HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA Minutes 1990-04-14 1.
FILED
+
F-?P
WN OF ITHACA
'�
-TOWN OF ITHACA Clerlk*&,
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
FEBRUARY 14 , 1990
PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Edward King , Eva Hoffmann , Joan
Reuning , Edward Austen , Town Attorney Barney , Zoning
Enforcement Officer/ Building Inspector Frost .
OTHERS PRESENT . Mrs . Valenza , Om P . Gupta , Bill Avery , Ken
Vineberg , Doria Higgins , Janet Jonson , Mrs .
Schriner , Robert Hines , Esq .
Chairman Aron called the meeting to order at 7 : 05 p . m . and
stated that all posting , publication and notification of the
public hearing had been completed and that proper affidavits of
sam'e':•;were in order .
The first Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF SUSAN CENTINI , APPELLANT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE OF
THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 2 . 01- 1 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA
SIGN LAW TO PERMIT THE PLACEMENT OF A 2 FT . BY 2 FT . SIGN ,
READING " CENTINI ' S CODDINGTON RESTAURANT " , OFF THE PROPERTY
OF THE RESTAURANT ON LAND OWNED BY ITHACA COLLEGE AND
LOCATED AT 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 SAID SIGN LAW PROHIBITS
OFF-PREMISES SIGNS .
Chairman Aron read from the Planning Board Adopted
Resolution of January 23 , 1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 1 .
Attorney Robert Hines , representing Mrs . Centini appeared
before the Board . He gave background information on the request
and stated for clarification that the permission given by Ithaca
College is revocable .
Chairman Aron questioned the height of the sign .
Mr . Frost stated that the proposed sign
gn will be ten feet
Mr . King asked about the location of the sign on the lot .
Atty . Hines responded that the sign has to be set back ten
feet from the highway . He referred to the map which is attached
hereto as Exhibit # 2 .
Chairman Aron read a letter from Thomas R . Salm , Vice
President for Business and Administrative Affairs at Ithaca
College , dated September 29 , 1989 , which is attached as Exhibit
# 3 , stating their approval of the proposed Centini sign .
Town of Ithaca 2
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing . No one appeared to
address the Board . Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Motion
By Mr . Edward Austen ; seconded by Mrs . Joan Reuning .
RESOLVED , That the Zoning Board of Appeals grant and hereby
does grant a variance for the sign proposed by the
Coddington Restaurant as shown on their drawing , being a 2 '
by 2 ' sign approximately 10 feet in height from the ground .
The voting on the motion was as follows .
Ayes - King , Austen , Reuning , Hoffmann , Aron .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
The next Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF WILLIAM AVERY , APPELLANT , KEN VINEBERG ,
® AGENT , REQUESTING A VARIANCE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF
ARTICLE IV , SECTION 13 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE , TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED
GARAGE , WITH A HEIGHT OF 26 . 5 FEET , TO BE LOCATED AT
1113 TRUMANSBURG ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO , 6 -
26 - 4 - 27 , , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 . SAID ORDINANCE
ALLOWS ACCESSORY BUILDINGS TO BE NO MORE THAN 15 FEET
IN HEIGHT , AND , RESTRICTS THE PLACEMENT OF AN
ACCESSORY BUILDING , OTHER THAN A GARAGE , TO THE REAR
YARD , THE PROPOSED GARAGE , CONTAINING A BASEMENT
SPACE , IS PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED 25 FEET FROM THE ROAD
RIGHT OF WAY . SAID PARCEL MAY BE CONSOLIDATED WITH
1115 TRUMANSBURG ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 -
26 -4 - 26 .
Chairman Aron read a letter into the record from Harry
Missirian , Acting Commissioner of Planning for Tompkins County ,
dated February 9 , 1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 4 .
Ken Vineberg , Agent , stated to the Board that he is the
designer for the project .
Chairman Aron read from the appeal into the record ; the
same is attached hereto as Exhibit # 5 .
® Chairman Aron asked Mr . Vineberg to explain why it is a
hardship and why they are going to all that expense to put two
cars in a garage .
r •
® Town of Ithaca 3
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
Mr . Vineberg stated that first he would like to clarify the
slope question . The slope is an 8 - foot drop in a 20 - foot run .
He presented photos to the Board and explained the need for the
8 - foot concrete wall . Mr . Vineberg stressed to the Board that
that foundation must be built to build this garage , which is a
legal structure in this part of the site .
Discussion followed between Mr . Vineberg , Chairman Aron and
Town Attorney Barney regarding Section 13 , Article IV , of the
Zoning Ordinance .
Mr . Vineberg stated that he was unaware of the newer Code
but he thinks that the issue here is that the garage is in a
legal space where the slope is such that it is literally
impossible to build a garage without creating this 8 - foot high
foundation . He explained that the garage would be 8 feet high at
the back and zero height in the front . The only desire for the
garage is as a shelter for cars .
Chairman Aron stated that he cannot visualize that they
• would build a basement under a garage and put a slab over the
basement without any further support .
Mr . Vineberg explained that a civil engineer was hired to
work on drawings of that and it is supported by steel and
reinforced concrete . He stated that it is a very elaborate
structure to support the cars and make it safe .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Vineberg what the hardship is in
this case .
Mr . Vineberg responded that the hardship is that this garage
has to be higher because of the slope of the land and they are
asking for an exception on the height so that Mr . Avery can build
the garage .
After further discussion , Chairman Aron opened the public
hearing . Chairman Aron read a letter into the record from Dr .
Achilles and Candace Filios in support of the proposed garage ,
dated February 9 , 1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 6 .
