 1.. '' a { 52NO " ? i r u7 y,i• ti ( SS}; ' t :<'� 1 'Y . t t, t T ,. - �: P'1� • 11 r i '' RSI v ' I, .r '. . . r , �. , r,:. ,, , i, „ r . { 1.,. {'. i t i 1t 'J SEx.`�Zr 'A• 1 , j z t` I. . t ry}y v `.Sr.tn r �>( t�y. :.Y ✓J. a F ,4;,,' � r 1417 !r: r. � ! '-, •�' , J r� , . , 'e' Ytry! 314^t r'� ;k A t, - '^ \ , Afi ..` t\, l y I :rte , j . rt a l� l v .� . . , , p fIN IV t b t l$ 1v f 1 �r a'4( i':il'ij , f 'YP; ,'. s+a?" 't t I , 3 rr 'fl` r ( r 1 Sb <' .' t F �+ k + NYA NOON y 1 ",' i- N 1 r Ye ri h 14 �iNr 0 r y7 iLLa IN ' NIN' ;' TOWN OF ITHACA :OF ' s . ,1' zaF' ��1f , t c t 1 f I it 'f aT-.t"fi+_:^ _'�' Ittw :: i .L` `Yt ; r t- - s - t3' k � 1 i c • ! t. f I .I v{.�l,.w7 r�tN 4 r1 tfttj..� At-1 1,31 JOIN t . (� n ik r, , . ,. � b � r r +rr F, i• ir .i i f J `5, '»,�,', !, 1;�q,A ,1 f '' 1 a+i t �}.t�' rY l' x, ` * ,, ( t ; _ f ": r ZONING BOARD OF : APPEALS NON IO �, :, , r`` ,l 3 .. t ��� ` h . Sp `I INK, f ` ON I Y,t t y rr z lFIN h I IN. 1 .r S rIN I IN ` J 1 . 3 ' x _ ,N 4yffk+ t '�• t. . }rM rdJ '1tf iF ; lti}^ ' at.' ' . f i i (' May 17 L1 1966 ;•�. .; I - t •rrt� Ill , isl I.ItfT{ f .1G}CiA , ', S � i .� u ;� 6' r h '�)Hy f4. ,K .. , t(J, y,Y^ + if I• , it 7 , 1Y ry+ r f t., F' •✓•`' ,1' .: i '( 5,, �l . +k &� r , tri I It 1.6 l r 1 r '. , 4 •f lei ..�4 t t }� t i t ' 1 w 1 ( w c e h . IF A .,I, IN I 1 y4Y kv in 1 1t ON.,t 3jf yl � r l t . 1 I 1. ` '•' I i 1f r' O} f .t+ 1 } h tlIN f. •i 11 .. s . 1R , ' IN 1' t t 1 Y" C 1. �' 1I\ ih, i y " .t+,•q.f" Y�Y J. `tya �i t , "! } I '' i �' .' r t . S ti `f rt ( '.:,o fl ,iiM1S,t� F off ^i .. t . . t� I1 .Y . . y.7. ,wr IF r' 1 t vl ifl! ' ' '�^t U ; ,. L ,f , Y t 'r9 ' i . '11 If i � ( .t_'+ 4♦ A ,t•}4 ft} y . `fIN s , , 1 -t r ,Y•¢ i b'+r. 2 . ., . . + <, _ A meeting of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals was III IN l: a ,i ` sj {�F � � �ON 1 held;. at the Q Town Offices , . 108. . :East Green Street , City - of c'�+' } . „_ �``� ,1IN I` {s, µYk , r_tiJOIN ON, Ithaca ' at . 7030 ' PoMo ori Tuesday , May 17 , 1966`®. ; : ; ON "ti , - A , IN I ' Members of the Board present were : Chairman David . F . Powers ® . tIN I IN IN William So • Scott , iro , Roger . Sovocool , Zoning Officer Andy IN. IN I IN -1SoyringIN . . ON , .and Secretary Cheryl So Beninatio I IN .. Also , present were Mro and Mrs ® . Go Ro . Livesay 1. 111 - IN, LIVESAY APPEAL _ SNYDER HILL ROAD FIRST CASE IN A ' Public Hearing was '' called to ' order at 7 : 35 PAM . Chairman _ y : , Powers explained to the. . members of the Board that MrA and S �' '' i 1 r , ` "_ ' Mrs Livesay had been denied a building permit to build aIN JOIN,` , garage within 50 feet of the right of way of the road The .., 4 It IN It N IN I r � h ON 1members of the Board studied - a sketch of the property , with r lON d �`` ,! 'f e . •} 44' the proposed garage , and . arrived at the following t ' \ t 4 G , ON F I NI IN • 1ONO FINDINGS ' OF FACT o t , y ' -. F N °4 r: IN I INxa/ } ` 1 ® The denial of the buildin ermit arose throw h ` ' ' 1 :' NO " i i"hs . 1 r g P gC �3 misinterpretation .of the Zoning Ordinance : - there r T � � yCi i t 4 a .. \r 4•r rCf � a�/rt I14 ��� °' was • no Town Zoning Office tY, f 2Y iNot` Fw rat the time tri guide f the ,4a . � 1NO applicant" in applying for the building permitAT c Cwt 1 > y - - f 1 1 i ri f 9Y kr+ � a 7t Ci�NO fry, . . - 4 ; t �'.s ` ,, � T " + `{+t tiw' NttFryI IN -yrl t.•stay x I.i t . NO rl-FF r +4 a 20 - At the time of application • for the building permit ; ,t " � NII-1 IA#Mj t r arI i � 1 ,t NNI 4L III .; fix the applicant sdid not . know the width of the right " ' ' Nz. It. ., - Fr .>•- •xy xd l , N i . „` t . 0 i t J�} .{ fn {tk ajr , f tirrr �.et,�',.t,- 1 1 �i'+ it p F highway p t U 4 ,f✓ s �f � A:; 7r J ^1 b' it yatti . s it M1,... . J - IN I M1 '� *L lei f a .j''.rr(.f r• } 9,y, f�•`L, .,1Iw5 'S ti r ._'. S , , ,, i r l�rY �! d + i 4Jt�' iYMiy�,j•,{ Sr,�+yd.,st' �.. 