HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1989-10-25 FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
• Town of Ithaca Dare. 9 91
Zoning Board of Appeals Clerk
October 25 , 1989
TOWN OF ITHACA
ZONING BOARD . OF APPEALS
OCTOBER 25 , 1989
PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Eva Hoffmann , Edward Austen , Joan
Reuning , Town Attorney John Barney , Zoning Enforcement
Officer/ Building Inspector Andrew Frost .
ABSENT . Edward King .
OTHERS PRESENT : Anita Henry -Wilkins , Susan Centini , Paula Jo
Gates , Robert Gates , Harrison Rue , Dave Auble , Hugh Howarth ,
Michael E . Visnyei , Robert Hines , Esq . , Paul Mahoney , Jeff
Coleman , Esq . , Richard Langendoerfer
Chairman Aron called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p . m . and
stated that all posting , publication and notifications of the
public hearings had been completed and that proper affidavits of
same were in order .
The first Appeal on the Agenda was the following :
APPEAL OF CRAIG AND anita WILKINS , APPELLANTS , REQUESTING A
SPECIAL APPROVAL UNDER ARTICLE XII , SECTION 54 , OF THE TOWN OF
ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE ENLARGEMENT OF A NON-CONFORMING
BUILDING/ LOT LOCATED AT 234 ENFIELD FALLS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA
TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 33 - 1 -22 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . SAID
ENLARGEMENT PROPOSES THE ADDITION OF AN ENCLOSED FRONT ENTRY-WAY
AND A REAR PORCH , LOCATED ON AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ,
APPROXIMATELY 41 + OR - - FEET FROM THE EAST SIDE YARD PROPERTY
LINE . SAID BUILDING/IAT IS NON-CONFORMING SINCE A SIDE YARD
BUILDING SET BACK ON AN IRREGULAR SHAPED LOT IS REQUIRED TO BE 50
FEET . SAID PROPERTY FURTHER HAS A WIDTH , AT THE FRONT YARD SET
BACK , OF 125 + OR - FEET WHEREBY 150 FEET IS REQUIRED .
Chairman Aron read into the record a letter from Madeline
Rockwell , 232 Enfield Falls Road , dated October 10 , 1989 ,
attached hereto as Exhibit # 1 .
Chairman Aron referred to the Survey Map that was submitted
to the Board , attached hereto as Exhibit # 2 . Mr . Frost referred
to the Tax Map ( attached as Exhibit # 3 ) and explained that it
shows the parcel of land as being rectangular with the exception
of the flow of the creek in the back and in seeing the deed , it
made reference to the triangular portion as a separate tax
parcel . Therefore , this was quite a confusing case .
Town of Ithaca 2
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Chairman Aron asked Ms . Wilkins if she acquired that
triangle of land . Ms . Wilkins stated that the seller , Larry
Fabbroni , did not claim it as part of the property when he sold
although there was a quit claim deed because the Town had not
officially abandoned the road .
Chairman Aron explained that the Town may not have
officially abandoned this road , so it may be a " paper " road
( Rte . 327 ) .
Mr . Frost said that he thought his assistant checked that
out and they were calling it a State right - of -way .
Chairman Aron stated that what the Board has to determine is
whether it is part of Mrs . Wilkins ' original parcel or whether it
is a separate parcel under the tax map ( the triangular parcel ) .
Mrs . Wilkins commented that they are taxed on it as a whole
which states that they have 160 feet of frontage . Mr . Frost
confirmed that that is by the tax rolls . He said that what is
• troubling is the right - of -way line because by definition the
front yard set back is that portion of land between the road
right - of -way and the principal building .
Town Attorney Barney stated that the Board has a survey
which shows that this is still part of the State highway so he
thinks the Board has to assume that the survey is correct - the
tax map is not always that accurate a source of information . He
thinks the Board should proceed on the assumption that there is
inadequate frontage .
Chairman Aron concurred that the Board has to go by the
survey map that is certified .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing . No one appeared to
address the Board . Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Chairman Aron explained to the Board members that they do
have a special approval before them . In his opinion , the road ,
although it is not a traveled road ( a paper road ) , it is still
there and the State of New York can , at any time , open it up with
a 60 foot wide road .
Mrs . Reuning asked about the entryway and the back porch .
Mrs . Wilkins explained that the entryway will be for boots and
things . The back porch will be enclosed and heated . She said
• that she does not think " porch " is an accurate description of
that space - it will actually be a room to allow for more living
space . She explained that the entryway will be 6 ' x 101
.
• Town of Ithaca 3
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
After further discussion Mr . Austen made the following
motion :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant Special Approval for the addition of
a room 14 ' x 16 ' on the northerly side of the house and the 6 ' x
10 ' addition on the southerly side of the house for an entryway ,
with the following findings :
1 . The house is a small house for the size of the lot .
2 . The additions will not affect the neighbors in any way
as the nearest neighbor would be to the east and there
is approximately sixty feet between houses , and that
neighbor has written a letter dated October 10 , 1989
indicating that they have no objections to the
additions .
3 . No one appeared before the Board in opposition to the
proposed additions .
4 . The health , safety , general welfare and morals of the
community will not be affected .
• 5 . The proposed additions are in harmony with the
character of the dwelling .
6 . The premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed
use .
7 . The proposed use and location and design of the
structure will be consistent with the character of the
district .
8 . The proposed will not be detrimental to the general
amenities or neighborhood character and will not
devaluate neighboring properties or seriously
inconvenience neighboring inhabitants .
9 . The access and egress of all structures are safely
designed and the general effect on the community as a
whole including traffic load upon public highways and
streets and load upon water and sewer are not
detrimental to the safety , health and welfare of the
community .
10 . If the area that is now denominated as part of the
State public highway were included as part of the lot
there would be no need for special approval at all .
Mrs . Hoffmann seconded the motion .
The voting on the motion was as follows :
Ayes - Aron , Reuning , Hoffmann , Austen .
• Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
Town of Ithaca 4
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
The second Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF SUSAN CENTINI , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE
FROM SECTION 2 . 01 - 1 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA SIGN LAW FOR THE
PLACEMENT OF A SIGN STATING " CENTINI ' S CODDINGTON RESTAURANT " , TO
BE LOCATED OFF THE PROPERTY OF THE RESTAURANT , ON LAND OWNED BY
ITHACA COLLEGE , ON THE CORNER OF N . Y . S . ROUTE 96B AND CODDINGTON
ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -40 - 4 - 1 , BUSINESS DISTRICT
"A" . SECTION 2 . 01- 1 OF THE SIGN LAW DOES NOT PERMIT SIGNS TO BE
LOCATED OFF PREMISES .
Chairman Aron read a letter into the record from Thomas R .
Salm , Vice President for Business and Administrative Affairs of
Ithaca College , dated September 29 , 1989 ( attached hereto as
Exhibit # 4 ) .