Mrs . Doria Higgins addressed the Board and stated that as
much as possible , she would hope that the garage would be as low
as possible because it will be cutting off her sun .
Mr . Avery stated that there are pine trees on the property
that are much higher than the proposed garage will be .
Town of Ithaca 4
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
Mr . King asked Mr . Vineberg about the height of the cupola
in comparison to the house . Mr . Vineberg responded that the
cupola height will be smaller than the house .
Mr . King questioned the applicant ' s desire to be able to
utilize the basement of this garage . Mr . Vineberg stated that
the basement part of the garage • would probably be utilized for
storage . In answer to Mr . King ' s question of - putting an
apartment in that space , Mr . Vineberg replied that there is
absolutely no intention of making it into any kind of a habitable
space .
Mr . Frost clarified for the Board that the height in front
of the garage to the ridge of the cupola will be 19 ' 2 " which
would still need a variance . Without the cupola , the height , at
least in the front , would be under 151
.
Town Attorney Barney questioned the spire on top of the
cupola . Mr . Vineberg stated that in the drawings that is an
aesthetic thing and it will not be part of the structure .
Town Attorney Barney asked that it be noted in the record
that that 4 - foot spire in the drawings will be altered and will
not be a part of the structure .
Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Mrs . Hoffmann stated that she finds the design of the garage
very attractive , and it makes sense to her to use that space
underneath the garage which would be wasted otherwise , but her
main problem with the proposal is that she doesn ' t see really
what the hardship is .
Mr . Vineberg stated that there is a lot of cost that goes
into that high a basement wall and that cost has to be incurred
Just because of the slope . To not be able to use that space for
storage would be a hardship because this money has to be spent to
create the wall .
Mr . Vineberg explained that $ 13 , 500 will be the cost of this
foundation . The cost of a normal foundation would be under
$ 51000 . He stated that the applicant would like to be able to
benefit by creating space because of the extra expense .
Mr . Frost confirmed that if Mr . Avery had to fill that space
in with dirt fill that would also be an added expenditure .
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Vineberg what the extra expense is
that makes it a hardship . Mr . Vineberg stated that the extra
Town of Ithaca 5
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
expense is mostly due to the slope of the site . The hardship is
not being able to benefit from the slope of the site by creating
some storage space .
Chairman Aron stated that one thing the Board has to
consider is that the garage is on a different lot than the house
is . He said that the garage with the basement will have to be
all on one lot with the house .
Town Attorney Barney stated that he thinks it would be wise
to have the tax parcels consolidated into one unit and that could
be conditioned into the granting of the variance , if the Board
wished to do so .
Motion
By Mr . Edward King ; seconded by Mr . Edward Austen .
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals find and
hereby does find with respect to the proposal to construct
the garage , as indicated in the drawings , with the cupola on
• top , ( without the spire ) , whereby the maximum exterior
height measured from the lowest exterior grade level will be
19 ' 2 " at the front ( southwest elevation ) , as shown on the
plans submitted , and the exterior height measured from the
lowest point in the rear ( northeast elevation ) will be 27 '
811 , with access to this garage being from approximately the
highway level of the Trumansburg Road , as follows .
1 . The cost of constructing the garage on this steeply
sloping lot will require $ 6 , 000 to $ 8 , 000 more being
put into the foundation and there would be a hardship
to deny the applicant the use of that garage space by
requiring that it be filled in ,
2 . The proposal meets all the criteria for a variance as
expressed in Section 77 , subdivision 7 , sub - sections A-
F of the Town ' s Zoning Ordinance ;
3 . No one appeared in opposition to the proposed garage ,
and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that this variance be granted with the
following conditions :
1 . The applicant will consolidate the two tax parcels
concerned , one being tax parcel 2600004000* 26 , the other
• being tax parcel 26 - 4 - 27 , into one residential lot .
This is to be accomplished not only at the Assessor ' s
Office as one tax parcel , but it also is to
Town of Ithaca 6
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
be accomplished by recordable covenant or deed , which
the applicant must submit to the Town Attorney for his
approval , along with recording fees , to make it a
permanent condition that the lot on which the garage is
being built becomes a part of the residential parcel
with the house which is being served by this garage .
2 . The garage and space underneath is not at any point in
time to be used as habitable space .
The voting on the motion was as follows .
Ayes - King , Austen , Reuning , Hoffmann , Aron .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
The next Appeal on the Agenda was the following .
APPEAL OF OM . P . GUPTA , APPELLANT , REQUESTING
• AUTHORIZATION BY THE BOARD OF APPEALS , UNDER ARTICLE
XII , SECTION 54 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING
ORDINANCE , FOR THE EXTENSION OF A NON-CONFORMING
BUILDING ON A NON-CONFORMING LOT LOCATED AT 940 EAST
SHORE DRIVE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 18 - 5 - 51
RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 . THE EXTENSION PROPOSED IS THE
CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONAL LIVING SPACE ON THE SOUTH
SIDE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING , WITH THE SOUTH SIDE
BUILDING SETBACK CHANGING FROM 20 . 8 FEET TO 9 . 4 FEET
( 15 FEET BEING REQUIRED ) , AND THE EXTENSION OF THE
SECOND FLOOR , OVER THE EXISTING FIRST FLOOR , OF THE
BUILDING IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION BUT NOT BEYOND THE
EXISTING 8 . 6 -FOOT NORTH SIDE BUILDING SETBACK ( 15 FEET
BEING REQUIRED ) , WITH THE BUILDING HEIGHT REMAINING THE
SAME .