0 way VIN , { 11 ., k� - }iv +. f ): IF I_ t p i f . ",d` i 1 :*" yr, A. {' � ,: tTpori motion by Mr Sovocooly seconded by Mr ® Scott andrY ' : ` ' { ' IN IN N�LN ��;']� < carried by unanimous vote , the findings of fact were tL} `,a�. ,' y if i 7 . T i :.: 1 1 Y t ,� l '} O r f' r ; ��7 "IN NNII;-�" wrc ; :`adopted - ' and ` the appeal granted o This public hearing ' was ' {. - , ,;t `' , ' ° r� tININ-IIt j =w ; t adjourned at 7 040 P oMA Note ; No :persons appeared in =;y � IN ' IN . wx 4 ; � opposition ' to the foregoing � . }t 't / n AN z Ga,$'"• rr1r�'i2a. 1.d, t. ' it > ® + , \ r,a,tIN NO t, YA.t.-z kt , k .� ,1 S - r . . y . rlt ri ter 3v 1yFy ,7n Yuri t . t"*yt�.� 4J � k yn •. ' , 1 i .• . f. ? . Y_ .:` . 'i: -. . > } . . ' . . •. - ' + 7 �+. t . ' S f fatro�Fk -�.+r341'1r -rst`+�t4hr. . k � ty r. , . � u . . .. i ,� L 1.' 'c tir, 1r:;K(G 4 F f `RI •••i i1 I - IN s ;- SOYRING ON APPLICATION 847 TAUGHANNOCK BLVDIN NO A `' " y J tYhp f. t,✓ ✓ � 4Y y. , qty � 1 r,sFt 1 F ^4i„P`y,ru tIF It L �; •. Mr ;rS 7t• ift ` ECOND CASE ,1. Pi * , 6Tt.,iT f�. .Mlxv'exFfi.T:. : ; ` airt kt �v . y. \ . . - - � I. NOJr / INN (: F 1 {J'{I. ((y 3.S^ ` k � :.Fi 1. .: r - IN �'IN ti�l(V ze'Ir 3�r Yk >`4 ''` = A Public Hearing Was called to order at 7045 PAM ® Chairman ,��!$P ,�tz 1 . .I xNNO� Powers . explained to the Board members that MrA Soyring had ; : `: ` ,,N INN been denied a building permit to build atwo-family dweLli �f � fi 4M �Y P% it rr'c on a one ®famil dI . well ; `" lot o .+y5 x y lug As of May 12 , Mr A Soyring ' r 4 .' N . , IN made application for a variance to build said two—famil ` � ` :. y r � 4� a dwelling and also 'for a set —back of 15 feet instead of 25 `' I N. I If Y ♦ .f iYIN J s, 3,ION , ° rarl feet from the road for said - dwelling , After studying , the Yi ' y � '� z •' : brt . NNI: ;ilyt� "i ,'A` sketch presented by Mr . Soyring , the members of the Board " IPIt • _ ' { � , ` arrived at the f ollowing o I. ` ``` 4ININ, i , 1 Cts; 1 1 ! 'Ns.\J - . { ' , 4 N n, i r n. ' f ' 1, . 7 -ail f k#Z.� G/, �J. r it . rfi `f-nr lF,s N5 I y w ' NO 1,1IF r}'•a w 1 Yl J 4 tlr.,a_7_ .�T.kA1 " 'rr . n r i : !. l t (i1� 7p •'jk ' 1• o I I I k - t i} s 1 'rs ay Xrt� < r•, ' � b. J } , IF 1. If 4 . 1 I x! '�x J tfd.",�v. 4 li 4 Q. +, If .Ik .' , ` .Y , I A, �'lr ti I r , L . . . / f'' t } .� y •: Y4 ht Ai?liiTri1l.'"!t.Ir sr i xu} q';� ,II Its T} Ikld T y '3 �:*?IM Y+�° f ry r p. � t r y \ t LL a xJ L , t t� FIJ ,`'I, I ar y - ..`� f•' t f.t: ' c I ! ,S .t 1 - t t �'t}' !'S h},C tl.:i° 1JIF .r r„ rFI.'S•tl�'Its ,.;;..,�1T IIti rt}F iGlt,,, a ��3Yaj: r7 III1 . ;!,r to I I L , r f )7 g E " " °w 1 : �,'.�c i � j4F I '1 +�', i�lth�- '41 '' , 3•i pR 'P 11 t AO✓F " , S K. " l •, I i t x r f -Y.: •. 1� t 'II \ t I �e;J I 1 e.LJ ) 93 ,'7[ 1 } ' x )t> r S J•• ' r `7+ � .1 d t . eft iw a t �p � 7 ? ` 1 1 -y l ' } r� ' .Jt rsl. \} jl I x'� r I '• I.Jv 42G d . 1'1}. i FINDINGS OF FACT o , 1 � If y } . 4 ' = ~' t � 44 � + r �� , � �,se, f, 4III t ` 7 _ ° r - - r f r' r r sxL ltr7'y a p• s .,.R..l' �, rf a af•1. ) ' - r r - r - 1 f % ..s ,} rr4. 'f ;I) : �Y +' J r r, i � . r. : j•'. , . ,•. : a . '4 . ' . F' ♦ i. t r r,nTgt"i'f,,. �". ) ji �w } tr`}na ) ?`r `fh pry'Q?t S?.r 1. i , f , s. ,. } t / ". '. t } . Y ".Nr# .0 } Y•< 'I . f^ t t ' I8'lfss . . � wF s. ° i `- i - 1 . The set ®back request of 15 - feet is It .more :'L .I.the � Ili . w I OFF � s IF f , ; - I :h , average set ®back to the north and south of this 4 } n 3 '} a r 7 ' , •a r `ifi J J t i < } x Y- 3 r t I r k + .r v n {. I, th rA € J pax, ,' > I It I, II. 4 r 'k ' 1 t .{r"-I (�§I II ill. SF+ n J ' S1 < )i< we7isS r r' proper ty n lr _ tt Ile I.; I { yi IIt OF�-- J t9 q t , ' 4r la 'aft ;V� OFF.FI, be NYI � f � 4P} IF 1. i rl II ! . O _ I i i •.11Y '�. IIt , , I 'L',`}rr�,i ♦ y t"f. t I it 1". !f eY y1 .l j} r if r` :f,'�S1Ol ", , 1 .. rw' t 0 Pilot . .t a 1 { W } I, ' 1 ' J : t . IF f 14 l,l.y II: = X4 1 lri Vt , ,1. +% 1rMa F '7 f{ ;h{{. lr f y g +. < I �. ' j,' .