Chairman Aron referred to a hand drawn map showing the
placement of the proposed sign ( map attached hereto as Exhibit
# 5 )
Attorney Robert Hines , representing Ms . Centini , addressed
the Board . Chairman Aron asked Attorney Hines how high the
proposed sign will be . Attorney Hines replied that the sketch
shows there is a set back of 10 feet . He stated the highway line
is wider than that and it has to be set back about 24 feet in
order to be free of the State highway line . , That point , at which
it will be located , will be 10 feet above that .
Chairman Aron asked if the sign would be lit . Ms . Centini
said that the sign will be made by the same company that made the
sign that is in front of the restaurant and it will not be lit .
She showed the Board a photo of the sign that is being proposed .
Mr . Frost cited from the Sign Law and discussion followed
between Attorneys Barney and Hines on the procedure for sign
approval and whether or not the matter needs to go before the
Sign Review Board .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Mr . David Auble stated to the Board that he is in favor of
the proposed sign .
Mr . Harrison Rue stated that he is in favor of the proposed
sign . He thinks it would contribute to traffic safety at that
intersection if the sign were there .
• Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Town of Ithaca 5
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Further discussion followed on the floor regarding the need
for the matter to go before the Sign Review Board before the
Zoning Board of Appeals can make a determination on it .
Chairman Aron stated that personally he has no objection to
the sign itself . However , he thinks the Sign Review Board should
really have looked into it and made a recommendation to the
Zoning Board of Appeals , as it is their job to do that . He
thinks that if the Board discusses this any further the Board
would be going against the Sign Law as it is written . He
suggested to Attorney Hines that he take the matter to the Sign
Review Board .
Attorney Hines withdrew the application from the Zoning
Board of Appeals ' agenda .
Chairman Aron declared the matter withdrawn .
The third Appeal on the agenda was the following .
• APPEAL OF DAVID AUBLE , APPELLANT , PAUL MAHONEY , AGENT ,
REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE IV , SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 10 ,
OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITH AN INTERIOR HEIGHT MEASUREMENT OF BETWEEN
37 AND 38 FEET , AND AN EXTERIOR HEIGHT OF 30 FEET , TO BE LOCATED
AT LOT 39 , # 7 LAGRAND COURT , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO .
6 - 45 - 1 - 39 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 . SAID ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR AN
INTERIOR HEIGHT MEASUREMENT OF NO MORE THAN 34 FEET AND AN
EXTERIOR HEIGHT OF 30 FEET .
Mr . Paul Mahoney explained the requested variance to the
Board . He stated that the variance they are asking for is in
relation to putting a basement in an existing house design that
they have in their office . He presented a photograph to the
Board of the house that they are proposing to build . He also
presented a hand drawn sketch of the house , which is attached
hereto as Exhibit # 6 .
Mr . Mahoney said that , basically , the house meets the
requirements for height on the exterior ( from the exterior
finished grade to the highest point in the roof ) - it is less
than 30 feet , which the Code allows for but when they put a
basement underneath that , that is what generates the lowest
interior grade which is part of the way that Code reads .
Mr . Mahoney stated that with this house design , which has a
• steeply pitched roof to associate itself with the " Salt Box "
design , that high roof takes up a lot of that allowable footage ,
so , essentially , it only leaves them about 4 feet from the first
floor to that lowest point which is not enough for a basement .
Town of Ithaca 6
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
He said that their feeling is that , because it does not have a
visual impact from the outside , as a practical matter , it should
be allowed to be that way .
Chairman Aron said that if they went with a 4 - 12 pitch roof
they would be all right , but if they go to a 12 - 12 pitch , that is
where the difference comes in .
Mr . Mahoney stated that is correct . However , they
personally and architecturally are not comfortable with reducing
the pitch on that particular roof because they feel it changes
the character of the house .
Mr . Auble stated that they did spend a fair amount of money
in trying to re -design the roof pitch and they just couldn ' t get
it to work .
In answer to Chairman Aron ' s question , Mr . Mahoney said that
the ceiling height for both floors is 8 feet , which is pretty
standard .
• Chairman Aron questioned , if Mr . Auble is asking for a
variance , what the hardship is about it .
Mr . Mahoney stated that the hardship aspect of it is that
they had contracted to build a house , they had already done the
model on the site with a crawl space . Mr . and Mrs . Gates , in
good faith , have proceeded with them to have them build a house
with a basement . Mr . and Mrs . Gates have invested a fair amount
of money and so has Mr . Auble in this process . They have sold
their house and are under some time constraints to move into a
new house and there is significant hardship on both sides , in a
sense . From the builder ' s standpoint because they have promised
the Gates a certain design which he thinks most people would
recognize as a very conventional design in the United States . It
just happens that our law does not allow for that particular
design at this point . Mr . Mahoney stated that they would
obviously be in a very difficult position with the Gates at this
point if they cannot produce what was promised to them .
Chairman Aron stated that the Board is sympathetic to what
Mr . Mahoney is saying . However , there is a law on the books .
Mr . Mahoney stated that they were honestly aware of the
house and they had a design presented to them where apparently a
mistake was made by their architect and construction people
which , he believes , was an honest mistake on their part , so it is
not as though they were trying to circumvent the regulation .
• Town of Ithaca 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Mr . Auble commented that they understand the logic and the
purpose of the law . He thinks that what they have is an
architectural style that is being outlawed by our community . He
said they did not realize that this was in non - conformance until
they got into this particular situation . Mr . Auble said that
they are generally aware of what is happening in terms of the
Code . They have professional , local architects that have
designed their structures but it just happened that this
particular architect was not aware and their construction people ,
knowing that they were building on a slab or on crawl space , did
not realize the situation .
Mr . Auble further stated that they really are very much in a
hardship situation here because of the time of year that it is
and the situation of Mr . and Mrs . Gates .
Mr . Auble said that at some point he would like to go before
the Town Board to discuss house designs that have been presented
to his company by different potential buyers and they have had to
say that would not be allowed in the Town of Ithaca . He feels ,
• however , that the Gates are a special situation that he thinks
the Town Zoning Board of Appeals has the authority and wisdom to
deal with .
Mrs . Hoffmann asked Mr . Auble how many people have asked him
for a house like this one or similar that would have the same
type of problem with height .
Mr . Auble said that he does not have the figure at his
fingertips but he can get the statistics from his office .
Mr . Mahoney stated that he thinks the company believes in
this notion of not going over 30 feet from the exterior grade .
He agreed that when you get over 30 feet , it does become imposing
and they do want to stay within that limit from the outside , but ,
as a practical concern , it seems to create a hardship in one
sense that they cannot sell this house to someone who wishes to
have a basement , even though they agree that they will not be
exposing any part of that basement . It is simply an interior
concern and the house from the outside is still meeting the Code
from the outside aspect .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Attorney Jeff Coleman , 178 Calkins Road , addressed the Board
regarding the design of the house . He feels that since the
• design , from the outside , will not visually be apparent , * that the
Board should grant the variance .
Town of Ithaca 8
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Mr . Michael Visnyei , 698 Coddington Road , spoke to the Board
in favor of the variance .
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Mr . Austen stated that he went and looked at the project and
he was surprised that the houses do not have basements .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Auble what the average height of all
his houses are now from grade up .