Chairman Aron read a letter from Harry Missirian , Acting
Commissioner of Planning for Tompkins County , dated February 9 ,
1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 71 and a letter from Om P .
Gupta , dated January 8 , 1990 , attached hereto as Exhibit # 8 .
Mr . Gupta addressed the Board and explained his reasons for
the requested expansion of his house . He said that he bought
the house almost two years ago . The house has one bedroom and
one bathroom . Mr . Gupta explained that he has a business here in
Ithaca and he is unable to invite his workers and business
acquaintances to his home due to the size of his home . Mr . Gupta
stated that he would like to have the opportunity to respond if
there is opposition presented against his plans . Chairman Aron
assured Mr . Gupta that he would have that opportunity .
i
Town of Ithaca 7
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
Chairman Aron asked Mr . Gupta how large his family is . Mr .
Gupta responded that at this time there is only himself .
Chairman Aron referred to the survey map that was submitted
to the Board , which is attached hereto as Exhibit # 9 . He
questioned Mr . Gupta regarding the three parcels that he owns at
that location .
Chairman Aron stated that it does not seem that Mr . Gupta ' s
ability to entertain or not to entertain should be considered as
a hardship .
Mr . Gupta explained that he does need the room to entertain
his business associates and friends but that is not the only
reason . He stated that he also needs the extra bathroom for
himself .
Chairman Aron opened the public hearing .
Mrs . Valenza stated that the land that is filled in now and
on which Mr . Gupta wishes to build , was done so with the
permission of the Army Corps of Engineers but unfortunately the
permission was obtained without full facts . There was no mention
of a creek , let alone a creek with a serious history of flooding .
She stated that the Assistant Town Engineer assured them that
there would be no flooding but within weeks there was a most
tremendous flood . She showed pictures to the Board showing how
the wall backed up the waters and was partially responsible for
causing that tremendous flood .
Mrs . Valenza questioned where the second bedroom went to
that she knows was in the house . Secondly , another thing that is
misleading in what Mr . Gupta has submitted is that the Army CorpS
of Engineers did give permission for a deck , but not the deck
that Mr . Gupta has drawn into his plans . Mrs . Valenza said that
thirdly , Mr . Gupta does not even mention that he is planning to
expand in a westerly direction . Expanding in this westerly
direction , which he has not mentioned at all , would make his
building totally block out her northern view toward the bluffs .
She stated that Mr . Gupta ' s plans show total windows on the side
of his house that is looking into her household and that would be
a total loss of privacy to her .
Mrs . Valenza went on to explain that with the construction
which Mr . Gupta has already made , she has lost privacy because
the ground that he used was on a lower level , perhaps 5 or & feet
below the level of her house . When Mr . Gupta added this four-
foot wall and filled in , where there was a partial
differentiation in privacy because of the difference in level ,
now whoever is on his property is looking into the windows of her
Town of Ithaca 8
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
living room and bedroom . Mrs . Valenza thinks these are very
important differences and she does not want any of us to make any
mistakes so that the same thing happens as has happened with the
Corps of Engineers .
Mrs . Valenza stated that for these reasons , as well as for
the fire protection problems in the neighborhood , the danger of
floods and the parking problems , she is opposed to Mr . Gupta ' s
proposal .
Mrs . Janet Jonson addressed the Board and spoke in favor of
Mr . Gupta ' s proposal . She stated that she is a neighbor of Mr .
Gupta and she is also a businesswoman so she can understand the
need to be able to entertain associates at your home - -
especially when you have employees . Mrs . Jonson stated that she
has been cleaning up her property and she is glad to see another
concerned resident like Mr . Gupta there . He has done a wonderful
job in what he has done so far with his property .
Mrs . Jonson stated that before Mr . Gupta bought his
• property it was a rental unit and thus she is very glad to see
the property owner- occupied . She stated that there are homes in
the neighborhood that are being rented out and she knows that
some of those houses are not up to Code . Mrs . Jonson said this
alarms her - - if we are talking about fire safety , we need
people to update their wiring and bring their houses up to Code .
She is sure that Mr . Gupta ' s home is not the way the codes read
today because no work has been done on this place and to put the
kind of money he is going to put into his home , he needs some
added rooms to make it worthwhile .
Mrs . Jonson said that as far as Mr . Gupta being the only
person living in the house , she is sure he will marry someday and
he has family in India that will be coming to visit him and he
has every right to do what he has proposed to do with his
property .
Mrs . Schriner , 940A East Shore Drive , stated that Mr . Gupta
should have a right to entertain his friends and his business
associates at his home and not to have to take them to a hotel .
She spoke in favor of Mr . Gupta ' s proposal .
Mrs . Doria Higgins , 2 Hillcrest Drive , spoke against the
proposal and she read a statement into the record which is
attached hereto as Exhibit # 10 .
• Chairman Aron closed the public hearing .
Mr . Gupta stated that he would like to point out that he has
tried to be a good neighbor . He knows Mrs . Valenza has a concern
Town of Ithaca 9
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
for her view and he has tried to respect it . In regard to the
flooding problem , he does not know what Mrs . Valenza is talking
about .
Town Attorney Barney interjected that in regard to the
flooding , it was not Mr . Gupta ' s fault . It was partly the Town ' s
fault because of some sewer line work that was being done there .
Mr . King asked Mr . Gupta how he addresses the concern of
Mrs . Valenza that the westward extension of the deck onto his
house would block her view .
Mr . Gupta stated that any construction will block her view .