� - ,I F , Ir 4 I . r».,1 ` s l .1 tj io!�. 41 S f • f la je: F ^t OF I EY; ✓- ,y�ji a 'r' 3 1� r.x e't .4. Y i . ! i,:. . . : t t , d I '{ t y {I i Y I y# , H r1 . } 4/ rY-}, 1} 4S - �, ,r h )t , . 1_ - ` � ` ` } �7 t' e,.. pr! �GY1M1" �Hc WJ <.� � �y1E ♦ tJ =4 f : ? 2 ® . The topograp r - zs 1. difficult ` upon ' whioh toy iivaldv � „1 , ; � ,= x`� 1, � > "' IF Oto t A + K I Ity7 } . t tii .a At ; x C � -y rl" s < v, OFF IF 'I because tie land drop $ off sharply to the ' east : `OF ; 1 rI 11 y , F. r r 1 - n i ` w• . w. r41 I. f 4 i , . i ' : 1. r } SISI 9i[f}. ri t f , ,e, r e `f i I. 4 , elx 4j`Y u H x i } I �I Y' •.SILT f r Ii r i�T r . l - r y ,1F =;K ,7.r 1`I ^L•a } F, I._ sy,i}I } th FI :F ? � I Ft t� ; t 'e[` ; h3 . . 1. 4} Iy,✓ I v 'r . .6r ' 1 • li ' . .f .l .. r.' - .. .. �. r_ai 1 3 .N. " ff�g 1 p.•p,,,. �4 c,w„a"t,.}f N`t � . }[t ;fit, { IA it/. W J,,, }y o i. 'moi �' ' �3 V ,,�, y,� OFF { -.'Isi r ` r L •. ,. oyr ng a fih i k 1 a (,1S r,rT . I , 1`11 IF i ryw,. i" � 3 . Mro � S � i canno make a reasonableus o rh s aa4 �,J , {. 1 ' : r 'Y " f y r ,ItOF; Ole- _ due to its peculiar size and shape• . ,F I tt ° ,. :rt . I ` „;I '`v 11 I It. I Y L j r 71 }t•, R. :I Y . Y'• - , I . . ' - It .j r I7 , 4o The proposed rbuilding does comply with side line : .IP . : " Y , !. requirements and depth of lot o . . ' , I It ` -o. ' . ' 5 The combined . areas of the - two buildings will not _ iJ. s It exceed the 20g� land use requirement . I • • L A ' ' ]k . . . I I 1 ' ' ' 60 The proposed . building complies with . Seotion .. 68 ;1 of the Town .}I of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . I � _ ,, ;„ i OF I _ , I !' : s r rw 3 t , + SI",3 . . . � , r `i. I ' , I , t 1. ? a There wil ] be ample parking spaces and there I 11 OF willX .; M ,:I' ' ; t : 11be no traffic hazard created by the , building or OF - IFtot ' i' I the proposed usem ; t ' 1 16 I iIF I� 1 I t x C JR. J 7 r . . w < s L 'W. I r ' - '. : - '' r 4 I . i . 1 dp V . Lb.- .� s r l IF ` t 8 ® The rproposed building is a . two ®family dwellin� 0II; {; , 4jr ,, ` 'k1,, ;{ :,L • F . 1. . , ,,.\ Y . _ -. , " :. rl r + . t" f t t 'i t iF.t v (� 1 f IIpon moti ®n by , r' < . a I I . Y . ' 'j ~' ' .0]{ ;J:" , I 1 „. . I I .I jt4 .L A. Mr . Sovocool , ' seconded , by ` Mr ®I IF , Scott•- IF 11 and..;• • t,lw a ,OF II , k tf I. carried by unanimous . vote ; it., was moved thatI the ,:, findings ofIt fact be ' adopted and that a variancs _• be granted to'. build ahe , III I • r r �. 7 proposed .. building ' . and that the wbuilding - .be ' built tno : less than = s` " <i' ,4 4Le 1 fee } • Jli` s w,:l z IF 111 : Ir } } to r ,"+ t, r 5 t ,: froffi .: the right •. of= way::. line .I °„ NoteeINo - persons , appeared =<}cr I 1.rvY�'f . $ ° " : in ' opposition to the foregoing `® }-:' r', , s ; .11 Air tr.lI 1,olk , <� xAfiIll PIII t1' -` � �fI. .�, � ` ` 4 . � 1' fO � t r �� ' `, IIIit t 1. : r ° t. 'rI , L. 1 .- a� A: , ' I' C (' ' q !, ! I Y tv . I OFfrtirt . OFF",, « r " - I L. 1.1 ✓ 1 a 1" v .- r ' : r fn i .jr }@1 Ila }. • 1 [I { n F 1 .M} 1 '.. F ,}% - . . {.I - Ii � . rti ' l II l w J k Y �x . > Al.r ,.lr I i ', . I"� •t , u- F 'I 1 -$ _ This • bearing was '' ad ourned at ' 8 e 00 . 1 .� ° :� k r t.� t ' r . rit , r ; I. Ft I I } II f "iI • $�I IF tt '. '. Lt�t Y ,." <, .-. t . I e ,t' i ! F 0t; I 7 '.s k+. Y .I 7 ems` {_'� � . . � s:sy-... {. f .vlh t . { f, t"+.Y:v. '- f' h x fw; } a4. - r ' ,t 7 t +,}t tY O •�� r # '" it slryl c. I.+ r+, I Y ! 'SI't { +.41 . tji l ' . OF . �'n^ ' \ ✓ I ;. i n .itl 7}. I 7 F 1_ s � -f i 4 i i I.1 t '� . tf . : \ 'i ' a: 1 4 .1-t OF 0".d f ' J : e I �' v" Y, t 1 j. . 