Mr . Auble replied that he thinks the average might be 28
feet .
Chairman Aron stated that the Board has to establish the
actual hardship if they have to give a variance and he wants that
properly in place . He asked Mr . Auble to tell the Board exactly
what the hardship is that they cannot have anything other than an
8 foot basement in this particular case , for that particular
house at lot # 39 .
Mr . Auble stated that they entered into negotiations with
the Gates to build them the house . They developed the design
with a basement which was a major element that they were
purchasing . The Gates have made substantial commitments in terms
of a large down payment and going ahead with the sale of their
house .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Auble if he is saying that the Gates
made a large down payment and if he is not granted a variance ,
then he is losing the sale .
Mr . Auble responded no ; they wish to own a house in his
development because the nature of the development is very
important to them and to their child that is soon to be born .
The problem is the timing with it being the end of the building
season , and the Gates ' time constraints , and in his company ' s
attempts to produce a design that will be suitable for them which
have been unable to satisfy their needs . Mr . Auble said they
have a twofold hardship here . One , that he cannot produce the
house that the Gates wish to have in the time frame that they
have to have . It is just basically impossible regardless of
financial aspects . The Gates are sitting in a very vulnerable
position of waiting to have a home started and having sold their
own home . It has become a fairly complex situation but he thinks
the Board can see the hardship actually impacting the Gates .
• Chairman Aron asked Mr . and Mrs . Gates where they live now .
• Town of Ithaca 9
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Mr . Gates replied that they live at 205 Eastern Heights
Drive . They have not had the closing on their house yet . He
said that it is their hope that they can stay in their house and
move directly into their new house . If not , they will have to
move into an apartment and start over again next summer .
Mr . Gates went on to explain that he and his wife really
want a " salt box " house and the designs that Mr . Auble came up
with , just lowering the roof enough to fit in with a full
basement , it was not the same house . In his opinion , it is
foolish to build a house without a basement in this area . Mr .
Gates said they did not want to change anything with the exterior
of the house , they just want a full basement .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Gates if it is his intent to put
utilities in the basement . Mr . Gates said yes , everything but
the washer and dryer .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Gates if their closing date will
depend entirely upon the completion of the " salt box " house .
Mr . Gates said , right , within reason . He explained that his
in - laws are in town and they can move in with them if need be but
he would not want to make that long term .
Ms . Hoffmann remarked that there seems to a practical
difficulty in this case in the form of a significant economic
injury . He asked Mr . Auble to address that .
Mr . Auble responded that the Gates are in a situation where
if they have to rent a place for a substantial period of time
they will have an income tax impact , there will be the matter of
having to pay moving expenses twice , there would be telephone
hook-ups . In his opinion , it would cost them a minimum of
$ 1 , 000 . 00 per move plus in the area of $ 5 , 000 . 00 for rental
expense . Mr . Auble handed the secretary a paper with estimated
costs if the Gates have to move twice , which is attached hereto
as Exhibit # 7 .
Further discussion following regarding the criteria for an
area variance set forth by the State of New York .
Chairman Aron asked for a motion on the above Appeal .
Town of Ithaca 10
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Mr . Austen made the following motion :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
grant and hereby does grant the area variance for a basement for
lot # 39 at LaGrand Court at Chase Farm to allow the addition of
a basement to this particular " salt box " home for the following
reasons .
1 . It will add 1/ 3 to the living space to this house .
2 . It will not look any different from any other house in
that project , as the majority of them are " salt box "
homes , with the same roof line , and the same exterior
height .
3 . There are hardships in this case besides losing the
space if the applicant does not get the variance .
4 . It would require setting the time frame back to build a
home suitable for the people that have purchased this
particular option .
5 . There would be a hardship of economic injury in having
to move more than once from their present home which
• has a purchase offer accepted on it .
6 . The variance is a small variance in that it is in
effect four more feet in the ground which would seem a
very minor change in the house as far as any outwardly
visual impact .
7 . It is not a self - created hardship .
8 . There are not any good alternatives to not putting a
basement , in that one would have to add to the size of
the house to get the same area .
9 . It will not affect the public health , safety and
welfare and would not change any loads on the streets
or the water and sewer systems .
10 . It would not be detrimental in any way to the rest of
the community .
11 . It would not devaluate the other homes in that area .
12 . No one appeared in opposition to the proposed variance ,
and there were people who spoke in favor of it .
13 . There is a baby due to the Gates family .
The variance will be subject to the following conditions :
1 . The only outside access to the basement area will be a
Bilco type door with an interior stair .
2 . That no access be provided to the attic level except
through a 2 foot hatch in the ceiling and under no
circumstance is the attic to be occupied in any manner .
3 . The maximum height should not exceed 30 feet from the
lowest point of exterior grade .
Town of Ithaca 11
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
4 . All exterior construction is to be substantially in
conformance with Auble Homes 101 in support of this
application .
Mr . Auble explained that the photograph is of their model
and there are minor exterior differences . In principle ,
structurally it will be the same house but people are trying to
make them somewhat different .
Mrs . Reuning seconded the motion .
The voting on the motion resulted as follows :
Ayes - Austen , Reuning , Hoffmann , Aron .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
The last Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
• APPEAL OF RICHARD LANGENDOERFER , APPLICANT , REQUESTING A USE
VARIANCE FROM ARTICLE V , SECTION 19 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE , FOR THE OPERATION OF A CARPET CLEANING BUSINESS KNOWN
AS " HELP OF ITHACA" , LOCATED AT 685 - 687 CODDINGTON ROAD , TOWN OF
ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -48 - 1-9 . 1 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 . SAID
ORDINANCE DOES NOT PERMIT A BUSINESS OPERATION IN SAID ZONE OTHER
THAN A CUSTOMARY HOME OCCUPATION OPERATED SOLELY BY A RESIDENT OF
THE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING AND PROVIDED THAT NO ADDITIONAL PERSON
NOT RESIDING ON THE PREMISES ARE EMPLOYED THEREIN . . . AND
ADVERTISING DOES NOT OCCUR . APPELLANT HAS ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES
NOT RESIDING ON THE PREMISES AND ADVERTISES IN THE N . Y . N . E . X .
YELLOW PAGES .
Attorney Jeff Coleman , representing Mr . Langendoerfer ,
addressed the Board . He stated that there are two factors which
have been pointed out as requiring the need for this variance and
he wished to speak to those . First , in regard to the Appellant
advertising in the Yellow Pages . He referred to Section 19 ,
paragraph 2 , and stated that the phrase about advertising is in
conjunction with the sale of goods or products , which the
Appellant does not sell goods or products - he has a service
business . None of his customers ever come to his house ; it is
completely run outside the house , so it is his opinion and the
Board can create their own , whether this is a case in which that
phrase about advertising applies .
• Attorney Coleman , in regard to the second factor , about
outside employees , the only person who works in the business at
the house is Mr . Langendoerfer ' s daughter - she works there
part - time . She is a family member although she does not reside
• Town of Ithaca 12
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
there . While she is there her children are often cared for by
the Langendoerfers which enables her to work .