Mr . Frost clarified for the Board that on the site plan map ,
what is shown as east elevation is really the west elevation , on
the Lake side - - they are mixed up . The site plan map is
attached as Exhibit # 11 .
Mr . King asked Mr . Gupta if he is also proposing to build a
• deck out into the Lake .
Mr . Gupta stated that he has permission for that from the
Army Corps of Engineers . ( See Exhibit # 12 , attached hereto . )
Chairman Aron read a letter into the record from Mrs . Cora
M . Sepos , 940B East Shore Drive , dated September 24 , 1989 and a
letter from John P . Lango , 926 East Shore Drive , dated November
30 , 1989 . The letters are attached as Exhibits # 13 and # 14 .
Mr . King referred to the southerly extension of the
proposal and asked Mr . Gupta if that wing will have an open glass
wall on the south . Mr . Gupta stated that it will be like a sun
room .
Mr . King stated that the proposal will cut the distance from
20 . 8 feet to 9 . 4 feet on Mrs . Valenza ' s side . He asked Mr . Gupta
why he wants so many windows on that side .
Mr . Gupta responded , because of the sun .
Discussion followed regarding the deck that is proposed to
be built out into the Lake and as to whether or not the Town has
jurisdiction over decks being built into the Lake .
Mr . King stated that he thinks before a decision is made in
• the Appeal , the members of the Board should make a trip to the
site and look at it staked out so that they have a better idea of
how the proposed addition will look on the lot .
Town of Ithaca 10
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
Motion
By Chairman Aron , seconded by Mr . Edward Austen
RESOLVED , that the Zoning Board of Appeals adjourn and
hereby does adjourn the matter of the Appeal of Mr . Om P . Gupta
for the extension of a non - conforming building on a non -
conforming lot , located at 940 East Shore Drive , to March 14 ,
1990 , and further
RESOLVED , that before that date the members of the Board
will visit the site of the proposed extension and look at
the property with stakes in places where the proposed
addition will be , and further
RESOLVED , that the meeting on March 14 , 1990 will be for a
decision by the Board only .
The vote on the motion was as follows .
Ayes - King , Aron , Austen , Reuning , Hoffmann .
Nays - None .
The motion was carried unanimously .
Chairman Aron directed Mr . Gupta to stake out the property
showing exactly what he intends to do and where he is going to
build the addition .
Town Attorney Barney stated for the record that his office
did represent Mr . Gupta when he purchased the property in
question but Mr . Gupta is not being represented by him now .
The meeting adjourned at 9 : 15 p . m .
Respectfully Submitted ,
Connie J . tftolcomb
Recording Secretary
APPROVED .
Henry Aron , Chairman
Centini ' s Coddington Restaurant - 1 -
Off- Premises Sign , 2 ft . X 2 ft .
Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals
Planning Board , January 23 , 1990
ADOPTED RESOLUTION : Centini ' s Coddington Restaurant
Off - Premises Sign , 2 ft . X 2 ft .
Recommendation to - Zoning Board of Appeals
Planning Board , January 23 , 1990
MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mr . Stephen Smith :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , in its capacity as
Sign Review Board , recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning
Board of Appeals approval of the request by Susan Centini for variance
of Section 2 . 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca Sign Law to permit the
placement of a 2 ft . X 2 ft . off - premises directional sign for
Centini ' s Coddington Restaurant on a parcel of land zoned Business
" A " , owned by Ithaca College , and located. at the northeast corner of
Rte , ' 96B ( Danby Road ) and Coddington Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No . 6 - 40 - 4 - 1 , and further
RESOLVED , that said Planning Board ( Sign Review Board ) recommend and
hereby does recommend that the Town Planning Department . be notified
• of , and review , any further plans for signage that might be proposed
for placement on the subject parcel .
Aye - Grigorov , Kenerson , Baker , Langhans , Lesser , Miller , Smith .
Nay - None .
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY .
Nan M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board .
January 25 , 1990 .
• EXHIBIT # 1
CP
z -+
O � �
"nF c ,
o �
® cp <
LpU
L40� Cid
Zi
zrn
7� o{ Z z
Z z Cir �
EXHIBIT # 2
Ithaca, New York 14850
807-274-3285
Vice President for
® Business and Administrative Affairs
September 29 , 1989
Town of Ithaca
Town Hall
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca , NY 14850
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 . Sai
, is located
land is in tax
parcel 40 - 4 - 1 and , more specificallycated at the
northeast corner of the intersection° of Routes 968 and
Coddington Road ,
Ms . Centini has approached the College seeking
Place a directional sign to their family restauprantissonion saido
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 . Assuminga
proval
permit application by the Town of Ithaca , te College wof t
illhe
work with Ms . Centini on installation of the sign .
Should there be any questions , please feel free to contact
me .
Sincerely ,
Thomas R . Salm
vice President for Business
and Administrative Affairs
•
EXHIBIT # 3
### ######## TOMPKINS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
Harry Missirian Acting Commissioner of Planning
############
February 9 , 1990
To . Andrew S . Frost , Town of Ithaca Zoning Officer
From : Harry Missirian , Acting Commissioner of Planning
Re . Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239- 1 and -m of the New
York State General Municipal Law .
Proposed discretionary action : Dimension variance appeal by William Avery at
1113 Trumansburg Road ( state highway )
Tax Map No . 26 -4- 27
This memorandum acknowledges your referral , of the proposal identified above
' for review and comment by the County Planning Department .
ZONING REVIEW , pursuant to NY General Municipal . Law , Section 239- 1 and -m .