11 ' { t r 4 It tIF X^ - I r i . , . . Y• r kY.i , "n.:l.. a �. I r �t{.r'I .iia }{„ 2 J.pLr rI t r . A •f ., Ar IF , , IF. f yA I ; . ,.y 41 ,x I 1 0 } 2 s'c•.Y: -� - ...4., �` 1' 7 i ,'J) j) d ,• L s it "h."A i ' '- .j^ t • i� [ t , ? '1 s , y x \ 1 . .t t r r 1 m r I 1 I. 7 , rre DIY r , ,yylf t : Re $ ectfull submitted 4t , a� { hb r t , i I w; I { i . F v '.w 1 ♦ t . . , p r yt.'' F .: I� Y d r t ' r - C - s Y r t yr. . t r ) r'; r I to r t� II. £'S."k. I r 1 rr rt . . « a v t , r 3 yI t 4 , r e 1 s, p� 3, 7tsk�t ,F b . 3 IV tit NI V. .y 4 r J < . �., �r • , \.n F...I f f .i« t'i` ;. Cherly S - Beninati t •SI b s -t ci 1 � I .1' • • • f �f 31 l,l •frrµ: • I i • . • : 11 I • � • • • ' : • I • / • , • • f - • r _ / - It _ r • • .: ( SyAY, • . 1 / — • : " • it : • .�"7 ' , '� Jot / _ 3 i • • • • • • • • • • ! • • • 4 • • : • • • � • �:, '4. rax S' a e I / ! 14 • • 11 _ , iT M ' iS ',�f' • If - • • • • - �N. : • • • : 11 � • .' Vii..,�1' . . . -r t __ _ • • - r r^ �i`y�'�f� - • (: • _ � � • • / • • • 1 t _ � S • y yam... .r ' • - 11 = • • • If • • 1 1 } ri.' • � • 11 • • • nr i�' i r • � / Y �� r • • 1 • �.�. y r° I'1.. fly. lga e � M g v 7 ' tst build a porch-like fire escape . Topography , peculiar to the, area , requiree he location of the fire escape 5 feet within the aide yard requirement . This porch would be an open ' p landing with a rail 3 feet from the base of same . Said ., porch would improve Are a. proteotion and also improve ingress and egress,. However , after sxamination. of the sketch on the rear of Mr . SoyrinCe appZleatfoa, it was noted that he altered the P location of the ' house as . it was originally shown on the Plan submitted with hie building permit . It was pointed out to Mr . So ; Trigg that he should re -apply to the Zoning Board with his . revised plan . Thia meeting . van adjour'ned at 8 : 30 P . M . ?5 f 'y 1 R . Respectfully submitted , Cheryl S . Beninati Secretary 4 r a R I I I I L I I I i I • r�. j �ddd I • . • • • • VVI • - u • • • . • S � ; I ♦fie 1 • rl • • ` • • • -ilMtl^YI n� � A ' • • 11M • 11 • ' • � 1 IV I Ilya • • : • • - : / • • � • • ' • r • _ ! IV; IF Al Allit It III IPA " 1 Y6 ' s� • ` lig ! � • • • • • / 4 • • .�,. 11 �)� k _ 1 ,y +3 Via - - - • • - • - • a • • : : u - - / • �r n t p • • 11 • / / •14. 17 11 1"a i 1 . ^.off 4b AAq' • • ;yr-4 • • • • • z • IFI _ 1 • I • • "` � ,ilW� aq f^.'FL� Y� FYI IND It • I ♦ � / • • • • 1 • e " � .4 ., t1• »Fri . • • / it • • • 1 • • • • • / • • • / • �'"� I J>s•1�'Yw r • ru. , • • 1 • 1 • • • , i �• "� , ,f { • _ 9 If IF • 11 . 1 • • / . 11 . • I • • 1 • • • x � . .$ Th,yR ti. a�n ,a�nl�y / � • 11 1 • • • II • • as ... _ _ L t: mit r N1 l �art.pr t • • / / • • • • p • • I }; 1 4r'Y All • 1 1 • • / • • • • • • ) L�^ Y rifpN7l..a' ,. ; • g It Y • .rJ ♦f-•int `�a, j R 7 1 ti M • - 1 . . ,art•,, ' � � / / _ _ 1 • 1 • / • _ • / / j N�f f 1 rv4fi,r�.} �tlr yls�:�•� F. : VA U1 tS a � 1 J •: � wV£ .. i ..a ,a. , '' h 51h {k( 4 N 1 �Ya s F Y !1 Y e efa , . ♦ 4 pp��} ,. ! !moi Al «YrJ^ I Y I s � dd t i4 t I l�•r. a ��ii Rancich / Morusty Two- Lot Subdivision - 1 - 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approvals Planning Board , November 1 , 1988 • ADOPTED RESOLUTION : SEQR Rancich /Morusty Two - Lot Subdivision 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approvals Planning Board , November 1 , 1988 MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded , by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : J WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 25 - 2 - 32 , located at 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . and containing two residential structures , into two lots of 0 . 37 and 0 . 17 acres , respectively . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed subdivision . The Zoning Board of Appeals has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for • environmental review of the requested variances . 3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance , subject to certain mitigation measures . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of this Unlisted ,action , make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance for the proposed subdivision . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Ken erson , Lesser , Miller . Nay - None . CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Rancich /Morusty Two - Lot Subdivision 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approvals Planning Board , November 1 , 1988 • MOTION b Mr . David seconded Y Klein ,, by Mr . James Baker : Rancich / Morusty Two-Lot Subdivision - 2 - 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approvals Planning Board , November 1 , 1988 • WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 25 - 2 - 32 , located at 845 - 847 Taughannock Blvd . and containing two residential structures , into two lots of 0 . 37 and 0 . 17 acres , respectively . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed subdivision , has , on November 1 , 1988 , made a negative determination of environmental significance . 3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on November 1 , 1988 , has reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form , Property Survey dated October 6 , 1988 , and other application submissions . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive certain requirements for Preliminary , and Final Subdivision Approval , having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor thepolicies enunciated or implied by the Town Board , 2 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to the subdivision as herein proposed , with the following conditions : a . The . reduction and restriction of the number of dwelling units as proposed , including removal of third meter and third kitchen in each building by August 1 , 1989 . b . The granting of variances _ by the Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to Article . XIII , Section 67 , and Article IV , Section 16 . c . The provision of adequate screening or containment for garbage cans in a location convenient for the four dwelling units involved , and improvement of the existing blacktop drive to include repair of the westernmost retaining wall . d . The connection to the Town public sewer main by December 1 , 1989 . e . The amendment of the property survey to show all side , front , and rear yard setbacks to the main building or deck , • whichever is closer , such amended property survey to be approved by the Town Engineer prior to the recording of the Rancich /Morusty Two -Lot Subdivision - 3 - 845 - 8.47 Taughannock Blvd . Preliminary and . Final Subdivision Approvals Planning Board , November 1 , 1988 final subdivision plat in the ' Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . f . The approval of access easement and leach field easement if necessary by the Town Attorney prior to the recording of the final subdivision plat in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office , such agreements . to be in a form acceptable to the Town Attorney for recording in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . • g . The receipt of a letter requesting the subdivision from the holder of legal title to the property . h . At least one unit in each of the properties must be , for at least three years out of every five , occupied by the owner of the premises . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller . Nay - None . CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY . i Nan y M . Fullerr Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board , November 4 , 1988 . �� } � r ,�vp}�a.a aafi',f j.1ptL,i r r . i •, 4. • ART�aII vironme _ . . :- rP - _Eu �s�.l._8� m��.=�n�3.�hlMorusty , - "" "P.�oAos �_Subdivisio ' • - µ ,>T .:- �"�� lt�. � `.Lil_1bC�r��y�MdldA.YL.Ii�L�ffi.eYL�i � . . ,s •,.� fn, *.. k - . f A .; Action is Unlisted . 