Attorney Coleman went on to explain that the only other
employees who are ever on the premises are the ones who come to
pick up the trucks with the equipment on them ( 2 trucks each
day ) .
Attorney Coleman believes that what brought this all about
is that the Langendoerfers have a large number of cars . The
house is a duplex . One half of the house is occupied by Mr . and
Mrs . Langendoerfer ; the other half of the house is occupied by
his son and family . Mr . Langendoerfer personally has 5 vehicles
and his son and his wife each have a vehicle so that is what is
there at any time . That has nothing to do with the business .
In answer to Chairman Aron ' s question , Mr . Langendoerfer
explained that he has 2 business trucks , a pick up truck ( only
used for plowing on the premises ) , a yellow station wagon ( the
night manager uses that ) and his wife has a car .
Mr . Langendoerfer stated that they want to keep their
business as much away from them as they can . He stated that they
have about 28 - 30 people working for them . They have developed a
system where they have a night manager , supervisors . These
persons go around and pick up the workers and deliver them to
their job locations . When the job is done , the workers are taken
home . The supervisors all have pagers . Mr . Langendoerfer
explained that he has people out working 24 hours a day ,
therefore , he is on call 24 hours a day for emergencies . Mr .
Langendoerfer explained that they have a Post Office Box for his
business . There is no business mail coming to the house . The
only advertisement that will be found for his business is in the
Yellow Pages .
Mr . Langendoerfer stated that they make a real effort to
keep the business away from the house . They like the
neighborhood ; they bought the house for the neighborhood , but the
nature of his business , which is a service business , requires him
to be in touch with his help 24 hours a day . Mr . Langendoerfer
said that the reason they have to keep in touch and work with the
supervisors is because he has had a policy for the last 12 or 14
years of hiring the handicapped and disadvantaged . Therefore ,
they need a little more supervision than other persons .
Mr . Langendoerfer explained that the basic thing that he has
• for his business at the house is his office . The accounting and
the payroll , as well as the book work is done by an outside
individual . At one time there was a tractor trailer delivering
supplies but now they buy their supplies locally so that is no
• Town of Ithaca 13
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
longer a problem . He stated that they are making every effort to
keep it their home , not an office . They do not really want an
office there but the phone has got to be there and in the Yellow
Pages he has to have an address - - that has got to be . He
explained when people call for employment , he goes out of his way
to interview them away from the house .
Chairman Aron referred to a statement that was taken over
the phone by Susan E . Elkins , Department Secretary for the
Building/ Zoning Department on October 25 , 1989 , which is attached
hereto as Exhibit # 8 .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Langendoerfer about the old school
bus that is on the property .
Mr . Langendoerfer responded that the bus belongs to his
brother - in - law . He is supposed to be moving it as soon as he
gets his property on Prospect Valley Road developed .
Chairman Aron referred to a copy of the advertisement from
• the Yellow Pages ( attached hereto as Exhibit # 9 ) . He read the
advertisement and stated that it is a very big ad for a small
business .
Mr . Langendoerfer stated that he did not say that it was a
small business ; he said that most of it is being operated outside
the home . In answer to Chairman Aron ' s question , Mr .
Langendoefer said that he has 27 employees .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Langendoerfer if he stores any
chemicals on the property . Mr . Langendoerfer stated that all the
chemicals are stored on the vehicles .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Mr . Visnyei , 698 Coddington Road , stated that he has no
objection to a man making a living in his building but the
neighbors keep their properties clean and he has counted as many
as 9 cars and trucks there in the afternoon and he thinks it
makes the property look like a commercial parking lot in a
residential section . He feels that what is going on there is
devaluating to the other properties in the area .
Mr . Langendoerfer agreed with Mr . Visnyei on the amount of
vehicles at his home . However , they are all licensed vehicles .
As far as the bus goes , he would be happy to move it out of
• there . He stated that when he bought that property it was busted
down , grown up and they have completely gone through the inside
of it and they have upgraded the property since they have owned
it .
Town of Ithaca 14
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Mr . Frost , for clarification , referred to a letter from Mr .
Langendoerfer that was attached to his Appeal ( attached hereto as
Exhibit # 10 ) . Mr . Frost cited the following : " all my employees
go directly to the job sites with the exceptions of two . They
pick up the vehicles and equipment and once a week do small
carpets on the premises . "
Mr . Langendoerfer said usually it is either two people or
his son .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Langendoerfer why he did not say
that • in the first place .
Mr . Langendoerfer replied that they were talking about the
offices . Mr . Langendoerfer said he is not trying to hide
anything .
Mrs . Hoffmann noted that in the ad from the Yellow Pages , it
says " plant " .
rMr . Langendoerfer responded that you have to look as good as
the other guy that has an ad . He said that they do about 6 to 8
rugs a week in the basement . He said they use the same steam
machines that are used on on -premise jobs .
Mrs . Hoffmann asked Mr . Langendoerfer where he keeps that
equipment in general .
Mr . Langendoerfer replied that the equipment is kept on the
trucks until the winter time and then they have to load it into
the basement where it is warm .
Mrs . Hoffmann asked Mr . Langendoerfer about the side of the
driveway which is toward to the center of Ithaca . She asked him
if that driveway has been extended recently .
Mr . Langendoerfer responded that when they moved there it
was a gully . The Town and County have dumped fill there with his
permission . A week ago he rented a backhoe and spread it all out
in the driveway - that is why it is humpy . Eventually what they
want to do is put a fence down the side .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Langendoerfer when he purchased the
property and if he purchased it as a home to live in . Mr .
• Langendoerfer replied that they bought the house in 1981 and they
did buy it for a residence .
Town of Ithaca 15
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Langendoerfer if , at the time of the
purchase , he intended to make it into a business kind of
structure .
Mr . Langendoerfer stated that he still does not consider it
a business -type structure because they have one 10 foot x 11 foot
office in there with one phone that is a business phone and the
other one is a private phone . He said they are not generating
traffic there because of the business ; they are generating
business from the family .
Mrs . Hoffmann stated that Mr . Langendoerfer said that
weekly employees come into the house to do cleaning of carpets
with the steam machines and in her opinion that is business being
conducted on the premises , and bringing the steam machines back
and forth is generating traffic .
Mr . Frost noted to the Board that Mr . Langendoerfer is using
the 120 square foot area for office space and the Board would
also have to consider the space where this steam cleaning occurs
on the property . Mr . Frost asked Mr . Langendoerfer if he had
this business elsewhere besides Coddington Road .
Mr . Langendoerfer said that he used to be at 308 East Court
Street which was a residential home and he never had any
problems .
Mrs . Hoffmann stated that she does not agree that this
matter will not have a significant adverse impact on the
neighborhood character , ( point C2 on the Environmental
Assessment . ) ,
Chairman Aron read Part III , the Determination of
Significance . ( The Environmental Assessment is attached hereto
as Exhibit # 11 . )
Environmental Assessment
MOTION by Mrs . Hoffmann , seconded by Mrs . Reuning
RESOLVED , that in the matter of the Appeal of Mr . Richard
Langendoerfer requesting a use variance from Article V , Section
19 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the operation of
a carpet cleaning business known as " Help of Ithaca " , located at
685 - 687 Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No .