The proposal , as submitted , will have no significant deleterious infpact on
intercommunity , county , or state interests . Therefore , no recommendation is
indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to act without
prejudice .
Additional comments not part of the 239- 1 & -m review .
One reason for a lower maximum height limit for accessory buildings is that
they are often allowed to be sited closer to the side or rear lot lines where
they might reduce the sunlight on a neighboring property if they were as high
as the principal building .
copy : file
® EXHIBIT #4
Biggs Center , Building A , 301 Dates Drive , Ithaca , New York 14850 ( 607 ) 274-5360
A P P E A L
to the
Building InspectortZoning Enforcement Officer
and the
Zoning Board of Appeals
of the
Town of Ithaca , New York
The garage shown in the accompanying drawings is 14 feet
high from the floor of the parking area to the peak: of the
garage roof . Allowable height for an accessary building is
15 feet . At issue here is the additional height created by
the basement below the parking level , and the cupola on the
roof . y
Since height is measured from the lowest floor in
contact with grade , the basement must be included in
calculating the garage height . Because of the natural slope
of this site , which drops steeply away from the road , the
basement walls are unavoidable . Surprisingly , if the
basement were filled with dirt , it would no longer be
included in calculating the building height . This would
make the garage legal even though it in no way changed its
actual height or shape .
I believe I would be suffering an unnecessary hardship
if I were not allowed to utilize this basement space .
Particularly since utilizing the basement space will not
change the actual height of the garage .
Since the Town of Ithaca makes no exceptions for roof
structures not intended for human occupancy , the cupola must
also be included in the height calculation . This makes the
garage a total of 26 . 5 feet high , including the basement .
Primary structures are allowed to be 30 feet high . I ' m
going to considerable trouble and expense to set this oarage
25 feet back from the road , so that it is in an area where + a
30 foot high building would be legal if it were part of the
existing house .
Because this garage is located to allow for the full
front , side , and rear yards required for primary buildings ,
I think it would be imposing an unnecessary hardship to
require this garage to meet the height restriction for an
accessory building .
Furthermore , the bupola is a charming aesthetic element ,
which adds to the picturesaue quality of this garage . By
including such things as cupolas , widows walks , spires ,
chimneys , and steeply pitched roofs in your height
restrictions , you are forcing the production of buildings
with low pitched rows and dull silhouettes . I think you
should look at the Village of Cayuga Heights and the City of
Ithaca codes and consider exempting certain non -habitable
roof structures from your height calculations , as they have
done .
EXHIBIT # 5
1
evo
: 2'o /I 10 Q r d 00,D,� CL�S
15
Tomes, � x3e
_ *74A ae, a
lee. ��p G(Jr r�t�,-� # IV ei . 71V Co�sfru �t a rQ
WL Cc r6 Gv�if •
AVL oar sWa 7Vai!�
, /� .
S r '7' � cot' s frr,zu4
MrtZ. `ZOUJeJ / #e
rn.�Q,u.ec . vL44.
n os f � we,
&4A. �
EXHIBIT # 6
• f '
1 xx
TOMPKINS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF •PLANNING
### #### Harry Missirian Acting Commissioner of Planning
February 9 , 1990
To : Andrew S . Frost , Town of Ithaca Zoning Officer
From : Harry Missirian , Acting Commissioner of Planning
Re : Zoning Review Pursuant to Section 239- 1 and -m of the New
York State General Municipal Law .
Proposed discretionary action : Application for special approval , by Om Gupta
at 940 East Shore Drive ( state highway )
Tax Map No . 18- 5-5
This memorandum acknowledges your referral of the .proposal identified above
for review and comment by the County Planning Department .
ZONING REVIEW , pursuant to NY General Municipal Law , Section 239- 1 and -m .
The proposal , as submitted , will have no significant deleterious impact on
intercommunity , county , or state interests . Therefore , no recommendation is
indicated by the County Planning Department and you are free to act without
prejudice .
Additional comments not part of the 239-1 & -m review .
Since this action concerns extension of a building on a lot , the configuration
and status of the lot is of considerable importance . However , in this case
there appear to be two lots , both owned by the applicant , with the expansion
taking place entirely on one of the 1ots , . which has no building on it now . It
is questionable whether a nonconformance should be allowed to expand across a
lot line , even though both lots are in the same ownership .
Also, the survey map and the map in Exhibit C , sheet 2 of 2 , on the one hand ,
and the tax map , on the other hand , seem not to describe the same site .
POA TGA r\01S
copy : file l
EXHIBIT # 7
Biggs Center , Building A , 301 Dates Drive , Ithaca , New York 14850 ( 607 ) 274-5360
. Qn P . Gupta
940 East Shore Drive
Ithaca , NY 14850
January 8 , 1990
Building Inspector/ Zoning Enforcement Officer
and the Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Ithaca
Ithaca, NY 14850
Dear Sirs .
1 . Enclosed herewith is my application for putting on an addition to
my house on 940 East Shore Drive. Exhibits A and B show survey map
and the architects drawings showing existing structure along with the
proposed changes .
2. To summarize the changes-,
(i ) The second floor is extended on the north and east side so as to
be in line with the existing structures .
(ii) The first floor is extended on the south side by 11 '4" . There will
still be a 9 ' left between the new structure and my property line.
3 . The proposed construction shows a deck on the west side over the
Cayuga Lake which requires approval form Army Corp . of Eningeers . I
have obtained their permit which is shown in Exhibit C .