7,V B!.~ . -Action wi -11 � receive coordinated review . : ; , • :_ 5 -. Could action result in_��1Y�3SiY �e g " ects on .. to " or a:a7 15e__ a. Cve1 = - t_XiStii7g--il �i , LiC tter ,''; 7 i.as vE: Z t} a "2Q T. 3, L, teiltlA ;• J �-_ _ L_ JO_ 1 _._ w �-- -- - 1 f C 1 n � , pi- , _- _ — -- Vv .,. .. '.7 ... .1 �. . . ,_�. ., 1.. ti G • . - J` lie. :1 'v: .i . 4,. i � . it :. Nf :a � L' J11,:0; 1. � �_1 � ' :. Ai a .., , �l Ci,• dCkilC w1 cur . uu li .` if viii ) YvQ �� If, II i �4Jt ti% C': UJ � �a iV �. ..: : a .. - .a V �. L• ia ..: 11 L,t viiC� _ lv . .., ..i l_ i. •-1 c„ G .�i M, Li - C. i.. .:.. . . 1V `. . 1i ll _ . . J �. 411 .1t• ti ,�• }Y '._. s _ T .. i \.: ';;i.ti: LS rrgUil'' e, d -rY . } ti ,J 'ut: , hiil': y _ '• C aliI 11t L : l ll �JZ lii ( 1 ` ' IP, ' 1 7 w � + .L siIN t1 , C: dY� Llli ;ll, S . 41 +'liwVi � ; ♦ . } 1 'I the i 6. J.. . II . . : ,a C. �: �., aa i. � C: i.+ .� .ai •Ji ::% Cii; C_ 1 . vJ li iiv � JJiX �. � ;1OL ld v < rL" O "v i tY' Cr tJ ;; i .i: ii IN � � 1 :1 , Y71Lia � 1 : C .� ii�: l �: lam :. i. pili LV Y'% �J '� N ,:a i �. a. ii � J j-1 +.:.� I. Ll_} t {J S. JL�- Used a , site impro 'y'eme .11ts , a14a �:• triC .t y rOj� � I- y" :i. anag Ti nt of any owner - occupied c : r :- ntai units , n0ca ;lt adverse • imlpact to t ,: e3-e If erI I There have been comlplairit $ as to the management and upkeep of the prcper ty . i; La ar•pl Kant presently proposes a reduction inCJ : C: ,1 lllil ' inns from v to v in each buiidir:g , Giil : C: i%3r c, i ; yrovemets to he property . -' Subject to cor.:pliance with a I i requirements , no significant impact to 11 a c. V nese t `~. � _% 1 J L s e .lrec_ - ed . _... I ACO3 «'eg t ; ,, r _f sh . _ sk elfish or wildlife peCie ? 1Sni. 11C � re��i_, enpd r_"d anaered J Pe. C _Le 77 ? Not nriOWn or expected . Y- -S�ii_ � �f� i_` ��.�-L_ C—'.• la ...�� � li' l�' F) l al s — V L.) `as as _ �_. ._c' teu _ia2uhQ2:_lI1IIsity of us i m {_. :1 .� ..- v % .Z educed and zestrictec.{ . A V� �. : : % c3 5,' • ; � � _' c: : t � l �, ?j '� : e z 4.j14 .L & 1g BOi3rd of Appeals On SEytcIl:: E 3:' Or �. ;lt ' 2 41 involve - ' S' •:: f � ncies d in i n e carr -.I, • - .. .. -. . :.. ' dr : a proposad for Fa � . � . 0l 'Z:1 .. �iOrl .�] idera� - i C. a. .. y" . . ml, %v' :. t-, �, -1 _ � .0 oz-, i. h1. s site . 6 #/V , S ' IS (, 1. ' _t ht' s •w - ! a . t'1 t .i ryt';It - } ._ u. , . _ _ 1,. ` , �.1 . � r •, C fy ;Vf, Proposed Parcel , l would have . an . area of;.;: 16 , 117+ ' square feet , and total frontage - of 105 :- 71• Ffeet-. - - Proposed Parcel 2 would have an area of . 7405 + / -• square feet , and total frontage of 59 . 29 feet . The narrowest north , 3Ws-i4e ''yard would bef 18 . 5 feet- : There - •is• . a II. preexist•ing�,Z. f.00t� .± , In.III In u .. . " side yard on - the south side for - which variance - was ' granted-= -; on November 3 , 1966 , and a preexisting 16 . 5 foot deep front - _.. _. . _ ... _ . ... yard': 'The proposed subdivision line is generally functionally �adequate ; '3nsidarin t : of the site and dwellings , LA,J I.IU V 'v V tv rL;al 11, 1 -_ F . 1. ... �-�..: i '� e. Y'i 1t11 conditions \.rxiUtiTlj or ti lat Gy � f nl :. tJJC Si _ Lbil � s a � ulI an �V tz: -11iI �. t l .cl. :ls.Aa:AA id _. m�:Y . .i �'.��!11�.•Ye.�t.�._.Sl�._i..ie�;r�.al. � _ y • T d4. . _ . y .f;Y .1: A.z�_�d.�!_:�J_ _ ! � J .— � • . -: . ; '- ._A ��- L. 1i �v i , ..-.i `•i ' r' � t�.. t� '.' -iter. ___s:.c_...__l._ .d1-.qtr-�_.�..