6 - 48 - 1 - 9 . 1 , Residence District R- 30 , the Town of Ithaca Zoning
• Board of Appeals make and hereby does make a negative declaration
of environmental significance .
I
• Town of Ithaca 16
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
A vote on the motion resulted as follows .
Ayes - Hoffmann , Reuning , Aron , Austen .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
Further discussion followed on the use variance request by
Mr . Langendoerfer .
Mr . Langendoerfer explained that almost all the rugs are
done on location . The only carpets they do at the house are ones
that are picked up , a 61x101 , a 81x101 or a 91x121 because they
have a $ 60 . 00 minimum charge to go into a house and some people
won ' t pay that . He said that if he had to take the rugs
somewhere else to clean them it would not create enough money to
even pay the rent .
Chairman Aron stated that even though Mr . Langendoerfer does
some cleaning of carpets without charging , such as for McGraw
House , it is still part of his business and he is still running a
Sbusiness out of that residential district .
Mrs . Hoffmann made the following motion :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals _
denies the request for the use variance as requested by Mr .
Richard Langendoerfer with the following findings :
1s there was no evidence presented to the Board showing
that Mr . Langendoerfer cannot earn a reasonable return
on his business without violating the ordinance .
2 * the use has an impact on the neighborhood by all the
cars parked there , even though there is no great
environmental impact .
3e statements were presented and persons appeared before
the Board in opposition to the number of cars parked at
the property and the amount of traffic that is
generated .
49 there is nothing particularly unique about this
property that makes it impossible to use it as a
residential property .
Mrs . Reuning seconded the motion .
The voting on the motion was as follows .
Ayes - Aron , Reuning , Hoffmann , Austen .
Nays - None .
Town of Ithaca 17
Zoning Board of Appeals
October 25 , 1989
The motion was carried unanimously .
The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 05 p . m .
Respectfully Submitted ,
&
'�k 6 4
Connie J . Holcomb
Recording Secretary
APPROVAT/
Y
Henry Aron , Chairman
•
74
000e '000
tetj
-
�' �Ch .bf-- -� 1
%` i* - — -- - -'
1 .�o.I, .AXM Ora y;
IIII
!� \ r
O
PARcrz No. ONS' 0
4L 33 onnn� /nont
r : 1 A/IIv S of cRA1G ANO ANm4 W14.KhVS J
Coo
FOR WRA, YF,-qCDRo�r��47�3071) °A
l W \ . `
onto
p" Fo UNG
' `.
town
aPf �� 0no , - � ,� E 159 i �, 1 0
Q C
cb
piPF — onto
'
elf7 0 1)14
F01)14 � � 5 � frE
, y
C a
(]rt
.. A ' / \
. . .,a �i ! z•�. f ' i�� - PIPE l t
�i
777
AV
Motor
y y
,� I Fyr.0,9 \yo N.
11 � 4Isp�o - _ NoM� � , Z
� � i�
OAI now.
P�
� a . '•
cep a�.�. , 44�oAK '� r 4
t� Fd Ami o J
s Syed-,9 , not
.� a
S�N9 ' — N5,30S_ 6_9,2 " pipe
,[z . 9'PiP£ Ts f1iGH�✓HY R/6HT ac Ot,,vgy��4 Fou ,uD
r—. ,� � � I VRr5ENT
yC3. � � oto cFN�RGivr: _
R= 7/7 '
4ocrc�i � c< �F�K /7on,
Al ifsENT �z U)/*)ck, 1
Sfbv oy / e 75
pipe �m =7�ArfJ
PRFsr;M'
All � I
to
� 4)FI- % ' 4' 4't 70+ CA99/ 4 NAO AJV6*79 W/<KPINS
AK A.Y /./�.tN 7 70/►R"I CIO= 1RdST 6� {{� N� TSF••
'7HRr A cf 44&40 &W 1EYOrt AV Y
'4 / fII �Yr 496 RNO A'.�l 7H�s �� Q D,q H^66/W�9Y MAS F'ir.EO RT �vMP/1'�/1^S Cc U*V
0KRFc-r(*Vr.4 /► �4rT AA AergM< zor Wr o •�Q c,� rc Qe c[E1PA' 'S c�?�"iC�� 4AJ9 Wfi- 407 . MAP No,
N� sRoulvo. �a�' MrF at "oMIIIPWa
# �� r/s/DAPI 'r7A
A �Acoo w/rrocviYr " IT : z ' to
44 on
"09411 ct�
gvh , Z
I,t� •
1
I�•: iVf �rle i�
llp
jig �� gg
ro
INN
\ n.
/ , �•.
1 Y
a �
i •— y � .n i
wry a I 1 I I
It
bf
ro
Oil
« X ^M
w
• ' C`4 a
i • • ; ' a I .
0r �6
Y
'p '� D iilii • •
M q Ya s31i
wy
N � « .
M
d0 NMOL
;.,..,.._.. . .. . , . . •. .. . . , , : .. .•,�,,. ,, .. .. � ,. .., � •.,_Win.-, w,• , �I : , :, I
�r,•d0
O
• Ithaca College
ITHA( A Ithaca, New York 14850
607-274-3285
• Vice President for
Business and Administrative Affairs
September 29 , 1989
Town of Ithaca
Town Hall
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca , NY 148.50
RE : Sign Application by Susan Centini
( Centini ' s Coddington Restaurant )
Dear Sir or Madam :
This letter is written in support of the sign application by
Ms . Susan Centini ( Centini ' s Coddington Restaurant ) to place
a sign on land owned by Ithaca College . Said land is in tax
parcel 40 - 4 - 1 and , more specifically , is located at the
northeast corner of the intersection of Routes 96B and
Coddington Road .
• Ms . Centini has approached the College seeking permission to
place a directional sign to their family restaurant on said
property . Because of the long - standing relationship between
the Centini family and Ithaca College , and because said
property was a gift to the College from Mr . Centini , we are
happy to accommodate the request . Assuming approval of the
permit application by the Town of Ithaca , the College will
work with Ms . Centini on installation of the sign .
Should there be any questions , please feel free to contact
me .
Sincerely ,
/4C_ --
Thomas R . Salm
Vice President for Business
and Administrative Affairs
(n
a r4
ici�
co
G
cp
a
rn
U� C; \ G N
vITIN
�'j r
lO . 2 S • Q� "(
• G ���R� l�� 39
O
osEc o� u FLvt�tZ- =p co
�O to
rtizsTyucotz J
-
• fa R/aD E
t
s77Q
�13A SEt+�► a �'T'
� . so - Oa F gmw l Grtz�4E To 0 IC1 H-MT �%NT O N
fiZ oc� O je. , S%r corm .
ISLA�'\/ AwTj o t`I Ttq> µ l4 N EST T'Cn NT vn-4 fMCC>Tr .
a
•
4�
•
r
r
TOVM ®F YTHACA
126 EASY SENECA STRNT
MACA, NEW YORK
14U0
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
OCTOBER 25 , 1989
STATEMENT OF : - - - Patricia Steele ( speaking for herself and - her -
husband ) , 680 Coddington Road , Ithaca , NY 14850 , 273 - 9148 .