4 . I have talked about this proposed construction with several of my
neighbors and they have told me that they have no objections to my
plans . Letters from Mrs. Schriner (immediate neighbor to the north ) ,
Mrs. Cora Sepos and John Lango are attached in Exhibit D . In addition,
Ivan & Janet Johnson have also told me that they support my proposal.
5 . I agree to provide any additional information that you may need to
favorably decide on my application. Looking forward to hearing from
you in ' the near future.
Yours Sincerely,
Om P. Gupta
EXHIBIT # 8
A^/a O ld Y (1N3 W3AVd j LN3592cd �' I
S+'£ • ; XN
aniao- - 32CM9 �' S'v3 3
� M61 - 11 N
too
zz
s i
LZ
: s m
Q•J
_6' YI I ' St 1
w } .r ZZ
4 3
fr
dl J /< � Z < ta •aa FJN 90 Z N
vl H . h Q C O < ILfN 1
Z 0 0 J 0 I- O
U2 v_ Q �• '
O W
J Z3 < ,dN -i-
a' ; y rl .a � 0. .9
0.
o�a , Q O o a_ Y .Y oovm %J LL v
a � � e. F- W mY ' vrD ' m
rN4C v Z J d YQ-ai u�i� N a
M w $ ~ dw = N
O i1 1• � ' r �' Or Qrw -I � ' aW < L Vd Y r
� j t l � y
J � I„ — rVy 1
kL N ( Alia » 2_ p oma any ay S c
V y m
7. 1r
vzu _ i OW � r vd >r- O v
6 =
01 I i- - 00 I rJ 1 � r.. h
r 1 0 t. N J o 0 <z h@ ..
G 3 N Q dQN '
U.
a 3 a rn Y $ r
COw o
o . .7 o v . , 3NM I d
Nm
ti. a Q „ dwz
S
(P did LMa
rl
~. IS Nw / M
° \
.Z :
w • .
.AI d 'IGji o q
(U
^ 3x25 ;z. S - \ \^ 9 12- n •Nu=, p r Q 'o2 :2 s 0a
�� H91�1 j r - S r '{ ' Vl
l -
�
ca
r w
I`ll w
in Q Qe' O " - d• r , `a V
WNL w J Ny .y p
��T(( r� o• . 6` i > v = o<. eit m W
K N N1aON 0 -a Q � }� 71 J L .1 00 �. �• „ } Wpl rU J v .r 1
LU b a d L niwZ c iQ£ r+ ywZ `17in nln N 4 G W
10 + v 'o i O o < 2 , N p I-
T h
1 1 a a p
r ° r v y.1n 1 1 A z A r of d 1
EXHIBIT #9
Statement of Doria Higgins , 2 Hillcrest Drive
before Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals
February 14 , 1990
I ' m here tonight to support Shirley Valenza of East Shore Drive in her
request that you not change your zoning rules and regulations to enable
her neighbor to the north , Om Gupta, to enlarge his house to bring it within
9 . 4 feet of her house .
As you know , present zoning regulations require 15 feet for side yards ,
which means a 30400t separation between dwellings . As you also know ,
many of the small bungalows on East Shore Drive were built before zoning
regulations went into effect . Mr . Gupta's house is only 20 . 8 feet from the
boundary he and Mrs . Valenza share , and her house is almost right on that
boundary — so that instead of having 30 feet between them they now have
only 20 . 8 feet . To decrease that already sub- regulation distance to only
9 . 4 feet would horribly press in upon the privacy of Mrs . Valenza's house
and most decidedly lower its real estate value , not to mention her pleasure
and comfort in living there — which she has done for the past 21 years .
It may be relevant and important for you to know that when Mr. Gupta
bought his house just two or three years ago , he did not have a side yard
to speak of . His "side yard " was mostly . at lake level and a good portion of
it was part of the creek drainage bed — the creek that runs between his
house and Mrs . Valenza 's house . By building his concrete wall and then
filling the land in on his side he has given himself a side yard . But at the
same time he has threatened Mrs . Valenza 's house with being undermined
at high level times , since the water which formerly spread between the two
houses is now forced with a higher velocity completely on to her side .
I do not think it would be fair or right for you to lift zoning regulations on Mr.
Gupta 's behalf when it would be so much to the detriment of Mrs .
Valenza 's welfare . She has already been harmed too much by his building
of the concrete wall . Mr. Gupta was aware of zoning rules and regulations
when he bought his house . He is a very aware and efficient business man
— I have known him for a number of years . He knew the rules and
regulations about side yards when he bought his house . I don 't see why
you should now change those rules to accommodate him when it will hurt
Mrs . Valenza so very much .
EXHIBIT # 10
)� .:.lor-
/n
J
JIM
'
Iljllll.,: — I , a • 4f
V4
00 Ar
Ag
= S- gid • T 1 _ . a•• � •
a ,III !�,� II i11 a � i • L' bll I'I' '�H��., . : _ I ,_ :�a
1 Uj3IIII jllll' 1' !!II jll s , u _ ; • i ; :
� I �Il-11-•l�j , • Jy�i- _..
Z /
II nuw�p'�gn`Js i
I 54 I
, i
LI I I I I III I . . . . . . ... _ t '.•__ _. _ _
•I I _ II III I � '
I
mosr • . . . . e • $ . .