—_t1L•^_]t__-11.3d_ v .. �. ... N.I. ii : Vl �i1 L: C r1Ji L .Y CIliQ _i Vw1C =JL J .: C" a. 1 I:rl L' V Vyi• r _ . J aJ .l aJ11` v 4K M. •'� ♦.11ll yt V'• .l V Y.T Y' p E% • a �% Cwald dY'liln , G < < Ci ,J , i� !ivt, ti. . . �qq � aen�St�e3 d{Ji_ a� > s 3 __.45 := i? �_�" L{ sis3�' ` s �il41 Y• Not C- X4;:�Cc •, e d V 7 _�� _� +�G�=_S. -1-iSs�i�� 1119."We G.. Not expecte "' . sna i �_:�z_i _ Lar l _._ � � nYlzLtad There have been cozplai :l•% s with respect to noise , parties , and property EQRT I I I A negative deter li :: at on of environmental significance is recommended based rr: following assumptions : nft. Reduction and -res - r•ze;-ion - of the number of dwell-ing - - - ^ units as proposed " iiiaroV �ileTi c :i _ ZLIJ V rig blackt p drive . U Provision of adeq"' ase Screening/containment for garbage cans in a location convia : e ;lt for the 4 dwelling units,. involved . Connection to the 'Tow.rl public sewer main by ' September , . :, 19890 l7r an v111 h,' of ' .:. i iQi . ._. � �iy l+ . . ei� 4., nilig-t_ Bo4rd of Appeals . Lead Agency : F' or : ; , � ; • _ _ , tj: Town planning Board For Var _ � :: : e .; . . � i: ': Boar "' o .f A ReY• iewer • u � wA _ _ - • - - - _ . . ' : ; r. : .: rlrer ppe is ,pN� iy�v iF: w i� u VC : L .., T _ - 5Y • # 13 tv me Ire • wilt tl�+' � � 94 wo s 1 � �t \\ g .1 •i Too, r..' Av KM 1 AD • q t rap t7nYt/ 0�r'Y� I b :2 ter , o � w kA SOT O v� I '4 .r RHaiw�n� w./ f 7 [//� a lip 0 ,6 94 Tit r re 3. A 1 C v '•k1L*i 9Gf O �J ;Zy � • � 1 , ' � � m n� � . . x2 ti , . i. . , , d 4p to 99 Y S ' . n.`. 1 '` I ' i • T a r y t OR 4 All I 1*84 ' . •' , 1. •1 S r• ' ji4 oto ! • w 21 . Imo • � • 25 . 4 L 2e tic N t �. • y- i C s I 29 r ' I � so - •� �• I CAYUGA LAKE IN, 0 - i ' �!F.- ter ` • �• i r . I4 Q =� a � a O ' 46 Y • `� { qs - look — 46 /v • Ito 1 .or . . ' I TAVELLI & SELDIN ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 405 NORTH TIOGA STREET PAUL N. TAVELLI P. O. BOX 695 TELEPHONE WILLIAM S. SELDIN ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 COPY FOR YOUR (607) 273. 8410 INFORMATION (607) 273. 3900 December 5 , 1988 �. Honorable Merton Wallenbeck Ithaca Town Court Judge 125 E . Seneca Street Ithaca , New York 14850 R � : PEOPLE VS . GORGE SHELDRAKE Dear Judge Wallenbec .'c : As previously discussed , I am authorized by my client , Geo . ge Sheldrake , to enter a plea of guilty on his behalf to the charge of " construction of a residential building without first i obtaining a building permit " as more particularly set forth by the enclosed appearance ticket . In that regard , I have enclosed m client ' s check in the ataa of g Y $ 100 . 00 :lade payable to the Ithaca Town Court in satisfaction of the fine imposed by the Court in this matter . J i With best regards to you and your family for this Holiday season , I I am , { Respectfully yours , WILLIAM S . SELDI '1d .JSS / ll Enc . cc : Mr . George Sheldrake u x ��--++��,Jtm�rC rM Pat- .f,Y1 . - h 1 Y. 'R . 9 a If A I— 141 1 Iva mJI 4 - ,f . aye, S s. 1. lIpw _ - - ll4x. If k l,It wil _ ^ wl , f0 40 , S71r s y + f i y 3r µ� S JII IMI If kIL- M 'tAt '!�`' LL �Ih'A Jr' - _ T14 . _ - .. 1 .._ _ S.'-. . TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING' TH;- E� THh ' AC D � .0 �� �� .`. . AGENDA,OC AHEARINGS OAND WEDNESDAY, DE , CEMBER 4, 1988, 7:00 P. M. f By direction of the Chairman `, of the ZoningBoard of Ap- ` ��±± � � peals NOTICE IS HEREBY �.2Qt: a tm a; •-$ k�.� tCC=" d, GIVEN that Public Hearings, as - r); * appropriate, will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals rill i <; • . i T of the Town of Ithaca on _ . ___5 __ .. . . t . ... beplow;+ ^ e' CI ':t �' _D�. . d"'JQS !S Wednesday, December 14, 1988, in Town Hall , 126 East " Io �` Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, r, ' LZ ^. fi \'s �.St 7 =SICl 'r L: 1`� �.BC>` County anis Mtn REAR Entrance, WEST Side ), Ithaca, N. Y. , COMMENCING 1 - n e o :.. _ _ - __ . .pow ' o t owing matters. .._ . . ._. _.. .. APPEAL of Evelyn C. lane, Ap- pellont, requesting variance Cii Tim iMACA OLwNAIL a ZJtIC. DSM 6 1�� f e requirements oArticle _._. 1. p t.7C6 tiII� �'„lj t Section 19, Paragraph 2, of — theTown of Ithaca Zoning Or- 4 dver- LS' 8: '� `iIIu 1r ns ng for 1sale of �handct the arafted = f - items i conjunction with a custom located a at h333 1Westp King 1rVLs .. . ,. IL. Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Par cel C> P tri District R-30.6-37-1 -27. 2, Residence ''-' — •+� . _ ... __.____ —_ _ _ _• APPEAL of Donna L Hofstead- -- \ Duffy, Appellant, requesting variances from the require- •' - -- - - - - ----- - - - - --• _- • • .—_ .-__._.. . .. . ments of Article V, Section 19, Paragraph , a Section 20, 6 and i n L ! of . the Town of Ithaca Zoning L"Si P _ iwfi. : c �. 0 p; S j ^ aC _ ..o k•`c OL tt , . j Ordinance, to permit the keeping o horses or e a k i f h f hit t 340 Warren Road, . Town of t R Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-68- 1 -2, O. � �: _•� ..e__ �.__" r ^ ... . . .. . . . . . . ... . .-• • . � `� = �• . . Residence District R-30. The . Appellant proposes, with re- _ _ . ._ spect to the keeping of horses - • •• • •- - •---•- • .. . . .. .. .... . . . __�-�� __ for hire, to construct an indoor - - - inceed ainuheinhtt with ' riding area i r`+IO:L saidbuildingbeing closer 9 9 C{ _—__ 2%t �� than 30 feet from a lot line (^j�J Said Ordinance does not per _ • _ • __ TC 7j b mit- the keeping of horses for ._ . ..."' - hire and further requires an . ac cessory. building to be no hi her than 15 feet with such If ... .. .. . . -- - M s» Fu a,� kana I I a wilding housing ho _ beat least 30 feet from I . h line. the Appellant sees va > _ from these require- ments. , riance f equ 're : :..:. . . ..... . -.. .. ,,_... ; . : ' JEAN hocanZoning t inancen 'or^gym E.L of John E. Rancich, N FORD S t Ord APP A Notary PuLlIC, Staf@ the extension of a non-con- Appellant, Michael J. Morus- eW 4 ty, Applicant, requesting vari- Of N YOf!� forming building or use at 17 NO 41 ( 5 x - 'ante of the requirements of Qualified in T 16 r Tompkins � nty, s e Apbpee: joftthle Towneof gIthaca Zoning q ins Road, own o . :: 'Article XIII, Section 67, and Tax Parcel O dente D itric� R 303Th Commission expires May 31,u� n texisPn bu�ldingnf nda- Ord ante, with r pect to the on a ng a two-story y sin-- abdivision Parcel fNoWn6-252-32 g of Ithaca gle-amilyai ' residence, a with 9. said parcel of land presently nown as 845-847 Taughan containing a se rate single- ResidenceDistrict ' a ily residential structure. Fi- Sad existing building foundo- v been gran tion presently contains a sinby oc Blvd. , es, IZ. I Subdivision Approval 15, into two to su inion having be ted P y a Su - ,on ^ ' gle-family residence which is the Planning Board on No 0 osed t become part of _ Ifa m ubjdect PrP o ber 1 , 1988, s to cer the proposed two-story single- . , n conditions. Sai subdiv, s family residence. Article Vf Inion , ' as conditionally s approved, creates one lot 7, Ithaca o ging Ordinance a per- Iw 5 plus or minus sq. ft. in size ' Section 0 It Z with a front yard width of _ , ; :- . ';, , . , ' . " . . • ' . ;: - mils only one dwelling build- ing on a single parcel of and. ',I f9 • Should the Appellant foil to e feet, pp tont plus d setback minus from an ' - prove o "legal'Pnon conform '.� existing dwelling of 16. 5 plus ing building or use, a request . °e minus feet, and a side yard i s for a variance from said Arti- stack of 2 plus or minus .- ,o e cle V. Section 18 has been re- feet. Said Ordinance requires quested. d Zoning Board of Appeals , size o sq. t. , a frontIII yard width of 100 feet, t, . P . will at said time, 7:00 p m• front yard setback of d. feet, and said place, hear all per- and a A foot side yard. _ sons in support of such matters I AGENDA ITEM: Determination or objections thereto. Persons by the Zoning Board of Ap- ! . may appear by agent or in I peals with respect to environ- person. mental review and Decision Andrew S. Frost by the Zoning Board of Ap- Building Inspector/ . I Peals with respect to the Ad- / a Zoning Enforcement OfficerI journed Appeal (from October ` Town of Irhnrn 26, 1988) of George Shel-