IN REGARD T0 : Appeal of Richard Langendoerfer , Help of Ithaca .
CALLED IN over the phone on Wednesday , October 25 , 1989 , 8 : 50
a . m . Taken by Susan E . Elkins , Department Secretary ,
Building / Zoning .
STATEMENT READS AS FOLLOWS :
As neighbors , we are concerned in regard to the traffic in and
out of the lot . Also , if variance is granted , what else would be
allowed if the place was sold . Other concerns are : increase in
business and the use of and disposal of cleaning agents and
chemicals .
Patricia Steele
Neighbor
Susan E . Elkins
Department Secretary
Building / Zoning
Ih. b;f �
' � 16 ® NYIEJ( hlorsutioa 8emarus romp, - 198A•t � '
filet Bazaar ; RA INROVINTERNATIONAI:CARPET— .CARPET ..
(ls+rrg Moslem )nx# Mounted EpNpnesnt , x " 'I DYEING & y'aq .�,.�, ,,1. . r '°"
w state _ , 272 5�9 CLEANING CID : ; , Carpet. & . Rug Cleaners= Cont'd `
-Dry Of Tompkins County c ,.� n . : y `
1 ► Carpet & Rug Cleaning Equip:
Ste Our Display Page 46' j. ..'. •,. , �� ERYICEMASTER OF TOMPKINS ;t n ;` Rental
185 Lane Rd V' i , - r; S
rc thaca 272 a 100 COUNTY .: .
NENTAL CLEANING CO ,• :j _ Sea Our Dlsplay Ad This Page 1 ANDERSON RENT-ALL
, _ .. .oyi i ' f , I ` �` , .. iyx.h' , y-•1 'G.;7n .,.a7.J . `. ' + ' � � ' 204 Hook - -
DO NOT STEAM! a '•f3i�tr t - 272-83 08 All Types Rented rna„dlny sream'Cheak
v r Y With Anders oh FbW ,
tFROFEseIONAL DFIT'FlEMo9ALt„At"'1*' CARPET A 'FURNITURE' CLEANING " ' ' ' - • 363 Elmira Rd— - 273 181
FLUFF a U* MAT Pa.E EMERGENCY SERVICES Are "you trying to build-'sales,, attract .'
1FF'REMOYFMosT'sTAM*A new - customers? ,Want 61^encourage Carpef & Rug CleaninI e4g;Equl
oDORs " fi„+, For Flrsy Flood B Insurance Work,:
DRAB FART, gEAsp � pATEat + old;• customers fo” come fback7 The `_ r '' 1 ;q ., a ,
BOXClEO PL,Y11OW" 24 Hn, A Dal I7 Days A• Week NYN + �* $OpIS �
r •.n ti t ,�g,rtwa �� , ^"- i , mf E:X Yellow Pe es 'Cali, ' *�-I'
'
j, o,L i�, Y r Mohr Cradp VArda,A ted r _ 9 Help LOOk' BAIVt� �g 1
1197 D Rd'I"" ■�� Coil Toll Free'i under,.;;Advertising! _' Directory �and ' , s E-CLENE YSTEMS
' = 541.1440 Guide for numbers for FACTORY DIRECT SALES '
ge J'Shehadl Ince ` K y s ti r Emergancles 788.8638 r Your local
sI 7 �_ wry NYNEX -,Yellow ' Pagesil ''office ' Cell 'I. BANE-CLENE CORP,IndienapolisIn ,,
y� Out Di Ad Pegg f .l pg$ Y t
3 502 ErieBhrdErS�i► ,Y315472 6397 ' ' r�i ; , Z72,r 4' collect for, 'expert advice �' and�` Toll Free-Dial �l &-Then-= -800428'951
OF ITHACA c�, ,n 4 : , inf6rmation: `' ", ; ; Alto '
, , . . . . , . , .,
OurDlaplay Ad This Page? `' t NYNEX Yellow Pages'save you tirhe.
m Coddmgton Rd ,� t 272-6 " M e •-�
ca .Services 068 .... y� ? a 3 s c : t i
� � E. r r e � � �r.> It
. , �, > HELP of ITHACA
< �z •. it
DW Display Ad Thl] Ct � 1 1 {J F' u < v ' ly ,.
BWState— - -="� X273 51 a O Q x ® a .r J
;r Y ,CARPET & CLEANING . - , r;. a "� x. ua ° a r
kai n. c of i - ; 3 s .v g3ry/" }x, C' .'F3' d a { + . •t,
Cles,tbq� h .i3 . V
And
<./INlVre • 1, .? -n S aR e,i`R. ?�� J £ `':...i3 ' G'✓r'w3�; , $F�' > is s >n vJrr.e 'r . .
eAtwater Lnsg== = =. - - ==' 833 4477 : . .. s. . ., , " '
ALL NEW POWERFUL DEEP CLEANING EQUIPMENT
• RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL
actually removes soil from both the pile of the carpet and the CARPET CLEANING
obtain the .. local :deajers ', of carpet backing by a powerful extraction process that restores matted pile to FURNITURE CLEANING -
'like new' appearance.
;r ovally advertised products or SAFE_OCESS scientifically developed . Itis completely safe for all carpet fibers.
ices, simply turn to the classified FULLY INSURED
ECONOMICAL reduces need for frequent professional cleaning because it re- DICK LANGENDOERFER - OWNER
moves deeply embedded soil and leaves no residue in the carpet fibers to
Ing' descriptive.,of the product or collect dirt. .
Y Ice, and there : " will . ffnd;. ari' LET US TELLYOU ABOUT OUR UNCONDITIONAL GUARANTEE FREE ESTIMATES
r abeticaf list of the - distrlb.tors,:4 . OVER 20 YRS.' EXPERIENCE ; ..
-M WE" EXTRACT THEIIIIL :'THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE PLANT ,
era or agents, making it easy for 685 CODDINGTON RD.' _ 272-6068'
to select the one who can serve
4-
the R - _ 'i•ry
- . .
Cleaning peoplewho cam (5
aTrrle:
: • ��
' Your:�. : �tra o� 3:�o Clean - POar�.t_ O he n
=tea - s .9. n". Vll els -
I { SHOPPING - �� - CaI1. for Systemlzed cleaning' of carpets and u holste
x '` < ^ {2 = by "deep- soil extraction " from out m P rY�
% L =:GUIDE 4 .r " - • • Power + obilesuperslzedY,
I r
A. �< 4.
,4 - y � r "We Guarantee •i
-, For a free estimate call We Can Clean
tj (_^.a■ . . _. /(/��a■ /q/ —/AJ Your Carpet"
FA , Vim'. V V� 1 ` r �v
Truck Mount Unit .....
.. ' " hi not let these pages - " ServiceMaster Of Tompkins County .