_ j, Ilj , I
j III. jI ! l
I ,I Ia
�-- i;lljltllllll ii� j�I � il� 'I
�•
fM
fro
so
1.01
.01
r
v
` • ^ e
r �
\• JIII 1
- t :
Tl V
. L •
�-q-• -.
t
.r I • - 1 - t
- - -
1 I 1
ago CM
Igo :0
p I �
j i tf .I Imei a • '3'
nIr uM
% oe ^
IR
I— Ij w > O M - • I It
r , 1�
[Z
I
s I iIf
{ I I Ion
^ rr."01
o I • o
of
Vp
wo
z mM
e• • I z 1
e u Id
70
' `
Z
EXHIBIT ## 11 j z
H p :fl a I :ss
t � ' - , : "•, Q _ 'ALTERATIONS TO Jagat P. Sharma
mo r1940 EAST SHORE DRIVE Architect
F�
YITN ACA, NEW MONK .....;1 r,ll .n..,..
n
. , 1 .
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
\ BUFFALO DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
I1776 NIAGARA STREET
BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14207 - 3146
j REPLY TO
ATTENTION of March 30 , 1989
Regulatory Branch
SUBJECT : Letter of Permission - Processing No . 89 - 101 - 9
Mr . Om P . Gupta
940 East Shore Drive
Ithaca , New York 14850 - 1026
`— Dear Mr . Gupta :
Please refer to your request for a Department of the Army
permit to perform work in Cayuga bake in the Town of Ithaca ,
Tompkins County , New York ,
UPON RECOMMENDATION OF THE CHIEF OF ENGINEERS , PURSUANT
TO SECTION 10 OF THE RIVERS AND HARBORS ACT OF 3 MARCH 1899
( 33 U . S . C . 403 ) , OM P . GUPTA , DESIGNATED THE PERMITTEE , IS
HEREBY GRANTED PERMISSION TO INSTALL A PILE SUPPORTED DECK IN
ACCORDANCE WITH ATTACHED PERMIT PROVISIONS , CONDITIONS AND
DRAWINGS WHICH ARE INCORPORATED IN AND MADE A PART HEREOF ,
PLEASE NOTE : The term " you " and its derivatives , as used
in this permit , means the permittee or any future transferee .
The term " this office " refers to the appropriate district or
division office of the Corps of Engineers having jurisdiction
over the permitted activity under the authority of the
commanding officer .
The District Commander must be informed of commencement
and completion of the authorized work . Please use the forms
enclosed . Commencement indicates your acceptance and
agreement to ccm 1 with the n = jmit terms and conditions .
EXHIBIT # 12
- 2 -
Regulatory Branch
SUBJECT : Letter of Permission - Processing No . 89 - 101 - 9
Questions pertaining to this matter should be directed to
Mr . Mel Schroeder , who can be contacted at 716 - 876 - 5454 ,
extension 2307 , or by writing to the above address .
Dated this 30 th day of March 1989
BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY :
'000 ''���e
�!
Hug F . Boyd III
Colonel , U . S . Army
Commanding
Enclosures
EXHIBIT # 12
w► �� ` ; r
2290
of
If
41 ; 1 m yl „� ' 1, . tr,. �. SD �1
< McKinneys'.:flat
am
r j o 3 >h>7
Z
• , •+
4L jv
1° ' \ •_ ;� , ��� ��:, 11=� Willow 2285
yll
NNNN
it
\Col) e \�\ x ,k \ I \ r4103os dt14
LighlO Slw Ig w, 1
Disposal
� • :\ � \� \,\\�\; — _ - - - —
BDY 2280
CORP
\ ` D
\':;. :• y .� l ,l ` :+ •` ) ><\ o• �� � .� Light , �• . � .Ji��' "oZ
• •�� '. s\ \ \ \ , ATHENIAN ST r o JB9 X. /•
r, V `,•� LAN• \ \\ tewar fa>rk!--%' I I
C . \\ .,\� ,•. MARINE PARK
�\ t\ \ :• ,•\ •: \ , I
, ,\ o C'•
Zama. o '
9 �� qR
` 1 � ' j1\' ` • d:'. 1' ii Golf Course C>,j II
N mat
7. ` � \ ' = 1 1';•J j� �.F1�11 , ; � �\ � . �-,; : , u fir � n I
Imp I
moo. t
to
1 I: In & T-, 4 -� , \ \ 1 ',`� , , . J)) J.\ I Sewage e. " azn
Til. � O
• ` C• (; t . ' n ;;. ,:1' � '. i oisposa � ._ 2 2 7 0
1 \IN
, ,Du�� 1 11l � � // : I� ial •�• • / rf�.l?1 �J! r '�iati` 1 �i %�^'� .\. /'� ./J.\ � I
In
�me,Itam .
� t I� I l ifs � � ` '� m � i � � II � Ilp�})) � :�: �.o \\ � Ste• ��'� �s1 �1i` I
1\ I J / it I f 1 o I C i .°�J VI } ♦ t� � . \ .\
m ( � I , . e
\ i \\ \ . f � '� `,�'. l'•^.,. I i.l ` ��-. " CMDLLOK 7 147DO
_ \� ' .-y fps•-.,• ',;.'f o f I ;�l�� ; • � !•. . . �. i �„ o I,
� • ) A40 Jr ' : � . . � i) i . 4i � :�7/-' . B on b y .
i I,4 /)" '// //� ,�, I 1 ) 11 • i'
�A J I�J�Vi , � II: /i ; / ;ril ?r, :;', d,� / _• • Olmmmm�mmot p-lWat
(it fq
Imp
all; ; 7 f �r � l / ��• �/i% / rf/ f J ;1.y : '=III 'r 'A
tAly � ' G
1 >� A CA — - - She I o 2-
1�/ FS � , NEw yOR
EXHIBIT # 12
' ' � � � � >L � C tet • ) - _
t
Z --
e i9hbot S ; � —y� r4b�
M
Pad
wa to v vvv rd L i,�► ; t - G ,F -be c "h - -T(TO be in Wilk or Shore 'v1nrd
o c �
line p 'F e �riltrn5 wgll � o
� • o
1°ro Posed N .