Your shopping for you? 204 Hook, PI
o matter what ou
codes
Y want'
> , u'll find 141. who sells'tt right k" ' ` I
re tn• the f 'aty lits r "` u , i - ' (^.■a PP - . ' . - , a9 Years tiixpe►IetlCe t-..t
4' ' fit, ', e.,7 �. t' Pfi. g7rj. . 1 t j ' n� D.^i r'. N�V• lj ` . COlYH1YdERCI�iL" •. , , • , , , . . , • _ '..
9 1. P,4
, + _ , •t
.� IR , L i rQ KYYt.
+ . F r�tY ii .. z "" T� (' ! rP. :• CARPE CLEANING
t ,1. , • 1 Sr ,. , ■ t_�' , in Tf inti S
L ��{��/1 •1 ,t s,r I ,w
O � ■ , " ' t
PAG p ♦� ALSO: RESIDENTIA
�i 1 1�. JOIE t L ORIENTAL a DOMESTIt2 <<
ES
a b R NO JOB TOO BIG RESIDE NTL4L CARPETICLEANING
ALWAYS SUPERIOR ORIENTAL RUGS41
Be sure to include your area
QUALITY WORK i. }
code when you. leave a BOUGHT SOLD'&JAPPRAISED
','• 1 message. And avoid wrong • AU trams FLOORS MWUB ,
numbers, by dialing the area • To men l s7awtf a � CARM
REPA�FIG
! �/e:%T WWN olke FRINUG . FINDING . PAN
'ee t code when you 're calling OVER 1XI11 Op MILLION DOLLAR DIVENToRT .
s outside your area' code' region: FREE ESTIMATES s FULLY INSURED
- q
• 4._ u. ,. 273-7451 315-472-6397.
, ITIZA SERVICES
It 1 r�1' x , N1rN�,: ® ' WE WILL DEDUCT COST OF
A.
`.f r F� CALL FROM Y MLL,
I I 1 eQN{iNBf= J:9 ., y �•e : .f t ' w .� YillllQylr�s •.., 31a W. STA .i . . . . OUR , . 1'a
S , a ! : t r,, , IS02E�RIEgLvDB�S1Mcu88
HEAD THE RM on N THE.
If you have a question about co in an ad a
ItIk�UCTORT PAGES OF THS NYRiX DHRECTatP ® PY Y appearing in the NYNEX Yellow Pages,
please let us know. See the front of the Yellow Pages for further instructions..
;
Z ,� y 3: t,• 3 it
Ll
ik
ig
IlIt
44
It
lk
'a+
�fa '.•1 .�k. �'3r ,•,y'�r1
4
• I
..t L111, jrS�'
: err �S�'• n�''i�` ::;:p'{.yl.
• rff;i J � f �i 1:
sIt,
10
It
rEr '.c;1 f `t�s
fj:1
.{ .� /•Fid '��S%}••� ` ,7
'llr'r 'd ���y"iai Sri
f
PART 01 - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
PROJECT : Request for Variance Prom • Article V . Section 19 of Town of Ithaca
Zoning Ordinance : 685-687 Coddtngton Road
• REVIEWER : George R . Frantz , Asst . Town Planner
DATE : October 24 , 1989
0
A . Does Action exceed any TYPE 1 threshold In 6 NYCRR, PART 617 . 12 ?
Yes_ No Action is UNLISTED_X—
B . Will Action receive coordinated review as provided for UNLISTED Actions in
6 NYCRR, PART 617 .6 ?
Yes— No.C_ Involved Agency0es ):
C . Could Action result in any adverse effects associated with the following :
C I . Existing air quality , surface or groundwater quality or quantity , noise levels , existing
traffic patterns , solid waste production or disposal , potential for erosion, drainage or flooding
problems ? Explain briefly :
No significant adverse impacts anticipated . Proposed action is the grant of a variance from Article V ,
Section 19 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning ordinance to allow a nonconforming use within an existing
structure . No new construction or change in existing character of site is proposed .
C2 . Aesthetic , agricultural , archaeological , historic , or other natural resources ; or community
• or neighborhood character ? Explain briefly :
No significant adverse impacts anticipated .
C3 . Vegetation or fauna , fish , shellfish or wildlife species , significant habitats, or threatened or
other natural resources ? Explain briefly .
No significant adverse impacts anticipated .
C4 . A community's existing pians or goals as officially adopted , or a change in use or intensity of
use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly :
Grant of the variance as requested would be contrary to certain community goals and plans as
officially adopted . The subject parcel is located in a R-30 Residence District, which allows , among
other uses, single- and two-family homes , specific public and institutional uses , agricultural uses,
offices of a resident doctor , dentist, musician, engineer , teacher, lawyer, architect, artist or
member of other recognized profession and quasi-profession , and customary home occupations
operated solely by a resident of the dwelling and subject to restrictions outlined in Article V, Section
19 . It is centrally located within the R-30 district, and surrounding land use is rural residential and
open fields , brush , and woodland . No other commercial activity appears to exist in the vicinity of the
subject parcel . No commercial development in the portion of the town where the subject parcel is
located is proposed or anticipated in any community plans and goals officially adopted by the Town of
Ithaca .
C5 . Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by. the proposed
• action? Explain briefly :
Given the small scale of the use for which the proposed variance is requested , no significant adverse
impacts with respect to the above factors are anticipated .
•
C6 . Long term , short term , cumulative , or other effects not identified in C 1 -CV Explain
briefly ;
Grant of the requested variance may set a precedent resulting in similar requests for relief from
zoning restrictions elsewhere in the Town of Ithaca .
C7 . Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy )? Explain
briefly ,
No significant adverse impacts anticipated .
D . Is there . or is there likely to be , controversy related to potential adverse
environmental impacts ?
Yes No.(— If Yes , explain briefly
PART III – DETERMINATION OF S16NIFICANCE
Because of the relatively small scale of the activity for which a variance is requested , a negative
determination of environmental significance is recommended . However it must be noted that the
grant of a variance may result in the establishment of a precedent which may be facilitate similar
requests for -variances elsewhere in the Town of Ithaca , and which may result in a cumulatively
significant adverse impact on community land use plans and goals as officially adopted .
George R . Frantz
Asst . Town Planner
^�_T?)'��T •- :� ••,,� . _ . i� .� �^ -• .; -r .•..• yr. �.. L� - rte a-.� • _,�� t .� � . t .• • ,�
► •- -Y : ll1 . % •.�Y• ', �r.J1 . • • - f- .� •.H _ . ISS:_ . .=r _
. . .. � . . �-~"•, '` ' .� � . - . . • •. . . - .,.� - ..tip . . :.` �' . .v � c�. - _ .. _ .
; — ;` : :: _ — _ " _ AfFtDAvtT OT Tit^B.s' CATJDN'
-• � • - -_- ; ,- - - - .. .y - .,• - ;; l{-rtil.•
- '= - - Lr TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ori. home?Coccupotion. • .opei- t
BOARD OF APPEALS, NOTICE oted solely by ';a residentbf .
OF PUBLIC HEARINGS , the residential 'dwellIng' and
THdE ..
URN,
� R T WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 25, provided ::that 'no' 'odditignal !