► ane of �— � -�
Exist-, P) 5 ( S ; to Pile
D P C K n�
n
z I
%U
V1\ _ I I
i
Existing
Z E) L4
rizE> c
I ,.
f� (,{ + �' a ;
Tto h -
a g )` Na , PF � pe � ;
Li_ '
nk
7M
' Proper-tr S (a � C 13 � 1 J
f
1
P
/CIA V i L> r�'PL�C.QTiG�Y �y<
p l f e Sol G r r` �' d. t 1 E' C ' ! O rn _ ICI V, to -4
7
o for
(N a T = � � � g � e .Z-
EXHIBIT # 12
Mrs . Cora Sepos
940B East Shore Drive
Ithaca , NY 14850
I am the owner/ resident at the above address , in neighborhood of Om' s
property. I have examined Om' s plans for (i ) extending the second floor on
the north and east side to the same length as the existing first floor and (ii )
extending the first floor to the south . I believe that Om' s renovations will
enhance and increase the neighborhood property values . I have no objection
to the town granting Om the necessary variances to go ahead with the project .
U r %
•
EXHIBIT # 13
PP ..
FPO - j
�10 �► •.1 I LA � Ga
Mr . s �nds i1 Sfln
` 0adG East Shore Drive
Ithaca, NY 14850
I am the owner e3at at the above address , in neighborhood of Om ' s
property. I have examined Om ' s plans for ( i ) extending the second floor on
the north and east side to the same length as the existing first floor and ( ii )
extending the first floor to the south . I believe that Om' s renovations will
enhance and increase the neighborhood property values . I have no objection
to the town granting Om the necessary variances to go ahead with the project .
tR I
EXHIBIT # 14
® AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICA TION
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING .
BOARD OF APPEALS, NOTICE .`
OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ,- '
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 14,
1990, 7:00 P. M.
B direction of the Chairman
of the Zoning Board of Ap=
T
����ggggA
eals NOTICE IS HEREBY, -�E C GIVEN that Public Hearings
will be held by the Zoning
Board of Appeals of the Town
of Ithaca on Wednesday, Feb-
ruary 14, 1990, in Town Hall ,
State of New York , Tompkins County , ss . : 126 East Seneca Street, (FIRST
Floor, REAR Entrance, WEST .
Side ), Ithaca, N. Y. , COM-
Gall SullinsMENCING AT 7 :00 P. M. , on
being dill } sworn , deposes and the following matters.
APPEAL of Susan Centini, Ap--
says , that she/he resides in Ithaca , Count \, and , tate af0resald and that pellant, requesting a variance
of the requirements of Section
Clerk 2. 01 - 1 of the Town of Ithaca .
she/he is Sign Law to permit the plata-`-
ment of a 2 ft. sign, reading
of The Ithaca Journal a public newspaper printed and published in "Centini's Coddington Restau-
rant", off the property of the
Ithaca aforesaid , and that a notice , of which the annexed is a true restaurant on land owned by
Ithaca College and located at
copy , was published in said paper the corner of N. Y. S. Rt. 96B
and Loddington Road , " Town
of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-40-
p r R Y v tion Business District Sign Sec-
C) � tion 2. 01 - 1 of said Sign Low
prohibits off-premises signs.
APPEAL of William Avery, Ap-
pellant, Ken Vineberg, Agent,
requesting a variance of the
requirements of Article IV,
Section 13, of the Town of
Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to i
d that the first publication of said notice was on the c permit the construction h a j
9c,
detached garage, with a
day of 6 height of 26. 5 feet, to be log
by Q r —r 19 i cared . at 1113 Trumansbur
Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Par-
cel No. 6-26-4-27, Residence
n District R- 15. Said Ordinance
allows accessory buildings to 1
be no more than 15 feet in
height, and , restricts the
placement of on accessory
Subscr ' bed and sworn to before me ; this day building, other than a garage, j
to the rear yard. The proposed i
garage, containing a base- i
of 19 ment lospace,
25 feetproposed
m the road
right of way. Said parcel may
be consolidated with 1115 Tru-
monsburg Road, Town of Itha-
ca Tax Parcel No. 6-26-4-26.
APPEAL of Om P. Gupta, Ap-
Notary Public , pellant, requesting authoriza-
tion by the Bcord of Appeals,
JEAN FORD under Article XII , Section 54, 1
of the Town of Ithaca Zoning .j
Notary Public State Of NeW YOrJ_�t Ordinance, for the extension
of a non-conforming building I
No. 4654410 on a non-conforming lot lo-
cated at 940 East Shore Drive,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
Qualified in Tompkins Counpl / 6- 16-5-5, Residence District R- {
• • 15. The extension proposed is
Commission expires May 31, 19 . / the construction of additional
living space on the south side
of the existing building, with ?
the south side building set-
back changing from 20. 8 feet
to 9. 4 feet ( 15 feet being re-
Kheired ), and the extension of
second floor, over the
existing first floor , of the
building in a northerly direc-
tion but not beyond the exist-
ing 8. 6 foot north side build-
ing setback ( 15 feet being
required ), with the building
height remaining the same.
Said Zoning Board of Appeals
will at said lima, 7 : 00p. m . ,
and said place, hear all per-
sons in support of such matters
or objections thereto . Persons
may appear by agent or in
person .
Andrew S. Frost
Building Inspector/