� � H AC & O v a `N, A y 1989 7 :00 P. M. person 'not ' residing .•on ,;the By direction of the Chairman premises are employed there-- ,
of the Zoning Board of Ap- In. . .and advertising does not ,
peals NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN . occur:: Appellant :has 'odditio`- ;
_ that Public Hearings will be' nal employees not residing on t
held by the Zoning Board of the premises and advertises
�r�s t4 T =� t =^"' � ': S ��'. � M= A eats of the Town of Ithaca the N Y. N:E.X. ,Yellow Pages. i
C` t' t onpWednesday, October 25, Said Zoning Board of Appealsl
1989, in Town all , 126 East will - at said time, 7:00
t d .x;� Seneca Street, (FIRST Floor, and said . place, hear al . per-.
V� } ISS _ _ • __ _ _ _, - „_, • „ , , ..„ . . .. . : . C : ., � T� '0 . . ., REAR Entrance , West Sid ),I sons in_ support of such matters
Ithaca, N . Y . , COMMENCING or objections thereto: Persons
- r^'� AT 7 :00 P. M. on the following; may oppear by 1cgent or in
.'- � ; .�. . , is -�. i � L- C
L^^ � f-= \Z , „_.i. . .?' . L . : .i :� LrG .1_rl + � L'1 ► T`.a . L matters. i personal ^ : ". i . . L� • +^s•c4 '. +
• APPEAL of Craig and Anita Andrew''.S. Frost, Building" , n-, i
-Wilkins, Appellants, request- sp* eeto"r%Zoning <'Enforcement
ing a special approval under Officer, Town of IthacaL273--
Article XII , Section 540 of the 1747. ' '= '-''; 4
Ithaca Zoning Ordi- O , __--
Town of It ani i October 20,- 1989
LZ � P„ '01%:Oed , for the enlargement of-,
off' T� i -sr. 0 �o:�� � a g..b�i � a- �T? ar-r P., : ._ .
..., -
Hance
. _ . . . . ”"-' o non-conforming building
- - /lot located at 234 Enfield
Falls Road, Town of Ithaca Tax ',_ _.._ _
tti-= -mot: , ' ot R�a1 ^4. L � l:7CICs Ls i trUt Parcel No. 6-33- 1 -22, Resi -
_ -
• . . . _ . . . . ... . . . .. . . .: dente District R 30 Said en-
largement
eosed front
largement pro os
•� tion of an encl n
- � , •. . . �-'. , . _ s - entry-way and a rear porch,
located on an existing single
family residence , approxi-
.. . .. .
pproxr
-- motel 41 lus/minus feet
y P
1 from the east side yard prop-
erty line . Said building/lot is
_ .... . .. . ... ._ . . - - . . .M__ .. . • -- - .._ .._ . .- - - --.._. .- ...- non-conforming since a side „
— -"- " - yard building set back on an
irregular shaped lot is re- -
t� , • ^ :_` � `. � :: Of SL: : O : : ='- K'i` O .: �� � •• ----• quired to be 50 feet. Said i
IL • " L' - .. �- r Jr - property further has a width,
_ at the front yard set back, of
_ . .. - 125 plus/minus feet whereby
rz•; o. i9 —
t �- �•�^� �C •�. „ „... • _.. _._.. „ . .. - . - • 150 feet is required . - -
- .. -.
APPEAL of Susan Centini , Ap-
- - ” - . . _ - ' ' - '• ellant requesting variance -
, __ __ _ - „ „. ,:. .:..__•_ . Section 2. 01 - 1 of the Town of
-
_ -- . Ithaca Sign Law for the place
ment of a sign stating ' Cenci-
: �- - � C t : ; c V: ni's Coddington Restaurant
tes _ L: ^ :^�': = `-' ^” ”' , •__-" ", - " - • -_`-• _ •• to be located off the property
79
of the restaurant, on land
_ • owned by Ithaca College, on
_ — •, _ - , __ _• _ , __ - ._ ,— . . .__ the corner of N . Y. S. Route 96B
and Coddington Rood , Town
of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6-40-
- =• - -- - _- -. . . _ . _ _ _ _ .. .rr:- „--- __..... ... 4- 1 , Business District "A". Sec-
" _ _ - - - mow"'- •-•fr - ” " . - •' tion 2.01 - 1 of the Sign Law _
-. }. p�,,,� C 11 ') :L . ' does not per
signs to be lo- :_ =
- JEAN : FORD - cated off premises.
-'- - - _ APPEAL of David Auble, Ap -
_ _ _ _ Notary Public, _ i�jg-Cf 1 ' pellant , Paul Mahoney ;
`• ;- -'___ _ _ _ _ IVB0+ ' ` Agent, requesting a variance
0. 4 -tiofrom Article IV, Section 11 ,
Paragraph 10, of the Town of }
Qualified in- 'Tc ; ^ � Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, for {1
l?r , Ins COUn the o trution f a single
CO
__ : = _ . : •' mMission expi,�s May 3J �9 ns o
family home with an interior r
c = height measurement of be-
-- tween 37 and 38 feet, and an
exterior height of 30 feet, to ; -
` . . - be located at Lot 39, N7 La- '.
. i ' - . -;?�:' _• - � ' "' - - ` � - -` " - - ' - Grand Court, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 6-45- 1 -39, Resi-
.••r,•;.-*^y,�•�. �_ •� - ��~ �• _r_ ��"' - - _ r - - - - -�• dence District R- 15. Said Ordi-
-- - - •^ ” `- i�x - � - � f Hance allows for an interior - • -
. �.__ _ . = height measurement of no -
► + . more than 34 feet and an e
{ terior height of 30 feet.
_ • ' ^ hard La
_ _: APPEAL of Ric ngen =- 'c
_ �.�.- - -- _�i-..':� �: ; cam. •; c: ^= : : doerfer, Appellant, request- _ -
�jy ,•xat^:1�•-,�. <� T-qr- •: -�s=� •' _ • �-.-� �: m Arti- r•% • c•' _ r
Y-_ - .� • f• �_ _. r^ �..- mow_ •L.i� ��+M •: a :• ._.� ' w� . .YMr•- %' • -
,: •: g-� . • ing a use variance from r •
�- ?:- ' - `:�� cle V, Section 19, of the Town �. - ,.-3
r= V - of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance ' I .
for the operation of a carpet
- -• - - y .� .:.. --. cleaning business known as :• -
-- - - _ - Help of Ithaca" located at `
_ - . . 685-687 Coddington Road ,
_� : :�. _ •• •; _. . ' � '•, • • • _ - own of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. •
.r. ' • r • _ _ . _ - 6.48- 1 -9. 1 , Residence District �. .,
_ . _: r_•i.�: 4: , ....t _; � _�: �„^..:r _. --c- R-30. Said Ordinance does not
� - . - . - - permit a business operation in
. ' , - .•. + - - - -- � said zone other than a custom-
•. .-- :� �_ __- „..- . .'. : - . _ . . - - . .. _ r � ) � . .i r: .: vr _ :ice • ' •